/ No new fossil fuel/hybrid cars by 2035

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
elliot.baker 10 Feb 2020

Just seen this and thought wow that's soon.

Has anyone got any interesting / informative / evidenced sources or articles they could link to about this? Specifically I'm curious as to the elements that go into batteries like lithium and cobalt etc., and how these are mined (and the impact this may have on the environment) and their relative scarcity (or not??)

Also, does anyone know what people who don't have a drive way and have to compete for on street parking will do? Is it assumed that every on street parking location will have charging, this is surely impossible as many people park just half on pavements or by the side of the road where they can. Does anyone have any articles or information on the power grid and how this would react to 30 million cars being plugged in at 6pm? Will it require double the pylons or every road in the country to be dug up for new electricity cables or something?

I find it interesting that this blanket ban assumes that there is literally no scenario whatsoever that might call for an ICE in this country (in a car). I mean... what if you are driving 'into the wilds' for several days? It simply couldn't be done in a plug in car could it? (I know this is not common usage but I just made this example up, there must surely be other scenarios in which a requirement to refill / re-charge will be required in the middle of no where).

Interested to find some sources on this and hear educated views!

Thanks

2
Phil Lyon 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

it's one of those things that politicians can say isn't it.

Other governments will be blamed in 10 years time when it's not going to happen so easily and clear cut.

Sorry that's not a source or an educated view, just a sceptical rant.

Post edited at 10:30
1
Pefa 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

I can't help with any of the knowledge you ask for but I must admit to looking out my window and seeing, the over 20 different places we park our car in the street outside our flat since we have to take what is left and wonder how on earth are people in 2,3,4 + high flats supposed to charge an electric car.

Or will us flat dwellers be forced to be carless leaving car ownership exclusively to those with a back and front door. 

summo 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

Hybrids should be banned today. 99% of the time they just pollute more whilst allowing the driver to feel smug about their fake green credentials. 

Was just in the news yesterday, the new suv Volvo hybrid with the average user is emitting more carbon per km, than the average 30,40,50 year old low tech volvos that are still limping along. 

2
Tricky Dicky 10 Feb 2020
In reply to Phil Lyon:

I agree with Phil, I doubt if the government will actually start seriously planning to install charging points in every lamp post.  Banning fossil fuel, but allowing hybrid cars is  a far more achievable objective.

summo 10 Feb 2020
In reply to Pefa:

> Or will us flat dwellers be forced to be carless leaving car ownership exclusively to those with a back and front door. 

To charge you don't just have to run an extension lead out of your front door! Imagine charging places on the street etc. It's a very solvable problem. Lifestyles will change, just as they have over the last few decades, century, millennium.... 

3
L mondite 10 Feb 2020
In reply to summo:

> To charge you don't just have to run an extension lead out of your front door! Imagine charging places on the street etc. It's a very solvable problem.

A rather expensive one though. Aside from anything else you will need a massive upgrade to the local power networks to allow for those charging places unless you only have a handful.

In which case those handful of spots are going to be keenly fought over. Bearing in mind there are plenty of places where people end up parking several streets away in the daily game of musical cars.

Jamie Wakeham 10 Feb 2020
In reply to summo:

> Hybrids should be banned today. 99% of the time they just pollute more whilst allowing the driver to feel smug about their fake green credentials. 

They are (were..?) a necessary stepping stone, technologically and on terms of consumer acceptance.

Used right they're pretty damn good. My Outlander is on a 3 year average of just shy of 100mpg - what other five seater with a huge boot could even come near that? 

The problem is that they're being bought by idiots who use them inappropriately - I know people with identical Outlanders getting 33mpg because they never charge them or use them primarily for long motorway runs. The massive company car incentives didn't help here, persuading people into poor choices.

summo 10 Feb 2020
In reply to mondite:

> A rather expensive one though. Aside from anything else you will need a massive upgrade to the local power networks to allow for those charging places unless you only have a handful.

Yeah well.. the cost of folk being hospitalised due to various respiratory illnesses isn't cheap either. Just a different budget. 

Just rip the paths up once, bury electric and dig in conduit that door to door fibre can be pulled through. 

You'll have endless charging points, proper broadband and no risk of storms bringing down power and phone lines.

Imagine a storm that knocks the power out and folk can't charge anything either. The future is coming, it's just a question of if the UK wants to be part of it. Or catching up 30 years later. 

> In which case those handful of spots are going to be keenly fought over. 

Smaller cars. Most cars are never full, apart from the annual holiday. 

Post edited at 10:51
Irk the Purist 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

We went from horses to cars in less time. Pretty sure people weren't worrying about not having a garage. The technology is here today to ban ice cars, it needs social change and investment in public transport, but it can be done. So I think 15 years is plenty.

If you want to buy a house today there are a few things that might put you off or make a property more affordable. No parking? No upstairs bathroom? In 20 years it will be no room for private charging. Oh well.

2
summo 10 Feb 2020
In reply to Jamie Wakeham:

I'd suggest you are the exception not the norm. 

They should be fastened to 1000cc engines. So when not being electrically powered, the cars creep along, instead of the current use where many are part of massive gas guzzlers. Porsches, bmws etc.

Post edited at 10:54
La benya 10 Feb 2020
In reply to Pefa:

Most journeys are less than 10 miles and the average EV range is more than enough for most people’s weekly usage. You don’t need to charge every night. When you do need to charge, you combine it with your weekly shop that has a fast charge station. An hour plugged in while you pick up your groceries and you’ll be 80 charged ready for the next week. 
 

if you have a longer journey planned you’ll just have to have a bit of for thought but even if you forget, waiting 20 mins at a rest stop for a hundred mile charge is hardly going to be the end of the world. 

