Whats your strategy for year 2030 / ban of ICE vehicles?

[markjay]

My opinion is that electric vehicles are like energy saving light bulbs we we all forced into. Inferior to what came before and will be superceded by the bet technology (LED) both are very political and driven by vested interests and money not common sense and science.
The obvious short term solution is to move existing petrol cars over to 100% methanol converting them (methanol has half of the calories than petrol, hence the issues with E10). Immediate reduction in pollution and renewable also uses the existing infrastructure then move to hydrogen. Neither have been considered by the government, why?
The government wants to end car ownership and electric cars fit this well as controlled by the manufacturer and government. This in the future will decide when you can travel, how fast, what route and charge you for the privilege.
I hope to keep my 2006 C280 going as long as possible.

All valid points, however the uptake of pure Methanol as a substitute for EV will only resolve the issue of refuelling speed. A car on 100% Methanol will do half the mileage of a petrol car for same-size tank (and even less when compared to a Diesel car), so those who reject EVs on the grounds of insufficient range, will also likely reject the pure methanol solution.

In terms of emissions, Methanol produces very low particulates and NOx emissions, which is great as far as air quality in city centres goes, however it only produces 10% less CO2 compared to petrol engines, and this will simply not go far enough for those concerned about CO2 emissions (the government).

 

[DrNick]

Burning anything is a bad idea. Even hydrogen isn’t going to be burned.

 

[clk320x]

You must be walking behind a bus. I’ve worked and lived up there for 30 years and never noticed And I’m right on Oxford st.

Nope.

I guess I pay more attention to it now and notice it more. Diesel cars do make a revolting smell tbh.

 

[Darrell]

Nope.

I guess I pay more attention to it now and notice it more. Diesel cars do make a revolting smell tbh.

I cycle in central London and the city most days and it all seems rather clean to me.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

The government wants to end car ownership and electric cars fit this well as controlled by the manufacturer and government.

Wait, what??!!

 

[clk320x]

Wait, what??!!

Sounds like the vaccine 5G argument

 

[DrNick]

You credit our government with too much competence!

By which I mean that even if they wanted to (and I’m pretty sure they don’t) they couldn’t get organised enough.

 

[markjay]

View attachment 122435

Yes, this was indeed a very sad case. This is her husband's Twitter page:

https://twitter.com/garetheve?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

However, it's not really related to this thread.... if you follow the conversation, then you'll see that daveseavista2 said that "The government wants to end car ownership and electric cars fit this well as controlled by the manufacturer and government", to which clk320x replied "Sounds like the vaccine 5G argument".

As you can see, the vaccine has been mentioned in the post above in relation to the conspiracy theory that the government is trying to control the population via the vaccines (which in turns ties-in to other, even more outlandish, conspiracy theories, including the various Bill Gates ones, or that there's a Free Masons' cabal of wealthy people, governments, and pharmaceutical companies who masterminded the entire COVID pandemic to achieve a 'New World Order', or that the vaccine was actually developed long before the pandemic broke out, etc etc etc).

Gareth Eve's issue, on the other hand, is a sad case of complications arising from the AstraZeneca vaccine, and how it was handled by the government. All of which is both sad and true, but not really a conspiracy theory and not really related to any of the posts in this thread.

Additionally, I feel it is inappropriate to mix someone's personal tragedy, loss, and grief, with a light-hearted comment made in jest regarding the government taking control of our cars.

Posted in the interest of clarity.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

Of course but the idea is that renewables supply into the ‘pool’ to offset the usage amount isn’t it?

Anyway air quality is a massive issue in larger cities, just try going for a walk in a central london street and the smell of diesel fumes is

Really? I reckon you must be a Nipper.

Back in 1995, I owned both a 4 litre Jaguar Sovereign and an immaculate 1968 Mk2 Jaguar at the same time. My MoT centre, just around the corner, happily pointed out that the Mk2 pumped out 25 times the pollution of the 4 year old Sovereign.

All through the 80's & 90's London air went yellow during windless winter evenings and mornings.

That said, there's a strong case for just banning ICE vehicles from congested city centres. What makes no sense at all is scrapping ICE technology before stable, refined EV technology has been created. It's comparable to throwing away landlines in 1990's and telling everyone to switch to cellular by year 2000 while the stable 4g and 5g cellular and Web 2.0 messaging technology was still a decade or two away.

