Embarrassing for Aston Martin if true.
Discussion
Mischief is being intimated in the article (link below).
It is suggested that a publication was issued by Clarendon Communications Limited, which might have links to Aston Martin.
Companies House website shows that the Clarendon company was incorporated on 10th February 2020 and has one director, Rebecca Caroline Stephens.
The Director Global Government & Corporate Affairs at Aston Martin Lagonda Ltd., is shown on the internet as James M Stevens.
Presumably somebody has established his home address matches the Clarendon address.
https://thedriven.io/2020/12/01/aston-martin-linke...
Veg said:
Too true. Everybody in automotive knows that EV is the future and that battery ones aren't as green as people think.
Carbon emission from power source, manufacture and rare earth metal mining and transportation. ...
Carbon emission from power source, manufacture and rare earth metal mining and transportation. ...
Yes, ...but if the sole director of the firm purported to have issued that press release, is actually related to a senior Aston Martin employee, would that make a difference to the underlying message ?
Presumably, for Aston Martin to stop making petrol engined cars (for the UK market) in just 9 years time, it is going to be a seismic change to their current business model.
Jon39 said:
Yes, ...but if the sole director of the firm purported to have issued that press release, is actually related to a senior Aston Martin employee, would that make a difference to the underlying message ?
Jon39 said:
Presumably, for Aston Martin to stop making petrol engined cars (for the UK market) in just 9 years time, it is going to be a seismic change to their current business model.
True. But in the big scheme of things AML are a minnow's egg in both the UK and the worlds automotive industry. They have no power to influence what the changes will be.Personally, I feel it will be a sad day when the petrol engine (the diesel is already doomed) is no more , except perhaps for race and exhibition days. But it will happen and a lot sooner than we think.
pschlute said:
Jon39 said:
Yes, ...but if the sole director of the firm purported to have issued that press release, is actually related to a senior Aston Martin employee, would that make a difference to the underlying message ?
Objectively it may be coincidence, especially if she had held that role for a number of years.
Practically, it stinks.
Not a number of years, the company was only incorporated on 10th February 2020.
It is not so popular these days, for directors or limited companies to use home addresses, but it does appear in this instance, that the registered address might have provided the connection.
^^ Indeed.
A quote from the article:
"The document (misleadingly referred to as a “study” in those articles) referenced was comprehensively debunked by Dutch EV researcher Auke Hoekstra, in a detailed Twitter thread."
Because comprehensive debunkings by reputable scientists are done on Twitter.
A quote from the article:
"The document (misleadingly referred to as a “study” in those articles) referenced was comprehensively debunked by Dutch EV researcher Auke Hoekstra, in a detailed Twitter thread."
Because comprehensive debunkings by reputable scientists are done on Twitter.
irocfan said:
very much this ^^ "There's lies, damned lies and statistics" - everyone has an agenda whether it is pro-ICE or pro-BEV and I'd venture to suggest you will NEVER get an unbiased viewpoint from either of them
I can be unbiased, mainly because I find future energy super interesting but I'm not important 
I love my Aston and my Model 3. The latter is the family mule and is absolutely superb at what it does. Is it greener than petrol, well yes, even more so if you're fortunate enough to charge from solar. Is it the future? For many, yes.
Hydrogen also looks an interesting prospect but its expensive.
Aviation, shipping and haulage will probably move that way first and maybe some cars. The latter will depend on battery tech. With energy density vs weight, hydrogen is way ahead (1kg of batteries is roughly 0.75km and 1kg of hydrogen is circa 90km of driving) but the cars weigh roughly the same. For those of us fortunate enough to charge at home the idea of visiting a station to fill up now seems alien.
Whatever side of the argument you're on, most of us can agree that we cannot go on digging up and burning stuff. Like it or not, the petrolhead's among the population are the minority. Most people just want to get from A to B.
Regarding the original post, it would be shady if AM were involved in such practices. My company is registered at my accountants address, where I know there are several others. I just hope he or none of the others start funding a revolution
quench said:
Because comprehensive debunkings by reputable scientists are done on Twitter.
