The EV fact thread

[PXW]

Well, I would suggest that a single BEV matching fuel cell range / cost doesn't support the general statement made that hydrogen FCVs are more expensive than BEVs.

The two FCVs as described in your post are 30-40% more expensive than the BEV in this example so not really a “match”. And in terms of general statements, that’s one random BEV compared to the entire available range of FCVs…

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Despite subsidies peak fares and walk on fares are high on the railways meaning that those using them for work / commuting are being hit both with the subsidy from their taxes and the gouging on pricing.

So what’s your suggestion for improvement there, more subsidy or less subsidy?

The subsidy model means that those who can afford to pay more - like those people on higher incomes and successful businesses - do so, which reduces the fares. Seems to make sense to me.

Outside of rush hour on commuting routes in and out of London, I suspect that the average person using public transport doesn’t pay enough income tax for the notional proportion allocated to public transport subsidies to be of any meaningful consequence to them - their fares will be much more than that.

The contributions of everyone else will have made a huge difference, ranging from making the fare much less expensive than it would otherwise be, to having aservice at all. Many local/rural routes are loss making and without subsidy would not be viable.

We have a lot of road freight. It may be that some decent public investment in radical management of it could improve roads generally and improve emissions.

We do, but business which move sufficient bulk freight do use rail freight because of the cost advantages, it makes good business sense to do so. It also helps those businesses who care about sustainability to reduce their carbon footprint, so again makes good business sense.

Why are our urban buses so cr*p. When I was young a bus going through a city would bang and crash and rattle and jolt because of the way it was constructed/fitted out and the the way it interacted with the nearside part of the road. Why is it when I ride in a modern EV bus that it is just as bad in terms of crash bang rattle jolt as several decades ago? Why are the seats just as cramped and bad?

Because making them physically larger (so that the seats are less cramped) would make them either occupy a larger foot print on the road contributing to congestion and causing problems on narrow routes, and would also mean that they’re heavier. More material, more weight, more energy required are not ideal.

Making them more substantial and cosseting would add weight, complexity and cost, would also require more raw materials, more energy, bigger footprint, more expensive fares. etc. If they were a bit roomier and a bit more comfy would you be taking the bus a lot more?

 

[clk320x]

They lose on environmental impact from cradle to grave so to speak.

How? First of all, not many EVs have been to their ‘grave’ yet, and secondly the grid gets cleaner and cleaner year on year, so an EV becomes ‘greener’ with the improvement of the grid, an ICE will always be an ICE.

I’m interested in this 20% figure, which I think you have used a few times. Collective wisdom on the Tesla forums (where widely used apps such as Teslafi give some fleet-wide data) seems to indicate that AC charging is around 87% efficient and DC charging more like 97-99%. Obviously vehicles and BMS can vary, but from my reading the 20% would be an outlier low number rather than typical.

Of course if we then look at the overall efficiency of conversion of onboard “fuel” to forward motion then the EV is massively ahead of any ICE…

Agreed - 20% is a ridiculously high number that I’ve never seen in real life use. It will be interesting to see the posters use data here.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

For the railways and underground yes we should pull subsidies, because the only way the unions have been able to take the pi$$ to the extent they have got away with is practically unlimited public funding. No fully private company would pay drivers such high salaries. They are being paid more than airline pilots for a skill set comparison that is laughable. In fact a private company wouldn't even have drivers on the underground, it would have been automated by now as it has been in other countries. I'd be more than happy for subsidies to fund efficiently run public transport but how do we get there for the railways and underground when the unions have no interest in efficiency ?

Pulling subsidies to fix a dysfunctional salary is quite extreme. It would fix that issue but the City of London and everything around it would have a seismic impact upon the economy which would affect the whole country. I’d try to find a different way of fixing generous salaries.

 

[Dryce]

So what’s your suggestion for improvement there, more subsidy or less subsidy?

Start with recognition of the level of subsidy.

I suspect it would come as a shock to many passengers as to how high the subsidy on rail journeys can be.

If you recognise it and still accept it - then fine - leave as is. Otherwise think about taking that money and spend it elsewhere.

We do, but business which move sufficient bulk freight do use rail freight because of the cost advantages, it makes good business sense to do so. It also helps those businesses who care about sustainability to reduce their carbon footprint, so again makes good business sense.

