Nearly-new car prices slashed as demand for diesel drops

Engineer Andy    on 6 June 2019

As for previous months figures, wouldn't this be as much, if not more to do with the impending change to the WLTP emissions tests, whereby manufacturers were desperately trying to offload stock that they knew wouldn't pass the more stringent test or at least give results far higher for the emissions and far lower for the mpg, and thus last years's sales figures were artificially high? Not only that, but that the figures for June, July and August will be even worse as the date draws nearer to the cut-off date last year of 1st September when the test changed?

Do you work for Amazon?.

Que? Not sure what your question has to do my comment. But in answer, no, I don't.

Phil McMillan    on 6 June 2019

Unless you are a total road warrior, and do 400 mile plus journeys without stopping for food or comfort breaks, then such a large battery is a waste of resource. A fuel tank is an empty space and costs nothing in real terms to increase capacity from 200 miles to 400 miles.

A battery on the other hand has components which have an environmental impact in manufacture. For a moderate size battery, this is offset by the long term emissions savings an EV offers, even in countries heavily dependant of fossil fuel for electricity.

Once you build a very large battery (>125 KWh) that you would need for 400 miles plus, then the environment impact is large. Given that most people drive under 250 miles per day (around 45 miles per day is the average), the extra weight would also lower the efficiency of the vehicle.

For most people, a car that offers 250 miles on a single charge is adequate. For a long journey, taking a break every 3 to 4 hours for 30 to 45 minutes would be sufficient for rapid charging to reach anywhere is the UK.

I do believe that the future is electric, but the demonisation of diesel is unnecessary. The main problem in older diesels, small particulate matter, has been significantly reduced by modern diesel technology (DPFs / AdBlue / etc). You are correct that CO2 kills the planet, and N02 kills people. With the current UK electricity generation mix, moving to EV makes a lot of sense. The incentives I would like to see are;

- All new houses to have EV chargers installed as standard.

- The OLEV grants for home chargers to be expanded, and offer the option of an interest free loan to those who currently do not own an EV, but would like to have the infrastructure for friends and family (or for each electric car owner to be able to install additional chargers at other locations for a discount)

- OLEV grant of EVs to be increased and include an element for efficiency (i.e. Cars like the Kia eNiro to have a greater grant that cars that are less efficient, such as Jaguar I-Pace). This will help ensure that we look after the resources on the grid more effectively.

- Subsidisation of the installation of more 100 Kw+ capable rapid chargers in service stations, town centres and shopping centres.

- For those that own an EV and home charger, to be offered additional grants to install solar panels and home battery storage.

- Businesses to receive a reduction in their corporate taxes should they either install chargers for their employees / customers or provide electric company cars.

- Other incentives such as scrappage of old petrol / diesel cars during the purchase of electric cars. As a significant amount of resources go into manufacturing cars, safeguards need to be in place to prevent newer cars going to scrap. a minimum age of 12 years or minimum mileage of 150,000 would be sensible.

Although the cost of these incentives will be high, the savings to the NHS in the long term together with the reduction in emissions would be worthwhile.

Petegeoff    on 6 June 2019

Diesels are bad so is sugar now. Diesels give more N20 that kills people but less C02, so they kill people. Petrol produces more C02 less N02. C02 is on the increase over the planet. Therefore petrol kills the planet and the people on it in the end. It would not be too bad if the Government would take it more seriously and start putting in an electric car infrastructure in and there was an electric car with a range of 400 miles plus at a reasonable price. My diesel car does 45 to the gall the same petrol does 25. No brainer then. The Government would do better to follow Norway's example, buy electric and get a tax incessive and they have an electric car infrastructure.

Can't really compare a tiny but very rich country like Norway to the UK. How many cars are there in Norway? Not many compared to us. Of course, not many people either. And where did much of their wealth come from? OIL! Hypocrites!

NickNike    on 11 June 2019

Norway uses hydroelectric power stations. They sell all their gas to us. So there is zero pollution. Most our electrical generation is fossil fuels, so producing the electrical power for cars still produces significant pollution. To think electric cars are clean is a nonsense. CO2 is non toxic and required for plant life. The levels in the air are actually low, and global warming is a myth. You diesel may travel further on a gallon,l but the petrol car will have better performance, be smoother and quieter and more fun to drive.

There's too much politics involved in all this subject, and not enough engineering logic.

soldierboy 001    on 6 June 2019

The amount of pollution being moved elsewhere is a lot less than the amount of pollution being made today, so less is good. My problem is the range that you can get and the refuel time, so for me hydrogen is the answer, and you can make this at home. Bit like home brew for cars.

Paul Franklin    on 7 June 2019

To expand upon this last, well-crafted post:
Moving the pollution from town centres to power stations is advisable/ admirable, but the overall pollution levels actually rise due to inefficiencies in generation.
The grid has recently managed to run for short periods "without coal", but the power stations did not shut down, they went to tick-over and some of the coal output was stored or shared with other countries.

Electric vehicles, despite the pro-lobby crowing how green they are "over their lifespan" are still very heavy resource consumers and polluters during manufacture - it will take decades before they are truly squeaky clean and green overall.

The building of sufficient infrastructure to make EVs even partly practical will take several years and cost billions (the Govt has set aside just 10 million . . . .), and for what?

You can google and confirm all of the above.

For me, in my Euro 6 diesel, the way forward is clear - IF THE GOVERNMENT GETS ITS FINGER OUT!
I will keep driving my clean diesel, doing plenty of MPG, with as low as any petrol vehicle in particulates and way less CO2.
Then, once Hydrogen distribution is in place, I will buy a Hydrogen vehicle.
Emissions kept within close limits, until I can drive a vehicle with water as its only emission!!

How can we influence the market to move that way soon?
The 'Electric Lobby' has masses of marketing budget.