1
Dax H 10 Feb 2020
In reply to summo:

> Just rip the paths up once, bury electric and dig in conduit that door to door fibre can be pulled through. 

> You'll have endless charging points, proper broadband and no risk of storms bringing down power and phone lines.

It would be great if we could have a little joined up thinking. A month ago my street was dug up to replace the gas pipes, for about 2 weeks we had diversions and trying to squeeze my van between the barriers and on to my drive was interesting. A couple of weeks after they finished City Fiber came round and dug it up again to lay a fiber to house network. Back to squeezing my van in and the paths look like a patchwork quilt. (the road and paths were replaced about 18 months ago. 

You would think its not beyond the bounds of scheduling to do multiple projects at once. Especially when just about all of South Leeds have been dug up for these 2 things. 

summo 10 Feb 2020
In reply to Dax H:

A council or highways agency should refuse permission unless they do coordinate works. 

elliot.baker 10 Feb 2020
In reply to La benya:

touché! won't everyone be getting shopping deliveries in 15 years? 

Reading all the thoughts above makes me think a big societal mindset change is required, certainly no consensus yet in to the how or the feasibility.

I guess every car gets left in certain types of places for periods of time long enough to charge it, and it's just going to be assessing which of these places is most appropriate for charging and installing infrastructure, e.g. workplace car parks, shopping centres, service stations... all car parks!??

It would be nice if there were just evenly spaced little pods in the road you parked on top of and it automatically started charging for you (like when you plug your phone in and almost immediately notice it's gone up 1%, that's a nice feeling!)

jkarran 10 Feb 2020
In reply to summo:

> A council or highways agency should refuse permission unless they do coordinate works. 

Then who will you complain to when your gas goes off (or worse, bang) while Transco are haggling with Virgin and Yorkshire Water over the fine details a joint permit to mildly inconvenience you for a couple of days?

jk

L mondite 10 Feb 2020
In reply to summo:

> Yeah well.. the cost of folk being hospitalised due to various respiratory illnesses isn't cheap either. Just a different budget. 

Yes a rather different budget. Reactive is always easier than preventative to get signed off on.

> Smaller cars. Most cars are never full, apart from the annual holiday. 

And how are you going to achieve that. Bearing in mind the current arms race to have the biggest car around to block everyone elses view of the road whilst maintaining your own?

wercat 10 Feb 2020
In reply to Irk the Purist:

> We went from horses to cars for the rich in less time.

that is true.  My grandad grew up with horses before WW1 and he worked with pit ponies as a youngster.

but he was 60 before he briefly owned a car (late 1960s).  It's easy to forget how car ownership expanded in the 60s and 70s.  

Post edited at 11:51
RomTheBear 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

The most likely outcome is that storing your car where you live isn’t going to be an option if you live in a city.

And it’ll be good news tbh, our cities would be so much more livable and beautiful without all those ugly stinky cars.

You’d still be able to have a personal car but most likely it will be stored just outside city boundary on park and rides equipped with charging facility.

Post edited at 12:01
4
Irk the Purist 10 Feb 2020
In reply to wercat:

Even looking at car ownership as % population it only really took 20 years from hardly any to 50%+ households (1950-1970). And that involved far more infrastructure than some plug sockets and a few wind turbines.

15 years is plenty of time for a mature technology like battery electric vehicles with a significant chunk of the market and government push.

elliott92 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

I think what people aren't addressing is commercial vehicles. As a carpenter and main contractor I do a hell of a lot of local driving, the most inefficient type. I need a van that can carry a lot of weight, charge real quick with a long range capable of a lot of short journeys in order to keep making a living. Anyway we can incorporate reliable solar on the roofs of EV's 

1
tom r 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

Lithium ion Batteries at the moment are very pollutant. If Aluminium Ion batteries become more used that will help.

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/lithium-batteries-environment-impact

1
elliott92 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

Also with the knowledge that wherever I move (some of us don't have a great choice of where we live and can't be picky with off street parking) I can know that I can park said van within eyesite of my house windows so when some scrote pikee ass hole tried to steal all my tools I have a fighting chance of hearing the alarm and doing something about it before they steal enough of my stuff to put me out of business 

La benya 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliott92:

How many miles do you do a day? Week?

Electric won't be the solution to everyone's transport needs. But if everyone that doesn't need to use petrol stops then those that do need to can use it guilt free!

jkarran 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliott92:

> I think what people aren't addressing is commercial vehicles. As a carpenter and main contractor I do a hell of a lot of local driving, the most inefficient type. I need a van that can carry a lot of weight, charge real quick with a long range capable of a lot of short journeys in order to keep making a living. Anyway we can incorporate reliable solar on the roofs of EV's 

Reliable: yes. Worthwhile: meh, depends what you mean by that but basically no. At least while cars look like cars we know today.

Solar energy is pretty diffuse (even where the weather is good) when compared to a car's energy needs.

jk

David Riley 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

I expect portable batteries will be part of the solution.   Tesco, drop off the empty, pick up a full one.

1
fred99 10 Feb 2020
In reply to David Riley:

> I expect portable batteries will be part of the solution.   Tesco, drop off the empty, pick up a full one.


You mean;

Drop off the empty (brand new) one, and pick up the (knackered and barely holds a charge) "full" one.

David Riley 10 Feb 2020
In reply to fred99:

Take it back.

summo 10 Feb 2020
In reply to jkarran:

> Then who will you complain to when your gas goes off (or worse, bang) while Transco are haggling with Virgin and Yorkshire Water over the fine details a joint permit to mildly inconvenience you for a couple of days?