 

[ChrisHGTV]

My Wife and I were discussing this yesterday (EV's and what we'd do). Id be quite happy with an EV, then a ICE for "pleasure" - so a classic weekend car, like i have my Alfa for instance. We've got plenty of space on the drive to allow charging etc so no issues there. The current range would be a bit of an issue for our (pre-covid) continental cycling trips but im sure that will be do-able with some planning. Most other journeys are probably on average 100-150 miles without an overnight stop (where the car could be re-charged). Im not concerned with any cost difference from the fuelling/charging aspect as im sure these will equilibrate anyway. For sure using EV's for many kinds of journey will require a slightly different approach but on balance i think for us it could work in a practical sense. The main issue i have though is cost to buy. I never buy a car new and normally only tie up about 15k per car. We could spend a lot more but although im a car nut ive never felt that comfortable tying up more. We always just buy with cash. I don't like the idea of leasing as i like things to "be mine" so i can do with them as i want. And this is where i start to struggle - typically the age of car i would buy, i would be nervous of the prospect of a big bill for a new battery within my ownership, or facing a huge depreciation in value when i would sell. I tend to keep my cars if i like them so there's a high risk id be lumbered with this cost.

So for me i can get my head round the practical conversion of going to an EV for the day to day cars, but the funding i think will require a completely different approach, and that seems to be the biggest challenge at the moment in terms of getting larger numbers of people to convert. Im not convinced costs will come down that much before 2030. Just look at other electronic gizmos like phones and laptops etc. Yes they can increasingly do a lot more and faster but im not sure the actual costs are less? Maybe i'll just have to bite the bullet at some point and lease.

 

[Tonye]

The main issue i have though is cost to buy

Spot on. Its all down to the money for day to day use, i too can cope with either planning a long trip or just use the SL for the trips down France.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Spot on. Its all down to the money for day to day use, i too can cope with either planning a long trip or just use the SL for the trips down France.

Is that a problem with EVs or new cars? By 2030 there will be EVs which are well over 15 years old, and there will be plenty which are 10 years old. And even then you won’t have to make the switch.

 

[markjay]

So for me i can get my head round the practical conversion of going to an EV for the day to day cars, but the funding i think will require a completely different approach, and that seems to be the biggest challenge at the moment in terms of getting larger numbers of people to convert. Im not convinced costs will come down that much before 2030. Just look at other electronic gizmos like phones and laptops etc. Yes they can increasingly do a lot more and faster but im not sure the actual costs are less? Maybe i'll just have to bite the bullet at some point and lease.

I agree that it will take time before there are cheap new EVs to buy, and before there's sufficient offering of old cheap ones.

There are three reason, I think, why new EVs are expensive.

The first two are obvious, and these are the huge amount of R&D invested in these young technologies and need to be recouped by the manufacturers, and the increase in cost of some components (semiconductors, HV batteries) due to current supply and demand issues.

But there's a third element. EV manufacturers at current semm to be competing on the same bracket, the 'smart' car. Everyone wants to build either a Tesla-beater, or a mini-Tesla. As result, the majority of EVs on the market today are packed with clever and expensive features that have nothing to do with the method of propulsion. The Nissan Leaf, in contrast, was a bold attempt at a 'simple' EV, but at 2011 it was ahead of its time.

What the market needs, in my view, is for car manufacturers to start building the EV equivalent of the Escort 1.3 L and the Astra 1.3 etc. A simple car that seats 5 and can cover 200-300 miles of electric motoring on a single charge. Without dual motors and AWD, wide-screen infotainment system, panoramic glass roof, autonomous driving, clever over-the-air software updates, etc etc. Just a simple, reliable, practical car, and above all, affordable.

 

[grober]

I agree that it will take time before there are cheap new EVs to buy, and before there's sufficient offering of old cheap ones.

There are three reason, I think, why new EVs are expensive.

The first two are obvious, and these are the huge amount of R&D invested in these young technologies and need to be recouped by the manufacturers, and the increase in cost of some components (semiconductors, HV batteries) due to current supply and demand issues.

But there's a third element. EV manufacturers at current semm to be competing on the same bracket, the 'smart' car. Everyone wants to build either a Tesla-beater, or a mini-Tesla. As result, the majority of EVs on the market today are packed with clever and expensive features that have nothing to do with the method of propulsion. The Nissan Leaf, in contrast, was a bold attempt at a 'simple' EV, but at 2011 it was ahead of its time.

