IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: electric cars
Topic Summary: just on the news breaking...ban of diesel and petrol by 2040
Created On: 26 July 2017 01:36 PM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
 electric cars   - psychicwarrior - 26 July 2017 01:36 PM  
 electric cars   - MWalker86 - 26 July 2017 02:41 PM  
 electric cars   - geoffsd - 26 July 2017 03:05 PM  
 electric cars   - MWalker86 - 26 July 2017 03:20 PM  
 electric cars   - davezawadi - 26 July 2017 03:28 PM  
 electric cars   - psychicwarrior - 26 July 2017 03:05 PM  
 electric cars   - geoffsd - 26 July 2017 03:32 PM  
 electric cars   - MWalker86 - 26 July 2017 03:42 PM  
 electric cars   - davezawadi - 26 July 2017 04:29 PM  
 electric cars   - rocknroll - 26 July 2017 04:57 PM  
 electric cars   - mapj1 - 26 July 2017 07:00 PM  
 electric cars   - MWalker86 - 26 July 2017 08:03 PM  
 electric cars   - hertzal123 - 26 July 2017 08:56 PM  
 electric cars   - psychicwarrior - 26 July 2017 09:17 PM  
 electric cars   - mapj1 - 26 July 2017 11:38 PM  
 electric cars   - ebee - 27 July 2017 12:42 AM  
 electric cars   - davezawadi - 27 July 2017 09:30 AM  
 electric cars   - mapj1 - 27 July 2017 09:51 AM  
 electric cars   - davezawadi - 27 July 2017 02:13 PM  
 electric cars   - geoffsd - 27 July 2017 02:53 PM  
 electric cars   - sparkingchip - 29 July 2017 09:23 PM  
 electric cars   - sparkingchip - 29 July 2017 09:36 PM  
 electric cars   - davezawadi - 30 July 2017 08:06 AM  
 electric cars   - broadgage - 30 July 2017 09:44 AM  
 electric cars   - sparkingchip - 29 July 2017 09:26 PM  
 electric cars   - antric2 - 31 July 2017 09:25 PM  
 electric cars   - potential - 01 August 2017 09:13 AM  
 electric cars   - ectophile - 01 August 2017 01:15 PM  
 electric cars   - davezawadi - 01 August 2017 01:32 PM  
 electric cars   - AJJewsbury - 27 July 2017 04:14 PM  
 electric cars   - davezawadi - 27 July 2017 04:29 PM  
 electric cars   - sparkingchip - 27 July 2017 05:23 PM  
 electric cars   - mapj1 - 28 July 2017 12:06 AM  
 electric cars   - arg - 28 July 2017 10:17 AM  
 electric cars   - Fm - 28 July 2017 10:24 AM  
 electric cars   - davezawadi - 28 July 2017 12:13 PM  
 electric cars   - ebee - 28 July 2017 12:35 PM  
 electric cars   - arg - 28 July 2017 04:15 PM  
 electric cars   - Zs - 28 July 2017 07:58 PM  
 electric cars   - rocknroll - 28 July 2017 10:07 PM  
 electric cars   - davezawadi - 29 July 2017 09:45 AM  
 electric cars   - sparkingchip - 28 July 2017 01:46 PM  
 electric cars   - psychicwarrior - 29 July 2017 10:24 AM  
 electric cars   - AJJewsbury - 29 July 2017 08:45 PM  
 electric cars   - AJJewsbury - 30 July 2017 10:11 AM  
 electric cars   - davezawadi - 31 July 2017 07:49 AM  
 electric cars   - AJJewsbury - 31 July 2017 09:54 AM  
 electric cars   - psychicwarrior - 31 July 2017 10:33 AM  
 electric cars   - psychicwarrior - 01 August 2017 01:08 PM  
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 26 July 2017 01:36 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



psychicwarrior

Posts: 683
Joined: 18 October 2010

don't you just love ideals and utopia, especially if they make a lot/total sense.

i'd like to see the ban of capitalism and the sustained feudal state that has existed for aeons and move towards a different social system for a 'better future', but its an unachievable ideal in most folks eyes and in any case...how do you get there fairly and equitably for all if powerful, vested interests abound. Any way, I digress.

Back to the breaking headline - how can this be supported infrastructure wise.... its not new because many have already commented on this subject based on what's been on the go....but now its serious [arguably]

- massive, I mean massive increase in charging provisions both at home and 'charging garages' up and down the country

e.g. currently you pull up in a car, fill up and gone in '60 seconds' - not so charging a car I suspect....a lot of cars can fizz through a petrol station in short order

- not sure how much money is made each year by the oil petrol industry, or what proportion is from motoring fuel - either way, will 'charging prices' rise to maintain the same level of executive salaries and share-holder dividends

- will electric prices rise even further, or come down

- is there enough available electric production

- what is the infrastructure plan or assessment requirements for a change like this

- why just cars, why not *every vehicle*

- what is the expected 'pollution' contribution from a massive increase in battery production and what is expected to be in place to handle that

- will electric car prices come down (one would think so, but errrmmm)

- are 'they' consulting with the knowledgeable in the electric industry and who are those people...

I'm sure there is much much more to all this in terms of questions and issues and I bet there is very little in terms of sound plans. Anyone can some up with a strap line that is totally sensible - but on complex issues like this, it is the lack of detail of how to get there that inevitably ends up in a 'make it up as it creeps along' which causes all sorts of issues and casualties along the way.

So Mr/Mrs Government - what are your well thought plans, or is it I;ve got a good idea and i'll let you all deal with the chaos....anyway the 'market' will control it.

It's a great idea and at some level makes sense....can't wait to see how it pans out and to watch a new 'cash cow' emerge around this every growing 'green' push to a new cleaner future... la de daa


Well, calm down dear...its only an advert :-)


PS: apologies, this should have been in a general chat forum I fear.
 26 July 2017 02:41 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



MWalker86

Posts: 101
Joined: 05 June 2017

Well yes it's a huge infrastructure challenge. But we faced essentially the same thing when introducing the infrastructure needed to make petrol cars a viable solution.