Gas... you won't have gas. Individual carbon emitters installed in every house. Hopefully a thing of the past long before 2050. 

wintertree 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

If you look at battery capacities vs year, battery specific energy (energy stored to mass) vs year, recharging rates vs year etc and you see that EV technology in general and battery tech in particular is rapidly changing.  Googling those terms will give you lots of data.

People without dedicated charging will in 25 years time (when most fossil cars would be off the roads with a sales ban in 15 years), will charge once every week or two at a charging point - it could be a garage/petrol station like now, or it could be at a supermarket, cinema or gym etc.  Charging will only take a short amount of time.

If you google “aluminium ion” you’ll see a lot of promise in this - both to get away from using relatively scarce lithium and to get more specific energy.

Cobalt is only needed for permanent magnet motors: Tesla in particular use three phase induction motors in their more expensive vehicles - this just use copper and steel.  I’m not clear how much the economy of scale could bring their costs down - Tesla are preferring permanent magnet motors in some cases now for cost and energy economy reasons.  

Driving into the wilds?  In the UK I’d be amazed if you can drive the range of a current model EV without passing a charger; let alone a 2035 model.  How often do people drive beyond their vehicles range by chocking the boot with Jerry cans of diesel?  Hardly an overriding concern for modern consumer vehicle design.  However integrated solar bodywork gives you perhaps 20 miles per day on something like the Cybetruck somewhere sunny, and you could make a light weight field deployable solar array if you wanted...

The biggest problem with 100% roll out of EVs at current mileage is the need for a doubling (or thereabouts) in power generation.  It’s no coincidence that Rolls Royce are pouring money into small, high economy of manufacture, modular fission reactors.  Solar PV needs almost blanket adoption.  The river Severn tidal generator seems almost inevitable.  Winters may well see a lot of methane burnt in CCGT plant for many years, unless we create a new “low mileage, low industry” holiday around the winter solstice when solar is not much use.

In terms of cars being plugged in at 6 pm; your average Joe will need to charge a current model EV once every 15 days going off actual mileage.  So there’s incredible scope to distribute charging in time to times or energy surpass.  Most current domestic chargers don’t have the smarts for it as the government paid over the odds under OLEV to have dumb chargers rolled out free to the user...

I see no fundamental barriers to adapting over the next quarter century.

tom r 10 Feb 2020
In reply to wintertree:

The river Severn tidal generator should have been built decades ago. The second or third biggest tidal range in the world not been used for generating electricity in a high usage country should be a national scandal.

mutt 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

Its a bit dispiriting that there is so much ignorance about the pace of change in technology given that 10 years ago hardly anyone had a mobile phone and 20 years ago the internet wasn't a thing.

So it turns out that in 1979(or was it 1978) north sea gas was discovered at the same time as OPEC where inflating the cost of middle eastern oil by restricting supply to the extent that the nation went down to a 3 day working week to preserve fuel. Under Tony Ben the labour minister of something akin to Business and Enterprise, oil rigs were created,the wells were drilled and a nationwide gas distribution network was created to deliver north sea gas to the vast majority of houses in the country. This was all achieved in the space of 1 year.

Making the changes to distribute electricity to every parking space is, I would suggest, substantially easier as it is technology that has long been able to deliver electricity to every household in the country. And no I don't have a notion how many technical challenges there are but taking a look back over the last 50 years of technological innovation I have no fears that 30 million cars cannot be charged at the same time in that extremely relaxed 15 year time scale.

However, this is, as usual, just words! What we need now is ACTION, Every one of us should be deeply skeptical about governments willingness to emasculate the oil companies in the time frame. The vast majority of oil extracted goes to propel private cars. Will the government be brave enough to remove the income stream form BP and Shell in that time frame? And I think we have even more reason to doubt that the directorship of those companies are able to make the transition to sustainable fuel given that their chief executives have worked in the oil and gas industry exclusively. Do they know anything else?

We must take the initiative and challenge Government, the Oil Industry and the Car industry to act on the warnings from the Scientific Community. Not in 15 years but right now! We cannot let fear of imagine problems put us off from demanding an end to fossil fuels in the 8 years remaining to us to go carbon free. Otherwise we risk catastrophic feedback events that threaten the very existence of the species. However unlikely that is we cannot risk such an event and raising temperatures over 1.5 C against pre-industrial averages makes those mechanisms very much more likely.

Strike for the climate of 14th February. Communicate to this government that words are not enough.

Post edited at 14:19
1
mrphilipoldham 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

I'd often pondered the charging situation for those with no driveway, as I currently have to park 100m away down the road. The solution I've come up with is hoping that everywhere I go to has a charging point, so I can charge it whilst working/shopping/whatever and so in theory not need to worry about charging it at home. Average distance travelled 'out' is maybe 25 miles, so range wouldn't be a problem with current tech.

elliot.baker 10 Feb 2020
In reply to mutt:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/11/25/why-everything-they-say-about-climate-change-is-wrong/#5186b91612d6

This article suggest there is no existential threat to mankind due to climate change. Perhaps other species but not us.

2
jkarran 10 Feb 2020
In reply to summo:

> Gas... you won't have gas. Individual carbon emitters installed in every house. Hopefully a thing of the past long before 2050. 

Swap electricity for gas, the point stands: if utilities are not allowed to dig until more than one service needs change or repair the networks collapse because the work required is infrequent and often reactive.

jk

jkarran 10 Feb 2020
In reply to David Riley:

> I expect portable batteries will be part of the solution.   Tesco, drop off the empty, pick up a full one.