Majority of freight in this country moves by road. Rail freight plays second fiddle to passenger traffic on the rail network (this has the effect of keeping rail freight in the background because mixing freight into dominant passenger traffic limits freight). The interface between rail and road for freight has always been a barrier.

I'd look at something more radical - building freight only road routes and new technology to manage road freight trains on those routes. Take a portion of road freight off some trunk routes on to dedicated managed freight trunks.

If they were a bit roomier and a bit more comfy would you be taking the bus a lot more?

Yes.

I'd be looking to actively improve buses to target providing comfort comparable with trains. Spend the money on the road maintenance on bus routes - and dedicated bus routes - and bus stock.

 

[Dryce]

Pulling subsidies to fix a dysfunctional salary is quite extreme.

Or privatise and remove TUPE from the operating companies. If a private operator fails the operational staff have to face being part of that failure.

As things stand unions can in effect bring down a private operator without worrying about employment consequences for their members.

More fundamentally - the question is do we get value for public money spent. And if we don't - then spend the public money on something else.

 

[Bellow]

I’m sure that’s the case. The reality is that all fuel types are less efficient in cold weather - partly down to science and partly because of the way we use them to make ourselves more comfortable, ie heated seats, heating, aircon (to dehumidify), lights - they all consume some energy.

ICE though is barely affected by cold. Maybe, slightly longer warm-up period for diesels but that's about it as far as the engine goes. The rest is due IMO to atmospheric air being denser and, as the roads are generally slippier, more speed reduction for cornering which then requires more acceleration to regain cruising speed. Throw in wet roads with greater rolling resistance and that's where a couple of mpg are lost to. EVs are not immune to this.

The other way of looking a “free heat” is wasted energy, and an EV wastes less. Some of the energy wasted as heat in non-EV vehicles is harvested and used for cabin heating, the rest, and the rest of the time it’s just good old fashioned wasted energy. An EV doesn my waste it, so it has to convert the energy to heat purposefully hence reduction in range.

Electrical conversions for EVs and FCs are chemical and all chemical reactions are faster with heat, slower without it. ICE's chemical reaction is combustion and at 2500-3000C is barely affected by ambient temperature variation in the tens of C.
23C for the WLTP tests is high for the UK. Temps here (NE Scotland) have rarely (if at all) been above 5C for the past few weeks.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Majority of freight in this country moves by road.

It does but that’s because most domestic freight is relatively small in volume or short distance in which case rail freight isn’t viable or doesn’t offer either the cost or sustainability benefits to justify it, as the movements by road at either end plus the rail movement exceed just doing by road.

Rail freight works for large volumes and long distances.

 

[BTB 500]

The range of EVs are definitely more affected by cold weather driving - for scientific and usage reasons - it’s often stated on this thread, and I don’t recall anyone anyone suggesting that it’s not the case. The difference of opinion usually comes from the perception of how impactful that is.

The point was simply that fuel cell vehicles are much less affected, which may be relevant to some who are interested in zero emissions.

 

[Dryce]

ICE though is barely affected by cold. Maybe, slightly longer warm-up period for diesels but that's about it as far as the engine goes. The rest is due IMO to atmospheric air being denser and, as the roads are generally slippier, more speed reduction for cornering which then requires more acceleration to regain cruising speed. Throw in wet roads with greater rolling resistance and that's where a couple of mpg are lost to. EVs are not immune to this.

Winter diesel has less energy per litre. AIUI about 3%.

 

[markjay]

...But not necessarily accessible by EVs.

Not at current, no, but with more public chargers installed in our streets, yes.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

ICE though is barely affected by cold. Maybe, slightly longer warm-up period for diesels but that's about it as far as the engine goes. The rest is due IMO to atmospheric air being denser and, as the roads are generally slippier, more speed reduction for cornering which then requires more acceleration to regain cruising speed. Throw in wet roads with greater rolling resistance and that's where a couple of mpg are lost to. EVs are not immune to this.

I don’t disagree with much of what you’ve written there. apart from ICE is barely affected by cold. It’s affected much less, but it is affected.

A cold start cycle and subsequent increase in mechanical drag until fluids are up to operating temperature has a noticeable effect on consumption and therefore range, and even more so in cold weather.

The average journey length in time and distance in the UK is sure to be much less time than it takes to get up to full operating temperature - in Winter even more so.

It’s measurable and therefore not insignificant. It just happens to have much less impact on range than EVs.

 

[Bellow]

Not at current, no, but with more public chargers installed in our streets, yes.

