Yes it's going to be a painful transition for some. Bound to be some turbulence. But the simple facts are as a society the demand for EV servicing isn't equal to the current level of providers. They require far less fettling. A direct marketing operation is perfectly feasible. So this is inevitable.
I'm waiting for specialist independents who can modify EVs to arise. Fix rather than replace batteries by replacing any single faulty cells etc. There are some in the states, we have one (Clevely iirc) I know of another in Holland but its wide open. In reality this isn't a disaster it's a massive opportunity to get in on the ground floor. I'm sure some will reject it. But history isn't on their side. Who remembers the Horse buggy repairers? Nobody.
As to the anti EV whining well it really doesn't matter. It's happening few years either way, no matter. It's happening.
Edited by Ethan Edwards on 24/12/2023 at 21:58
|
Just out of interest. You know we get threads concerning renewal of Insurance. Well I'm looking to renew my home energy deal. What's the motoring connection? Well I run two EVs so this very much pertains to motoring. Currently I'm getting 4.5p per kw enabling me to run around for 1.179p per mile. Cheapest deal found so far 8p per kw but the day rate is cheaper but the standing charge double. Overall a little more expensive. Early days, still looking.
|
I'm looking to renew my home energy deal. What's the motoring connection? Well I run two EVs so this very much pertains to motoring. Currently I'm getting 4.5p per kw enabling me to run around for 1.179p per mile. Cheapest deal found so far 8p per kw but the day rate is cheaper but the standing charge double. Overall a little more expensive.
Not sure I understand this, but taking a broad view of home and car energy production and consumption, our 14 solar panel array generates approx 3megawatts per annum, for which, thanks to inflation applied to the original 2011 contract, I get paid around 2000 tax free pounds per annum which pays for either most of our petrol or all of our domestic oil and electricity use.
Seems to me that now the FIT payments are so small the future lies in making a clever inverter to feed three ways - the EV, a spare battery pile which can charge the EV, or into the grid if both EV and battery pile are fully charged. Perhaps such a system already exists?
|
<< ... our 14 solar panel array generates approx 3megawatts per annum ... >>
John , there is a bit of confusion of units here. I think you are telling us that your installation provides 3000 units (kilowatt-hours) annually, which would tally with my own giving about 2000 units from 9 panels. Megawatts or kilowatts are an instantaneous rate, as I'm sure you know :-)
I expected my panels, which cost about £10K to install in 2011, to be paid off by the FIT after 10 years, which is about what came to pass, meaning that henceforth I should effectively get free leccy. However I suspect that, despite getting the protected high FIT rate, the revised contract which will very shortly take effect will mean that balance will no longer operate.
|
|
JohnF It does exist. I have one for my solar pv. Sunsynk Hybrid Inverter. With a home battery.
Edited by Ethan Edwards on 25/12/2023 at 13:56
|
|
|
|
"I'm waiting for specialist independents who can modify EVs to arise. Fix rather than replace batteries by replacing any single faulty cells etc."
Happens already.
My trusted indie bought a Toyota Prius some years ago to learn about the model and in particular issues with battery failure. He was able to replace individual faulty cells.
|
|
Yes it's going to be a painful transition for some. Bound to be some turbulence. But the simple facts are as a society the demand for EV servicing isn't equal to the current level of providers. They require far less fettling. A direct marketing operation is perfectly feasible. So this is inevitable.
I'm waiting for specialist independents who can modify EVs to arise. Fix rather than replace batteries by replacing any single faulty cells etc. There are some in the states, we have one (Clevely iirc) I know of another in Holland but its wide open. In reality this isn't a disaster it's a massive opportunity to get in on the ground floor. I'm sure some will reject it. But history isn't on their side. Who remembers the Horse buggy repairers? Nobody.
As to the anti EV whining well it really doesn't matter. It's happening few years either way, no matter. It's happening.
