Diesel Car Ban

This is the place for posts that don't fit into any other category.

Moderator: RichardW

Gibbo2286
Donor 2020
Posts: 4697
Joined: 08 Jun 2011, 18:04
x 830

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by Gibbo2286 »

The truck versus train argument is simply a matter of cost and time, take a load, any load by train and you have to handle it several times, load it at source, deliver it from source to the train, load it, then at the other end unload it, load it onto a road vehicle, take it to destination and unload it.

By road you load it at source and unload it at destination.

User avatar
CitroJim
A very naughty boy
Posts: 42125
Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 23:33
x 1231

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by CitroJim »

And also, thanks to myopic government transport policies in the 60s the railways just don't have enough capacity now...

All the money being frittered away on the HS2 vanity project would be far better spent re-opening lines foolishly closed following the Beeching Report and upgrading what's left to handle a lot more traffic -both passenger and intermodal freight.

Good examples are the old Great Central and the Oxford-Cambridge east-west link - now put back to 2024.

HS2 and 3 are like Concorde - brilliant and technically wonderful but ultimately of very little use or enduring value... Good to look at and marvel at but that's about all...

As I say, the HS2 and 3 are nothing more than expensive toys for insecure politicians to say 'look at us, aren't we wonderful - look! I can get to Birmingham 15 minutes sooner now!'

Whoopee-do... :evil:

User avatar
bobins
Donor 2020
Posts: 3385
Joined: 05 Jul 2012, 18:07
x 977

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by bobins »

CitroJim wrote:
25 Aug 2017, 11:13

HS2 and 3 are like Concorde - brilliant and technically wonderful but ultimately of very little use or enduring value... Good to look at and marvel at but that's about all...

As I say, the HS2 and 3 are nothing more than expensive toys for insecure politicians to say 'look at us, aren't we wonderful - look! I can get to Birmingham 15 minutes sooner now!'


Ah, but don't overlook the fact that part of the reason for HS2 / 3 is to l'egitamately' inject government money into a major infrastructure project to help keep the economy ticking over. On this occasion it happens to be for fast railways, but it could easily be for new schools, a new airport, concrete ping pong tables for under 7s !!! The main thing is that the money is spent on something that at least some of the public will accept....... even if a lot of the public can't see the sense in it :-D

User avatar
CitroJim
A very naughty boy
Posts: 42125
Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 23:33
x 1231

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by CitroJim »

Bobins, yes, I see precisely what you're saying and and I agree.

I reckon we're both of the opinion it could have been better spent though!

User avatar
Stickyfinger
Donor 2016
Posts: 10005
Joined: 28 Mar 2013, 22:05
x 734

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by Stickyfinger »

2040....I will have shot myself in frustration @ the new taxes on "Car-tricity" by then :)

Online
doctle
Posts: 907
Joined: 16 Oct 2014, 12:17
x 195

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by doctle »

In Ireland the "experts" on everything environmental, the green party was part of a coalition gubbermint a few years ago. Petrol was bad, tax on diesel cars was lowered, diesels were the only way and for a while 75% of all new cars sold here were diesel as were most UK imports. Now these same "experts" want to raise the duty on diesel to encourage people to buy petrol, diesels are killers, VAG let the cat out of the bag etc. It's hard to know who or what to believe especially as the experts are now lying about what they said a few years ago. Double speak 1984 etc

User avatar
Mandrake
Posts: 8196
Joined: 10 Apr 2005, 17:23
x 328

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by Mandrake »

BAH HUMBUG! Electric cars ? I'm going back to my Model-T...and while I'm at it, get off my lawn! :rofl2:
MikeT wrote:
24 Aug 2017, 16:24
There is no way in the foreseeable I can see any country with a security complex giving up such transportable, high-energy-density fuels. In fact, we're fighting wars for it.
The fact that countries are willing to (and have, many times) gone to war over oil to me is a pretty good reason to reduce reliance on it, not to worship it! :lol: (And who says liquid fuel is "more transportable" than electricity ? It takes energy to power the trucks that transport liquid fuel...electricity moves from one part of the country to another without moving any physical goods)

