Electric cars

stator

Solar panels, Wind farms, Gas and Coal all have annual deaths in the UK attributed to them.
Number of people killed in the UK from nuclear power: 0 (year after year after year after year).

I don't know why you keep repeating charge at home electric can solve any problems. Most people can't charge at home and never will be able to.
Council provided charging points are few and far between. There simply isn't space to put them outside everyone's houses, and even if you did they are a rip off and no-one would want to use them. Charging at council run car parks is also a rip off. Electric only makes sense if you have a driveway. Then it is cheap and a good option. For everyone else it is a rip off.
Look at the second hand electric cars you can buy now. The batteries are knackered, you can't go 50 miles without stopping. Leasing the batteries costs £840 per year. I can go out and buy a petrol/diesel car for £500 and away I go.
New advances in battery technology have been few and far between. They'll still cost £5000 for a crap car or £10000 for a medium crap car.

Blackouts in winter when the wind stops blowing are unavoidable if try to build a grid on them without 100% redundancy from a reliable source of fuel like coal or gas. Especially if everybody had an electric car, got home at 7pm when it's dark and plugged in their car.

Electric car sales are still tiny, and there's a reason for it. They're still crap and most people won't want one. Ironically they might suit me quite well. But with crap batteries on second hand electric cars, I won't be getting one soon.

silverwhistle

I really can't be bothered to address all the inaccuracies in your latest post, but at least I know that I'll only have to skim read your posts in future. Maybe one of the regulars will have the infinite patience to reply to them, but I'm keeping my reply brief as I don't think anything would change your negative mindset.

Martyn1981

almillar wrote: »

I'm not arguing against a nuclear power plant, we probably do need one more, but you've got some crazy ideas about renewable energy.

I think that's a really important point. there's nothing wrong with listing pro's and con's for RE, and nuclear, and even FF's. The important point is what you then do with the information.

Nuclear is low carbon, and despite the 'problems' it can have when not treated with respect, is still far cleaner than coal. So let's build some nuclear, ideally in the 80's or 90's.

Now step forward to 2012, we get the HPC contract at £92.50/MWh (later reduced to £89.50 is SC is built). Not a bad price, way cheaper than off-shore wind at around £150/MWh, cheaper than PV, and probably similar to on-shore wind.

Fast forward to 2015, a whole, massive, gigantic leap of 3yrs, we have off-shore wind costs falling, coal gen falling fast and plans to scrap it, and on-shore wind and PV contracts issued at £80/MWh.

So nuclear is now an expensive form of low carbon generation and coal is going anyway.

Fast forward to the autumn of 2017 and we get off-shore wind bids for 2023 commissioning of £57.50/MWh. And whilst the UK has banned on-shore wind and PV from the CfD auctions, we can compare to Germany who also issued contracts in 2015 at approx £80 (€91/MWh) but are now issuing contracts at about £40/MWh.

It no longer matters whether you like or dislike nuclear, the economics argument has interrupted the discussion and little else matters - and for once that's a good thing.

Note all of the CfD prices are quoted in 2012 prices as that's the base that the government uses for comparison. they are subject to inflationary lifts during construction and throughout the subsidy term, that's part of the reason why nuclear costs get even more scary as HPC will see about 15yrs of inflationary lifts before it starts generating, whilst RE costs are falling in real terms each year.

Martyn1981

stator wrote: »

Solar panels, Wind farms, Gas and Coal all have annual deaths in the UK attributed to them.
Number of people killed in the UK from nuclear power: 0 (year after year after year after year).

I don't know why you keep repeating charge at home electric can solve any problems. Most people can't charge at home and never will be able to.
Council provided charging points are few and far between. There simply isn't space to put them outside everyone's houses, and even if you did they are a rip off and no-one would want to use them. Charging at council run car parks is also a rip off. Electric only makes sense if you have a driveway. Then it is cheap and a good option. For everyone else it is a rip off.
Look at the second hand electric cars you can buy now. The batteries are knackered, you can't go 50 miles without stopping. Leasing the batteries costs £840 per year. I can go out and buy a petrol/diesel car for £500 and away I go.
New advances in battery technology have been few and far between. They'll still cost £5000 for a crap car or £10000 for a medium crap car.

Blackouts in winter when the wind stops blowing are unavoidable if try to build a grid on them without 100% redundancy from a reliable source of fuel like coal or gas. Especially if everybody had an electric car, got home at 7pm when it's dark and plugged in their car.

Electric car sales are still tiny, and there's a reason for it. They're still crap and most people won't want one. Ironically they might suit me quite well. But with crap batteries on second hand electric cars, I won't be getting one soon.

Wow - a whole load of unsubstantiated claims even less accurate than your starting point that nuclear generation is cheap, or that it will be cheap if you build 10 reactors - after all, whose building HPC and potentially SC, would it be EDF (France), does France have more or less than 10 reactors, does France have nearly 60 reactors, does the US have even more, is nuclear generation cheap in those countries or are they scaling it back?


Most people can't charge at home - evidence please?