You don't seem to have read the article I linked to:-
"With each passing day, it becomes more apparent that this attempted electric vehicle mandate is unrealistic based on current and forecasted customer demand. Already, electric vehicles are stacking up on our lots which is our best indicator of customer demand in the marketplace"
If you cannot shift the stock that keeps arriving because you signed up to a Buick franchise agreement to take X hundred/thousand vehicles a year, because your potential customers are turned off by your product, that's not "anti EV whining" that's "why should I invest $300k of my own money to sell and service a product that my actual and potential customers are not interested in buying?"
|
Yes read it. Understood your points. Disagree completely. These are Temporary issues but the trend will continue. Buiick realise that, which is why they are covertly seeking to dump some unwanted dealers.
Big picture, its happening.
Let's say for the sake of argument a ME conflict causes prolonged fuel scarcity. Plausible right? Look what happened last time in the 70's. Gas guzzlers became as popular as leprosy overnight. Everyone bought VW Bugs and little Hondas.
Things change and the publics mood changes very quickly.
That's one scenario. I'm sure you can come up with many more.
Oh and what was the best selling car ( not EV) in Aug 23 across 160 countries...here's a hint. It was an EV.
Edited by Ethan Edwards on 25/12/2023 at 00:53
|
Things change and the public's mood changes very quickly.
Exactly. That's why both you and Focussed are guessing at what the future is for EVs, You both believe what you want to, the common human trait :-)
|
|
Yes read it. Understood your points. Disagree completely. These are Temporary issues but the trend will continue. Buiick realise that, which is why they are covertly seeking to dump some unwanted dealers.
Big picture, its happening.
Let's say for the sake of argument a ME conflict causes prolonged fuel scarcity. Plausible right? Look what happened last time in the 70's. Gas guzzlers became as popular as leprosy overnight. Everyone bought VW Bugs and little Hondas.
Things change and the publics mood changes very quickly.
That's one scenario. I'm sure you can come up with many more.
Oh and what was the best selling car ( not EV) in Aug 23 across 160 countries...here's a hint. It was an EV.
It's only happening now because the powers that be (controlled by some very powerful backers who will be making HUGE bank on the 'green' changes to society) have said it is and far sooner that both needs to be or is economically viable to do so.
If people cannot afford to buy an (expensive) EV, then you can't force them to do so. Note that sales of Teslas (for example) - which may be your 'most popular car' in Aug 23 - tend to back up in one or two months because that's when they're shipped worldwide, then nothing for many months. Rinse and repeat.
Car manufacturers were making more profits out of ICE than EV until the same PTB declared this cannot be so via 'environmental laws' that essentially prices small ICE ownership out of the game. Hardly 'market forces', more like communism with a corporatist twist forcing people and firms to do as they want to benefit the (rich and powerful) few only and send most to penury.
The mediaeval serf is back, with a modern twist?
If the ICE and EV market were to adjust organically, people wouldn't be complaining.
|
If the ICE and EV market were to adjust organically, people wouldn't be complaining.
You must not have met many people - people complain about everything.
|
If the ICE and EV market were to adjust organically, people wouldn't be complaining.
You must not have met many people - people complain about everything.
But they still only complain about things that negatively affect them, not things that are in their favour, don't they?
Here's a comment from a Telegraph reader regarding EVs in an article today about the coming year (car-wise):
Meet the new car. Heavier than the old car. More expensive than the old car. Shorter range than the old car. Longer to refuel than the old car. More expensive to insure than the old car. More damaging to the road than the old car. Easier for the Chinese to hack than the old car.
And they wonder why demand is collapsing?
Another reader relayed a tale of a Canadian Hyundai EV owner stiffed with a bill more than the (new) list price of the car to replace the battery. Presumably it was out of (battery) warranty, but even if it wasn't, that cost has to be recouped from somewhere.
That, linked in with EV battery fires and the potential for deadly hidden battery damage from minor accidents has caused EV insurance costs to rocket, far more than ICE cars.
I wouldn't be surprised if insurers are pushing some of those extra costs onto all car owners because they thought it might make some mid and lower spec EVs uninsurable, and thus making EV ownership for the 'Average Joe' a worthless prospect, killing the market. Not the first time (IMHO) insurers have pushed certain costs on everyone that technically should've been born by a few.
Perfectly valid complaints if you ask me, and 100% true in my view.
|
If the ICE and EV market were to adjust organically, people wouldn't be complaining.
You must not have met many people - people complain about everything.
But they still only complain about things that negatively affect them, not things that are in their favour, don't they?
