UK CAR SALES DROP.

[TheFoX]

It would be like comparing a 3000w electric fire to a mobile phone charger, or comparing Usain Bolt to a little old granny with her Zimmer frame.

 

[Dryce]

Here's the answer from the Tesla users. As expected, insignificant loss. What uses power is accelerating a two tonne vehicle to 60 mph and driving it a hundred miles, not sitting in traffic.

Figures of about 300Wh per mile seem to be commonly quoted.

So charging a smart phone 10W, car lighting - 40W total perhaps if using LEDs, heating or aircon could be quite a bit more (may include battery conditioning as well as the occupants). But would it all add up to something like 200W or 300W average over an hour to consume a mile without moving - and how often would you be stationary in that condition for an hour.

 

[markjay]

Here's the answer from the Tesla users. As expected, insignificant loss. What uses power is accelerating a two tonne vehicle to 60 mph and driving it a hundred miles, not sitting in traffic. Here's the link:

Model S Owners - Range loss while sitting still? | Tesla

Yes, owners report that the drop in range when sitting in traffic is either none or up to '2-3' miles for a 30 minutes wait. So no significant range loss, it seems.

 

[Deleted member 113659]

Yes, owners report that the drop in range when sitting in traffic is either none or up to '2-3' miles for a 30 minutes wait. So no significant range loss, it seems.

That's cause of all the totally unnecessary mod cons. When I were a lad helping out on a milk round the milk float used nothing when the driver hopped out.

Mind you the batteries were the size of 2 suitcases.

 

[markjay]

That's cause of all the totally unnecessary mod cons. When I were a lad helping out on a milk round the milk float used nothing when the driver hopped out.

Mind you the batteries were the size of 2 suitcases.

What? It didn't even have Snakes???

 

[Deleted member 113659]

What? It didn't even have Snakes???

Ok you lost me, Snakes? Are you showing your age Mr MJ?

 

[markjay]

Ok you lost me, Snakes? Are you showing your age Mr MJ?

Nokia Snakes.... what you would expect to find on a primitive device...

 

[Deleted member 113659]

Nokia Snakes.... what you would expect to find on a primitive device...

Arrrrr. Get ya.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

Well if it was night time you'll need to have the headlamps on;

If it was summer you'd want the aircon on;

If it was winter you'd want the heater fan and the heated seats on;

Your phone might be in the charger;

And the massive LCD display won't be switch-off off either;

So yes I can see the range dropping if you are stuck in a traffic jam.

Perhpas a Tesla owner could comment on the range display when stuck in stationary traffic?

When I was in Hong Kong just before Christmas Teslas were a popular form of Uber transport. HK traffic being what it was, my journeys included quite a number of long waits, where I watched the Tesla range with interest. Not once did I spot it dropping.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

There's a lot of dodgy Eco point scoring and tax-raising manipulation going on.

Most of London's pollution problem doesn't come from the bog standard Golf Diesel driving private citizen.

The true cause of the central London pollution is: Wood burning stoves, which produce 25-33% of the pollutants (sic), heavy commercials, including buses, and traffic flows in areas like Euston Road, Putney High Street etc. Rather than doing anything proactive, Government are just playing for time by debating whether to increase the 200% tax on fuel.


Pizza stoves more important than cars in causing pollution? Here's the background:
Blame Wood-Burning Stoves for London's Terrible Air

But is that correct. As usual with these matters, the opposing argument is also offered: https://inews.co.uk/news/environment/wood-burners-really-blame-londons-air-pollution/

 

[Deleted member 65149]

The growing evidence for particle and carcinogen generation [benzopyrene is only one example] in gasoline direct injection (GDI) vehicles continues to mount. It would appear the more engineers make a petrol engine behave like a diesel in the name of economy the more it suffers similar emission problems to compression ignition engines. Particulate Emissions can however easily be reduced with PPFs I find it hard to believe vehicle manufacturers are unaware of this phenomenon but once more are prepared to sit on their hands till legislation forces their hand.
http://www.ccem.ch/MediaBoard/CCEM_Annual_Activity_Report_2016.pdf#page=59&view=Fit

Really?

“Mercedes-Benz reduces nitrogen oxide emissions [from its 350CGI engines] in two ways: with an electrically controlled, cooled, twin-pipe exhaust gas recirculation system, which returns up to 40 percent of the exhaust gases to the cylinders depending on the engine’s operating point, and by two underbody Nox storage-type catalytic converters. During lean-burn operation these converters absorb the nitrogen oxides and release them during brief regeneration phases, so that these pollutants react with the other exhaust gas constituents to produce harmless nitrogen. Sensors located upstream and downstream of the catalytic converters monitor their operation.”