Council charging, no space and a rip off - evidence please?

Electric charging is a rip off - but H2 will require the input of 3 to 4 times as much leccy, but that will be cheap?

Second hand EV's have knackered batts - evidence please?

You can't go 50 miles - evidence please? And perhaps some clarification on make and model, rather than extreme generalisations.

Battery improvements few and far between - seriously! I won't even ask for evidence, might as well ask for evidence of Nessie.

Blackouts, everyone charging at 7pm, need coal for back up - oh boy, you'll be claiming PSA are leading the EV revolution next.

EV sales are small and there's a reason - yes, new things start out small, they wouldn't be new otherwise would they? Wind and PV were very small 10yrs ago, now they are, by far, the largest amount of annual deployed generating capacity in the world.

To deny EV's on their current deployment rates is to ignore the evolution of technology across time, and worse still, to ignore the deployment of disruptive technolgies, such as the mobile phone, took about 20yrs to displace land lines, or the smart phone, which took about 2yrs to displace the basic mobile phone ...... beware disruptive technologies and the "S" curve - EV's have passed all of the key points, they work, they have enough range, they are cheap enough*, costs are still falling fast - they will dominate.

*Cheap enough to ensure that their position is assured, and that position will now expand as costs fall.

Gloomendoom

Martyn1981 wrote: »

or the smart phone, which took about 2yrs to displace the basic mobile phone

It took a bit longer than that. I had my first smart phone in 2002 and it was years before everybody else followed suit.

AdrianC

Gloomendoom wrote: »

Martyn1981 wrote:

or the smart phone, which took about 2yrs to displace the basic mobile phone

It took a bit longer than that. I had my first smart phone in 2002 and it was years before everybody else followed suit.

Indeed.

The first Nokia Communicator was launched in 1996.



I suspect somebody's believing Apple's marketing.

Gloomendoom

Mine was a Motorola Accompli 008 and was followed by Orange SPVs running Windows.

AdrianC

Gloomendoom wrote: »

...Orange SPVs running Windows.

Yes, I made that mistake, too. An SPV2000/HTC BlueAngel. I have never loathed a phone more. It was odds-on whether it'd hard-reset and wipe the entire memory if you tried to answer a call.

stator

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Wow - a whole load of unsubstantiated claims even less accurate than your starting point that nuclear generation is cheap, or that it will be cheap if you build 10 reactors - after all, whose building HPC and potentially SC, would it be EDF (France), does France have more or less than 10 reactors, does France have nearly 60 reactors, does the US have even more, is nuclear generation cheap in those countries or are they scaling it back?


Most people can't charge at home - evidence please?

Council charging, no space and a rip off - evidence please?

Electric charging is a rip off - but H2 will require the input of 3 to 4 times as much leccy, but that will be cheap?

Second hand EV's have knackered batts - evidence please?

You can't go 50 miles - evidence please? And perhaps some clarification on make and model, rather than extreme generalisations.

Battery improvements few and far between - seriously! I won't even ask for evidence, might as well ask for evidence of Nessie.

Blackouts, everyone charging at 7pm, need coal for back up - oh boy, you'll be claiming PSA are leading the EV revolution next.

EV sales are small and there's a reason - yes, new things start out small, they wouldn't be new otherwise would they? Wind and PV were very small 10yrs ago, now they are, by far, the largest amount of annual deployed generating capacity in the world.

If you actually read what I had said you would see that I said the nuclear is the cheapest clean and reliable source of energy. Coal and gas are not clean but very reliable. Wind is clean but not reliable. Solar is useless at providing energy when you need it. The only alternative to nuclear that is clean is hydro and you'd have to flood half the country to provide our energy needs from hydro.

If you leave your house once and a while you'll see with your own eyes why everyone can't own an electric car.


EVs have nowhere to go. Batteries are expensive and heavy.
If someone invents a new type of battery that costs half as much and stores twice as much energy without weighing any more, then EVs will be viable. Lithium technology will never drive EVs to the majority of vehicles in the UK because for most people they are crap.

If you want sources, learn to use google. I'm not pretending to write a dissertation here.

AdrianC

stator wrote: »

If you actually read what I had said...

Good luck with that...

Martyn1981 wrote:

Most people can't charge at home - evidence please?

If you leave your house once and a while you'll see with your own eyes why everyone can't own an electric car.

In urban areas where off-street or allocated parking is scarce or non-existent, then it's undeniably the case, although not insolubly so - the payment infrastructure would need to be substantial, as well as the physical grid infrastructure.



However, there's a very strong argument to say that personal private transport (of whatever kind) is the wrong solution for mobility there, anyway. Improved public transport makes far more sense.



In suburban and rural areas, where public transport is less viable due to lower population densities, also due to the greater time imposed by any kind of hub-and-spoke architecture, then allocated parking becomes less of an issue.

If you want sources, learn to use google. I'm not pretending to write a dissertation here.

S'ok, he'd only ignore the ones that are inconvenient to his preconceptions, anyway.


<starts stopwatch>