I did once but I don't anymore. There's the simple mechanics of safely moving all that energy dense solid mass around what is a human space. There is the reduced ability to significantly integrate battery and vehicle structure. There is the brake on innovation as designs become constrained by standard forms, capacities etc. There is the necessity for strong standards to be developed and agreed during a period of intense innovation and competition where there is no driver for cooperation. Ultimately, there's not enough need to overcome those hurdles, fast charging is already good enough and only getting better.

jk

Post edited at 14:43
summo 10 Feb 2020
In reply to jkarran:

> Swap electricity for gas, the point stands: if utilities are not allowed to dig until more than one service needs change or repair the networks collapse because the work required is infrequent and often reactive.

No. That's not really the point that was being made. Doing planned works just a week or two apart, digging up the same bit of road is ridiculous and it's the customer that's paying for It, both financially and with inconvenience.

If you bury 150mm conduit, you don't have to do any digging in the future to replace, or modify and upgrade fibre connections. 

Post edited at 14:47
wbo2 10 Feb 2020
In reply to David Riley:they're too big and non standard.  Given how well the modern batteries work I don't really see this ever being 'the solution'.   You can go and buy any number of models of chargeable cars with a >200 mile range. 

The ultimate driver for this will come when a lot of garages shut and petrol becomes an expensive p.i.t.a. to source

## the national grid can handle the load incidentally - or at least say they can 

Post edited at 14:59
mutt 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

so you've google it and now you are an expert? Schellenberger is a lobbyist. He' is widely accused of applying a veneer of light weight analysis to any number of environmental topics and flip flopping according to whomever is paying. I said, listen to the scientists not the lobbyists.

jkarran 10 Feb 2020
In reply to summo:

> No. That's not really the point that was being made. Doing planned works just a week or two apart, digging up the same bit of road is ridiculous and it's the customer that's paying for It, both financially and with inconvenience.

That is the point that was being made. While roadworks for service maintenance/upgrade are an emotive touchstone in conversation they're generally not actually that disruptive, however if you force one service provider to wait for a shared use permit then the networks and the services they provide will degrade rapidly.

Imagine calling to get your broadband or water fixed to be told they're aware of the issue but waiting for something else to break so they can get a permit to deal with it. It's ok though, on average that road gets dug up twice a year so it won't be long in the grand scheme of things.

Yes it'd be nice if that work could be minimised but given much of it is reactive and the business plans and capabilities of disparate private enterprises cannot be forcibly synchronised (because nationalisation!!!) It's just not practical or realistic in most circumstances.

> If you bury 150mm conduit, you don't have to do any digging in the future to replace, or modify and upgrade fibre connections. 

Until you do.

jk

summo 10 Feb 2020
In reply to jkarran:

> Until you do.

With conduit they just blow new fibre cables through the pipe, all the work is at either end at junction boxes. 

Unless!!!! Some Muppet digs through them! 

elliot.baker 10 Feb 2020
In reply to mutt:

I didn't say I was an expert and I wouldn't claim to be and I have no idea who the guy is who wrote that article.

I've read a couple of the IPCC reports though and I've never seen anything that says our species' existence is under threat.

5
henwardian 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

This isn't well resourced, but I think many of the people who see this as unrealistic are posing problems that they haven't tried very hard to think of solutions for.

e.g.

Problem: The "I want to adventure in the middle of nowhere" point.

Solution: There isn't any "middle of nowhere" in the UK. At all. Period. The furthest you can get from a sizable town is perhaps... 30 miles? And even then, there are plenty of small villages which will, inevitably need charging facilities for their residents to use. Ergo, you can use them when travelling in the wilds.

Problem: Everyone needs to charge at 6pm.

Solution: Not in a technologically controlled solution they don't. The charging network needs enough connectors for each car but can save massively on infrastructure by charging each car during a different "slot" between 6pm and 7am and the entire network can be in a constant state of optimised flux if you allow the cars to communicate directly with the chargers so the network is aware of when and for how long your car is likely to need charged.

Problem: Not enough raw materials/expensive raw materials.

Solution: Solid state batteries. They are not in production yet but the prototypes are incredible. This also solves issues with charging rate, battery lifespan and maximum charge storage (read maximum range for the vehicle).

Problem: Charging point needed for every car.

Solution: There are lots of parts to this. Firstly, 72% of cars are either parked on private property or in a garage (https://www.racfoundation.org/motoring-faqs/mobility), so charging facilities on the street are actually only needed for about a quarter of vehicles - everyone else can just plug into a glorified power socket in their own house. Secondly, many vehicles, especially for people who are retired or work from home, will not be used every day, so the charging required is much reduced. Thirdly, the infrastructure needs to be built but this is well within our ability - you only need to look at similar infrastructures in the UK like street lights and gas, water and phone connections to see that having a connection for every person of a service is very manageable, it just requires the commitment to embarking on the project. In a country that can fund HS2, we can certainly fund an electric car infrastructure.

To all the cynics about the governments plan to actually achieve this: There will be milestones every single step of the way - numbers of charging points, numbers of electric cars, etc. etc. - and if the government fails to keep increasing these metrics in line with what is needed, this WILL be pointed out in the media and WILL be clear to see on the streets of our towns and cities. The question is not whether the government means to deliver their promise, the question is whether the public will punish them in the next election if they are not on their way to delivering it.

1
elliot.baker 10 Feb 2020
In reply to henwardian:

Good points, thanks! 

Tom V 10 Feb 2020
In reply to mutt:

> Its a bit dispiriting that there is so much ignorance about the pace of change in technology given that 10 years ago hardly anyone had a mobile phone and 20 years ago the internet wasn't a thing.