Mercedes-Benz E 350 CGI: More performance and lower fuel consumption thanks to innovative direct petrol injection | marsMediaSite

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

But is that correct. As usual with these matters, the opposing argument is also offered: https://inews.co.uk/news/environment/wood-burners-really-blame-londons-air-pollution/

If you look at my comment again, I wasn't saying that woodturners are the only cause of London's air pollution.

My point was that most of London's pollution problem does not come from bog standard diesel Golfs. I went on to say that the problem comes more from those wood burning stoves AND heavy commercials, including buses, AND traffic flows in heavily congested areas like the Euston Road and Putney High Street.

But sadly no council is ever going to admit that pollution is being caused by its own poor town planning.

Here's the NHS take on the whole report. Again, the NHS are not making our bog standard diesels the prime cause of the pollution that's killing our Dads and Grans prematurely:
Air pollution 'kills 40,000 a year' in the UK, says report

The good news, if you live in London, as I do, is that you can avoid the pollution hotspots if you just take a different route. Putney High Street has always been poisonous, while Barnes and Battersea aren't.

.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

I think it’s a little unfair to blame poor town planning (particularly in London) for pollution when most UK cities’ roads were planned and built long before Gottleib Daimler was born. Everyone’s short-sightedness, selfishness, impatience and greed are, in my opinion, far greater causes.

I think it’s a misconception that heavy commercial vehicles are more polluting than “bog standard diesel Golfs”. For a start there are far more of the latter group chucking out pollutants. But what most people don’t realise is that there’s far stricter control of emissions from newer heavy commercials, resulting in them actually producing less than half the NOx per km of that from Euro6 diesel cars! The technology is there to reduce NOx from cars, but not the incentive.
Diesel cars emit 10 times more toxic pollution than trucks and buses, data shows

 

[grober]

Really?

“Mercedes-Benz reduces nitrogen oxide emissions [from its 350CGI engines] in two ways: with an electrically controlled, cooled, twin-pipe exhaust gas recirculation system, which returns up to 40 percent of the exhaust gases to the cylinders depending on the engine’s operating point, and by two underbody Nox storage-type catalytic converters. During lean-burn operation these converters absorb the nitrogen oxides and release them during brief regeneration phases, so that these pollutants react with the other exhaust gas constituents to produce harmless nitrogen. Sensors located upstream and downstream of the catalytic converters monitor their operation.”

Mercedes-Benz E 350 CGI: More performance and lower fuel consumption thanks to innovative direct petrol injection | marsMediaSite

Yes really. The Swiss technical report I referenced dealt with the generation of particulates whereas your Mercedes reference deals with Oxides of Nitrogen produced by the 350CGI ENGINE------ two different moities. IIRC the generation of fine particulates is complex and can vary according to engine temperature- the levels increase with cold engines . The ultra fine particles generated in GDI clump together to form larger particles but are still of a size the bodies normal mechanisms of expelling inhaled particulate matter don't work. In terms of hydrocarbon carcinogens the molecules are adsorbed on these fine particulates which act as vectors to carry them deep into the lungs. The ongoing report which was limited in scope used several makes of engines employing direct injection GDI. They also tested several prototype PPF's with varying results varying from ineffective to good. AFAIK no Mercedes vehicles were used in the current survey in question.

 

[GeeJayW]

Particulate matter, even those of nominally benign chemistries, can be harmful simply due to size i.e. when they are very small (sub 10 micron). So much so that current regulations include the particle number (i.e. how many) as a controlled metric that applies to both diesel and gasoline. Another issue is that with modern diesel and gasoline engines, the particulates produced can be very tiny (sub 1 micron). These don't reflect visible light, so to us are invisible when they come out of the tailpipe giving a false impression of cleanliness.

NOx is a different pollutant, produced in a different way, controlled in a different way, correlates inversely with particulates production, and has different health effects.

 

[markjay]

UK firm building autonomous drone which will get you from Heathrow to central London in 12 minutes

 

[Deleted member 37751]

I do find it funny how pretty much every single negative news item gets Brexit shoehorned into it!

 

[Darrell]

I do find it funny how pretty much every single negative news item gets Brexit shoehorned into it!

We blame Brexit for the cold weather we’re having at the moment b

 

[anglaslt]

I do find it funny how pretty much every single negative news item gets Brexit shoehorned into it!

Yep. Euronews headline a couple of days back "UK car sales slump over Brexit fears". Still third best year on record though