Home Page
   Articles
       links
About Us    
Traders        
Recipes            
Latest Articles
Long range EVs
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 11, 12, 13  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Energy Efficiency and Construction/Major Projects
Author 
 Message
Mistress Rose



Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 14538

PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 22 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

It is the same with any new technology. Not too many years ago digital cameras were the same.

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 43264
Location: yes
PostPosted: Wed Nov 16, 22 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

tahir wrote:
jema wrote:
Intelligence would suggest saving the environment is a generational project.
Capitalism says we will only save the environment if we can make an immediate profit.


That's the problem at the moment.

EVs are frankly brilliant, and realtively easy to recycle as there's a high density of high value stuff in them.

With regards to being able to do any DIY maintenance on them, I can't think of a single modern car that is designed to let the owner do anything beyond the most trivial maintenance tasks.


our bikes are beyond me apart from basic stuff like tyres and tighten nuts
even the brakes are hydraulic, and the drive is intimate with the electronics and neither speak to me

air crew /ground crew

jema
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 27713
Location: escaped from Swindon
PostPosted: Wed Nov 16, 22 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Mistress Rose wrote:
It is the same with any new technology. Not too many years ago digital cameras were the same.


Mine is several years old now and has a fairly awful network interface, but I have figured at the end of the day there's only so many megapixels that matter and in fact my phone takes pretty good photos. So not playing any more.

Mistress Rose



Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 14538

PostPosted: Fri Dec 23, 22 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Not quite EVs, but something that has one of the same potential problems.

We live not too far from a port, and the local council who own it want to install electric charging for ships in harbour so them don't have to run their engines and potentially for running electric ferries. Unfortunately they have to bid against other large users for the electricity from the supplier, and it doesn't look as if they will be able to get it until about 2080. Going electric also has the advantage that the part of the city near the port has very high levels of pollution. The government response is to tell them to start a charging scheme for certain vehicles.

I think this highlights the problems with supply for charging electric vehicles which is a combination of generation and infrastructure to make the supply available wherever and whenever it is needed.

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 43264
Location: yes
PostPosted: Fri Dec 23, 22 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

has the port got access to roof space, moving water/wind etc?

peeps who talk of by 2080 are missing the point or front loading scammers

make it work now* and make it to last at least until 2080 seems sensible

* 5 year target, a bit of flexibility for the unknowns, liabilities for failure and rewards for a job extra well done should both be large

a south coast uk port 2080 plans might need more infrastructure changes than the power supply

the tyneside"freeport" and biological disaster seems to be at the front loader end of investment opportunities for ports at the mo

jema
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 27713
Location: escaped from Swindon
PostPosted: Sat Dec 24, 22 6:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

I think it is a lot different, the ships are mini cities that need power 24/7.

EVs will charge at night and with bidriectional power might even save grid capacity needs during peak hours.

2080 is clearly a joke, a political decision on investment or rather a political decision not to invest.

This is the same government that has blocked onshore wind.

Mistress Rose



Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 14538

PostPosted: Sat Dec 24, 22 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

I think you have grasped the point there Jema; each ship is a mini city and to run hybrid ferries is going to need a lot of power. Yes, it is a political, either government of power provider policy that is to blame. It is going to need a lot of power.

While I agree that each EV is going to need a lot less power, in a road that has nose to tail parking up both sides with terraced houses, which is the situation in the same city, that is going to need a lot of power as well if everyone charges at night. I don't think the infrastructure or power generation is up to it. I would be interested to see figures though.

jema
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 27713
Location: escaped from Swindon
PostPosted: Sun Dec 25, 22 6:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/journey-to-net-zero/electric-vehicles-myths-misconceptions

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 43264
Location: yes
PostPosted: Sun Dec 25, 22 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    



another, perhaps underestimated, parameter is that most cars are parked far more hours than they are driven and mostly they are driven far less distance than fully charged or fuelled to empty, I.E. there is a large battery bank as well as a load beside the roads

the criteria for "smart charging points" could include charge for travel and as storage/buffering while parked using the battery as say 80% car dedicated and the rest as part of the grid when plugged in

even now most batteries listed capacity is about 80% of the actual capacity so most folk would never notice, new batteries could be built and rated with that in mind

Treacodactyl
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 25795
Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism
PostPosted: Wed Dec 28, 22 4:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

https://metro.co.uk/2022/12/28/six-hour-queues-show-what-its-really-like-owning-a-tesla-at-christmas-18004669/

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 43264
Location: yes
PostPosted: Wed Dec 28, 22 5:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Metro is owned by Daily Mail and General Trust plc (DMGT)

2022 hottest on record (again) in the uk and far outside of normal for extreme events and climate anomalies

the first hint of a petrol shortage and peeps are filling buckets in the rear foot well

jema
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 27713
Location: escaped from Swindon
PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 22 7:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Treacodactyl wrote:
https://metro.co.uk/2022/12/28/six-hour-queues-show-what-its-really-like-owning-a-tesla-at-christmas-18004669/


A click bait link saying 6 hours, an article that halves that.
I have to queue for petrol most times I fill up, there's often traffic disruptions, it does not make it "really like owning" a gas car.