What sane western country (*ahem* USA) would want to be dependent on Middle Eastern oil from "frenemy" countries when you could become largely self sufficient by moving a lot of your transport infrastructure over to locally generated renewable electricity ? Purely from a national security and sovereignty standpoint it makes sense before you even bring in the environmental or efficiency angles. (And from an engineering point of view it kills me to think 80% of the energy I put into a petrol car goes to waste in heat and that so many people are OK with that...)

Do we really want to be fighting wars over the scraps of the oil fields left when it finally gets to that point ? Probably not in our lifetimes, but what about our children and grandchildren's lifetimes... and as a parent now I'm very conscious of the problems that we are kicking down the road to our decedents to deal with so that we can continue to live in the manner to which we are accustomed to today... [-X

EV's vs ICE is not just about comparing conveniences such as range and filling time, energy densities and so on, but partly about "doing the right thing" by those that come after us even if it is a little bit less convenient at first while the technology is still maturing. And I'm confident that long before 2040 the convenience issue will have improved to the point where it will have swapped around and that it will be running an ICE that is less convenient by then.

I've said in the other EV thread that I think the governments 2040 "ban" is a lot of unnecessary hot air because the technology itself is improving so rapidly that people will WANT to buy and use EV's in preference long before 2040. Mark my words, 23 years is an awful long time when EV's have only really been mass produced for the last 7 years and made huge strides in that time. People don't want to be forced to do something by the government banning the thing they do now, but they will be happy to do it if it becomes cheaper, more reliable, more convenient or a combination of the above.

Driving experience of EV's is great, the only drawbacks at the moment are higher purchase cost and battery technology - eg range and charging time. Higher purchase cost is largely due to low production volumes and will be go away as numbers ramp up - ultimately EV's will become cheaper than an equivalent ICE as the battery is the most expensive part of the car and battery costs are plummeting - the rest of the car like the electric motor is cheaper far simpler than an ICE already.

Battery research is intensive now that EV's are ramping up - at no time in history has so much research and development been done on battery technology, and there will be a breakthrough sooner or later and certainly before 2040, there are promising avenues of research like solid state electrolytes using plastic or glass electrolyte that should solve most Lithium Ion battery problems, including reliance on Lithium!
Eddie Nuff wrote:
24 Aug 2017, 19:26
How often do we hear, on forums like this, of guys moaning and whinging of the deplorable range of the electric car. The best is the Tesla at a reported 335 miles, but boy does it cost :!: but the average range is c100 - 125 miles - and that's pulling a car weighing no more than a ton and half. A standard unladen unit and trailer will weigh in at c17t and must be capable of pulling 44t and the range must be an absolute minimum of 200 miles with the ability to recharge sufficiently to get back. Don't get me wrong, electric is coming, but it's a long way off for haulage.
A bit like rockets, electric cars work better at a larger scale than smaller scale. That's why you can get 335 miles on a 2200Kg Tesla Model S, but not on a 1100Kg Peugeot Ion - no matter how much current tech battery you try to jam into the little car. The bigger the car the more battery it can carry and the larger battery gives you more range than the weight increase of the bigger, heavier car and battery looses you, for a net increase in range. So from this perspective a semi-truck is actually easier to produce with a long range than a car. Tesla certainly seems to think so:

https://electrek.co/guides/tesla-semi/

Regenerative braking also greatly offsets the energy consumption penalty for hauling a heavy load vs an unhitched cab - it takes more energy to accelerate a heavy load up to speed, but you also get loads more regenerative braking to charge the battery when you slow down!
Pug_XUD_KeenAmateur wrote:
24 Aug 2017, 22:17
electric by 2040?! Nonsense. I know the goverment say so, but do you believe em?!
I don't believe them for a second. People will begin switching over in droves well before then... :lol:
And as for Electric being clean, what a load of BS that is with the nuclear waste from power stations going in the bin; various of which have been recently shut down.
Electric cars are as clean as the electricity that charges them. It's very naive to believe that today's generation mix will stay the same when it has changed dramatically towards renewable in just the last 5 years or so in the UK. Nuclear is already only about 20% of the mix depending on how much wind is blowing.

The ICE that you buy today will still be just as polluting 20 years from now as it was the day it was bought. It has no hope of redemption except at the crusher... :wink:
I hear that the National Grid couldn't possibly cope with electric cars, if everyone plugged in at 6pm it'd just go into meltdown
Yeah but that's what happens when you read rags like the daily mail or the sun. :lol: The whole factually incorrect scaremongering stories doing the rounds saying "don't use your kettle while you charge your car" have been well and truly debunked, it's just absolute nonsense and is based on out of context quotes cherry picked by ignorant journalists from a national grid article. Guess what, I use my 3.6kW kettle while my EV charges - no problems... in fact I use the 10kW electric shower too, or the oven... ;)

Grrr, electric indeed. Poppycock!
BAH HUMBUG! :-D
Energy to move something will always require energy, what's your pollutant of choice?
So solar is a pollutant ? News to me... :wink:

elma
Posts: 3745
Joined: 13 May 2007, 02:17
x 213

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by elma »

Mandrake wrote:
25 Aug 2017, 14:54
I use my 3.6kW kettle while my EV charges - no problems... in fact I use the 10kW electric shower too... ;)

That does put you close to the limit though.

13.6kW = 13600w
Amps=watts/volts
Amps=13600/240
Amps= 56.6

Your main fuse will be 60/80/100amps.
I'm guessing in your case it isn't 60.

Gibbo2286
Donor 2020
Posts: 4697
Joined: 08 Jun 2011, 18:04
x 830

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by Gibbo2286 »

Stickyfinger wrote:
25 Aug 2017, 13:51
2040....I will have shot myself in frustration @ the new taxes on "Car-tricity" by then :)


I'm 82, I don't think I'll be too bothered by it. :-D

Gibbo2286
Donor 2020
Posts: 4697
Joined: 08 Jun 2011, 18:04
x 830

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by Gibbo2286 »

Mandrake wrote:
25 Aug 2017, 14:54
BAH HUMBUG! Electric cars ? I'm going back to my Model-T...and while I'm at it, get off my lawn! :rofl2:
MikeT wrote:
24 Aug 2017, 16:24
There is no way in the foreseeable I can see any country with a security complex giving up such transportable, high-energy-density fuels. In fact, we're fighting wars for it.
The fact that countries are willing to (and have, many times) gone to war over oil to me is a pretty good reason to reduce reliance on it, not to worship it! :lol: (And who says liquid fuel is "more transportable" than electricity ? It takes energy to power the trucks that transport liquid fuel...electricity moves from one part of the country to another without moving any physical goods)

What sane western country (*ahem* USA) would want to be dependent on Middle Eastern oil from "frenemy" countries when you could become largely self sufficient by moving a lot of your transport infrastructure over to locally generated renewable electricity ? Purely from a national security and sovereignty standpoint it makes sense before you even bring in the environmental or efficiency angles. (And from an engineering point of view it kills me to think 80% of the energy I put into a petrol car goes to waste in heat and that so many people are OK with that...)

Do we really want to be fighting wars over the scraps of the oil fields left when it finally gets to that point ? Probably not in our lifetimes, but what about our children and grandchildren's lifetimes... and as a parent now I'm very conscious of the problems that we are kicking down the road to our decedents to deal with so that we can continue to live in the manner to which we are accustomed to today... [-X

EV's vs ICE is not just about comparing conveniences such as range and filling time, energy densities and so on, but partly about "doing the right thing" by those that come after us even if it is a little bit less convenient at first while the technology is still maturing. And I'm confident that long before 2040 the convenience issue will have improved to the point where it will have swapped around and that it will be running an ICE that is less convenient by then.

I've said in the other EV thread that I think the governments 2040 "ban" is a lot of unnecessary hot air because the technology itself is improving so rapidly that people will WANT to buy and use EV's in preference long before 2040. Mark my words, 23 years is an awful long time when EV's have only really been mass produced for the last 7 years and made huge strides in that time. People don't want to be forced to do something by the government banning the thing they do now, but they will be happy to do it if it becomes cheaper, more reliable, more convenient or a combination of the above.

Driving experience of EV's is great, the only drawbacks at the moment are higher purchase cost and battery technology - eg range and charging time. Higher purchase cost is largely due to low production volumes and will be go away as numbers ramp up - ultimately EV's will become cheaper than an equivalent ICE as the battery is the most expensive part of the car and battery costs are plummeting - the rest of the car like the electric motor is cheaper far simpler than an ICE already.

Battery research is intensive now that EV's are ramping up - at no time in history has so much research and development been done on battery technology, and there will be a breakthrough sooner or later and certainly before 2040, there are promising avenues of research like solid state electrolytes using plastic or glass electrolyte that should solve most Lithium Ion battery problems, including reliance on Lithium!
Eddie Nuff wrote:
24 Aug 2017, 19:26
How often do we hear, on forums like this, of guys moaning and whinging of the deplorable range of the electric car. The best is the Tesla at a reported 335 miles, but boy does it cost :!: but the average range is c100 - 125 miles - and that's pulling a car weighing no more than a ton and half. A standard unladen unit and trailer will weigh in at c17t and must be capable of pulling 44t and the range must be an absolute minimum of 200 miles with the ability to recharge sufficiently to get back. Don't get me wrong, electric is coming, but it's a long way off for haulage.
A bit like rockets, electric cars work better at a larger scale than smaller scale. That's why you can get 335 miles on a 2200Kg Tesla Model S, but not on a 1100Kg Peugeot Ion - no matter how much current tech battery you try to jam into the little car. The bigger the car the more battery it can carry and the larger battery gives you more range than the weight increase of the bigger, heavier car and battery looses you, for a net increase in range. So from this perspective a semi-truck is actually easier to produce with a long range than a car. Tesla certainly seems to think so:

https://electrek.co/guides/tesla-semi/

Regenerative braking also greatly offsets the energy consumption penalty for hauling a heavy load vs an unhitched cab - it takes more energy to accelerate a heavy load up to speed, but you also get loads more regenerative braking to charge the battery when you slow down!
Pug_XUD_KeenAmateur wrote:
24 Aug 2017, 22:17
electric by 2040?! Nonsense. I know the goverment say so, but do you believe em?!
I don't believe them for a second. People will begin switching over in droves well before then... :lol:
And as for Electric being clean, what a load of BS that is with the nuclear waste from power stations going in the bin; various of which have been recently shut down.
Electric cars are as clean as the electricity that charges them. It's very naive to believe that today's generation mix will stay the same when it has changed dramatically towards renewable in just the last 5 years or so in the UK. Nuclear is already only about 20% of the mix depending on how much wind is blowing.

The ICE that you buy today will still be just as polluting 20 years from now as it was the day it was bought. It has no hope of redemption except at the crusher... :wink:
I hear that the National Grid couldn't possibly cope with electric cars, if everyone plugged in at 6pm it'd just go into meltdown
Yeah but that's what happens when you read rags like the daily mail or the sun. :lol: The whole factually incorrect scaremongering stories doing the rounds saying "don't use your kettle while you charge your car" have been well and truly debunked, it's just absolute nonsense and is based on out of context quotes cherry picked by ignorant journalists from a national grid article. Guess what, I use my 3.6kW kettle while my EV charges - no problems... in fact I use the 10kW electric shower too, or the oven... ;)

Grrr, electric indeed. Poppycock!
BAH HUMBUG! :-D
Energy to move something will always require energy, what's your pollutant of choice?
So solar is a pollutant ? News to me... :wink:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_pow ... ted_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_powe ... ted_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_powe ... ted_States

User avatar
Mandrake
Posts: 8196
Joined: 10 Apr 2005, 17:23
x 328

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by Mandrake »

elma wrote:
25 Aug 2017, 15:23
Mandrake wrote:
25 Aug 2017, 14:54
I use my 3.6kW kettle while my EV charges - no problems... in fact I use the 10kW electric shower too... ;)

That does put you close to the limit though.

13.6kW = 13600w
Amps=watts/volts
Amps=13600/240
Amps= 56.6

Your main fuse will be 60/80/100amps.
I'm guessing in your case it isn't 60.

My main fuse is 100A and so is my main breaker in my consumer unit, in a 1930's bungalow, so plenty of spare capacity available for me for a 32 amp charger, which I am getting installed in a couple of weeks. (Until now I've been charging at 10amps through a normal 3 pin plug - on the new charger the Ion will charge at 16 amps, and the charger is future proof for cars that will do up to 32 amps)

One of the gross inaccuracies of the "don't charge your car and use your kettle" articles doing the rounds that annoys me is they talk about using an 11kW EV charger and not turning on your kettle. Slight problem - there is no such thing as an 11kW single phase EV charger in the UK!! :roll:

In the UK on a single phase domestic supply you can only get a 16 amp (3.6kW) or 32 amp (7.2kW) EV charge point, the latter of which is still less than a 10kW electric shower. During the initial quote before installation they check to see what capacity your incoming fuse is and what other loads you have and if you don't have enough safety margin for a 32a charger they would either ask the DNO to upgrade the main fuse or only install a 16 amp charger.

An 11kW (or 22kW) EV charger needs a 3 phase supply - which almost no residential UK property even has. And the majority of EV's don't support AC charging above 7.2kW anyway, with the main exceptions being Tesla's and Zoe's.

An 11kW single phase charger - if such a thing existed, would be 46 amps - too much for a normal single phase household with other loads, but an actual 11kW 3 phase charger is only 15 amps per phase, for the few large houses (mansions ?) that do have a 3 phase supply.

So a complete non-story to get clicks.

elma
Posts: 3745
Joined: 13 May 2007, 02:17
x 213

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by elma »

Mandrake wrote:
25 Aug 2017, 15:42
An 11kW (or 22kW) EV charger needs a 3 phase supply - which almost no residential UK property even has. .

That isn't strictly true.
For example if you look at a terrace of houses usually the first one (relative to the electric supply) has 3 phase coming to a box. From the box each single phase will supply 1/3 of the terrace.

Older large houses often have 3 phase as well but only one is brought to the meter. It's very cheap and easy to comission the other 2.

This isn't always the case but with EVs looming it may well become a factor in valuing a house soon. It's also possible to use capacitors to convert 1ph to 3ph, having not investigated I'm not sure if this offers reduced amps/watts but I expect so.

Of course the media have taken that horribly out of context. Each phase would have its own fuse so they are implying that domestic properties have 3ph with 20-30amps available per phase. I might look at ev charger installer certification actually. Could be a good certificate to have.

User avatar
EDC5
Donor 2020
Posts: 1220
Joined: 01 Jul 2017, 21:48
x 105

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by EDC5 »

A house may have a 100A breaker... but if more than a few people on the same circuit (street) try pulling 100A the lights will soon go out.....

elma
Posts: 3745
Joined: 13 May 2007, 02:17
x 213

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by elma »

Why would that happen? The cables can take it and the network can respond to increased demand quite rapidly.

RichardW
Forum Treasurer
Posts: 9251
Joined: 07 Aug 2002, 17:12
x 371

Re: Diesel Car Ban

Post by RichardW »

We used to have a house with 2 phases to it!!! One for normal electricity and one for heating on economy 7.