What the market needs, in my view, is for car manufacturers to start building the EV equivalent of the Escort 1.3 L and the Astra 1.3 etc. A simple car that seats 5 and can cover 200-300 miles of electric motoring on a single charge. Without dual motors and AWD, wide-screen infotainment system, panoramic glass roof, autonomous driving, clever over-the-air software updates, etc etc. Just a simple, reliable, practical car, and above all, affordable.

Been saying that for a while.

 

[Swotty]

It is indeed related to the thread. Your insertion of the word "really" does not negate that.

What you have espoused is a different take on CC's view.

That is fine, as long as you acknowledge and accept his - and anyone else's - right to do the same.

 

[Tonye]

Is that a problem with EVs or new cars? By 2030 there will be EVs which are well over 15 years old,

And require a new battery at the cost of an ICE car today. 10k is my top wack, in 2030 will be around 15k, so just as well I'm keeping the SL (AT ANY COST).

 

[clk320x]

And require a new battery at the cost of an ICE car today. 10k is my top wack, in 2030 will be around 15k, so just as well I'm keeping the SL (AT ANY COST).

You know full battery replacement will be a thing of the past soon, there’ll be a market for battery refurbishment (replacing individual cells which fail)

 

[markjay]

It is indeed related to the thread. Your insertion of the word "really" does not negate that.

What you have espoused is a different take on CC's view.

That is fine, as long as you acknowledge and accept his - and anyone else's - right to do the same.

I am assuming this is meant for me.

Let me give you another angle to it then.

clk320x mentioned the word 'vaccine' - which is a reference to Covid, in essence is a forbidden topic on this forum - in a light-hearted way.

ChipChop took the opportunity, used the word 'vaccine' as a hook, and plugged a very serious - and very sad - true Covid story.

That ChipChop chose this particular story, it not surprising in itself. He often said - on the Covid thread, while it was still open - that he supports 'informed consent' for vaccines. And, indeed, this is what Lisa Shaw's husband said:
'Her husband Gareth Eve said the jab had been "outstanding" but its "risks" should be "recognised".
...
Mr Eve said he was "absolutely not an anti-vaxxer" but while "we don't know this information, maybe the answer is to give people the alternative".

"It's not as if we don't have other vaccines available to us, so while there is this cloud over AstraZeneca, maybe put it on ice and say we are going to look into giving people the other jab," he said.

Mr Eve added: "What the vaccine has done is unbelievable. The work these people have done to get the country back on its feet is outstanding.
"But we need to recognise there are families who have been affected by this jab."

He said he realised the number of fatalities linked to the vaccine was a "drop in the ocean" but said: "It hasn't been a drop in the ocean for our family, it has hit our family like a tidal wave." '

(From: Lisa Shaw death: Husband calls for vaccine choice )

In summary, this was a Covid-related post, plain and simple, which is a direct continuation of a discussion that ChipChop had on the thread that was closed.

This is unfair, because it allows him to post his own views freely, knowing all too well that others - like me - who disagree with him will not be able to respond to the content of his posts.

 

[Tonye]

(replacing individual cells which fail)

Still at a cost, and how much will that be ?

 

[davymead]

A team of scientists has written to the Committee of Climate Change warning that if the UK’s 31.5 million cars are replaced by electric vehicles by 2050, as is currently planned by the Government, this will require almost twice the current annual global supply of cobalt.

The researchers have also calculated that based on the latest ‘811’ battery technology (80 per cent nickel, 10 per cent cobalt, 10 per cent manganese), UK demand for EV batteries will require almost the total amount of neodymium produced globally each year, three quarter’s of the world’s lithium, and “at least half” of the world’s copper.

• Cobalt: the electric car's dirty secret

The letter, authored by a team of eight scientists headed by the Natural History Museum’s head of earth sciences, professor Richard Herrington, explains that to replace the UK’s cars with EVs will require 207,900 tonnes of cobalt, 264,600 tonnes of lithium carbonate and “at least” 7,200 tonnes of neodymium and dysprosium, as well as 2,362,500 tonnes of copper.

Furthermore, the Committee on Climate Change, an independent statutory body established under the Climate Change Act 2008, has previously called for all new cars and vans to be zero-emission by 2035. Professor Herrington and his colleagues estimate that to make the (roughly) 2.5 million new cars sold each year in the UK electric “will require the UK to annually import the equivalent of the entire annual cobalt needs of European industry.”