EV's . . . . No Surprise There Then . . .

[Deleted member 149005]

Maybe it's simply my age, I really don't know, but I'm really struggling with this constant "post-apocalyptic vision" as an argument against EV's, it's been aired a few times now and I'm baffled by it because you could apply it to virtually anything and everything:

"We have a new water saving device that reduces usage by 40%"

'Yes, but if terrorists get control of the water networks then it won't work'

Or

"We've created a car tyre with a base material of waste vegetables"

'Well if terrorists take over the fields, we won't be able to make them'

Are people so afraid of change that they'd rather put up spurious barriers to progress just so they feel better?

did you read about the doorbells, fridges et al which stopped working when AWS fell over?

 

[glojo]

As a child, I grew up in the age of the dreaded London smogs and to see buses quite literally crawling along with the driver trying desperately to see the kerb, or if available a centre line in the road, that was what I called pollution. Oh how this country has advanced.

EU6 compliant diesel and petrol powered vehicles are NOT the killers that are being portrayed by the media. I have read with great interest the post submitted by Markjay and perhaps we all might want to read it again.

Totally agree about wars being fought over oil, but one day, perhaps not in my lifetime,, but the world might become more stable IF oil was sold in euros, but that situation has already caused conflict. What folks may, or may not realise is that there is still a great abundance of oil. Yes it pollutes but we are at EU6 with our ICE propelled engines. What will that pollution be when they are EU7,EU8 or above?

I will keep saying this until the penny drops.... Are aircraft a major contributor to our large cities and is their burnt fuel possibly completely unfiltered and why are they EXEMPT from contaminating our population???? What is good for the goose MUST surely be good for the flying gander.

Oh and we have ordered a petrol powered hybrid so I am not opposed to modern technology, I just refuse to be influenced by journalists and politicians that I disagree with regarding ICE power.

 

[markjay]

Maybe it's simply my age, I really don't know, but I'm really struggling with this constant "post-apocalyptic vision" as an argument against EV's, it's been aired a few times now and I'm baffled by it because you could apply it to virtually anything and everything:

"We have a new water saving device that reduces usage by 40%"

'Yes, but if terrorists get control of the water networks then it won't work'

Or

"We've created a car tyre with a base material of waste vegetables"

'Well if terrorists take over the fields, we won't be able to make them'

Are people so afraid of change that they'd rather put up spurious barriers to progress just so they feel better?

I agree and I don't think this objection will stop progress but I do think it's a view that needs to be heard.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

did you read about the doorbells, fridges et al which stopped working when AWS fell over?

They would still work, they would just been unable to send notifications or interact with other devices or “things” outside of their own network.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I will keep saying this until the penny drops.... Are aircraft a major contributor to our large cities and is their burnt fuel possibly completely unfiltered and why are they EXEMPT from contaminating our population????

I doubt many will argue with that John. Whether viewed from the perspective of carbon dioxide, particulates or other forms of pollution, aircraft consume significant amounts of fossil fuels and produce significant amounts of pollution.

 

[markjay]

Aircraft obviously burn a lot of fuel, but from the purely scientific perspective I would hazard a guess that a jet engine will burn aviation fuel much cleaner (and definitely producing less particulates per kg of fuel) than your average Diesel or petrol car engine.

And, the key issue with pollution from cars is that it is being emitted in-your-face - literally - an issue which EVs will solve.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Aircraft obviously burn a lot of fuel, but from the purely scientific perspective I would hazard a guess that a jet engine will burn aviation fuel much cleaner (and definitely producing less particulates per kg of fuel) than your average Diesel or petrol car engine.

And, the key issue with pollution from cars is that it is being emitted in-your-face - literally - an issue which EVs will solve.

Yes aircraft distribute their “pollution” over a much larger area than road traffic which tends to concentrate pollution in much smaller areas (relatively speaking).

 

[markjay]

They would still work, they would just been unable to send notifications or interact with other devices or “things” outside of their own network.

This is true, though I was thinking more of an apocalyptic event, such as a major earthquake or nuclear war... something that could turn off the grid at least in parts of the country.

 

[ChipChop]

People living in cities should not be allowed to use cars. There is public transport in cities. Massive out of town car parks could be used to store a vehicle, which can then be used to travel between cities and then back onto public transport.

Particulates from tyre wear and brakes are a feature of both ICE and electric vehicles.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

This is true, though I was thinking more of an apocalyptic event, such as a major earthquake or nuclear war... something that could turn off the grid at least in parts of the country.