Ignorant or not, I'm pretty sure that the internet was well established twenty years ago and I'm absolutely positive that nearly everyone had a mobile phone fifteen years ago. Slight exaggeration maybe, but Vodaphone alone had 14 million UK customers in 2005.

Post edited at 15:50
mutt 10 Feb 2020
In reply to Tom V:

Adsl was introduced on 2001. Prior to that if you had a connection it would only download text. Fine if you are an academic only interested in words, not so good for internet enabled life. 

https://kitz.co.uk/adsl/history.htm

first generation of data enabled mobile was 2G, invented in 1991 so yes completely wrong there, I guess I was thinking about smart phones.

never-the-less running electricity down a wire isn't exactly taxing.

edited to remove ignorant and replace with pessimism

3
Eric9Points 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

> I didn't say I was an expert and I wouldn't claim to be and I have no idea who the guy is who wrote that article.

> I've read a couple of the IPCC reports though and I've never seen anything that says our species' existence is under threat.

So the only thing that would persuade you that electric vehicles are necessary is the complete extinction of the human race?

1
elsewhere 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

> Does anyone have any articles or information on the power grid and how this would react to 30 million cars being plugged in at 6pm?

You can be pretty sure petrol stations would not cope if 30 million cars went to fill up at 6pm.

There are 8000* petrol stations in the UK, on average each would have a queue of 4000 cars so at 60 cars per hour the last person in the queue would get petrol/diesel after waiting about 3 days.

A coordinated fueling by 30 million people is not worth planning for. A coordinated plan by 30 million people to run  batteries flat at the same time is also not worth planning for.

20* miles per day is UK average, an electric car needs about 0.2kWh* per mile so 4kWh per day compared to average household consumption 10kWh* per day. That doesn't sound too bad for a network that can cope with a UK widespread winter frost, although charging during a widespread winter frost might go pear shaped,

So back of the envelope suggests charging demand requires no sci-fi provided charging spread through the night (not 6pm-7pm).

Replacing domestic gas (35kWh per day and seasonal) looks ten times harder than electric vehicles (4kWh per day and not very seasonal). 

*it's on the internet, so they must be true!

Post edited at 16:49
mutt 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab2726 details one of the many mechanisms of  feedback. i.e the release of methane from wetlands d/t global heating actively exacerbates global heating

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320718313636 details the 6th mass extinction of life on earth, particularly insects, which because they pollinate crops for humans (and animals) is very much an existential risk to humankind.

there are many others.

https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ is the report that demands " model pathways with no or limited overshoot of 1.5°C, global net anthropogenic CO2 emissions decline by about 45% from 2010 levels by 2030 (40–60% interquartile range)" does indeed indicate that we are all fine but then the Antarctic has already warmed by 3degreesC and that is where the ice is (or isn't!).

Caution is probably best when deciding how to react to a warming world imo.

Post edited at 17:03
wercat 10 Feb 2020
In reply to Tom V:

I was quite a late adopter of the internet, signing up for dial up Compuserve in 1998.  Within a minute of signing up I experienced a cyber attack - asking me to re-enter my credit card details!

The magazines were already giving away floppy disks for AOL and compuserve etc as early as 93.

As I said I saw a demo of "the internet" in about 82-3 and at a conference in May 92 a presentation/demo of HP's view of global access to data and functionality that we now call the Web. They showed what they saw as the goal and the audience was astonished by the assertion that they were about 98% there.

wercat 10 Feb 2020
In reply to mutt:

I was watching spacewalks on NASA TV long before we got adsl - we only had a voice band US Robotics modem and dial up Compuserve.

We still had dial up when that big storm hit cumbria in the noughties - I know because I managed to get the BBC website up via dial up using the internal modem on an old thinkpad(?) which I managed to power from a car battery.  Mobile fones were down for days for those who had them and electricity was off for a couple of days for us and a week for some folk.  We got more than text via those audio signals

Post edited at 17:08
HansStuttgart 10 Feb 2020
In reply to La benya:

> Most journeys are less than 10 miles and the average EV range is more than enough for most people’s weekly usage. You don’t need to charge every night. When you do need to charge, you combine it with your weekly shop that has a fast charge station. An hour plugged in while you pick up your groceries and you’ll be 80 charged ready for the next week. 

EV cars aren't that good for small journeys. The optimum is a lot of medium length drives (about 100 km/day). From a money point of view: the car is 10.000 euro more expensive because of the batteries, but costs/km is much lower because electricity is cheap*. If you drive 100 km/day an EV car is now cheaper than a petrol car and you make money after a couple of years. but you need to be able to afford the initial investment. From an environmental point of view: EV cars emit less CO2 per km, but the CO2 emitted during the production is higher (more mineral mining). Moreover, the latter CO2 emission is done upfront and CO2 that is emitted not now but 5 years down the line is better. 

For long distance driving, EVs aren't great either, because the cars then become very heavy.

So, EVs are great for medium distance commuting traffic. It just requires people to accept buying a car with a range of 100 km for their commutes and rent a ICE car for their weekend trips.

PS. This analysis changes when energy taxes on petrol are transferred to electricity prices in an EV driving society.

1
elsewhere 10 Feb 2020
In reply to HansStuttgart:

Does that mean EV worse environmentally than small ICE for average usage which is much less than 100km per day?

1
Irk the Purist 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elsewhere:

As an asthmatic it infuriates me that people keep forgetting the impact diesels and petrol engines are having on my lungs. Even if ice cars had no impact on climate change at all, it should still be an urgent priority to remove them from our roads.