If the economics carry on supporting it, IE fossil fuels keep rising in price and electricity keeps coming down then it's an inevitability as sure as the demise of the horse and carriage.
 26 July 2017 03:05 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



geoffsd

Posts: 2342
Joined: 15 June 2010

Originally posted by: MWalker86

Well yes it's a huge infrastructure challenge. But we faced essentially the same thing when introducing the infrastructure needed to make petrol cars a viable solution.

All they needed was a tank.
It was and still is delivered by lorry - to anywhere.

and electricity keeps coming down

Where do you live?

That certainly won't be the case if demand outstrips supply.
 26 July 2017 03:20 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



MWalker86

Posts: 101
Joined: 05 June 2017

Originally posted by: geoffsd
Originally posted by: MWalker86 Well yes it's a huge infrastructure challenge. But we faced essentially the same thing when introducing the infrastructure needed to make petrol cars a viable solution.
All they needed was a tank. It was and still is delivered by lorry - to anywhere.


And all they need here is a battery! See I can do over simplification too.

It is anyway an inherently inefficient system, where every time you want to move some energy from A-B you have to expend energy on literally carrying it there whilst paying a guy to do it.

Not the same with transmission of electricity, once you have paid to put the infrastructure up you can send as much energy down it as you want (within reason obviously) and the maintenance costs are fixed.


and electricity keeps coming down


Where do you live?



That certainly won't be the case if demand outstrips supply.


Fossil fuels are a finite resource, electricity is not. So sooner or later the supply of one is going to be a lot greater than the other.
 26 July 2017 03:28 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 4259
Joined: 26 June 2002

Electric car changing would need the generating capacity to be increased by 30 - 50%, but let us assume the best case of 20GW, 30%. This would charge about 6 million cars at the standard rate, or perhaps 1 million Teslas at the quick (1 hour) rate. We are building Hinkley C to generate about 2GW, and many gas turbine CCGT plants to cover the deficit present now. Note that these use gas and produce both CO2 and NOx, although this is not usually mentioned. Other sources of NOx are space heating, and other types of fuel burning at high temperatures, such as steel making, and lightning (probably 1500 tonnes last week). The usual answer that we can use solar / wind is completely untrue, because we cannot store energy when they are unavailable. Unless you controlled charge times and quantities to a low level, and found a way to tax at different rates, the treasury would loose £20 billion per year in fuel tax, need huge new power stations (green) and have to fund new infrastructure of the grid and electricity distribution to every road with houses. All immensely expensive!

Batteries are suggested as providing such storage, but this is also untrue in bulk because they are inherently very dangerous, as is any concentrated source of energy. A 1GWhr battery contains 15,000,000,000,000J (15 trillion joules), comparable to the power of an atom bomb and similarly damaging should it explode! It is roughly equivalent to 600,000 litres of diesel fuel or 1000 tonnes of TNT. The pumped storage scheme in Wales is also roughly equivalent, and to depend on it in any reliable way we would need at least 5 days of storage of the wind maximum capacity plus some of the solar in case of bad weather, lets assume at least 200GWhr. This would mean flooding most of upland Wales to provide additional storage, and many more pumps / turbines to move the water and produce power when required. The process is also quite inefficient, needing even more windmills and solar panels!

Anyone any good answers to these, and then there are trucks and buses and trains and ships and space heating and industrial processes (steel making) and.......?

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET


Edited: 26 July 2017 at 03:39 PM by davezawadi
 26 July 2017 03:05 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



psychicwarrior

Posts: 683
Joined: 18 October 2010

I feel in my bones that its a bit more challenging than the move from 'horse and cart to petrol'. :-) In any case everything is achievable some would say....hmmm
 26 July 2017 03:32 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



geoffsd

Posts: 2342
Joined: 15 June 2010

No, I meant the filling stations only needed a tank to be a filling station.

"So sooner or later the supply of one is going to be a lot greater than the other."
One what?

When everyone has an EV and wants scarce electricity, it WILL NOT be cheap.
 26 July 2017 03:42 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



MWalker86

Posts: 101
Joined: 05 June 2017

Yeah and neither will petrol be if there isn't any left in the ground.

I suspect anything where we really need to stick with something like diesel will be replaced by bio-fuels. Light vehicles will switch to a small battery capable of covering short journeys because that's what most people need them for.

I'm sure there will be great technical challenges, but my thought is it's absolutely inevitable, sooner or later, it is going to happen regardless of all the numbers you want to quote, there is simply no other way and people will make it happen.

Somebody bump this thread every 10 years or so and we'll see what's happened.
 26 July 2017 04:29 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 4259
Joined: 26 June 2002

I assume this biofuel idea does not include the tractors to grow it? Perhaps it does in which case we are doomed.

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
 26 July 2017 04:57 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rocknroll

Posts: 9677
Joined: 03 October 2005

Back to the breaking headline - how can this be supported infrastructure wise.... its not new because many have already commented on this subject based on what's been on the go....but now its serious [arguably]


I am afraid you missed something a couple of months back where various documents were leaked showing that EM drives are likely to be the way forward so there realistically may not be a strain on the infrastructure after all, at first it seemed impossible that EM drives could support terrestrial vehicles but an interesting statement was made that could see the future, the question has always been "can the EM drive produce enough thrust for terrestrial applications?", the hidden answer was yes, the second generation engines will be capable of producing a specific thrust of 30kN/kW. Thus for 1 kilowatt (typical of the power in a microwave oven) a static thrust of 3 tonnes can be obtained, which is enough to support a large car. This is clearly adequate for terrestrial transport applications.

Where we are at the moment is the EM drive can easily counter gravity upwards or along a plane without losing kinetic energy but some form of propulsion will still be required to produce the kinetic energy to accelerate the vehicle, probably batteries but nowhere near the size of what is needed in a present electric vehicle, charging could probably be achieved using the EM drive.

So you may be panicking for nothing, the future is here.