If only - if something is in their favour they will complain that it's in other peoples favour as well and should only be in their own favour. Sadly there are a lot of people who just lik to complain no matter what.
|
|
Perfectly true but he gov is runaway train on this "green" issue and nothing is going to stop them. The last company that builds steel is earmarked to close down, with half the workforce being lost in the next couple of weeks. We will be the only modern country that will not produce their own steel, because of green issues.
|
Perfectly true but he gov is runaway train on this "green" issue and nothing is going to stop them. The last company that builds steel is earmarked to close down, with half the workforce being lost in the next couple of weeks. We will be the only modern country that will not produce their own steel, because of green issues.
Daft thing is that it's still produced, just abroad, and often to vastly lower environmental and ethical (treatment of employees) standards.
All because governments and big business can pretend they are 'saving the planet', when in reality they are just moving emissions abroad and often increasing them due to additional imports and inefficient production methods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In fairness, the article is on Breitbart; one rung below the Dandy for journalistic integrity.
|
There are people who want to go electric, there are people who don't want to, some of the latter (myself included) can see the advantages of a petrol driven car that can recoup some of the losses and may well go down that route next time.
Some battery advocates seem to assume those of us in the latter 1.5 groups will accept andf come to welcome being forced into going along with this latest must have, but there is such a word as NO, some should try it sometime, if we decide to go electric at some point in the future it will because we want the product not because we are being cajoled bullied or ridiculed into being suitably progressive, the more bullying that goes on the more those of us that use the word NO will push back.
Its not because we're dinosaurs (though if homo sapiens last as long as they did it will be a miracle) or as one poster ridiculed one of my posts about this subject a little while ago, because we like brmm brmm noises, it's because what we presently drive is far from broken, suiots our needs and is far from end of life and the current (hoho) fix despite all the fanfare doesn't convince us.
|
There are people who want to go electric, there are people who don't want to, some of the latter (myself included) can see the advantages of a petrol driven car that can recoup some of the losses and may well go down that route next time.
Some battery advocates seem to assume those of us in the latter 1.5 groups will accept andf come to welcome being forced into going along with this latest must have, but there is such a word as NO, some should try it sometime, if we decide to go electric at some point in the future it will because we want the product not because we are being cajoled bullied or ridiculed into being suitably progressive, the more bullying that goes on the more those of us that use the word NO will push back.
Its not because we're dinosaurs (though if homo sapiens last as long as they did it will be a miracle) or as one poster ridiculed one of my posts about this subject a little while ago, because we like brmm brmm noises, it's because what we presently drive is far from broken, suiots our needs and is far from end of life and the current (hoho) fix despite all the fanfare doesn't convince us.
Well said GB, I agree and my last post here, Merry Christmas all!
|
I agree with GB. My current Ssangyong Korando is serving us well, Costs are annual service, insurance and VED. Cost to change to an Ev would be too much loss on the current car which does what we want and after 26 months we really like our left field choice,
|
Yes you're not being forced. Nobody will pop round and take your car. Just that new ones won't be available.
ICE car usage will simply wither on the vine.
And I trust ALL our politicians to not unreasonably penalise ICE car fuel taxes or ICE vehicle taxes in a vain effort to compensate for their 'drunken sailor first night in Port spending', or to placate the greenies. Simply wont happen.
Edited by Ethan Edwards on 25/12/2023 at 14:24
|
I completely agree with EE - nobody is being forced, but the legislative and environmental agenda means EV will dominate.
No major political force has an alternative strategy. Development of ICE is taking a very second place to EV. ICE vehicles will begin to materially lag EV in terms of functionality, overall performance and design.
Fossil fuels are ultimately a polluting dead end irrespective of views on climate change - they will run out. Using them for transport where there are effective alternatives makes zero sense against its other more specialist uses.
Folk are free to chose if/when to go EV - it will make little difference to the outcome. In 10 years time the only ICE available will be s/h. In 20 years any ICE purchase will be 10+ years old. Spares and support will become increasingly marginal.
About then government will legislate to remove them from the road completely, if it hasn't already happened with autonomous vehicles taking over from homo sapiens.
|
cdn.shortpixel.ai/spai/w_669+q_lossy+ret_img+to_we...g
Hand cranked, apparently.