1
La benya 10 Feb 2020
In reply to HansStuttgart:

Why do you say they aren't good for short journeys? 

elsewhere 10 Feb 2020
In reply to Irk the Purist:

Good point.

wintertree 10 Feb 2020
In reply to mutt:

> Adsl was introduced on 2001. Prior to that if you had a connection it would only download text.  Fine if you are an academic only interested in words, not so good for internet enabled life. 

Totally disagree.  In 1994 we downloaded and watched a movie of the Shormaker-Levy impact on Jupiter.  In 1996 I was collaborating with people on different continents on a problem.  I hadn’t even finished 6th form at that point but the Internet was enabling my life.   My dad was contacting distant relatives through the Internet then on a family tree project.

In 1997 my sixth form had fast internet and my employer had dual channel ISDN.

> never-the-less running electricity down a wire isn't exactly taxing.

Beg to differ.  Ah awful lot of work goes in to distributing power.  It’s all manageable and there are no great surprises but it’s not trivial - land ownership, access rights, pylon foundations, vector force balancing on poles and pylons, theres 101 things not directly related to putting electricity down a wire...
 

wintertree 10 Feb 2020
In reply to La benya:

> Why do you say they aren't good for short journeys? 

I think they really mean “low annual mileage” rather than “short journeys”.  At the moment there’s a price premium to EVs and so it doesn’t make economic sense to buy one for low mileage use as the savings over combustion cars (5p per mile vs 12 p per mile energy costs, 0 rated VED, lower maintenance costs) aren’t enough to make up for the increase capital outlay.

This ignores external costs (health damage to others from combustion engine pollution, climate costs).

Our EV is great for short journeys.  The moment I leave the village speed limit my right foot goes down and I don’t have a worry in the world about caning a cold engine.  For a vehicle that does many short journeys and so normally runs cold, an EV far surpasses combustion.  

HansStuttgart 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elsewhere:

> Does that mean EV worse environmentally than small ICE for average usage which is much less than 100km per day?


maybe. EV has higher fixed cost and lower cost per km. Where the crossover is depends on factors like: how much nuclear/wind energy is in the grid at the time the car is charged, what materials are in the battery and where do they come from, how much battery is in the car, the lifetime of the batteries, etc.

For a lot of small distance commutes, e-bikes are the solution 25 kg additional transport per person, as opposed to 1000 kg EV car. I am reliably informed it almost never rains in the UK either.... 

HansStuttgart 10 Feb 2020
In reply to La benya:

it is a fixed cost vs variable cost issue.

EVs are good at reducing variable costs (cost per km) but have a high fixed cost (production of the vehicle). So you need a minimum amount of km before EVs surpass ICE cars.

BTW, cost here refers both to money and to environmental costs. This is correlated. Once something is very expensive, there are a lot of possibilities for suppliers to burn fossile fuel somewhere in the process. Especially considering oil and coal are very cheap if you don't pay taxes. Manufacturers never pay energy tax.

wintertree 10 Feb 2020
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> BTW, cost here refers both to money and to environmental costs. This is correlated.

The main additional cost in an EV is the lithium battery pack.  It’s not clear to me that it’s appropriate to account all off that environmental cost to the vehicle as battery packs are being reused (stationary storage) and then recycled.

La benya 10 Feb 2020
In reply to HansStuttgart:

Thanks for clarifying. Are they more expensive initially? Genuine question as I haven't ever shopped for a new car. When I see electric cars being advertised they seems ballpark the same as normal. A quick Google shows the new Audi e tron for £60k for the electric. That doesn't seem massively over the odds for a high end SUV... And the audi Q7 is basically the same price for a much older car model...not that I would spend that much personally. 

bonebag 10 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

Have a look at this. I watched it last night.

https://www.thegwpf.com/is-it-really-the-end-of-internal-combustion-engines-petroleum-in-transport

Only one point of view but I found it very interesting.

wbo2 11 Feb 2020
In reply to elsewhere:

> Does that mean EV worse environmentally than small ICE for average usage which is much less than 100km per day?

No. That's basically the same argument as 'is getting a cleaner, newer ICE more polluting than using my banger when manufacture is taken into account?' where the answer is no, and even more so for an EV.

to HanSyuttgart - re short journeys - I do <100km per days, normally in the 40- 80 range and my 2nd hand car is appreciably cheaper than the previous ICE , by several hundred pounds per month, when all costs are taken into account, plus there are the driving advantages Wintertree notes.  Costs include car purchase,, fuel, road tax, tolls, electricity and servicing.

And they are simply better to drive for short journeys, particularly if you have roundabouts, stop start traffic and so on

elsewhere 11 Feb 2020
In reply to wbo2:

Stop start traffic - I was walking along the road catching up with a bin lorry stopping every 15-20 metres for the guys to pick up 4 bins from adjacent houses. I thought the wear and tear on brakes and clutch along with fuel economy must be horrendous. Looked like an ideal case for EV or hybrid.

jimtitt 11 Feb 2020
In reply to elsewhere:

There's some going into service in Basel, I expect the fleet operators will be looking at long-term battery life on something with a use cycle like a bin-truck.

Ian W 11 Feb 2020
In reply to elsewhere:

> Stop start traffic - I was walking along the road catching up with a bin lorry stopping every 15-20 metres for the guys to pick up 4 bins from adjacent houses. I thought the wear and tear on brakes and clutch along with fuel economy must be horrendous. Looked like an ideal case for EV or hybrid.

A bit like the duty cycle for milk floats in the 60's and 70's..........

ianstevens 11 Feb 2020
In reply to wintertree:

Re: the wilds - take a look at the map of chargers in mid wales. 