My comments were regarding an AWS outage. In the event of a true apocalyptic event most “connected” devices would become irrelevant anyway, because survival becomes more important than the purpose of most devices, nevermind the connected element.

Moreover those “analogue” devices which are not connected become irrelevant very soon after. For example a SMART oven won’t need a connection following an apocalyptic event but not will it function without it’s energy source, same goes for cars, despite what the films suggest.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

People living in cities should not be allowed to use cars. There is public transport in cities. Massive out of town car parks could be used to store a vehicle, which can then be used to travel between cities and then back onto public transport.

Particulates from tyre wear and brakes are a feature of both ICE and electric vehicles.

If only used to travel between cities, why do they need their own car at all?

Whether you realise it or not, your statement supports the argument for mobility rather than car ownership, ie an integrated transport system which uses technology and data to seamlessly connect multiple modes of transport including autonomous shares vehicles which know all about you, your preferences, where you’ve come from, and where you’re going.

 

[ChipChop]

If only used to travel between cities, why do they need their own car at all?

Whether you realise it or not, your statement supports the argument for personal mobility rather than car ownership.

If only used to travel within a city why do you need to use a car at all? Public transport provides solutions for the vast majority, disabled etc excepted.

Between cities, on motorways is an efficient use of a car. Particularily a thermally efficient diesel engined car. Electric cars not so much from what i have read. Constant motorway speeds drain battery load.

Ownership is down to personal choice.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

If only used to travel within a city why do you need to use a car at all? Public transport provides solutions for the vast majority, disabled etc excepted.

Between cities, on motorways is an efficient use of a car. Particularily a thermally efficient diesel engined car. Electric cars not so much from what i have read. Constant motorway speeds drain battery load.

Ownership is down to personal choice.

Public transport between cities is excellent in most developed countries - and is even pretty good in the UK - so for someone living in a city, traveling to another city, why would they use public transport to travel to a big car park outside of the city, in order to drive to another city?

For example, for someone living in Birmingham city centre, the fastest way to get to London is by train, not by car - even if their car is parked beneath their home, nevermind if they had to catch a train to Coventry to collect the car before driving to London. I would imagine Newcastle to London would be an even more marked difference.

 

[markjay]

If only used to travel within a city why do you need to use a car at all? Public transport provides solutions for the vast majority, disabled etc excepted.

Between cities, on motorways is an efficient use of a car. Particularily a thermally efficient diesel engined car. Electric cars not so much from what i have read. Constant motorway speeds drain battery load.

Ownership is down to personal choice.

I wouldn't go as far as prohibit private car ownership, but I am certainly in favour of banning private vehicles from city centres, similarly to how they have in parts of Oxford and Edinburgh (and I'm sure in some other cities as well).

 

[Big Janner]

Ciy travel, without a car is, for the most part effective, but relatively expensive, on a daily basis

Between cities ditto

Try getting between, say, Stoke Row and Horning using public transport

 

[Deleted member 149005]

oops..

Aston Martin in row over 'sockpuppet PR firm' pushing anti-electric vehicle study (msn.com)

 

[Deleted member 37751]

oops..

Aston Martin in row over 'sockpuppet PR firm' pushing anti-electric vehicle study (msn.com)

I was just about to post the same thing!

 

[Big Janner]

What do you class as short to medium term?
I would suggest 20 - 30 years

I dismiss nothing, I'm not wedded to any sort of dogma, I simply see where the technology is headed and give my opinion.
I've not suggested you do or are
There are however, many who look no further than the next perceived panace
Battery, unless there are major changes, cannot support the current needs (40 tonnes/distance/convenience)

If the apology was aimed at me then there's no need whatsoever; like I've said a few times, it doesn't really matter what anyone on here thinks - EV's are coming thick and fast along with billions being invested in technologies like battery storage that will help balance the grid network which I would think people would be happy with so that we don't have to rely on foreign powers to heat our homes...
It was and well meant

 

[flying haggis]

not just aircraft that pollute. southampton suffers terribly from pollution when the cruise liners are in dock and the engines in a big ship basically burn tar so not very "green"

 

[ChrisEdu]

not just aircraft that pollute. southampton suffers terribly from pollution when the cruise liners are in dock and the engines in a big ship basically burn tar so not very "green"

Hence that electric point in the new T5.