Sorted, 1912
She should have finished charging it by now, and it was probably repairable.
|
Even our politicians and Royals can now have an armoured EV to protect them.
www.driving.co.uk/news/new-cars/want-an-armoured-e.../
[Edited link as messing the screen width - mod]
Edited by Xileno on 26/12/2023 at 14:42
|
Looking at this from another perspective. ICE car owners ought to be happy that a lot of EVs are already in service. It reduces competition for the remaining fuel at the forecourt. And will provide used EVs for some to 'get on board'.
Your welcome.
|
Looking at this from another perspective. ICE car owners ought to be happy that a lot of EVs are already in service. It reduces competition for the remaining fuel at the forecourt. And will provide used EVs for some to 'get on board'.
Your welcome.
Nope. Do you think that filling station companies will push the cost of installing EV charging stations and possible car queuing areas onto just EV owners via charging fees? Especially when they (as a good business) need to provide such services that can nope with demand for at least (say) 5 years ahead of what it currently is?
I don't see ICE cars and petrol pump equipment being subsidised by the taxpayer (including commercial wind and solar generation, which keeps pretending it's 'mature' tech yet STILL needs huge subsidies to 'invest' [more like line the pockets of its ultra rich backers of the backs of ordinary people]).
I'm sure everyone who has to wait longer for a fire engine or to get to a destination urgently because it's on a shout trying to put out a toxic EV battery fire for 12hrs will be grateful.
Yeah, we have a lot to be thankful for as regards EVs. ((tugs me forelock m'Lud))
If people want EVs - great - but pay the FULL economic cost of buying and running/owning them. Don't expect the serfs to subsidise ownership for the better off. It's not as though 95% of them can't afford it, is it?
|
Have you any evidence of public subsidy for installation of chargers?
Sure purchase of EVs WERE getting a small bung but that's been over for some while. I suppose you might be irked by charging at home only attracting 5% VAT but public chargers pay 20% VAT. In Dec 24 EVs will pay VED so please explain exactly where you think you're being rinsed?
|
Have you any evidence of public subsidy for installation of chargers?
Sure purchase of EVs WERE getting a small bung but that's been over for some while. I suppose you might be irked by charging at home only attracting 5% VAT but public chargers pay 20% VAT. In Dec 24 EVs will pay VED so please explain exactly where you think you're being rinsed?
Because I believe that ICE car prices are being artificially raised to subsidise prices for EVs to enable car firms to sell them in sufficient numbers to avoid the penalties coming in this coming year (and getting more stringent) to force them to 'sell' more and more EVs compared to ICE cars.
They have done the same with boilers, where manufacturers admitted putting gas boiler prices up to subsidise prices of heat pump systems. And it STILL wasn't anywhere enough to get sufficient numbers sold.
For all those saying people are 'free' to still buy ICE cars, they aren't, because they are artificially being priced out of affordability by such methods and the so-called 'safety' and 'environmental' rules that pretend cars that now 'only' get low NCAP ratings are 'unsafe' when under just the previous rules, they would've achieved a 4 or 5 star rating (as opposed to a 2 or 3 at best) and been lauded for doing so.
And they aren't THAT much safer. Similarly with the Euro6 and soon 7 ratings, that have made (as well as the NCAP stuff) cars so complex they can often be write offs in relatively small accidents after just a few years of ownership, many are MOT fails even though the car is perfectly (physically) driveable.
Few are easily or cheaply replaceable, which doesn't lend itself to such cars being purchased when they get nearer the decade mark. This is why there are less and less new city cars and superminis, and why EVs won't be popular either on the second hand market.
I'd bet that car manufacturers are being told behind closed doors to deliberately make ICE car ownership as difficult / expensive as possible for older cars through them not producing spares or 'logistical issues' (the Pandemic ones should've been sorted by now, and yet...), despite there being millions and millions of cars on the roads worldwide that need them.
Unfortunately, the Plebs aren't playing ball, and thus more and more punitive measures are being touted / rolled out. That's hardly going to help those on modest and lower incomes, is it?
|
I'm sure everyone who has to wait longer for a fire engine or to get to a destination urgently because it's on a shout trying to put out a toxic EV battery fire for 12hrs will be grateful.
