Values of ICE Cars v EV's - the next decade
Discussion
paulrockliffe said:
The other elephant in that particular room - there are lots of rooms and lots of elephants - is that the future for hydrogen is entirely predicated on it being produced from fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage fixing the emissions problem. There won't be any CCS so there will be no clean hydrogen either. Your efficiency calculation I think doesn't include the use of fossil fuels to create the hydrogen to create the fossils fuels either, so the reality is far worse.
You will never convince the ICE acolytes that the EV will be replacing their ICE cars.Some simple numbers for them.
To produce 1 kg of hydrogen requires 8 litres of water and 41.4 kWh of electricity, assuming electrolysis at 100% efficiency; the actual efficiency is closer to 77%.
1 kg of hydrogen will allow a fuel cell car to travel between 97 and 100 km.
A Nissan Leaf with a 40 kw battery pack can travel 240 kilometers on a single charge. (The battery pack has a warranty of 8 years or 100,000 miles)
And as for carbon capture, it's still in the experimental stage
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/31/climate/is-carb...
The numbers don't add up.
Can I be Jeremy Clarkson and the voice of reason?! 
The way some contributors are posting it's as though ICE cars will be instantly worth zero at the 2030/35/40 deadline. On 01/01/2031, there will still be millions upon millions of ICE cars on the road and respective fuels will still be available (probably with a higher taxation level). Governments cannot afford to lose tax revenue and will tax EVs or introduce road pricing.
My personal view is thus: I will buy an EV for local farting around in the next few years. In 2020, I bought the family Bus-sat on a 10 year plan. In 2028/9 I'll buy another ICE family estate to see out any long journeys and where there is insufficient charging, which should cover me until nuclear fission cars are widely available (or EV range is realistically similar to diesel range). I think the Luddites in the room are often EV owners who say things like "Well, I never have a problem with range". Well that's because you're boring and never go anywhere!
The way some contributors are posting it's as though ICE cars will be instantly worth zero at the 2030/35/40 deadline. On 01/01/2031, there will still be millions upon millions of ICE cars on the road and respective fuels will still be available (probably with a higher taxation level). Governments cannot afford to lose tax revenue and will tax EVs or introduce road pricing.
My personal view is thus: I will buy an EV for local farting around in the next few years. In 2020, I bought the family Bus-sat on a 10 year plan. In 2028/9 I'll buy another ICE family estate to see out any long journeys and where there is insufficient charging, which should cover me until nuclear fission cars are widely available (or EV range is realistically similar to diesel range). I think the Luddites in the room are often EV owners who say things like "Well, I never have a problem with range". Well that's because you're boring and never go anywhere!
OP, what do you think the answer is?
Personally I am not bothered, hopefully I will still be able to drive my ICE vehicles for a good few years yet.
As all of this is about reducing CO2 emissions, the talk of zero value/scrapping of ICE vehicles completely ignores the embodied carbon cost of the already existing ICE vehicle.
The fuel used is a small percentage of the total carbon cost over the life of the vehicle, not to mention the embodied carbon cost of the new EV.
It is all a political game as the strategy is unlikely to save any carbon even if all the EV's run off renewable electricity as the damage has already be done by making the EV and scrapping the ICE vehicle.
Personally I am not bothered, hopefully I will still be able to drive my ICE vehicles for a good few years yet.
As all of this is about reducing CO2 emissions, the talk of zero value/scrapping of ICE vehicles completely ignores the embodied carbon cost of the already existing ICE vehicle.
The fuel used is a small percentage of the total carbon cost over the life of the vehicle, not to mention the embodied carbon cost of the new EV.
It is all a political game as the strategy is unlikely to save any carbon even if all the EV's run off renewable electricity as the damage has already be done by making the EV and scrapping the ICE vehicle.
GT9 said:
Terminator X said:
PS my entire family was wiped out by an out of control EV including the grandkids. I have nothing left other than PH.