Absolutely 
This tweet made me chuckle from Brian Cox
https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/1305488773...
Edited by dbs2000 on Wednesday 2nd December 09:03
dbs2000 said:
This tweet made me chuckle from Brian Cox
https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/1305488773...
I have huge admiration for Brian Cox for his knowledge, his enthusiasm and his drive to communicate science to normal mortals. I was in two minds as to whether my admiration increased further to find he'd had the courage to wade into that particular social cesspool or was diminished by the fact he engaged with it in the first place.https://twitter.com/profbriancox/status/1305488773...
I wasn't so keen on his music (although they may well be getting better because of science) but his portrayal of the first Dr Hannibal Lecter was definitely the best.
The debate so far has been about the science, which was not why I started this post. I guess that it might be years, before we know whether batteries have solved the environment problems.
We do not know whether it is true, but the article gives an impression, that the Aston Martin director of corporate affairs might have a connection with the original press release, which is stated to have come from a newly formed limited company.
Would this be what is called a leak via a third party, to conceal an identity ?
This saga seems to be turning into a back and forth tennis match.
Several national newspapers have picked up this story and are reporting;
The new chief executive, Tobias Moers, said Aston Martin’s involvement in the widely discredited report began before he joined the company last August, and that he was not aware of its contents before it was published.
Moers said he was “deeply concerned” and would be conducting a review into the circumstances surrounding the commissioning and publication of the report.
The newspaper said. that Clarendon was set up under the name of Rebecca Stephens, the wife of Aston Martin’s government affairs director, James Stephens, in February this year.
Rebecca Stephens, an NHS nurse, confirmed that the report was written by the same companies which claimed to have commissioned the study.
..............
Clarendon Communications Ltd has a very sllck website, describing all the work they do in several business sectors.
However, a look at the usual 'About Us', makes things look rather strange. No 'Meet our team', or even any mention of any employees at all. Now we are told the only director is an NHS nurse, so how does she have time to handle her various business sector accounts?
BREAKING NEWS.
Clarendon Communications Ltd website has now disappeared from the internet.
( Try not to confuse with Clarendon Group, a 30 year old New York media relations and communications firm. )
Clarendon Communications twitter page now says. 'This account doesn't exist'.
I would be surprised if Aston Martin had done something as cack handed as this, with so little potential benefit to them. For my money it is an provocateur action, setting up a straw man so that some pro-EV activist can come along and rubbish it.
All the same, it does illustrate how we are returning to medieval attitudes, with pseudoscience taking the place of religion. No-one can criticize the conventional wisdom without being burned as a heretic or a 'denier'. Free speech is at serious risk. Will we ever know whether electric vehicles are more beneficial to the environment than efficient ICE engines? I doubt it. The real reason for all this climate change activism (and I have no doubt that XR is Security Service sponsored) is that Western Europe, and possibly the United States, have come to the conclusion, maybe correctly, that we can no longer pay for the oil which we need and we can no longer invade other countries to steal it. So we are trying to make virtue out of necessity. I am not trying to stir up an argument, just telling you what I think, and you won't change my mind so don't bother trying.
However, either way, the prestige car manufacturers, with the possible exceptions of Bentley and Rolls-Royce, maybe Porsche, have no future in the EV world. So they would have every reason to gripe. Given the current state of technology, I can't see BEV's being much use for anything other that City vehicles. Nevertheless, apparently everything else will be illegal from 2030? It's 'enshrined in legislation', it's probably a Vow, for goodness' sake.
What would be the conceivable point in buying a Ferrari, a Lamborghini, McLaren, a Maserati or an Aston Martin with electric motors? Think carefully about that. Their whole being is genetically entwined with the ICE. There would be no point. What would you be buying? A badge? Nicely stitched leather? Dodgy paintwork? The same old electric motor as a Tesla? If this happens, all of these companies are history. Or history will become their business.
It's going to be a short Second Century.