But yes infrastructure needs to improve.

Treacodactyl
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 25795
Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism
PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 22 9:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

I'm curious why any comment pointing out obvious shortcomings with EVs is met with such hostility.

I can honestly say I can't remember when I last queued for fuel, I've never queued for more than a couple of minutes ever. But I'm not defending petrol/diesel cars so that's irrelevant.

If the queues reported (reports in many places but I'm not surprised if some press don't run them) are only an hour that isn't acceptable. I was more interested in the fact people do need a decent range and, at the moment EVs don't have an acceptable range for many.

It also seems strange having a pop at the reports when you've posted up a very one sided advert from the company that will do very well out of the switch to EVs.

Calling something a myth when it's completely provable is a bit strange. As someone that's looked and will look again at buying an EV it's very clear that they are far more expensive than a ICE car and that's for something with less than half the range. Running costs today also don't seem to be much cheaper, I'll shall have a go at working it out for myself but costs seem to be similar.

If I ignore the 30k extra I would need to spend on the car I would still have concerns about charging as I know the electrical supply to my house isn't great. It fluctuates considerably and speaking to the engineers in the area the local grid doesn't seem to be up to supplying the current needs. I don't need sales whitewash to tell me different.

I'm currently visiting my mum, no off road parking and no place to charge a car here. Just like other places I've lived there's a few selfish households that fill the road with cars and vans, I really can't see usable charging infrastructure in place for the majority of people for decades.

I thought this bit sums how little the National Grid seem to be aware of the problems. Talking about infrastructure in rural areas:

Quote:
In the UK, National Grid has proposed the optimum locations for adequate grid capacity to enable others to provide ultra-fast chargers, ensuring that nobody on the strategic road network (motorways and principle dual carriageways) is further than 50 driven miles from ultra-rapid charging. This will give drivers consistency, continuity and therefore confidence that their main – or only – car can be electric
.

I'm about 50 miles from a motorway or principle dual carriageway so am I meant to be reassured that a rapid charger will be a max 200 mile round trip away? Clueless.

Mistress Rose



Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 14538

PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 22 9:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Treacodactyl you have the same thoughts I have. I think our electricity supply is up to it, but many others aren't and others like your mother live in a road that is already wall to wall cars some also with a dubious supply.

Add to that the bit I quoted earlier about it being probably 2080 before supply can be arranged for a port to have an adequate supply for cruise liners and hybrid ferries, and I think it shows that supply issues are likely to be a limiting factor in going electric.

It may well come, or we may find some other way of powering vehicles. We are probably at the stage we were at some years ago when CFCs were banned for cleaning electronic components. I left the industry about that time, so not sure which way it went.

As an aside, George Mombiot wrote an article in the Guardian saying he wished in retrospect that he had bought a gas boiler rather than 3 wood burning stoves. Can't think why he wants 3 as we manage quite well with one. I don't think it produces more particulates than the road outside, and it doesn't trigger problems for either my husband or son whos triggers appear to be cigarette smoke and some perfumes respectively.

Treacodactyl
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 25795
Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism
PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 22 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Mistress Rose wrote:
As an aside, George Mombiot wrote an article in the Guardian saying he wished in retrospect that he had bought a gas boiler rather than 3 wood burning stoves. Can't think why he wants 3 as we manage quite well with one. I don't think it produces more particulates than the road outside, and it doesn't trigger problems for either my husband or son whos triggers appear to be cigarette smoke and some perfumes respectively.


It's tempting to dismiss the paper and source but it's another thing I find curious as the data often doesn't stack up with these articles.

Firstly I agree with you, we heat our house, heat some water and do most of our cooking on a single wood burner. It's also common knowledge you shouldn't slumber them, burn them hot and if you must slumber make sure you only turn them down on embers. I don't get any black smoke from our chimney and no noticeable smoke after about 5 mins after lighting and that's with an older stove and older uninsulated chimney. We also have work to do on our insulation and could get our home cut wood a bit drier, I've no idea what he's doing to have so many problems - perhaps he should learn a bit more before preaching.

As for the particulates, there's been some rather dodgy research done seemingly to bring in the new law for wood sales. Subsequently sumwhat disproven I'm also a bit suspicious of the claims for household particulates with woodburners as people don't seem to be able record anywhere near the levels claimed. Again it's noticeable that open fires and bonfires are often overlooked as a source, plenty of people (including those less well off) still use open fires.

I'm also curious about his comments on the source of his wood and claims that road contractors cut more 'zealously'. It would be nice to see some proof to back that up, I know some contractors and most material is chipped and left at the side of the road. They are very well paid and firewood, even at today's prices, wouldn't be worth dealing with. The council's round here have decided to clear more roadside trees, possibly down to ash die back so I wonder if he's just made a dodgy assumption?

Having said all that, I would be interested in proper research to see if I can improve our set up at all.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Energy Efficiency and Construction/Major Projects All times are GMT
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 11, 12, 13  Next
Page 3 of 13
View Latest Posts View Latest Posts

 

Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
Copyright 2004 marsjupiter.com