Has UK enough generating power for electric cars , heat pumps and all other requirements

[Dryce]

The most expensive I could find online is 70p per kWh from Ionity 350kW super chargers, of which there are 14 in the UK. And even so, it's on PAYG tariff, but with a subscription the cost goes down to 40p per kWh.

So at 0.34KWh per mile (a number I dug up as an average off the internet) that's basically 40p for 3 miles.

So currently diesel is at say £1.50 per litre in our area - which is (yikes!) £6.81 per gallon.

A decent diesel will better 60mpg so being conservative £6.81 for 60 miles - or ..... 34p for 3 miles.

ISTR that you made a comment about EVs always being cheaper .....

 

[markjay]

So at 0.34KWh per mile (a number I dug up as an average off the internet) that's basically 40p for 3 miles.

So currently diesel is at say £1.50 per litre in our area - which is (yikes!) £6.81 per gallon.

A decent diesel will better 60mpg so being conservative £6.81 for 60 miles - or ..... 34p for 3 miles.

ISTR that you made a comment about EVs always being cheaper .....

Where did you get your figures from?

I pay 24p per kWh on the public charger outsude my house (Shell Ubitricitry 5.5kW lamppost charger).

The computer on my dash shows that I have so far averaged 3.1 miles per kWh.

That's just under 8p per mile.

I don't believe that my charger is particularly cheap or that my EV is particularly more frugal than other EVs.

Also, most of my driving so far has been short start-stop journeys in city traffic (the car has only covered 600 miles since I got it 6 months ago). No Diesel car that I know off returns anything near 60 mpg under these driving conditions.

That said, EVs become less efficient as speed goes up. Where the Diesel car can achieve 60 mpg (and even then it will be with a push...), I.e. driving at 70mph on the motorway, my EV would only average 2 miles per kWh, based on what I read on the forums (have only driven it myself on a motorway once, when I collected it from the dealer), which will bring up my cost per mile to 12p.

And... again, I pay no VED, no Congestion Charge, no Residents Permit Charge, and hardly any servicing costs at all (the first year service is not mandatory and costs £60 at the dealer, it's in effect an optional health check).

As I said before, cars driven by battery and electric motor will in time be cheaper to make than cars with and engine and gearbox. ICE has run it's course.

 

[Dryce]

Also, most of my driving so far has been short start-stop journeys in city traffic (the car has only covered 600 miles since I got it 6 months ago). No Diesel car that I know off returns anything near 60 mpg under these driving conditions.

Well you're not going to buy a siesel to do 100 miles a month.

In fact it's hardly worth owning a car to do 100 miles a month!

The 40p per kWh was taken from you quoted lower figure.

Actually going back to the 100 miles per month - the running cost per mile is almosts superfluous. The environmental cost per mile is utterly appalling given the resources required to manufactiure the car.

Why on earth did you buy it?

 

[markjay]

...The 40p per kWh was taken from you quoted lower figure...

40p per kWh was the lowest cost from an Ionity 350 kW super charger, if you wish to charge at the highest speed. As I said, currently there are only 14 such super chargers in the UK.

Actual electricity prices vary considerably. On a home charger you'll pay anything between 6-7p to 16-17p, depending on your tariff and time of day etc.

As I said, on the public lamppost charger outsude my house the price is 24p (I live in a flat and can't install my own charger). I expect that fast chargers at motorway services will be more expensive than that, but cheaper than the Ionity 40p.

And, a colleague at work got a Model-X that came bundled with free charging (on the Tesla network) for the lifetime of the vehicle.

So there isn't a simple answer as to how much a mile costs in an EV. But in any event, even the mist frugal Diesel will have a hard time competing with these figures.

The only relevant cost-related arguments against EVs are at current (a) there's still no cheap EVs, because they are too new and because they tend to come with various luxuries, and (b) depreciation is still an unknown factor, though this can be mitigated with a lease of GFV finance deal.

Any attempt to portray EVs as uneconomical due to any other reason than these two, is doomed to fail.... because its false. Though, again this is only in part due to the product itself, the rest is due to various tax exemptions, and taxation will change in the run up to 2030.

 

[markjay]

Well you're not going to buy a siesel to do 100 miles a month.

In fact it's hardly worth owning a car to do 100 miles a month!

.....

Actually going back to the 100 miles per month - the running cost per mile is almosts superfluous. The environmental cost per mile is utterly appalling given the resources required to manufactiure the car.

Why on earth did you buy it?

Firstly, I like the idea of zero exhasut emission, and the air quality that comes with EVs. Then, I wanted to have a go with the new technology, and with the tax incentives it's actually ridiculously cheap. The 1% BIK is a huge saving (compared to privately buying or leasing), and the London-specific benefits are also significant (Congestion Charge and parking).