Regards

-------------------------
"Take nothing but a picture,
leave nothing but footprints!"
-------------------------
"Oh! The drama of it all."
-------------------------
"You can throw all the philosophy you like at the problem, but at the end of the day it's just basic electrical theory!"
-------------------------

Edited: 26 July 2017 at 06:27 PM by rocknroll
 26 July 2017 07:00 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mapj1

Posts: 12039
Joined: 22 July 2004

I think someone fell asleep while watching Star Trek or Dr Who, and woke up with a seemingly marvellous idea.
We need to remember also how long the horse to car transition took, and it was a lot more than 20 years, more like 50 boosted by the 20 years of progress you get in 5 years when you go to war. Very few individuals had a car until the 1950s, by which time the technology had been fully debugged..
If yuo want an idea of cars on road verus year, it is quite fun to reverse process the govt tables on cars registered to see how few were on the road until about 1960, when it really took off.
Sadly not in an easy to digest form, but in table 124 for example by doing column totals per year back to about 1900.

-------------------------
regards Mike
 26 July 2017 08:03 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



MWalker86

Posts: 101
Joined: 05 June 2017

Well technology tends to advance at an exponential rate and we are already a good 30 years at least into electric cars.

Call me a doe eyed dreamer if you like but history doesn't remember the people who said 'You'll never get that thing into space.'
 26 July 2017 08:56 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



hertzal123

Posts: 503
Joined: 26 August 2007

Read somewhere recently that its possible to drain the " discharged "
electrolyte from electric vehicles and replace with "charged" fluid.If true, this could overcome the long down time at filling stations or dwellings.
Regards,Hz.
 26 July 2017 09:17 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



psychicwarrior

Posts: 683
Joined: 18 October 2010

maybe the idea will/should be that cars will be leased (on a day, week, month, year basis) from a large local area car pool(s) - owned by [put your money bags monopoly piece here] - rather than personally owned (i read somewhere that batteries in them will only every be leased). Either way this is really is going to be a challenge and I suspect that a serious reduction in personal ownership of vehicles will be a necessity running along side all this move to electric stuff.

i did laugh at the thought that a family member's household has 4 cars at the moment parked outside...imagine the setup just at the house....leads spidering out all over the place.....then what about the folks that live on terrace streets. Where I am I can see now 3 streets, with the whole road full of cars outside (both sides)....... wash a repeat all over the place...hehehe eee it's grand.
 26 July 2017 11:38 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mapj1

Posts: 12039
Joined: 22 July 2004

we have had electric vehicles since before the internal combustion engine, but its not just the time something has been around per-se but how stable the development is.
Computing technology seems to advance exponentially, but very few natural world things do, things like how many people you can feed from an acre of land, which has risen, depending how far back you look, or physical things the strength of steel alloys, or the capacity per kilo of batteries, yes again both have risen compared to 20 years ago, but nothing like exponentially
There have been a few key developments that make electric vehicles a bit more practical than 100 years ago, such as electronics that allows brushless motors and regeneration during braking, and of course, batteries, but not to the extent that is really needed to be better than petrol. More available than petrol, perhaps, but market forces will sor that out, by pushing fuel costs, rather than legislatilon.

Reading a 1960 cub annual the other day (present from someone who knows my involvement and thought I may be interested) some 'things you will see when you grow up' are fun reading.
Free electricity from nuclear has not yet happened, nor has the personal heicopter as the standard means of commmuting, just because things sound good, does not make them happen.
And when did anyone last step on the moon? I'd say as a society, we have more or less lost the ability to do that sort of thing, after perhaps one more generation, all the folk who remember how to do it will all be long retired or even dead.
The direction of progress is only forwards if people push it that way.

-------------------------
regards Mike
 27 July 2017 12:42 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



ebee

Posts: 6735
Joined: 02 December 2004

the last electric car I drove had a big stick on the back with some springy metal on the end and you and your one passenger drove towards a similar set up and cause them to bump.
eeh such fun

-------------------------
Regards,
Ebee (M I S P N)

Knotted cables cause Lumpy Lektrik
 27 July 2017 09:30 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 4259
Joined: 26 June 2002

Latest news!
I heard a man from KPMG (probably advising someone in the Government) saying that the load to charge all the cars was only 4GW! So my calculation is as follows:
20 million cars charged at 1kW for 24 hours a day = 20GW. Average value some slower, some quicker.
24 kWhr is approximately equivalent to burning 4 litres of diesel with 40% efficiency.
Most of us use more than 28 litres of fuel per week so my figure seems an under estimate.
Therefore we need 20GW more generating capacity average at all times, and just using night time "spare capacity" would need 60 GW for 8 hours, answer "Oh dear!". Daytime charging would have to be banned I'm afraid making any reasonable journey about as slow as a horse and cart. I can only imagine that somehow 90% of people will not be allowed a car anymore.
Next point, batteries.
Lots of people think that we can improve batteries significantly. There are two problems, basic chemistry and cycle life. The chemistry is limited by the activity of the element used in the battery. We already use lithium, the most active available element except hydrogen, so unless someone can make a gas mode battery this is a bit of a dead end. You could perhaps look at fuel cells instead, but these are very sensitive to impure hydrogen and comparatively expensive. Getting the hydrogen would need large scale electrolysis, which is not very efficient. Cycle life tends to get worse as the battery chemicals are more active, and there is a smaller quantity of them. Lithium cells may get to 1000 cycles with 30% loss of capacity of full cycles, but my phone one does not, and rarely gets much below half charge. It is the bottom end that really suffers.
Friends of the Earth claimed that we had 25% solar on the best day this year for some reason, one sunny hour does not make a practical transport system even if true, which I doubt.
When electric trucks were mentioned there was an evasiveness which was very illuminating! An HGV would need a 2.5MWhr battery to be any good at all.
Now back to the good old reliable diesel van!
Please argue with the numbers, that's why I put them there because we need to work with facts not fancies.

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
 27 July 2017 09:51 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mapj1

Posts: 12039
Joined: 22 July 2004

Coming at it another way - early adopters win financially, but the kVA figures are not good for the grid.

