The EV fact thread

[clk320x]

Pardon? You mean there was no alternative to me flying to Geneva off season for a couple of weeks?

Are you sure about that?

When I could have stayed closer to home ? Or even driven there myself in an ICE car and emitted less CO2 ?

Not a fair comparison though? If you could drive to Geneva in a reasonably similar time to flying then yeah…

People on here can barely tolerate a 20 min recharge, they aren’t going to drive those distances.

To be fair anyway my main argument for EVs is moving NoX and PM2.5 away from busy city centres, overall CO2 is a whole other ball game.

I can’t disagree with the overall premise of your argument though, IMO we need to electrify air travel ASAP.

 

[markjay]

And this probably explains why there are so many fast chargers everywhere......:

 

[BTB 500]

True.....but whichever way you look at it, the more EVs on the road the less CO overal

Not in the short term. The manufacture of an EV produces more CO2 than an equivalent ICE, so it's not until they've both covered a significant mileage that there's any benefit. As mentioned the 'break even point' depends on where the electricity used to charge the EV comes from - in the example of the Polestar 2 the best case was 50,000 km when charged solely using wind power and worst case was 112,000 km on 'global mix' electricity. Other cars will vary - I assume the size of the battery will be a significant factor in CO2 produced to manufacture, and obviously the efficiency (miles per kWh achieved) impacts the 'saving' when in use.

 

[BTB 500]

IMO we need to electrify air travel ASAP.

Not happening in the foreseeable future. Rolls-Royce abandoned their electric power programme last year ... all focus now seems to be on 'sustainable' fuels:

Green flights not in easy reach, warn scientists

No clear scientific solutions currently to the emissions caused by flying, scientists conclude.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Bellow]

To be fair anyway my main argument for EVs is moving NoX and PM2.5 away from busy city centres, overall CO2 is a whole other ball game.

No it isn't - or there'd not be a pending IC ban on their sale where they could be used outwith cities.

 

[markjay]

..To be fair anyway my main argument for EVs is moving NoX and PM2.5 away from busy city centres, overall CO2 is a whole other ball game....

No it isn't - or there'd not be a pending IC ban on their sale where they could be used outwith cities.

I am in the same boat as clk320x.

For me, the great thing about EVs is the removal of the toxic exhaust gasses (not CO2) from urban areas.

Personally, I am less concerned about overall CO2 emissions, for the simple reason that the only way of dealing with CO2 emissions from prive vehicles is to have less of them, and drive them less (reversing the trend and going back to using public transport). But that's a separate issue.

I fully understand your point, that Western governments are chasing Net Zero, but again this is not why I personally (and to my understanding, also clk320x) are in favour of EVs replacing ICE cars.

 

[Bellow]

For me, the great thing about EVs is the removal of the toxic exhaust gasses (not CO2) from urban areas.

Personally, I am less concerned about overall CO2 emissions, for the simple reason that the only way of dealing with CO2 emissions from prive vehicles is to have less of them, and drive them less (reversing the trend and going back to using public transport). But that's a separate issue.

The same argument of fewer cars also applies to NOx and particulates....

I fully understand your point, that Western governments are chasing Net Zero, but again this is not why I personally (and to my understanding, also clk320x) are in favour of EVs replacing ICE cars.

The changing climate if unchecked will kill many many more people than inner city pollution ever will. But hey, there'll never be a landslide or forest fire in London and that's all that matters.

 

[clk320x]

I am in the same boat as clk320x.

For me, the great thing about EVs is the removal of the toxic exhaust gasses (not CO2) from urban areas.

Personally, I am less concerned about overall CO2 emissions, for the simple reason that the only way of dealing with CO2 emissions from prive vehicles is to have less of them, and drive them less (reversing the trend and going back to using public transport). But that's a separate issue.

I fully understand your point, that Western governments are chasing Net Zero, but again this is not why I personally (and to my understanding, also clk320x) are in favour of EVs replacing ICE cars.

I agree.

 

[clk320x]

The changing climate if unchecked will kill many many more people than inner city pollution ever will. But hey, there'll never be a landslide or forest fire in London and that's all that matters

But replacing ICE vehicles with EV will only benefit everyone in the end. It’s just that you personally don’t want to give up your car, which is fine.