For someone who doesn't have the option of a business lease, and doesn't live in the London, it is still cheap (compared to ICE), especially if they buy or lease a car costing under £35k and are eligible to the £3k EV grant. Cheap electricity, zero VED, and almost no annual service costs

As for the annual mileage... as a Londoner, I don't see it this way. In recent years, many back streets were closed to through traffic, and car lanes were converted to bus or cycle lanes. This means that traffic is now slow at all times. My commute to the office is only 6 miles each way, but it takes me around 45 minutes on average to get there.

My point is that as a driver, what matters to me is how much time I spend in the car, and not how many miles it covers in that time. If my commute to the office and back means spending and hour an a half (or two hours, on a bad day) in the car, then I want to be just as comfortable as I would have been if I was traveling from London to Oxford on the M40 in the same time.

If you are used only to light urban traffic then 100 miles may sound like a breeze. But at an average speed 10 miles per hour, that's 10 hours a month inside the car.

Ultimately, I could have managed without it, if I had too. But I was curious, it was cheap (compared to the ICE alternatives), and I don't regret it.

But yes, if I'm honest, we should have less cars, and drive them less, because no car is 'good for the environment'.

I will vote for the party that has this in their manifesto... but I won't be the first to jump into the water.

 

[190]

I pay 24p per kWh on the public charger outsude my house (Shell Ubitricitry 5.5kW lamppost charger).

I'd get that EV battery charged up while you can because 24p per KWh can't last given the increase in the price cap announced this morning. Domestic electricity is already near 20p per KWh and will rise well above 24p from April. If street chargers are being subsidised, council tax payers may have something to say about it.

What ever the benefit of fueling an EV is over an IC the gap is narrowing.

 

[markjay]

I'd get that EV battery charged up while you can because 24p per KWh can't last given the increase in the price cap announced this morning. Domestic electricity is already near 20p per KWh and will rise well above 24p from April. If street chargers are being subsidised, council tax payers may have something to say about it.

What ever the benefit of fueling an EV is over an IC the gap is narrowing.

And it will narrow even further once the long list of incentives and tax exemptions is withdrawn from EVs.

But right now, EVs make a lot of sense, financially, especially if you can get one on a business lease, and especially if you live in London.

In the longer term I expect that EVs will be cheaper than ICE cars, both due to the simplicity of the design compared to ICE cars, and the significantly smaller number of mechanical parts.

But it will take another 10 years until the R&D spent on battery chemistry and software development is recouped, and it will take another 20 years before the patents expire and everyone can start making them freely while copying the technology.

 

[Dryce]

But right now, EVs make a lot of sense, financially, especially if you can get one on a business lease, and especially if you live in London.

I actually object to this repeated assertion.

It's only true for a given group of drivers with the appropriate means.

It completely ignores the reality of many people in this country for whom a PCP or lease on a new car *OF ANY TYPE* in the sort of category where an EV is an option or even nice to have is either economically unattractive or unattainable.

Your own costs and economics of car ownership are in a different world from the majority in the UK. And I don't think you are compensating for your personal perspective in this sort of pronouncement.

I had a car on which I got a ridiculous lease deal on an expensive car a few years back - but I tend to refer to it as a 'stupid car' when talking about the economics. It was a stupid car to own and buy if looking at the hard realities. The lease simply made it less stupid - and smoothed the way to the self indlugence

I'll be quite blunt. You I judge your EV procurement on a similar basis to that lease. Nice to have for a number of reasons. And why not if it is within your means . But in reality for most people .... 'a stupid car' from the point of view of the actual economics and use case. The reality is that a 'stupid car' is an indulgence. And better to be honest about that.

 

[markjay]

I actually object to this repeated assertion.

It's only true for a given group of drivers with the appropriate means.

It completely ignores the reality of many people in this country for whom a PCP or lease on a new car *OF ANY TYPE* in the sort of category where an EV is an option or even nice to have is either economically unattractive or unattainable.

Your own costs and economics of car ownership are in a different world from the majority in the UK. And I don't think you are compensating for your personal perspective in this sort of pronouncement.

I had a car on which I got a ridiculous lease deal on an expensive car a few years back - but I tend to refer to it as a 'stupid car' when talking about the economics. It was a stupid car to own and buy if looking at the hard realities. The lease simply made it less stupid - and smoothed the way to the self indlugence

I'll be quite blunt. You I judge your EV procurement on a similar basis to that lease. Nice to have for a number of reasons. And why not if it is within your means . But in reality for most people .... 'a stupid car' from the point of view of the actual economics and use case. The reality is that a 'stupid car' is an indulgence. And better to be honest about that.