Leaf 24kWh battery capacity assume charge at @ 12p per kWh so £3 for full charge Leaf range 80 miles call it 4p per mile (ish)

Light user
8k miles a year (20 miles per day, so 6kWh of charge per night ?)
Annual petrol cost ~ £1,400 ?
Annual re- charging costs ~£300

Commuter - longest sensible range on that battery to avoid mid journey re-charge when 80 mile range reduces a bit..
20k miles a year (bit like 50 miles per day, so 20 kWh of charge per night ?) similar if assuming not driving weekends, but 80 miles 5 days week
Annual petrol cost: ~£4000
Annual re-charging cost: ~£900

-------------------------
regards Mike
 27 July 2017 02:13 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 4259
Joined: 26 June 2002

A leaf using only 6kWh per day to do 20 miles. That's only 0.4 hp hours per mile, so I hope none of it is up hill. That is not a realistic number, otherwise we could get away with 5BHP cars, Do you remember those Mike, I rather doubt it? I assume the number comes from a constant 20MPH along a nice smooth flat road with no other traffic. If that is what is claimed I would like to see them prove it on the average city commute with everyone else trying to do 40! The same vehicle would probably be able to do at least 120 MPG on petrol, so the cost is not that much less is it, we must be very careful not to compare apples and pears. 6kWh is about the energy in 1 litre of petrol burnt in a modern engine so if we forget the tax petrol is cheaper. BTW my electricity is more like 16p / unit. They will have to tax electricity somehow to raise £20 billion at least from electric cars.

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
 27 July 2017 02:53 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



geoffsd

Posts: 2342
Joined: 15 June 2010

"They will have to tax electricity somehow to raise £20 billion at least from electric cars."

Smart meters
 29 July 2017 09:23 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



sparkingchip

Posts: 11682
Joined: 18 January 2003

This policy is due to come to fruition in twenty three years, do you remember 1994 twenty three years ago? how many government environmental policies from 1994 have come to fruition?

Andy B.
 29 July 2017 09:36 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



sparkingchip

Posts: 11682
Joined: 18 January 2003

Originally posted by: sparkingchip

This policy is due to come to fruition in twenty three years, do you remember 1994 twenty three years ago? how many government environmental policies from 1994 have come to fruition?



Andy B.


21 February 1994 - Honda sells its 20% stake of the Rover Group, allowing BMW to take full control. This marks the end of the 13-year venture between the two carmakers, although the Honda-based Rover 400 will still go into production next year, becoming the seventh and final product of the venture.

How many Rover 400 cars did you pass n the road today?

Andy B.
 30 July 2017 08:06 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 4259
Joined: 26 June 2002

The point is Andy that a couple of minutes to charge a liquid fuel car cannot be replicated if each takes an hour or more. Also much more frequent refueling is required (at least now) making the problem worse. We do get queues for fuel sometimes, but not often.

My basic premise is that excess reliance is being placed on "new technology" in this area, and if it doesn't happen for whatever reason, we have a major problem. The whole electricity thing is not understood properly because it appears to the uninitiated to be an infinite resource, but as we know it is a very delicate balance to keep everyone's power on. The whole discussion is distorted because fake statistics are banded about by the "green" lobby, such as 40,000 people are killed by vehicle emissions every year. This is not borne out by genuine medical data, these people do not show a single identifiable NOx cause of death (in PM results), they have a huge array of other diseases. Low levels of NOx may cause some effects, but there is not much data and very little research because the "experiment" is confounded by thousands of other confounding factors to do with lifestyle, food, exercise, smoking, environment etc. over many years, which are not under any kind of control. Unless a proper control group can be found with none of these effects the statistics are very dubious indeed. Average lifetimes are still increasing, which is a strong counter indicator that things are getting worse.

Such numbers make headlines because they are shocking, leading to knee jerk response, but are they correct?

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
 30 July 2017 09:44 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



broadgage

Posts: 3170
Joined: 07 August 2007

I feel that some members are overdoing the "doom and gloom" a bit.
The proposed ban on new sales of petrol/diesel cars and light vans does not come into force for over 20 years, after which existing vehicles may still be used.
So about 30 years until the supply of good used ICE vehicles dries up.
In the interim I expect a gradual shift towards EVs, not a sudden mass adoption.
Charging an initially small, but steadily growing number of EVs need not present any great challenges.
Charging during the evening peak should be strongly discouraged by tariffs.
Charging overnight would be the norm. It seems unlikely that mass market EVs will have batteries greater than 45KWH, so charging overnight from a single phase 32 amp circuit is easily achieved.
" Smart chargers" that communicate with the grid are a distinct possibility. This would allow the charging demand to be controlled remotely so as to better balance supply and demand.
It would be a simple matter to provide three colour coded buttons on the charger.
RED=CHARGE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, at a premium price.
YELLOW=CHARGE MORE CHEAPLY subject to being fully charged by say 07-00 tomorrow.
GREEN= CHARGE VERY CHEAPLY INDEED, subject to be being done within 24 hours.
And while we are at it, similar controls could be fitted to some other appliances.
Some charging would probably be done at workplaces, but again should be remote controlled so as to balance supply and demand

Charging a million EVs all plugged in at about 09-00 would be a challenge. The same number with smart chargers that ensure that they are all done by 17-00 should be easy.
Presuming a million cars with 7KW/32 amp chargers, if they all charged at once on arrival at work, the total demand would be 7 million KW. 7GW for the first hour or two of the working day would be a significant increase in morning peak demand and require building a lot of expensive new capacity.
If instead the load was spread over an 8 hour day, then nothing would be added to the peak demand, and about 1 or 2 GW added to the average demand.

If instead the demand was spread over the working day
 29 July 2017 09:26 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



sparkingchip

Posts: 11682
Joined: 18 January 2003

Originally posted by: geoffsd

"They will have to tax electricity somehow to raise £20 billion at least from electric cars."



Smart meters



Multiple tariffs with cheap charging for cars at the times most people want to drive them.
Andy B.
 31 July 2017 09:25 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



antric2

Posts: 1267
Joined: 20 October 2006

If I keep my car for 20 more years,the floor pan will rust away, I can stick my feet through the floor and then I can power my car like Fred Flintstone does....simpullsss

Surely by then either the car will recharge whilst being driven and plug in charging wont be needed or maybe a cheap and efficient method of extracting hydrogen or oxygen from water as a fuel will be available or maybe the world will be full of hop on hop off ski type lifts around the world...............I am sorry for being facitious but tele is garbage tonight and I am bored and its the best your gonna get out of me tonight.....infact,just remembered I will be in my 80.s about 2040 so will only need my skateboard or roller blades....better go and get some oil on them to preserve them
Regards
Antric
 01 August 2017 09:13 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



potential

Posts: 1774
Joined: 01 February 2007

It all seems rather fanciful to me.
Whatever happens in the future we'll be expected to pay for it all.
Taxes will be placed on electric cars probably sooner than you think.
At present they seem such a good idea mainly because so much speculative money is being thrown at it, the government is distorting the market (never a good thing, take my word for it) and lies are being told.... that's my take.

As for oil running out that won't happen as soon as you think because new reserves are being found albeit more difficult to access.
I snigger to myself with the self-satisfied attitude many people have over their electric car being so easy to manage.
I cannot reconcile myself with the green credentials of millions of half ton batteries being moved about all the time and their manufacture, upkeep etc.
What I do foresee is that, unlike the combustion engine car, electric cars will be for the rich who have money.
The poor will not be using them much, it will cost too much to take part in this wonderful but rather drab future we are being told we will have.

Soon it will be illegal to actually drive a car.
PC pressure will make it "unacceptable".

But when we have another war all things will change..... and we will.
 01 August 2017 01:15 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



ectophile

Posts: 857
Joined: 17 September 2001

Originally posted by: potential
I cannot reconcile myself with the green credentials of millions of half ton batteries being moved about all the time and their manufacture, upkeep etc.


Electric vehicles require much less maintenance than petrol or diesel ones. There's no engine oil to replace. There's no gearbox or differential oils to check. No cooling liquid to top up or replace. No clutches to wear out.

The batteries should last a good ten years with no maintenance before they need replacing. Then just send them off for recycling. That is, if the second-hand batteries don't get re-purposed as static energy storage systems. If we start switching to more renewables, we'll need a lot of battery storage to ride out the times of less generation.

Electric cars are still very expensive to buy, but the "fuel" and servicing is cheap.

-------------------------
S P Barker BSc PhD IEng MIET
 01 August 2017 01:32 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 4259
Joined: 26 June 2002

I disagree that the fuel is cheap. If all the costs are included, as they are for liquid fuels, then they are more expensive! Various persons have used economy 7 prices for car charging, but this is just lies. There is no possibility that the government will not find a way to collect 40 billion (in today's money) from electric cars by 2040. These renewables infrastructure costs should be borne by the "supplier" entirely, it is unreasonable to charge the consumer for their business capital costs. Perhaps they would like to subsidise my business by giving me free capital to upgrade to entirely "green" equipment? With this new charge consumers are probably paying 25% of their bill to finance the supplier capital expenditure, where are the corresponding shares in the companies, because they belong to the consumers not existing shareholders? The government should make the companies and grid borrow the money on the stock market, not steal it from consumers who have no say at all. An end to all subsidies is firmly indicated, it would be better for the consumer, and prevent distortion of the market economy we are supposed to have.

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
 27 July 2017 04:14 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 17795
Joined: 13 August 2003

Most of us use more than 28 litres of fuel per week

Maybe, although I suspect a lot of urban""2nd car runarounds" do a lot less, which might bring the average down. It would be interesting to know what the total petrol/diesel sales are - not that it's a direct comparison as IC engines loose a lot of efficiency when idling or in slow traffic.

I heard a man from KPMG (probably advising someone in the Government) saying that the load to charge all the cars was only 4GW! So my calculation is as follows:
20 million cars charged at 1kW for 24 hours a day = 20GW.

Maybe they're noticed there's a lot of "spare" generating and distribution capacity - e.g. we can produce something like 50GW when we need to, but most nights less than 20GW is needed - so as long as you can arrange things so that the bulk of charging is done at off-peak times the overall expansion of generating & distribution capacity perhaps need only be in the area of 4GW. Just a guess.

- Andy.
 27 July 2017 04:29 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 4259
Joined: 26 June 2002

That kind of reasoning is beyond contempt Andy (not you, whoever suggested 4GW) as they are expecting charging points in car parks and work, not much good if only powered between 10pm and 6 am. It just does not add up. Smart meters could have multiple outputs with varying charges I suppose but fraud would rise horribly once the bad boys realised. As I said below the whole lot is entirely a misguided sop to the green members of society, it will probably end in tears once examined properly. I do like a nice diesel generator though, just to give me power wherever and whenever I want!

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
 27 July 2017 05:23 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



sparkingchip

Posts: 11682
Joined: 18 January 2003

Allegedly gas cookers and boilers will disappear long before this ban on petrol and diesel cars.

Andy B.
 28 July 2017 12:06 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mapj1

Posts: 12039
Joined: 22 July 2004

Well, I don't have an electric car personally, but I am aware of the electronics of some, and the 80 miles per charge (24 kVA) figure is consideded by most not to be unreasonable. And stacks up with user reported experiance
Of course your 1920s 5 horse power car with a top speed of 20mph did not have regenerative breaking, so slowing down was a dead loss, and it probably had a 3 speed gearbox and a propshaft. And the numbers are a bit of a wild guess to show another side to it.
However the thrust of my point is not an argumeent about 12p or 16p per kwhr, more to say that right now it is worth it as a car user to have an electric vehicle if charging and fuel costs remain at currnet levels, at least it would be if other cost of ownership issues could be neglected.
But of course as more people want to charge their cars, that cost advantage simply cannot remain the case, as the roles of peak time and off-peak will reverse. The early bird gets the worm. There is less advantage to being the early worm.
And of course both David and I have lived through the burning off about half the worlds easily extracted oil reserves, and when only the hard to get stuff is left, the price will not stay down.
Coal we have enough of at current rates of use, but of course current rates have been in decline for a while, as gas and oil are easier.

-------------------------
regards Mike
 28 July 2017 10:17 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



arg

Posts: 254
Joined: 18 March 2015

To give you some real numbers to work with:

- A large, heavy, high-performance EV will achieve an average of about 3 miles per kWh in real-world use, including motorway driving
and the need for heating in winter. Smaller/slower ones such as Leaf or Zoe will achieve about 4 miles per kWh.
In both cases you can achieve much better if you try hard (and the official NEDC figures that car manufacturers are required to
publish are, like MPG figures on conventional cars, hopelessly optimistic). But 3-4 miles per kWh is what people actually
get in practice.

- Statistics for car use are here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/611304/annual-road-traffic-estimates-2016.pdf

Considering just cars and taxis, there were 252.6 billion miles driven in 2016, or an average of 692 million per day. At 3.5 miles/kWh, that needs 200 GWh/day, or 25GW of extra generation for the 8-hour economy 7 period overnight. That's a lot, but only equivalent to the difference between the evening peak and the current overnight low. Obviously we can't expect the flat-out performance needed for the peak to be sustained 24x7, but just keeping generation going at daytime levels through the night would get us half way there.

Add in light commercials (vans) - 49.1bn miles/yr, 135m miles/day, assume 3miles/kWh (heavier than the cars, but lower average speeds), gives 44GWh/day, another 5GW needed overnight.


In practice, the distribution network is likely to feel the pinch before we run out of generation. Those 252 billion miles were driven by 32 million cars, so an average of 7875 miles/year for each car, or 22 miles/day/car, needing somewhere between 5 and 8 kWh charging each night. Given distribution networks planned at 2kW per house average, that's just about OK if everything is precisely average - but of course it won't be. Although the national average is about 1 car/household, there will obviously be many estates with the majority having 2 cars, balanced by others with low car ownership. Likewise, unless given strong incentives the charging load won't be spread evenly through the night. This is easily solved from a technical perspective (smart metering and automated charging control), but putting together the commercial/regulatory arrangements to make it actually happen is harder.

There's also trade-offs. Most people will buy an EV with a bigger battery than they need for day-to-day use because they sometimes want to drive further (and efforts to persuade people that they could hire a car or whatever for those long journeys have been highly unsuccessful - it seems that people want 200 miles of range to feel comfortable buying an EV, even though the statistics say they are only going to be driving an average of 20-odd miles a day in it). So it would be easy to provide people with a chargepoint with three buttons on it when they plug in: a) "Get me enough charge overnight for my commute tomorrow" b) "I'm going on a trip tomorrow, get me a full charge overnight", c) "The hell with the expense, charge at max speed right now!", with suitable financial incentives. That would help with the generation side of things - allowing more charging to be done on days when there's excess renewables (eg. wind) and less when generation is tight - but does put proportionately more pressure on the distribution side of things.


Finally, on the timescale we are talking about, there's the impact of self-driving cars to consider. In one world view, by 2040 all cars will be self-driving and most of us won't bother to own one - we'll just summon a (self-driving) taxi when we want to go somewhere. That doesn't necessarily make much difference to the total energy required, but does make a big difference to when and where charging is needed. On the one hand, given the state of technology and social changes needed, it would be brave to make plans on the basis this is definitely going to happen; on the other hand, it would be foolish to assume it definitely won't happen.
 28 July 2017 10:24 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Fm

Posts: 2032
Joined: 24 August 2011

Wonder who in the government has shares with large battery manufacturers
 28 July 2017 12:13 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 4259
Joined: 26 June 2002

OK Arg not much different to my numbers really. However these "average" numbers are hopeless for planning. Charging has to be 24 hr availability as otherwise any trip longer than 60 miles is no longer possible without an overnight stay. I can see motorway services offering charge at £5 per kWh already! So the non-green conventional generating capacity has to meet another 10GW peak load on a dark wet windless day, and that is an "average figure", every house with 4 cars taking an extra 120A at night might also be amusing for the distribution infrastructure, as might every house taking 30A extra, it would lead to total failure immediately because each 50 - 60 houses usually have one 600A fuse! Only 5 more nuclear power stations need to be built in the next 20 years then. It is not sensible to suggest a plan which requires that all the domestic electrical infrastructure be hugely uprated, or plan on the basis that only 1 in 10 houses will have one car and the rest none. The missing information is still "who pays" and sounds like the magic money tree again! Of course this could just be an aspiration and not really on the table at all. I estimate that this plan costs £500 Billion to £1 Trillion at today's prices, so not a loose change job.
Changing the subject slightly, it has now been admitted that the high pollution levels in Oxford Street and elsewhere are caused by buses and taxis and only a little by private cars, so this plan seems to be solving a non-problem. Diesels can be made very clean with Ad-blue or similar, such as tier 6 lorries, so more misinformation is being used to promote a political viewpoint. I have still failed to find any papers which actually analyse very low level NOx toxicity, so there doesn't seem to be much science either. Good here isn't it!

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
 28 July 2017 12:35 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



ebee

Posts: 6735
Joined: 02 December 2004

It`s the kettle wattage reduction fiasco but taken to a higher level

-------------------------
Regards,
Ebee (M I S P N)

Knotted cables cause Lumpy Lektrik
 28 July 2017 04:15 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



arg

Posts: 254
Joined: 18 March 2015

Originally posted by: davezawadi

OK Arg not much different to my numbers really. However these "average" numbers are hopeless for planning.


Well, actions to force things towards the average are the way to make this actually feasible. Certainly the overnight charging situation is completely unmanageable if you let people charge when they feel like, but comes close to solving the whole problem if you get the charging spread through the available hours (by offering an appropriate tariff - Economy 7 is already helping here).


Charging has to be 24 hr availability as otherwise any trip longer than 60 miles is no longer possible without an overnight stay. I can see motorway services offering charge at £5 per kWh already!


Yes, public rapid charging will, and should be, expensive - but the need to use it should be rare. 60 miles is already at the lowest end of the available capacities, and I'd expect such cars (if they continue to exist) to be bought only in the 2nd car/commuter car role. It's generally considered that 200 miles range is needed for mass-market acceptance (and such vehicles are within sight from multiple manufacurers). With that sort of range, you only need public charging a few times a year, and have spare capacity much of the rest of the time to make the averaging work better.


So the non-green conventional generating capacity has to meet another 10GW peak load on a dark wet windless day, and that is an "average figure",


Where do you get that figure from?


every house with 4 cars taking an extra 120A at night might also be amusing for the distribution infrastructure, as might every house taking 30A extra, it would lead to total failure immediately because each 50 - 60 houses usually have one 600A fuse!


Which is why tariffs and control systems need to arrange that those 4 cars (each doing only 20 miles a day and so needing 30A for only an hour) charge sequentially rather than all at once.