Philb1950 11 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

Irrespective of charging points and range limitations and the whole logistics issues of electricity generation etc, the dust to dust costs of an EV far exceeds that of a post 2016 with limited emissions ITC vehicle kept for 10 years or more. Electricity is less calorific in value compared to petrol, so large trucks are nonviable because of lack of power and very limited range. Finally what about decommissioning the batteries and very limited rare metals available for batteries, or do we start digging up the planet? Battery technology is already knocking on the door of physics and what is possible, given current technology.

2
HansStuttgart 11 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

here is an EU report on lifecycle analysis of EVs and ICEs:

https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/electric-vehicles-from-life-cycle

wintertree 11 Feb 2020
In reply to Philb1950:

> Electricity is less calorific in value compared to petrol

That statement makes no sense.  Do you mean that the specific energy of batteries (J/Kg) is less than that of petrol?  Of course one must also account for the dramatic reduction in engine mass when going to an EV which gives more weight for batteries.

> so large trucks are nonviable because of lack of power and very limited range

Well except all the large EV trucks being built...

> Finally what about decommissioning the batteries and very limited rare metals available for batteries, or do we start digging up the planet?

Radical idea - what about reusing the metals?  Lithium isn’t that rare and aluminium is emerging as the likely next battery chemistry.  No shortage of that...

> Battery technology is already knocking on the door of physics and what is possible, given current technology.

Disagree.  Aluminium ion has a theoretical limit far higher than anything that’s already in viable EVs of today.  We’re nowhere near theoretical limits for specific power.  

Dax H 12 Feb 2020
In reply to jkarran:

The point that I was making was not aimed at reactive work, things break and need fixing, it happens and people understand and deal with it. 

Planned upgrades could be done far better though, both of the current projects in South Leeds to replace the gas pipes and lay a new fiber to house connection did not spring up over night. They will have been at least a year if not more in the planning, the resurfacing of the roads and pavements (that were perfect and now covered in patches) was not done on a whim one morning. 

A bit of planning goes a long way, we recently did a 4 week job fitting a compressed Air system in to a new factory, we worked with the electricians, the water / chiller guts, the machinery installers, the work flow / productivity guys and the safety guy so that we could design the optimal system for all of the above then install it all together without me putting my pipe where the Sparky needs to run his wire.

It's not difficult. 

wbo2 12 Feb 2020
In reply to Philb1950: Want to back that up?  None of it sounds very truthful to be honest

Moving timeline to 2032 by the way

Post edited at 10:45
Ian W 12 Feb 2020
In reply to elliot.baker:

One thing i cant understand about this whole thing is why motorcycles are exempt......i can buy a motorbike with ICE after 2035, but not a car? It is really strange as bikes / scooters etc are ideal for electric powered personal urban transport, and are already sold (literally) by the million in china. Removable batteries that can be plugged into the mains, 60 - 100 mile range, top speed about 60 mph (about the same as a current 125 but with twist and go ease and "spritely" acceleration. And available now.

jimtitt 12 Feb 2020
In reply to Ian W:

Because they are a negligable part of already a relatively small part of the problem. Might as well ban all those shocking gas and multifuel cookers climbers use at the same time.

wintertree 12 Feb 2020
In reply to ianstevens:

> Re: the wilds - take a look at the map of chargers in mid wales. 

Let’s take a relatively low range EV, the 2019 base spec Nissan Leaf.  160 miles of range.

Now look a map of Wales.  Where in Wales is more than 80 miles from a major town with a charger?  Nowhere.

Now take a look at zap-map to see chargers.  There’s a place called Clun looks to be 11 miles from the nearest charger and that’s the worst I could find.   There’s almost an unbroken band of chargers around the cost and along the motorways to the east, and chargers are dotted all over the interior.  Even the northern highlands of Scotland have sufficient coverage.

That’s now.  In my post you’ll notice “2035”.  It’s *already* a solved problem.  Range will go up, chargers will continue to proliferate.

1
Philb1950 12 Feb 2020
In reply to wbo2:

Just google the various points, although if you want a distillation, there was an article in The Times last weekend outlining what I listed and more.

1
Ian W 12 Feb 2020
In reply to jimtitt:

They are, but could provide a larger part of the solution, not only simply emissions; a 200kg scooter /bike is much more efficient at moving a 70 kg person around an urban area and requires much less in the way of resources to build etc than a 1500kg car, and much less in the way of charging resources/ infrastructure, and will lessen congestion etc. Ignoring bikes / scooters just seems odd when they are already part of the solution elsewhere in the world.

As for the suggestion of banning campig stoves - pfft. how dare you, sir! we still use the Bleuet my dad bought in the fifties; and I have in the past used the primus that my grandad used when a truck driver in the 30's!! It worked last time i tried it, and in fact, i think its about time i sparked it up again.......

jkarran 12 Feb 2020
In reply to jimtitt:

> There's some going into service in Basel, I expect the fleet operators will be looking at long-term battery life on something with a use cycle like a bin-truck.

There'll be a decent resale value in the truck battery for static storage even once it needs overhaul.

I wonder how much energy the compactor uses in a typical outing, it sounds like they run the engines pretty hard to power the hydraulics. The noise and urban emissions reduction would be worthwhile if the weight gain from electrification is tolerable.

jk

galpinos 12 Feb 2020
In reply to Philb1950:

> Irrespective of charging points

We are talking about 2035, that's 15yrs worth of sorting the problem

> and range limitations

A Kia e-Niro does 280miles to a charge. Imagine what a normal e hatchback will be capapble of in 15yrs time?

> and the whole logistics issues of electricity generation etc,

The National Grid aren't worried about it and we, again, have 15 yrs to get more generation online if required.

> the dust to dust costs of an EV far exceeds that of a post 2016 with limited emissions ITC vehicle kept for 10 years or more.