Just think of how much more time you could have spent with them if you hadn't typed out TX. at the end of your posts 12,000 times.TX.
Terminator X said:
GT9 said:
Terminator X said:
PS my entire family was wiped out by an out of control EV including the grandkids. I have nothing left other than PH.
Just think of how much more time you could have spent with them if you hadn't typed out TX. at the end of your posts 12,000 times.TX.
SpeckledJim said:
LuS1fer said:
There was an article recently that said EV batteries are getting more expensive so EVs will become even more expensive.
Ah, but I wrote an article that said EVs could fly, so EVs can fly.https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com...
NMNeil said:
You will never convince the ICE acolytes that the EV will be replacing their ICE cars.
Some simple numbers for them.
To produce 1 kg of hydrogen requires 8 litres of water and 41.4 kWh of electricity, assuming electrolysis at 100% efficiency; the actual efficiency is closer to 77%.
1 kg of hydrogen will allow a fuel cell car to travel between 97 and 100 km.
A Nissan Leaf with a 40 kw battery pack can travel 240 kilometers on a single charge. (The battery pack has a warranty of 8 years or 100,000 miles)
And as for carbon capture, it's still in the experimental stage
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/31/climate/is-carb...
The numbers don't add up.
Also, hydrogen cars are comically slow.Some simple numbers for them.
To produce 1 kg of hydrogen requires 8 litres of water and 41.4 kWh of electricity, assuming electrolysis at 100% efficiency; the actual efficiency is closer to 77%.
1 kg of hydrogen will allow a fuel cell car to travel between 97 and 100 km.
A Nissan Leaf with a 40 kw battery pack can travel 240 kilometers on a single charge. (The battery pack has a warranty of 8 years or 100,000 miles)
And as for carbon capture, it's still in the experimental stage
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/31/climate/is-carb...
The numbers don't add up.
KB.
gottans said:
OP, what do you think the answer is?
Personally I am not bothered, hopefully I will still be able to drive my ICE vehicles for a good few years yet.
As all of this is about reducing CO2 emissions, the talk of zero value/scrapping of ICE vehicles completely ignores the embodied carbon cost of the already existing ICE vehicle.
The fuel used is a small percentage of the total carbon cost over the life of the vehicle, not to mention the embodied carbon cost of the new EV.
It is all a political game as the strategy is unlikely to save any carbon even if all the EV's run off renewable electricity as the damage has already be done by making the EV and scrapping the ICE vehicle.
The fuel used isn't a small percentage though. The average car costs something like 4-8000kgs of carbon emissions and every gallon of fuel then produces approx 10kg.Personally I am not bothered, hopefully I will still be able to drive my ICE vehicles for a good few years yet.
As all of this is about reducing CO2 emissions, the talk of zero value/scrapping of ICE vehicles completely ignores the embodied carbon cost of the already existing ICE vehicle.
The fuel used is a small percentage of the total carbon cost over the life of the vehicle, not to mention the embodied carbon cost of the new EV.
It is all a political game as the strategy is unlikely to save any carbon even if all the EV's run off renewable electricity as the damage has already be done by making the EV and scrapping the ICE vehicle.
paulrockliffe said:
Again, this simply isn't a valid comparison, the early car was objectively so much better than a horse, they were worlds apart.
It really wasn't! For the decade or so of car production, cars could barely go anywhere without breaking down (hence driving one from London to Brighton was a genuine challenge), there was nowhere to fuel them, they were no faster than horses, they cost massively more both to buy and to maintain,...As for the OP's question, I don't think much will change for used car prices. Currently, used car prices are being propped up by lack of new supply but because of the microchip shortage that applies to both ICE and EV. I think by the time production comes back fully on stream new supply of both will no longer be an issue and we'll see residuals on mainstream cars look pretty similar regardless of the propulsion. Maybe EVs will have slightly stronger residuals for a few years while second-hand buyers don't have much choice but with the extraordinary rate at which EV market share is increasing, I don't think it'll last long.