All the same, it does illustrate how we are returning to medieval attitudes, with pseudoscience taking the place of religion. No-one can criticize the conventional wisdom without being burned as a heretic or a 'denier'. Free speech is at serious risk. Will we ever know whether electric vehicles are more beneficial to the environment than efficient ICE engines? I doubt it. The real reason for all this climate change activism (and I have no doubt that XR is Security Service sponsored) is that Western Europe, and possibly the United States, have come to the conclusion, maybe correctly, that we can no longer pay for the oil which we need and we can no longer invade other countries to steal it. So we are trying to make virtue out of necessity. I am not trying to stir up an argument, just telling you what I think, and you won't change my mind so don't bother trying.
However, either way, the prestige car manufacturers, with the possible exceptions of Bentley and Rolls-Royce, maybe Porsche, have no future in the EV world. So they would have every reason to gripe. Given the current state of technology, I can't see BEV's being much use for anything other that City vehicles. Nevertheless, apparently everything else will be illegal from 2030? It's 'enshrined in legislation', it's probably a Vow, for goodness' sake.
What would be the conceivable point in buying a Ferrari, a Lamborghini, McLaren, a Maserati or an Aston Martin with electric motors? Think carefully about that. Their whole being is genetically entwined with the ICE. There would be no point. What would you be buying? A badge? Nicely stitched leather? Dodgy paintwork? The same old electric motor as a Tesla? If this happens, all of these companies are history. Or history will become their business.
It's going to be a short Second Century.
Edited by GrimLeaper on Tuesday 8th December 10:36
GrimLeaper said:
All the same, it does illustrate how we are returning to medieval attitudes, with pseudoscience taking the place of religion. No-one can criticize the conventional wisdom without being burned as a heretic or a 'denier'. Free speech is at serious risk. Will we ever know whether electric vehicles are more beneficial to the environment than efficient ICE engines? I doubt it. The real reason for all this climate change activism (and I have no doubt that XR is Security Service sponsored) is that Western Europe, and possibly the United States, have come to the conclusion, maybe correctly, that we can no longer pay for the oil which we need and we can no longer invade other countries to steal it. So we are trying to make virtue out of necessity. I am not trying to stir up an argument, just telling you what I think, and you won't change my mind so don't bother trying.
well said, sad but true...Edited by GrimLeaper on Tuesday 8th December 10:36
GrimLeaper said:
I would be surprised if Aston Martin had done something as cack handed as this, with so little potential benefit to them. For my money it is an provocateur action, setting up a straw man so that some pro-EV activist can come along and rubbish it.
All the same, it does illustrate how we are returning to medieval attitudes, with pseudoscience taking the place of religion. No-one can criticize the conventional wisdom without being burned as a heretic or a 'denier'. Free speech is at serious risk. Will we ever know whether electric vehicles are more beneficial to the environment than efficient ICE engines? I doubt it. The real reason for all this climate change activism (and I have no doubt that XR is Security Service sponsored) is that Western Europe, and possibly the United States, have come to the conclusion, maybe correctly, that we can no longer pay for the oil which we need and we can no longer invade other countries to steal it. So we are trying to make virtue out of necessity. I am not trying to stir up an argument, just telling you what I think, and you won't change my mind so don't bother trying.
However, either way, the prestige car manufacturers, with the possible exceptions of Bentley and Rolls-Royce, maybe Porsche, have no future in the EV world. So they would have every reason to gripe. Given the current state of technology, I can't see BEV's being much use for anything other that City vehicles. Nevertheless, apparently everything else will be illegal from 2030? It's 'enshrined in legislation', it's probably a Vow, for goodness' sake.
What would be the conceivable point in buying a Ferrari, a Lamborghini, McLaren, a Maserati or an Aston Martin with electric motors? Think carefully about that. Their whole being is genetically entwined with the ICE. There would be no point. What would you be buying? A badge? Nicely stitched leather? Dodgy paintwork? The same old electric motor as a Tesla? If this happens, all of these companies are history. Or history will become their business.
It's going to be a short Second Century.