But not in the home as you previously stated so fresh installations required. Not mere utilisation of the existing.

 

[BTB 500]

I’m interested in this 20% figure, which I think you have used a few times. Collective wisdom on the Tesla forums (where widely used apps such as Teslafi give some fleet-wide data) seems to indicate that AC charging is around 87% efficient and DC charging more like 97-99%. Obviously vehicles and BMS can vary, but from my reading the 20% would be an outlier low number rather than typical.

ADAC in Germany measure the total charging loss (mains kWh consumed during charging versus kWh added to the battery) to get an accurate cost per mile figure for the EVs they test. I have no idea how Tesla chargers/cars/apps would be able to measure/report this, if at all. But a total charging loss as low as 1% is inconceivable to me ... I'm sure you'd incur more than that simply converting mains voltage AC to high-current DC.

Note that ADAC are independent & impartial and not involved in promoting or selling cars of any type. I've previously posted links to test results they've obtained, but if I get a chance later I'll see what else I can find.

 

[BTB 500]

And in terms of general statements, that’s one random BEV compared to the entire available range of FCVs…

Do you know of any other BEVs with comparable price/range?

 

[PXW]

ADAC in Germany measure the total charging loss (mains kWh consumed during charging versus kWh added to the battery) to get an accurate cost per mile figure for the EVs they test. I have no idea how Tesla chargers/cars/apps would be able to measure/report this, if at all. But a total charging loss as low as 1% is inconceivable to me ... I'm sure you'd incur more than that simply converting mains voltage AC to high-current DC.

Note that ADAC are independent & impartial and not involved in promoting or selling cars of any type. I've previously posted links to test results they've obtained, but if I get a chance later I'll see what else I can find.

Would appreciate any data. It may be a question of how far you need to go back “up the supply chain” - which of course applies equally to ICE and FCV. What I am quoting is the loss from a rapid (DC) charger to a BEV, which is DC-DC. The c87% figure I mentioned was the equivalent AC-DC.

 

[markjay]

But not in the home as you previously stated so fresh installations required. Not mere utilisation of the existing.

Only in houses with a drive, obviously, but not in apartment blocks, or houses with no drive, where charging will be done via public chargers in the street.

Perhaps someone who (unlike me) knows something about electrical installations can elaborate on how complicated/expensive is it to rewire the house to get 3-phase supply for an EV charger on the drive?

 

[MeQ]

If you can’t make your mind up on looks between Mercedes, Porsche and Tesla then this BYD Seal has a bit of all three

BYD SEAL: Dynamic and Intelligent

The stunning BYD SEAL is a true masterpiece of ocean-inspired design, boasting an X-shaped front end that exudes sportiness and style. It is a proud recipient of the coveted iF Design Award, cementing its superior design and innovation.

www.byd.com

 

[PXW]

Only in houses with a drive, obviously, but not in apartment blocks, or houses with no drive, where charging will be done via public chargers in the street.

Perhaps someone who (unlike me) knows something about electrical installations can elaborate on how complicated/expensive is it to rewire the house to get 3-phase supply for an EV charger on the drive?

I may have missed something in this part of the debate but it’s not clear to me why houses would need 3 phase supplies in order to have an EV charger on the drive. Huge numbers right now operate perfectly well on single phase.

 

[BTB 500]

Would appreciate any data. It may be a question of how far you need to go back “up the supply chain” - which of course applies equally to ICE and FCV. What I am quoting is the loss from a rapid (DC) charger to a BEV, which is DC-DC. The c87% figure I mentioned was the equivalent AC-DC.

ADAC's data is aimed at cost to the owner, so total mains AC kWh consumed for a charge (what you are actually paying your energy supplier for). The figures I've seen relate to domestic wall boxes and 'granny cables' where you can easily measure the kWh taken from the mains supply. Not sure how it would work with commercial fast chargers ... presumably they report the kWh they output and total cost (free chargers excepted of course ). Unless the charger calculates and reports its own internal losses you'd have no way of knowing what it consumed in converting to DC - I assume that would just be factored in to the pence per output kWh rate you pay. Losses in the charge cable (potentially quite significant at high currents) couldn't be identified unless you reconciled what the charger output against what the car received. Losses from the input socket on the car onwards could be tracked and reported by the car's systems, but I don't know whether this is done or not. Apart from the extra complexity involved it presumably wouldn't really be in the car maker's interests to highlight the internal charging losses that occur.