 

[clk320x]

Not happening in the foreseeable future. Rolls-Royce abandoned their electric power programme last year ... all focus now seems to be on 'sustainable' fuels:

Green flights not in easy reach, warn scientists

No clear scientific solutions currently to the emissions caused by flying, scientists conclude.

www.bbc.co.uk

Which is still a good thing, and I don’t think a reason to continue using ICE fuels for passenger transport when EV is a viable option for most peoples use case.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

And this probably explains why there are so many fast chargers everywhere......:

Has the EU been financing fast chargers that are springing up all over the UK and the States too ?

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

The EU is announcing today that it will put tariffs of up to 48% on Chinese EV imports. Good old Brussel Sprouts !!

(Hopefully not Koreans)

At last the EU is delaying the roll out of EV's across Europe !

EU to hit Chinese electric cars with tariffs of up to 48%

Brussels acts against imports it says are heavily subsidised by Beijing despite German warnings move could spark trade war

www.ft.com

 

[Deleted member 55947]

The EU is announcing today that it will put tariffs of up to 48% on Chinese EV imports. Good old Brussel Sprouts !!

(Hopefully not Koreans)

At last the EU is delaying the roll out of EV's across Europe !

EU to hit Chinese electric cars with tariffs of up to 48%

Brussels acts against imports it says are heavily subsidised by Beijing despite German warnings move could spark trade war

www.ft.com

Will the Chinese not just reduce the price of the cars to compensate for that?
After all they’re not in it for the money (just yet) are they

 

[markjay]

So do want cheap Chonese goods, or not? Well, we do, and we don't. The West hasn't made up its mind yet.

 

[Dryce]

Personally, I am less concerned about overall CO2 emissions, for the simple reason that the only way of dealing with CO2 emissions from prive vehicles is to have less of them, and drive them less (reversing the trend and going back to using public transport). But that's a separate issue.

I'm more concerned about climate change.

It's an existential threat.

By comparison the LEZs and ULEZs are just political willy waving.

 

[ALFAitalia]

.....and the quality of the air people breathe......which I think most sensible people would like to see improved in the big cities......as long as it does not affect me, what I drive or how much I pay to drive there of course!!!!!

 

[Dryce]

.....and the quality of the air people breathe......which I think most sensible people would like to see improved in the big cities......as long as it does not affect me, what I drive or how much I pay to drive there of course!!!!!

I don't think we have a tangible problem in our cities. I think we have sort of created one after years of tangible improvements. It's a bit like the opposite of the smoking research that demonstrated smoking was safe - so we have research and declared numbers which deem our cities to be unsafe.

There is also the practicality issue - "because we can" - aspect of implementation and enforcement when it comes to vehicles. So this enables private parking controls without barriers and bus lane enforcement (and bus 'gates' without barriers) and average speed cameras and so on.

I'm old enough to remember 'real' pollution where going into a city meant you felt it. I can recall the changes in smells and air through the 80s and 90s. That's hardly scientific - but I think it matches the the tangible progress. I'm now watching Glasgow ignore its problems of measurement and modelling of its LEZ (if the modelling and measurement don't make sense then how can you justify decisions made based on them).

So in my position of considered apathy for vehicle emissions in cities (and London suburbs) I am very concerned (actually appalled) by the impact of air travel and shipping of goods across the world. Among my peers I'm surprised by the number who will put the effort into reducing vehicle emissions but think nothing of making three intercontinental leisure trips per year.

Proportionality would suggest controlling long distance travel should be a higher priority.

I think that practicality issue means that it's easier to go down what is a effectively a righteous symbolic route of managed vehicle zones than tackle the really important stuff.

 

[ALFAitalia]

But as said above....air travel is pretty efficient carbon wise with a big plane flying long distance......way better carbon per person output than driving with one person in the car. But I appreciate what you are saying, that they doing really need to go at all. I do my bit buy not being able to afford long haul holidays more than about once a decade!!

 

[Bellow]

If inner city air quality is so bad for some people why don't they just move to somewhere with better air quality? If the answer is 'I was born and raised here, for generations we've been here' then clearly the air quality isn't harming them as much as claimed.

 

[Bellow]

Saw today that lifecycle figures published by Polestar give 112,000 km as the point where a Polestar 2 breaks even in terms of CO2 against an equivalent petrol Volvo XC40 (using averaged 'global electricity mix' for charging).

A kick in the **** off 70,000 miles! Not many first owners are going to be 'cleaner' in that over petrol. That will fall to subsequent owners and whatever remains of the vehicle's life post 70,000 miles. And still, bio-fuels are shunned.

And that is only the manufacturing of the vehicle. Still to be factored in is the enormous CO2 emissions from constructing the supporting infrastructure.