That 600A over 8 night-time hours can deliver 16kWh to each house (with 2kWh spare to run their fridges etc). That's about 60 miles, enough for 3 cars per house doing an average 20 miles each.

Yes, there will be hot-spots, estates with above average commuting mileages on account of where they are located, and some reinforcement work will be required; equally, there will be areas where there's no extra needed at all.


I wouldn't claim that the Government have a joined-up strategy here - they plainly don't - but from an engineering perspective this is achievable if there is reason to do it.
 28 July 2017 07:58 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zs

Posts: 3877
Joined: 20 July 2006

Rock, I had to go away and look up EM drives on the web. I thought you meant Electro Motive, as in Force, and was expecting that to come back at me and then to learn how it applies to cars.

I get the EMF and power generation thing you see... in my head it works just fine.

I was sort of hoping that it was something to do with as the wheels turn they make their own electricity and a bit more than you are using. So it keeps you going for hundreds of miles without having to have a place outside your house for a charger. Cos I live down a little alley in a cute place with no car parking you see....

I was,in fact, sent to a load of NASA sites about radio frequency and things.

Blimey, do you think we are really that far advanced? I doubt it. Never say never I suppose.

Don't blame me - I'm only the guitar player. But that might be a tad advanced for Mrs May.

What is the Prime ministers favourite shampoo?

Zs
 28 July 2017 10:07 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rocknroll

Posts: 9677
Joined: 03 October 2005

Blimey, do you think we are really that far advanced? I doubt it. Never say never I suppose


Absolutely I know we are, technology is advancing along at a break neck pace, to explain it; 30 years ago technology was dependant on man, it was slow, laborious and restricted by the laws of physics, now technology is dependant on technology where problems can be solved in milliseconds and it holds no bounds as it is not restricted by the laws of physics which are being broken every day.

Regards

-------------------------
"Take nothing but a picture,
leave nothing but footprints!"
-------------------------
"Oh! The drama of it all."
-------------------------
"You can throw all the philosophy you like at the problem, but at the end of the day it's just basic electrical theory!"
-------------------------
 29 July 2017 09:45 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 4259
Joined: 26 June 2002

Well Arg, you seem happy with this situation, but I am not. So your car will do 200 miles of average conditions, and then you might find a charging slot if it is not a holiday day, no wind and overcast? Really you do believe in hype don't you? Your average 16kWh needs extreme central control over every charging point in the country, running all generating plant at full capacity continuously, and nothing in reserve when a breakdown looses 2GW off the grid. In other words you would be happy to have a vehicle which you could never depend on because sometimes it would not be charged? We have about 40GW of conventional plant available and this is already fully committed, because you need at least 2GW of rotating standby as wind and solar are not reliable, and never can be. This number can only get higher as more "renewables" come on line, and CCGT plants should be a tax on the windmills and solar not a charge on your bill. The entire economics is so distorted by subsidies that sense has gone out of the window. On a number of occasions the grid has already been close to collapse triggering load shedding of customers with backup generation at huge cost. In fact I consulted for a company who generally ran 4MW of diesel daily because they could do so at a very significant profit, which is not a good car replacement is it? I get the additional 10GW from my previous calculation to provide enough charging come what may, day or night, and to deal with this 20 miles a day limit - and limit it is. Some days I drive 400 miles, some nothing, but this cannot be averaged can it? I still need 400 miles of daily range, with total reliability. I certainly could not deal with having my car go flat 10 miles from the destination, have it towed to a charging point, visit my customer, wait to charge to full capacity, nearly get home and then walk, could I? Saying that I could buy a 1 hour charge Tesla also is useless because the grid could not cope with a million of us at the same time all trying to fast charge our cars, whereas the petrol stations can without any problem at all. Controlling this demand by price is clearly unworkable, as is suggesting public transport which is already totally crowded and very expensive. I really object to having to stand for hours whilst paying some train company a small fortune to travel, and trains probably do not go where I want anyway, or be willing to carry large boxes of kit, so I still need a car at the ends and an entirely different way to conduct my business, all of which adds to costs and prices.

As I am trying to explain, the policy is unworkable for many reasons, from Nissan recommending only charging to 80% to get reasonable battery life (still not defined, lets have a 100,000 mile total replacement warranty) to the impossibility of funding the supply industry without gut wrenching price increases. It could be that the technology gets better by 2040, it probably will, but not to the extent required and the right price point, which this policy requires.

This is a serious national economic problem which is very difficult to solve. An economy without free availability of every bit of transport required to make it work is in deep trouble. A simple strike on a rail line cast business a fortune when its workers cannot get to work. A breakdown or accident causes havoc for a huge number of people. Imagine how much worse this could be if you have flat electric cars stopped every few miles along all the roads, and this is not a case of pouring a can of fuel into the tank. Whilst electric cars sound wonderful, they have serious shortcomings and huge costs which proponents are trying to force onto society as a whole. This is not right, they should be taxed at a rate to pay for their infrastructure just like liquid fueled vehicles, which pay several times their actual costs.

I does appear to me that the Government (or any other party) is amazingly economically ignorant, in that they make none of the cost / benefit analyses which are part of our life. The HS2 at £60 Billion is a prime example, it cannot possibly return a reasonable rate on this expenditure, and appears to be a political project to make the North feel better, although it will take a small fraction off present journey times. It would be much better to build another motorway, North-South in as straight a line as possible with 4-5 lanes each way, avoiding London and other cities completely to make a proper economic difference, at probably a similar cost and much quicker build time. You cannot reduce road traffic by building railways (lots of reasons for that) and it is road traffic which is our problem. Perhaps the electric car is simply a way to reduce road traffic, well that is a good conspiracy theory anyway?

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
 28 July 2017 01:46 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



sparkingchip

Posts: 11682
Joined: 18 January 2003

In a possible moment of madness I have recently bought a Daihatsu Hijet pickup, AKA a Piaggio Porter pickup, that has a 1296cc petrol engine and LPG conversion.

It costs eleven pounds to fill the gas tank up at 58 pence per litre with less miles per litre, but on direct debit the road tax is over £250 per year.

However as far as I know there is only one LPG pump locally, but as it is at Calor it is unlikely to disappear in the short term.

Over n Herefordshire there is a readily available supply of LPG at filling stations with LPG being used more in rural areas, though I can't imagine there are many new LPG conversions and it will gradually fade away as a road fuel choice.

Andy B
 29 July 2017 10:24 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



psychicwarrior

Posts: 683
Joined: 18 October 2010

Not that DaveZ requires my support....but putting aside all the figures stuff (however appropriate/accurate they are or not).... I agree with the sentiment and it reflects mine.....summed up to some degree by the last paragraph of David's last post.

We have the wrong social and economical setup to change this (or any other stuff) for the better, easily and with a modicum of sense and sensibility and that doesn't create chaos.... there are many 'thinkers' out there that have known this for so many years...but you just cannot easily change the immovable that we are brain washed into and accepting of from birth (as there are powerful vested interests at work).

Ho hum

PS: i'm from 'the north' (wherever that is) and we - as in my circle at least - dont see the point or value of HS2...cant see the point and feel there are better ideas to spend money like that on
 29 July 2017 08:45 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 17795
Joined: 13 August 2003

PS: i'm from 'the north' (wherever that is) and we - as in my circle at least - dont see the point or value of HS2

I'm 'up north' too - but I know that the local transport authorities around here are strongly in favour of HS 2 - not really for the improved travel times, but because it'll free up an awful lot of capacity on the 'legacy' tracks - by no longer having to keep great big swathes of track clear for high speed passenger trains you can get loads more slow local passenger and more to the point lots and lots more goods trains on the system.

the grid could not cope with a million of us at the same time all trying to fast charge our cars, whereas the petrol stations can without any problem at all.

Sorry - I'm not following, are you suggesting that our current 8,000-odd filling stations could cope with millions of simultaneous customers?

- Andy.
 30 July 2017 10:11 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 17795
Joined: 13 August 2003

The point is Andy that a couple of minutes to charge a liquid fuel car cannot be replicated if each takes an hour or more. Also much more frequent refueling is required (at least now) making the problem worse. We do get queues for fuel sometimes, but not often.

So would most of your fundamental objections disappear if electric cars were equipped with exchangeable battery packs? (as I suggested earlier) Charging could then be done at a time to suit the grid and "re-filling" the vehicle could be at least as quick and convenient as pumping liquid fuel. No major technology development necessary, just a bit of standardization.

- Andy.
 31 July 2017 07:49 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



davezawadi

Posts: 4259
Joined: 26 June 2002

We shall see Broadgage, but remember once these things get going with governments they take on a life of their own, and should this all start to go wrong, guess who will foot the bill. I also wonder on the treatment I might get from the Inland Revenue if I bought a nice Tesla S and two spare batteries because I need the range, as a company car? Can you just imagine the H&S problems when you change your 100 kg of batteries Andy, presumably using a crane, and the legal problems when you are sold a much used duff set with your new charge? OK you lease the batteries and the cars would be much cheaper, but then who puts up the money to buy 10 - 20 million of the batteries (you probably need a spare one for each car) as well as all the infrastructure? It would be added to the fuel cost of course, but you'd be back with high fuel prices.

-------------------------
David
BSc CEng MIET
 31 July 2017 09:54 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AJJewsbury

Posts: 17795
Joined: 13 August 2003

Can you just imagine the H&S problems when you change your 100 kg of batteries Andy, presumably using a crane,

I was imagining more of a slide-out slide-in system (like on some UPSs) - maybe handled by something like a pallet trolley initially, more likely an automated system (something akin to an automatic car wash) in the longer term.

and the legal problems when you are sold a much used duff set with your new charge?

I'd would have thought it was in the power company's best interest to monitor battery performance closely (discharge rates could be logged within the battery module and obviously charge data would be immediately available); and lower performing units either offered to lower mileage users at a discount or taken out of car use altogether and either scrapped or passed on to less demanding users (grid storage perhaps?). A guaranteed minimum usable energy content and a generous compensation package should it ever fail to deliver (say free recovery and a large cash recompense) would probably reassure most drivers.

OK you lease the batteries and the cars would be much cheaper, but then who puts up the money to buy 10 - 20 million of the batteries (you probably need a spare one for each car) as well as all the infrastructure?

Given the number of battery modules would need to increase at quite a modest rate over several decades, and should provide a reasonable return on investment, I'd suspect the usual venture capital types would be interested initially, handing over to the more stayed investment funds (pensions etc) once the system is up and running nicely.

It would be added to the fuel cost of course, but you'd be back with high fuel prices

Indeed, but as oil runs out (and becomes unacceptable to burn), that's a given whatever happens. At least with EVs you have some kind of option of switching between original energy sources without having to update or replace the engine every time.

- Andy.
 31 July 2017 10:33 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



psychicwarrior

Posts: 683
Joined: 18 October 2010

The probable reality is as said earlier ... there will have to be less privately owned vehicles......... for all the reasons presented. It will be interesting to see what 'damage' (maybe not the right word) happens to the car industry over the next 20 years. That sham of a general tax that governments rely on that is fuel and vehicle excise duty or whatever its called (used to be road tax), will have to be transferred elsewhere no doubt..as will the old oil revenue/profits have to be protected for the barons... 'for the good of the world economy' haha. I stand with DaveZ over the way these things start out with the strap-line great idea for good intentions [one hopes] and then grow into something very costly for all sorts of reasons, that some wrongly get rich out of and in the end the tax payer bails it [inc. private business et al] all out as I see it.

Oil etc will run out...no doubt (cue MadMax panorama :-) ... and something else [this electric] will creep along with all sorts of questionable actions along the way because of vested interests and so forth; that never changes sadly because we have the wrong socio-economic approach and political setup.

I'm all for change...but not the way it has been done up until now where 'fair is not fair' and in the systems we continue to sustain. It's this that causes the gripes.
 01 August 2017 01:08 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



psychicwarrior

Posts: 683
Joined: 18 October 2010

and there's more

Breaking news... BritishGas (Centrica) - hiking prices ~12%, mainly on electric and because transmission prices are increasing and the environmental cost (levy/tax) is going up. Hmmm
Statistics

New here?

  • To participate in discussions, please log in and introduce yourself.

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2022 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.

 
..