Edited by kambites on Monday 8th November 18:50
The reality is most people (ie not us on ph) don’t care.
The market will be driven by regulation but governments are Cognisent that it takes time to implement a car manufacturers roadmap, typically around 5 years to develop a new car. The point being that it’s unrealistic to expect a major change to current policy so one way or another zero emissions vehicles will be mainstream ahead of 2030.
In my view you then look to the classic market for a clue of the future.
Interesting and tasty stuff will have an enthusiast market, probably one where economics are less important, eg aston, lotus, etc.
Run of the mill stuff will die when costs become an issue, eg less than 70 Morris marinas still around today, aside from die hard enthusiasts
Most popular car this year so far is a corsa. Hard to think there will be people in 2030 willing to pay a premium for a 10 year old corsa because it’s got more “soul” than an ev.
The market will be driven by regulation but governments are Cognisent that it takes time to implement a car manufacturers roadmap, typically around 5 years to develop a new car. The point being that it’s unrealistic to expect a major change to current policy so one way or another zero emissions vehicles will be mainstream ahead of 2030.
In my view you then look to the classic market for a clue of the future.
Interesting and tasty stuff will have an enthusiast market, probably one where economics are less important, eg aston, lotus, etc.
Run of the mill stuff will die when costs become an issue, eg less than 70 Morris marinas still around today, aside from die hard enthusiasts
Most popular car this year so far is a corsa. Hard to think there will be people in 2030 willing to pay a premium for a 10 year old corsa because it’s got more “soul” than an ev.
TheDeuce said:
The fuel used isn't a small percentage though. The average car costs something like 4-8000kgs of carbon emissions and every gallon of fuel then produces approx 10kg.
That's a bit naughty isn't it? How many cars are doing 270,000km? And even without putting some more realistic numbers in the ICE car is well ahead.paulrockliffe said:
That's a bit naughty isn't it? How many cars are doing 270,000km? And even without putting some more realistic numbers in the ICE car is well ahead.
160k miles? That doesn't sound unreasonable for the average car over its entire lifetime does it? The average car in the UK gets driven about 8k miles a year so that would imply the average car is registered for 20 years, which sounds plausible. SpeckledJim said:
Except diesel and petrol cars both cost a lot to run, waste a lot of energy and break a lot. They're very similar to each other.
Whereas an EV costs very little to run, wastes very little energy, and doesn't break much at all.
It won’t stay like that’s once the majority are EV drivers! Tax is king.Whereas an EV costs very little to run, wastes very little energy, and doesn't break much at all.
Weekendrebuild said:
SpeckledJim said:
Except diesel and petrol cars both cost a lot to run, waste a lot of energy and break a lot. They're very similar to each other.
Whereas an EV costs very little to run, wastes very little energy, and doesn't break much at all.
It won’t stay like that’s once the majority are EV drivers! Tax is king.Whereas an EV costs very little to run, wastes very little energy, and doesn't break much at all.
kambites said:
paulrockliffe said:
That's a bit naughty isn't it? How many cars are doing 270,000km? And even without putting some more realistic numbers in the ICE car is well ahead.
160k miles? That doesn't sound unreasonable for the average car over its entire lifetime does it? The average car in the UK gets driven about 8k miles a year so that would imply the average car is registered for 20 years, which sounds plausible. SpeckledJim said:
Weekendrebuild said:
SpeckledJim said:
Except diesel and petrol cars both cost a lot to run, waste a lot of energy and break a lot. They're very similar to each other.
Whereas an EV costs very little to run, wastes very little energy, and doesn't break much at all.
It won’t stay like that’s once the majority are EV drivers! Tax is king.Whereas an EV costs very little to run, wastes very little energy, and doesn't break much at all.
Although if we stayed with ICE, the fuel would actually run out within many members lifetime.. I'd guess that as that point approached the prices might start to rise quite alarmingly!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff