You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Molgrips - its not baseload to charge EVs. Look at the data supplied. Any increase in electricity consumption is provided by burning gas - they are the rapid spinup
so EVs are now used as energy storage onthe grid - thats new. thought that was another benefit that may appear some time in the future
Well no politice camera action - obviously molgrips is disputing it but the facts are clear and the vast majority of electricity for EVs is produced by fossil fuel burning
Molgrips – its not baseload to charge EVs. Look at the data supplied. Any increase in electricity consumption is provided by burning gas – they are the rapid spinup
You do realise that most EVs are not charging as soon as they are plugged in, right? They charge when the provider schedules it.
The gas and coal is there to provide base load - the EVs are (generally) the things taking the surplus, because they are battery powered.
so EVs are now used as energy storage onthe grid
Some cars have the abillty to resupply it back to the grid, but generally they store it by taking when there's a surplus, and using it when you want to drive which could be days later.
And the other thing you also forget is that cars would otherwise be burning diesel or petrol, and doing it much less efficiently. And spewing the combustion products into city streets where people live. So even if you do choose to account for the coal as being due to EVs, it's still more efficient.
The gas and coal is there to provide base load – the EVs are (generally) the things taking the surplus, because they are battery powered.
have you any evidence of that? Coal and gas are the easiest power sources to turn up-and-down, and as such is most used when there is more demand than supply. Nuclear takes an age, and renewables generally can't be controlled. At night (when most EVs are charging) theres no solar, it might be blowy, so there might be a lot of wind-sourced power, but I can't find any data to suggest we're running 100% renewable/nuclear for any significant proportions of time.
Attempting to drag this back in track…
Putting aside the moral position. What’s the hive mind on economics of a ICE car purchase Vs hybrid/battery. 1/2 yr old. 5-10 yrs ownership. Large estate/MPV/small van/SUV
We’ve bought 2 ICE cars in the last year (one small car, 1 mid size estate), but suspect they’ll be our last. For us, whilst the cost to fuel them would likely be marginally lower with electric, the hassle and lack of infrastructure outweighs the cost saving. We tend to keep cars for 6 or 7 years so hope by that time the decision will be easy to make to go electric.
Molgrips will disagree with our decision, TJ may not…
IMolgrips – its indisputable that increased energy consumption means more fossil fuels being burnt. EVs increase electricity consumption. Look at the data linked below. Stop believing in the greenwash
Whilst I'm firmly of the belief that all car use is bad and fundamentally should be unnecessary. I still disagree with this. Yes we fire up the GTG's at peak times, or at times when the wind doesn't blow/sun doesn't shine. But your statement assumes that EV charging takes place at those times, which it likely wont. The majority are likely to be charged at home, on the cheapest offest-of-off-peak tariffs. Bearing in mind most peoples mileage will mean they only actually have to charge it 2-3 times a month, they'll just wait for a windy day/night to do it.
Mineral mining, the amount of public space and finance expended on car infrastructure, the death toll, etc. All good reasons to hate the whole concept of car driving. But EV's are undeniably going to be incrementally "better" in some ways.
have you any evidence of that?
That's how intelligent charging tariffs work, the ones that most people are on. They ask you to leave the car plugged in all the time when it's home. When you plug in it gives you a graph of when it's going to charge and how much. And when it's windy you do get charge at random times outside the off peak window. This is how it works and why the rate is so cheap - you are committing to use a significant amount of power when there's generally a surplus. It's not available to people without EVs.
Molgrips will disagree with our decision, TJ may not…
Not exactly. If you can't do the above mentioned super cheap tariff because you don't have off street parking then it's a completely different situation. And that is something that we need to fix.
Bearing in mind most peoples mileage will mean they only actually have to charge it 2-3 times a month
That's not what they want you to do. They want you to plug in all the time so they can do something with the surplus. Most people plug in when they get home.
A key issue is that these tariffs can be adjusted and the process changed if necessary. If everyone has an EV then the government can decarbonise it centrally by installing more renewable capacity or grid storage, and no consumer has to do anything. If we are all using fossil fuel then nothing can ever be done (besides banning cars outright of course bla bla bla).
But your statement assumes that EV charging takes place at those times, which it likely wont. The majority are likely to be charged at home, on the cheapest offest-of-off-peak tariffs.
They will be charged at home on the cheapest tariffs available that night, I agree, but most nights the marginal load is still met with fossil fuels, and so that is what is powering the cars. If you look at last night, a fairly typically blowy autumn night, there was still 3.5Gw of gas/coal generation going all night long. The same was true the night before. I don't have stats for every single night, and for sure there are likely to be some occasional nights where no gas or coal is burned, but that's not true the majority of the time.
That’s how intelligent charging tariffs work, the ones that most people are on. They ask you to leave the car plugged in all the time when it’s home. When you plug in it gives you a graph of when it’s going to charge and how much. And when it’s windy you do get charge at random times outside the off peak window. This is how it works and why the rate is so cheap – you are committing to use a significant amount of power when there’s generally a surplus. It’s not available to people without EVs.
it is surplus, but what do you think would happen to that surplus if your car wasn't plugged in? the same energy has to go somewhere. In the UK, it will either go into pumping (which will offset fossil fuel use later that day), or the coal/gas fired power stations will be turned down a touch. Either way, using that electricity for charging your car is causing more fossil fuels to be burned.
If you look at last night, a fairly typically blowy autumn night, there was still 3.5Gw of gas/coal generation going all night long.
Right, but if it weren't for EVs would they have turned that off and relied on renewables? I don't think that's necessarily the case. If the wind drops, they won't shut factories and hospitals down for a few hours, but they will pause EV charging.
But the point is that right now they may be using coal, but as more renewable capacity comes online that will drop further. And the EV driver (or electric van/truck operator or train operator) won't have to do anything at all to reduce their carbon emissions.
In the UK, it will either go into pumping (which will offset fossil fuel use later that day)
Me charging my car at surplus times will offset fuel usage later in the day because I will not be filling it with diesel...
Either way, using that electricity for charging your car is causing more fossil fuels to be burned.
More than if I didn't charge my car at all, but LESS fossil fuel than if I were filling it with diesel.
tjagain
Full Memberof course it should be. this is why EVs are a greenwash.
Not sure I agree with your logic on that, but I was curious how the numbers would stack up anyway.
I found this article about a charity that had run the numbers in Malaysia.
https://www.eco-business.com/news/stop-ev-greenwashing-malaysian-watchdog-tells-advertisers/
Summary: The Malaysia peninsular uses 60% coal/35% gas for their grid.
Even with that CO2-heavy mix of sources, an EV (even a large one like an EQS) produces 10-20% less CO2 per mile than a Perodua Myvi, which is a Malaysian subcompact (smaller than a Fiesta) ICE car. Obviously a regular sized ICE car would produce far more CO2, let alone a petrol or diesel car the size of an EQS.
To get a closer comparison to the performance and size of an EQS you'd actually need to look at something like a 550i which will chuck out 243g/km. Far far more polluting than the electric EQS @ 0.086kg.
Then there are the not inconsiderable local air benefits from EVs. As an asthma sufferer, my condition is noticeably worse after riding to work on a cyclepath alongside a major industrial road with a lot of diesel traffic. I cannot wait to get diesels off the road for that reason alone.
We need to account for lifetime pollution really but that's far more complicated. How can you account for all the illegal methane leaking from oil wells for example, how can you account for the damage from oil spills, or compare that to the damage done by a lithium or coal mine?
Something to consider. I work with quite a number of colleagues with EVs, many who have had them now for 2-3 yrs, and the biggest complaint they all seem to have is the batteries are knackered . I therefore wouldn't consider a full EV as a long term vehicle, and if possible lease it and get rid when the warranty is up.
That’s not what they want you to do. They want you to plug in all the time so they can do something with the surplus. Most people plug in when they get home.
Entirely possible, whether you plug it in manually when the rate drops to zero, have some sort of smart charger that switches on when the rate drops, or does it in conjunction with the grid. However it achieves it the result will be the same, the cars will mostly end up being charged at optimized times, and may even allow you to have a cup of tea at peak times without having an existential environmental crisis over boiling the kettle.
I work with quite a number of colleagues with EVs, many who have had them now for 2-3 yrs, and the biggest complaint they all seem to have is the batteries are knackered .
You what? That absolutely stinks. There's no way batteries are getting knackered in 2-3 years. Either you're talking bollocks or they are. Or they are all driving early Nissan Leafs which are known to be shit - however this is absolutely 100% not the case with any other car you're likely to see.
EV batteries are warrantied for 8 or 10 years.
have some sort of smart charger that switches on when the rate drops
That's what happens. For this to work you need a 'smart' car or charger. You tell it what level of charge you want and at what time, and when you plug in it looks at the weather forecast and creates a charge schedule with different rates each half-hour period.
Not everyone can use this, but that's what the industry is aiming for.
We need to account for lifetime pollution
Indeed - but the question is wether or not pollution from mining is intrinsic to the concept of mining, or if it's simply a consequence of the fact that we buy the minerals from dodgy regimes who don't give a shit about the environment; or poor countries that cannot afford to regulate it.
Also it's not lithium that's the biggest problem, it is (or was) cobalt that is used in NMC cells. However these are now considered old tech and there is a move away from them.
More than if I didn’t charge my car at all, but LESS fossil fuel than if I were filling it with diesel.
that is fair, and something I'm not debating, my only point is that the CO2 effectively produced by an EV should be calculated based on the co2 for the worst-case-that-night scenario, not the average mix.
And the EV driver (or electric van/truck operator or train operator) won’t have to do anything at all to reduce their carbon emissions.
only if the growth in wave/wind generation (solar is pretty irelevent overnight) exceeds the growth in consumption from more EVs being charged. Some back of the fag packet maths that might be innacurate and has some assumptions below..
We'll probably be adding an average of ~ 1mm evs per year for the next decade (starting small, increasing as they become cheaper/legislated in - eventually ending up north of 2mm per year). thats approx 10bn extra ev miles per year (10k per car), assuming an average of 3m/kwh we need 3.3bn kwh - or approx 10mm kwh per night (rounded to make the maths easier). assuming the charging window is 10 hours long, that's an additional 1m kw/1000 mw/1gw of capacity growth per year for the next decade.
Seems like we're adding about 2gw per year in max capacity, but realistic capacity is around 1/3 of that (currently we have ~24gw of capacity, but the average per day produced is ~8gw) - so we're not quite adding enough to keep up with the number of EVs being added (trailing by somewhere around 200mw/year in generational capacity)
Something to consider. I work with quite a number of colleagues with EVs, many who have had them now for 2-3 yrs, and the biggest complaint they all seem to have is the batteries are knackered . I therefore wouldn’t consider a full EV as a long term vehicle, and if possible lease it and get rid when the warranty is up.
This is something that predominantly effects small cars like the leaf or converted designs where the battery capacity was an afterthought to an exiting platform.
A 30kWh battery running a 30kW motor for an hour then being charged back upto 100% every trip is doing a LOT more damage to itself than a 100kWh battery doing the same job and being charged up 3x less often. And that isn't a linear difference. A Leaf doing it's maximum range every day isn't doing it's battery 3x more damage than a Tesla doing the same, it's higher. So a small battery being degraded in 3 years really means a longer range one 3x the size will have a comparable lifespan >>9years.
Same with PHEV's, if you plug them in every day and use the battery driving in electric mode (which is the only way to get the claimed mpg equivalent) they get knackered.
This was quite an interesting thread for most of the first page, but like many others it has now degenerated in to the same handful of users shouting at each other, which seems to direct the course of the thread and prevents other users continuing interestingly or usefully to the conversation.
This seems to happen on quite a lot of topics with the same people usually involved. It feels like they hang around in a pack, looking for the next thread to all pile in to and ruin.
This is something that predominantly effects small cars like the leaf or converted designs where the battery capacity was an afterthought to an exiting platform.
No, it's only the Leaf that has no battery cooling. That applies to all Leafs, both old and new model, but they did improve the software to care for the battery better. There is an issue where if you fast charge it more than twice on a long motorway trip, the battery gets too hot and it restricts your power and charging speed.
But I think ALL other EVs, even early ones Zoes, e-Golfs and whatnot, even ones that are converted normal cars have either air cooled or liquid cooled batteries. If you buy a Leaf later than 2014 it should have reasonable battery health unless it's been abused, but it will still suffer from battery overheating. The only good thing about Leafs is that they are quite decent as actual cars, and they are cheap.
Squirrelking EDF said it would be generating before the end of 2020
Which was daft but...
all the rest of the stuff you want to discard is a part of the delays.
Albeit external factors that were outwith the control of EDF. Unless you think the various EU governments that brought court cases against it were accountable to EDF?
There were internal delays due to finance questions, yes, but not anywhere near as long as you're suggesting.
the reality is if it makes the 2028 timeline and I will bet it will not thats 19 years since the project started
What are you saying is the start point now?
EDF buying British Energy?
UK government identifying new nuclear sites?
Hi @Molgrips, no ,I'm not talking absolute shit, just reporting back my colleagues experiences of EVs. They all do big motorway miles, so not ideal for EV's, but they have no choice, but all report big losses in charging capacity and therefore range. One particular VW ID3 has lost 50% of its capacity and that's before winter sets in.
Why would I make it up? Our next car will be and EV,( but it will be leased), I don't represent the oil industry, or car industry, or any other interested party, I'm merely reporting what happens in the real world where vehicles do large mileage and the effects on them.
One particular VW ID3 has lost 50% of its capacity and that’s before winter sets in.
Then I've got good news for your colleague then - he can go and get himself a new battery under warranty. (ID3 batteries are warrantied for 8yrs/100,000 miles to retain 70% battery capacity).
Funnily enough @timmys he's inline for a new battery, under warranty, but the car goes back in a few weeks and the battery pack is on back order. So as far as he's concerned someone else's problem now, but he's also had to put up with it for the last six months.
As per the OP, my point would be don't consider a used EV as a long term investment.
One particular VW ID3 has lost 50% of its capacity and that’s before winter sets in.
Why would I make it up?
I don't think you are making it up I think your colleagues are mistaken.
You can lose range in colder weather - especially if you have no heat pump and the heating cranked up. You will also lose range if it's raining, but all cars do this including ICEs.
If the actual battery capacity i.e. the state of health has fallen to 50% in 2 years then it's a pretty major battery failure - those are very rare, and are warrantied. There's no way all your colleagues have lost 50% of battery capacity in 2 years.
Neither of my two EVs have dropped to anything like 50% of max range in winter. It is possible that your colleagues are driving fast on the motorway, which could (depending on the car) get 70% of the advertised WTLP range, and that could in theory drop to 50% if the drivers are unsympathetic. But that's absolutely not the same as losing 50% of battery capacity.
ID3 batteries are warrantied for 8yrs/100,000 miles to retain 70% battery capacity
I'm guessing that's going to be the sticking point if they've been doing heavy motorway miles. Might not be mind.
But it certainly says something for the longevity of batteries* depending on the loading conditions. Used to be a motorway muncher was a good thing, maybe not now.
*yes anecdote is not data but if true something is clearly worth investigating.
But it certainly says something for the longevity of batteries* depending on the loading conditions. Used to be a motorway muncher was a good thing, maybe not now.
Well that's just the warranty, remember. Actual data on the small number of EVs that have reached high mileage is that batteries last very well. We only really have data for Model S and they are showing an average 88% of capacity left after 200k miles. If that's typical then they will last better than ICEs. Also worth noting that degradation is not linear, it happens in the first couple of years then levels off.
As per the OP, my point would be don’t consider a used EV as a long term investment.
No car (other than some rare classic) is a long term investment. However, the extra money you pay up front will be returned a few times over if you keep the car for more than a few years. So if you consider an EV purchase to be an investment against future fuel costs, then it is a good one. My fuel savings offset the car's loan by about 50%, but the loan will be paid off in a few years and I'll still be driving it around for peanuts*.
* actually, EV driving (once the car is bought) is cheaper per mile than cycling. If I could cycle at 18mph average and use 600 calories an hour whilst doing so, and I was fuelled by jelly babies at £1.50 a bag that works out at 11p a mile which is a lot more than my EV mileage cost 🙂
I bought a diesel 5 series...
3.0d too. I know.... terrible.
But 55mpg 700 to 850 miles on a tank.
Think we need a mix of options. No option is perfect
Either way, using that electricity for charging your car is causing more fossil fuels to be burned...
...than what?
700 to 850 miles on a tank.
Dunno why people quote miles per tank...
Because they don't like stopping to fill up.
EVs increase electricity consumption.
Yes but they decrease fossil fuel consumption.
A BEV running on a dirty grid like Poland's is still releasing 30% less CO2 over its lifetime than an ICE vehicle (that includes the embedded carbon from its cosntruction). On a reletively clean grid like the UK its more like 60% less and rising. BEVs emissions reduce as we decarbonise the grid but ICE emissions are baked in when the vehicle is made. Oh and lets not forget no exhaust NOx and particulates.
Because they don’t like stopping to fill up.
800 miles without a stop? 12hrs? That's something people want?
Doesn't have to be one continuous drive. A long range from a full tank is useful to me as we dont have any petrol stations in town or the neighbouring ones, its two communities over, and Im not anywhere remote.
There's a regular route I drive, about 2hrs round trip. No petrol stations on the route apart from one overpriced services as I cross a motorway.
Bit extreme for the UK, but ive plenty of colleagues that work throughout the highlands visiting remote for the UK communities, plenty of range in the tank allows them to make more efficient travel plans instead of having to veer off the shortest routes.
We only really have data for Model S and they are showing an average 88% of capacity left after 200k miles. If that’s typical
I'm sorry, I'll be right back, just grabbing something to season that data...
I’m sorry, I’ll be right back, just grabbing something to season that data…
I wouldn't bother. Here's a Model 3 with 88% battery at 200k miles
I’m sorry, I’ll be right back, just grabbing something to season that data…
Go on..?
Really?
"well we don't have any long term data except for the stuff that Tesla said was definitely really true"
Some chunky discounts on the out going electric Corsa
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202304266691291?advertising-location=at_cars&atmobcid=soc5&fromsra&include-delivery-option=on&make=Vauxhall&model=Corsa-e&sort=distance
I also quoted mpg but fill your boots.
Reason for the range is as pie monster said. I cover Scotland for a job so being comfortably able to cover big distances without any fuel range concern is a plus
I like the sound of the big engined BMW, is it shocking on the smaller little pootles? - i ask as the Op sounded like s/he does alot of them and only a few trips stretching the legs a bit further on longer trips.
I'm way too influenced by money hence freezing my nads off on a little moped but I reckon if the Op isn't then something like that could be rather nice...consider it a "last chance to see drive" decision.
As range has been mentioned recently above, I don't think it was mentioned that another disadvantage of PHEVs seem to be that they run out of both electric and petrol pretty quick (i.e. small fuel tank). At least on my wife's Outlander
Hmmmmm… I have a Model 3 (one car household, not many local miles, a few 1000km+ trips per year). Used to charge it from our solar panels but have since moved so just on a cheap nighttime tariff now. I work in transport and the trends are interesting.
Demand for ICE fuels has largely flatlined despite growth in the national fleet (partly the EV effect, partly increased fuel efficiency somewhat undermined by SUVs).
If you live in a rural area, the filling station options will contract (even more) over the next decade (unless some radical diversification ensues). Distribution of fuel over long distances is expensive and the margins in filling stations are slim. The network was already shrinking before EVs gained any traction, I expect it to be put under further pressure.
Even as an early EV convert I have been surprised in the increased uptake - Stellantis is reporting that its growth in sales this year is driven by increased EV sales. The main problem (as an environmentalist) with EVs is that they’re really nice to drive. Which may encourage more driving. Aargh. More CO2 is emitted in manufacture but the lifetime emissions are still lower (exactly how much will depend on the electricity fuel mix). That’s on an individual vehicle level - we still need to reduce the total numbers of vehicles on the roads to get to net zero, not just switch 38 million cars to renewable-powered electric.
Pootle wise 40 to 44mpg. But i don't really use it for small runs. Use my little mazda but as its petrol is worse on mpg
Its genuinely impressive. If it was a company car I'd go electric but as I'm on an allowance I've bought a used vehicle rather than lease as I'll have an asset at the end of my loan.
Agreed less cars is the goal.
However economically we're all pushed to consumerism so to keep buying new stuff.
Think if we could utilise more bio gas and retrofit gas conversions this again would be part of the transition.
Not one solution will work we need a mix
The thing is with cars is that absolutely noone wants to spend 2hrs a day in rush hour traffic and pay a fortune for the privilege. But we feel we have no choice, and that is the issue that needs addressing.
Bio gas is probably better used to heat homes I reckon where it can be 95% efficient rather than 30% in cars.
Bio gas is probably better used to heat homes I reckon where it can be 95% efficient rather than 30% in cars.
Depends on the use case, I'd say the use case for gas heating neatly overlaps the use case for ICE (poor/unreliable infrastructure).
The thing is with cars is that absolutely noone wants to spend 2hrs a day in rush hour traffic and pay a fortune for the privilege. But we feel we have no choice, and that is the issue that needs addressing.
Fully agree, that's TJs point as well, the power train is just tinkering round the edges.
In the meantime...
Not one solution will work we need a mix
...this is true for all our energy needs.
Depends on the use case
Yeah that's fair, also HGVs could use gas. Most properties should be on heat pumps, same as most cars should be electric (eventually) but there could be outliers.
Fully agree, that’s TJs point as well, the power train is just tinkering round the edges.
Yes and no, depending on your view point, but it's something we CAN do right now with a modest investment in infrastructure. I don't think anyone has the first clue about how to stop us needing to drive all over the country.
I mean, if the govt bought every single house, then sold them all back to us at low prices - between £5k and £100k with a mandatory govt mortgage (no cash purchase), and fixed those prices permanently our housing costs would be slashed and we wouldn't be forced to drive around the country to get jobs that paid for decent houses, that might work - although I'm not sure what to do with all the spare cash that would suddenly make available. I used to think that education was the root solution to almost every problem, but now I think there are two fundamental problems in the UK - education and house prices.
The main problem (as an environmentalist) with EVs is that they’re really nice to drive. Which may encourage more driving.
And cheap per mile, zero ved, zero ULEZ, zero congestion charge, low BIK - which are all great as encouragement but I do feel there should be a limit on size & weight of vehicle to get some of those benefits...
Not a dig, just a note.
Distribution of fuel over long distances is expensive and the margins in filling stations are slim
The petrol station I referred to is 37 minutes from the refinery.
Some chunky discounts on the out going electric Corsa
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202304266691291?advertising-location=at_cars&atmobcid=soc5&fromsra&include-delivery-option=on&make=Vauxhall&model=Corsa-e&sort=distance/blockquote >there's £8k off electric fiat 500s on there as well - a big saving considering that model has probably got a decade left to run. Might be the start of prices going back to sensible levels? that discount compares to only £3k off a fiat 500 (non-electric) - so its definitely hitting EVs more
Most properties should be on heat pumps
Once you insulate them so that heat pumps are effective you've done most of the work. In theory you're right but the emissions from such a well insulated property would be negligible.
I don’t think anyone has the first clue about how to stop us needing to drive all over the country.
Well telecommuting is a good start.
A decent affordable public transport system would be another.
Taxing second and unoccupied homes to prevent land banking.
Rent caps that prevent renting costing more than an equivalent mortgage.
It's really not all that difficult to come up with solutions.