They don't (assuming we are talking about in the UK and using the UK or EU mix of electricty generation)

> Electricity is less calorific in value compared to petrol

That is gibberish but I assume you mean petrol is more energy dense than a battery, in whiuch case, that statement is correct.

so large trucks are nonviable because of lack of power and very limited range.

They already exist, but that's not to say some hydrogen vehicles won't appear for haulage solutions.

> Finally what about decommissioning the batteries and very limited rare metals available for batteries, or do we start digging up the planet?

We are already "digging up the planet" for every laptop, mobile phone, etc battery now. No one seemed to care until it threatened the ICE car status quo. Tesla batteries seem to be doing 500k miles with minimal range loss and even at their end of life, they don't need "decommissioning", they can be recycled or re purposed for other uses, i.e. home storage which will become more prevalent

> Battery technology is already knocking on the door of physics and what is possible, given current technology.

1. It's not. 2. Current technology won't be current in 15yrs time, it'll be old tech!

None of your points seem to have been very well thought through. 

Fundamentally, a 2 tonne car is not a sensible way to move an 80kg human, especially for short distances in urban areas where public transport or active travel are far better options. We need to make fewer cars, buy fewer cars and use them less often.

1
jkarran 12 Feb 2020
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> PS. This analysis changes when energy taxes on petrol are transferred to electricity prices in an EV driving society.

I don't think they will be. Almost all forecourt petrol and diesel goes to the road, fuel duty is in effect already a road use charge, albeit one we have some wriggle room over (choosing our vehicle economy). EV's will eventually need to pay a comparable road use fee or the lost revenue will need to be replaced elsewhere.

Lumping road charges in with domestic electricity makes no sense if you're trying to wean people of gas and oil. Unpopular changes coming, with the current trend to populism we'll doubtless get this very very wrong more than once before we start getting it right.

jk

jkarran 12 Feb 2020
In reply to Ian W:

> One thing i cant understand about this whole thing is why motorcycles are exempt......i can buy a motorbike with ICE after 2035, but not a car? It is really strange as bikes / scooters etc are ideal for electric powered personal urban transport, and are already sold (literally) by the million in china. Removable batteries that can be plugged into the mains, 60 - 100 mile range, top speed about 60 mph (about the same as a current 125 but with twist and go ease and "spritely" acceleration. And available now.

I guess because in the UK context they're toys, their emissions contribute next to nothing to our climate forcing output. Feeding off the technology coming out of e-car production and e-car racing I suspect most sport bikes will be electric by then without legislation, largely for the mind-bending performance which is their raison de etre.

jk

jkarran 12 Feb 2020
In reply to Ian W:

> They are, but could provide a larger part of the solution, not only simply emissions; a 200kg scooter /bike is much more efficient at moving a 70 kg person around an urban area and requires much less in the way of resources to build etc than a 1500kg car, and much less in the way of charging resources/ infrastructure, and will lessen congestion etc. Ignoring bikes / scooters just seems odd when they are already part of the solution elsewhere in the world.

Yeah but why don't I ride a scooter to work rather than driving a 4x4? In my case it's not cost, snobbery, performance, safety, weather, a lack of care for the harm I do... it's my dog. Scooters are cheap and readily available today, we don't use them because we all have similar excuses.

Sorting out (mildly liberalising IMO) e-bike legislation, cycle (and linked, pedestrian) infrastructure, that's definitely worthwhile and it could really clear up our cities of both fumes and congestion.

jk

Ian W 12 Feb 2020
In reply to jkarran:

You are right about the excuses. My daily commute is less than 10 mins each way, i regularly visit other sites in the region and occasionally have to travel to london. My choice of vehicles is currently a 3 litre diesel merc, or a Honda Blackbird. Why havent i bought a cheap 125 that would cost 3/5 of fk all for my dailt tpt? My only excuse is thats its rural, with no stop / start.........which is a pathetic excuse.

And a thumbs up to the second paragraph regarding infrastructure.....that could be hugely beneficial, and potentially come in at a smidge under HS2's cost.....

jimtitt 12 Feb 2020
In reply to Ian W:

Just took one of my fleet for a test ride after fitting a restrictor kit for my son to use it which reminds me why I stopped commuting on a bike as soon as I could, it's blowing about 50km/hr, 2° and lightly snowing!

When it's nice it's great on a bike, when it's sh#t it's really sh#t!

Ian W 12 Feb 2020
In reply to jimtitt:

> Just took one of my fleet for a test ride after fitting a restrictor kit for my son to use it which reminds me why I stopped commuting on a bike as soon as I could, it's blowing about 50km/hr, 2° and lightly snowing!

> When it's nice it's great on a bike, when it's sh#t it's really sh#t!

Amen to that!

petemeads 12 Feb 2020
In reply to jkarran:

I banked my carbon offsetting in 2004/5, commuting 70+ miles per day on a Honda Innova at 160.2 mpg over 11,000 miles. I passed my test and graduated to a 650 Suzuki that averaged 70mpg for the next 45,000 miles until I retired. After a sucession of diesel Golfs which managed 60+ mpg I have finished up with a 4wd estate with 187bhp and all the trimmings, 50mpg on a decent run. The bikes get ridden to their MOTs and borrowed by my son. I don't feel guilty for taking the car to Tescos, but I still walk to Sainsbury's...

PS It was really annoying to pay 60+ quid to tax the big bike when the earlier Golfs were £20 a year.

wbo2 12 Feb 2020
In reply to Philb1950: I can do, but I don't really need too as I already these points are not correct.  But I'd like to see the assumptions behind your dust to dust cost?

And petrol contains more energy than electricity? Interesting concept 


This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.