That's a daft argument as EVs are less likely to catch fire than ICE vehicles as you know so the fire engine is much less likely to be at an EV fire in the first place.
|
I'm sure everyone who has to wait longer for a fire engine or to get to a destination urgently because it's on a shout trying to put out a toxic EV battery fire for 12hrs will be grateful.
That's a daft argument as EVs are less likely to catch fire than ICE vehicles as you know so the fire engine is much less likely to be at an EV fire in the first place.
Is there any proof that EV fires are less common per (say) 1000 vehicles of the same age and load capacity than ICE ones? As I and others have said many, many times, there is a whole world of difference between an ICE car fire and an EV lithium battery fire.
The former, the vast majority of the time, can be controlled / extinguished reasonably quickly / easily, with not too much in the way of noxious chemicals given off.
On the other hand, lithium battery fires are essentially uncontrollable without huge amounts of fire brigade resources (far more than for an equivalent ICE car) - water included, and it is 100% proven that such fires give off significant quantities of incredibly noxious chemicals.
There have been several cases of fire fighters who've got life changing lung injuries (which ties up huge amounts of scarce medical resources and reduces the operational capacity of fire stations until they [at great expense] fin and train replacements) from being 'in the vicinity' of such fires, plus lithium battery fires are akin to thermite fires, which have to burn themselves out due to the chemical reaction making their own source of Oxygen to keep it going.
Some have taken days to do so (closing off busy arterial roads) , others have burned so hot / long that they took out entire ships, etc.
The closest you get on that score with ICE are certain cars with both aluminium bodyshells (aluminium oxide) and especially magnesium parts, such as, if I recall, some Jags. Even so, they don't have as much of the 'self-contained fuel source' as an EV would.
As I learned working on the Tube, the overall risk of something depends both on the frequency of it AND the resultant issues it might cause. In the base of lithium battery fires, they are far more significant than of petrol or diesel.
|
<< The closest you get on that score with ICE are certain cars with both aluminium bodyshells (aluminium oxide) and especially magnesium parts, such as, if I recall, some Jags >>
I'm not sure of the chemistry quoted here. 'aluminium oxide' ? And not many cars will have anything made of (pure) magnesium ; alloy (magnalium = Mg + Al) quite likely I suppose.
|
Is there any proof that EV fires are less common per (say) 1000 vehicles of the same age and load capacity than ICE ones? As I and others have said many, many times, there is a whole world of difference between an ICE car fire and an EV lithium battery fire.‘
Yes. The Guardian summarises it here - www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/20/do-electr...s
Amongst the hullabaloo around the recent fire at Luton Airport, there was apparent disbelief that a diesel engined vehicle could ignite, given the comparative lack of volatility of diesel.
What people don’t think about is that any car has lots of flammable materials, regardless of its fuel source. Petrols, diesels and EV’s have 12V batteries - short across the terminals, introduce a bit of underbonnet insulation and you’ve got, at least, a smoulder.
They’ve all got lots of flammable wire insulation, dashboards, seat facings, headlinings, plastic scuttle panels, maybe plastic body panels.
And that’s before you get to a tank of unleaded, diesel or a traction battery.
My point is that you will see EV’s go up in flames (there was one outside a house in the S-W recently), but given that the fire service extinguished it then left it outside the house suggests it was a car fire that happened to take place in an EV. The fact that the family were pictured leaning against the burned out car the following day suggests that the battery was not involved. That was a Vauxhall. Anyone remember the spate of Zafiras burning themselves to the ground a few years ago?
|
I'm sure everyone who has to wait longer for a fire engine or to get to a destination urgently because it's on a shout trying to put out a toxic EV battery fire for 12hrs will be grateful.
That's a daft argument as EVs are less likely to catch fire than ICE vehicles as you know so the fire engine is much less likely to be at an EV fire in the first place.
It may look statistically 'daft', but when that scenario does happen it will be rather unpleasant ?
|
|
|
|
|
Whining? simply putting their views which is fine wether you agree or not. UK EV only sales have been put back 5 years and it remains to be seen if this is feasible.
|
|
|
|