This may come as surprise to you, but I don't disagree with anything you said.

And, as I said before, I don't think EV ownership should be incentivised at all. The money should have gone into public transport instead.

 

[Tonygw]

In answer to the original post
The answer is erm...

No

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

I think I'm right in generalising that manufacturing a new EV releases 10 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere, and that an "average" ICE car releases one tonne of CO2 in a year.

And a return transatlantic flight is about 1.5 tonnes of CO2 per passenger ?

Anyone seen more accurate numbers?


(I know Google is my friend, but I'm out and about, and I'm making a point about whether the urgent dash to EV is counterproductive)

 

[Tonygw]

Sounds about right,

What we do as individuals is insignificant when the true reality of where our greenhouse gases come from.

Climate change: Satellites map huge methane plumes from oil and gas

Plugging methane leaks from oil and gas fields could be an easy win in curbing climate change.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Bellow]

Sounds about right,

What we do as individuals is insignificant when the true reality of where our greenhouse gases come from.

Climate change: Satellites map huge methane plumes from oil and gas

Plugging methane leaks from oil and gas fields could be an easy win in curbing climate change.

www.bbc.co.uk

Not so.
From the article:
''In terms of benefits for the environment, the scientists estimate that stopping the leaks would prevent between 0.005C and 0.002C of warming.
That is equivalent to removing all emissions from Australia since 2005 from the atmosphere or emissions from 20 million cars for a year, they suggest.''

So 40 million (individual) motorists halving their annual mileage would achieve the same. Probably halving is a little ambitious but there can't be many who who couldn't cut their mileage without degrading their quality of life. That, and curbing the methane leaks (and other changes - many also at the personal level) and we are on the right track.

 

[Tonygw]

We all need to become vegan.. apparently that will solve the problem..

 

[Bellow]

We all need to become vegan.. apparently that will solve the problem..

The species that cannot adapt to its environment dies.

 

[ChipChop]

Before we all turn vegan and slaughter all the cattle there are other emerging factors with a significant environmental cost to Western societies that are never raised in the 'eco' debate.

Adoption of technology. The cost of tech adoption.

Aside from the footprint created by tech shipped worldwide and the associated environmental costs of these disposable products it is estimated that by 2025 20% of the worlds electricity will be used by information and communications technology.

Maybe super fast internet and the Internet of Things carry too high an environmental cost for society.

 

[Bellow]

Before we all turn vegan and slaughter all the cattle there are other emerging factors with a significant environmental cost to Western societies that are never raised in the 'eco' debate.

Adoption of technology. The cost of tech adoption.

Aside from the footprint created by tech shipped worldwide and the associated environmental costs of these disposable products it is estimated that by 2025 20% of the worlds electricity will be used by information and communications technology.

Maybe super fast internet and the Internet of Things carry too high an environmental cost for society.

It is said that at any point in time half of all internet traffic is porn....
But, some internet usage is under our control - streaming less content being the obvious first step.

 

[Tonygw]

Before we all turn vegan and slaughter all the cattle there are other emerging factors with a significant environmental cost to Western societies that are never raised in the 'eco' debate.

Adoption of technology. The cost of tech adoption.

Aside from the footprint created by tech shipped worldwide and the associated environmental costs of these disposable products it is estimated that by 2025 20% of the worlds electricity will be used by information and communications technology.

Maybe super fast internet and the Internet of Things carry too high an environmental cost for society.

Absolutely right, we are constantly told its all our fault but the reality is we are fed technology and convenience all the time.. all of which is quite damaging. But we simply "cant" or "refuse" to live without it.

In the 70's and 80's we have 1 tv, one radio and and electric cooker. No central heating, no internet, no smartphones, no computers, no ring door bells, no amazon accounts, no tablets, laptops, tumble dryers, microwaves.

We consume energy at a ferocious rate and are told to stop doing so by the people who consume as much if not more than us. And then we are told to stop eating meat, stop driving, stop flying, stop modern life as we know it.
Does any body know what to do anymore?

Confused.com....

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Absolutely right, we are constantly told its all our fault but the reality is we are fed technology and convenience all the time.. all of which is quite damaging. But we simply "cant" or "refuse" to live without it.

We consume energy at a ferocious rate and are told to stop doing so by the people who consume as much if not more than us. And then we are told to stop eating meat, stop driving, stop flying, stop modern life as we know it.
Does any body know what to do anymore?

Confused.com....

Who is it that’s telling you this?

I feel left out.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Maybe super fast internet and the Internet of Things carry too high an environmental cost for society.

Yeah, bloody Internet of Things.