Well said indeedAll the same, it does illustrate how we are returning to medieval attitudes, with pseudoscience taking the place of religion. No-one can criticize the conventional wisdom without being burned as a heretic or a 'denier'. Free speech is at serious risk. Will we ever know whether electric vehicles are more beneficial to the environment than efficient ICE engines? I doubt it. The real reason for all this climate change activism (and I have no doubt that XR is Security Service sponsored) is that Western Europe, and possibly the United States, have come to the conclusion, maybe correctly, that we can no longer pay for the oil which we need and we can no longer invade other countries to steal it. So we are trying to make virtue out of necessity. I am not trying to stir up an argument, just telling you what I think, and you won't change my mind so don't bother trying.
However, either way, the prestige car manufacturers, with the possible exceptions of Bentley and Rolls-Royce, maybe Porsche, have no future in the EV world. So they would have every reason to gripe. Given the current state of technology, I can't see BEV's being much use for anything other that City vehicles. Nevertheless, apparently everything else will be illegal from 2030? It's 'enshrined in legislation', it's probably a Vow, for goodness' sake.
What would be the conceivable point in buying a Ferrari, a Lamborghini, McLaren, a Maserati or an Aston Martin with electric motors? Think carefully about that. Their whole being is genetically entwined with the ICE. There would be no point. What would you be buying? A badge? Nicely stitched leather? Dodgy paintwork? The same old electric motor as a Tesla? If this happens, all of these companies are history. Or history will become their business.
It's going to be a short Second Century.
Edited by GrimLeaper on Tuesday 8th December 10:36
GrimLeaper said:
What would be the conceivable point in buying a Ferrari, a Lamborghini, McLaren, a Maserati or an Aston Martin with electric motors? Think carefully about that. Their whole being is genetically entwined with the ICE. There would be no point. What would you be buying? A badge? Nicely stitched leather? Dodgy paintwork? The same old electric motor as a Tesla? If this happens, all of these companies are history. Or history will become their business.
A very succinct, plausible and interesting post from the GrimLeaper. I find the last paragraph particularly pertinent to myself, (and dragging slightly off topic) as I too find that once the innate characteristics of the ICE are taken out of the equation, along with much of the analogue aspects of a car, all I`m left with is a mode of transport and a hefty Duracell, and then I just want it to be practical and hopefully good looking. If along with new cars, older ICE vehicles are legislated off the road, I would find certainly find more appeal in a converted electric rust bucket from a bygone era.GrimLeaper said:
Lots of perceptive stuff
I have zero interest in electric cars for performance or fun. As it would appear we are all going to be forced to use them in the near future, when the day comes I will grit my teeth and give them as much thought as any other appliance in my home. Well, I suppose that's how the majority of the populace views and has always viewed ICE cars anyway.dbs2000 said:
I can be unbiased, mainly because I find future energy super interesting but I'm not important
I love my Aston and my Model 3. The latter is the family mule and is absolutely superb at what it does. Is it greener than petrol, well yes, even more so if you're fortunate enough to charge from solar. Is it the future? For many, yes.
[url]I love my Aston and my Model 3. The latter is the family mule and is absolutely superb at what it does. Is it greener than petrol, well yes, even more so if you're fortunate enough to charge from solar. Is it the future? For many, yes.
Regarding the greener than petrol comment. Is it really over the life of the car? Volkswagen say you have to drive 120k KM in an electric Golf to break even with a diesel, due to the increased CO2 for manufacturing.
|https://thumbsnap.com/EoqjafKs[/url]George29 said:
dbs2000 said:
I can be unbiased, mainly because I find future energy super interesting but I'm not important
I love my Aston and my Model 3. The latter is the family mule and is absolutely superb at what it does. Is it greener than petrol, well yes, even more so if you're fortunate enough to charge from solar. Is it the future? For many, yes.
[url]I love my Aston and my Model 3. The latter is the family mule and is absolutely superb at what it does. Is it greener than petrol, well yes, even more so if you're fortunate enough to charge from solar. Is it the future? For many, yes.
Regarding the greener than petrol comment. Is it really over the life of the car? Volkswagen say you have to drive 120k KM in an electric Golf to break even with a diesel, due to the increased CO2 for manufacturing.
|https://thumbsnap.com/EoqjafKs[/url]So my excuse for a V8 petrol Range Rover is its lighter and less polluting than an EV
Gassing Station | Aston Martin | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff