We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Electric cars
Comments
-
The beef analogy doesn't work - you have control over how that beef if transported via the system. The same doesn't apply to the energy grid and no-one is crazy enough to have dedicated lines. Thus the only way to be 100% renewable is to add as much renewable into the system as the green tariff user takes out. That's exactly what they are saying and perfectly fair. It's also something a lot of people are happy to pay a little bit more for.
There's no false advertising, no-one is being conned, and green usage is increasing. I'm not sure I understand the problem anymore.0 -
When they advertise "100% renewable", then go on to say "But of course, we don't even mean in the UK", then that's a bit more debatable, wouldn't you say?There's no false advertising, no-one is being conned
As it would be anyway.and green usage is increasing.
Nor am I, since it seems like we're pretty much agreeing vehemently that signing up to a "100% renewable" tariff makes...I'm not sure I understand the problem anymore....zero difference to the source of the electricity entering your home, and it makes zero difference to the balance of sources of electricity entering the grid.
It's just another knee-jerk messenger-shot, tbh, ignoring the content completely. <shrug>0 -
HiThe beef analogy doesn't work - you have control over how that beef if transported via the system. The same doesn't apply to the energy grid and no-one is crazy enough to have dedicated lines. Thus the only way to be 100% renewable is to add as much renewable into the system as the green tariff user takes out. That's exactly what they are saying and perfectly fair. It's also something a lot of people are happy to pay a little bit more for.
There's no false advertising, no-one is being conned, and green usage is increasing. I'm not sure I understand the problem anymore.
The problem is simply one of perception & how particular individuals thrive of the self gratification derived from point scoring in a self defined game where those points are self awarded ... why else would anyone continue to argue against EVs and renewable energy on a thread dedicated to discussing EVs and their positive contribution towards future carbon emissions reductions and refuse to accept fallibility when implicitly proven to be incorrect by data, logic & the experiences of current owners? ...
... well, either that or we have a deep-cover agent of those with vested interests that would naturally oppose the electrification of transport for various reasons! ... <looks up> ... Tin foil hats anyone? ...
HTH
Z"We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. " ...... Aristotle
0 -
Umm, Zeu... I guess you're having a little personal dig at me? You may wish to note that I've never "argued against" either EVs or renewables. I'll repeat what I've said repeatedly - both have a strong and necessary place.
All I've ever "argued against" is the wilder claims and marketing made. When I've made an error, or have been mistaken, I've been only to happy to stand corrected.0 -
HiUmm, Zeu... I guess you're having a little personal dig at me? You may wish to note that I've never "argued against" either EVs or renewables. I'll repeat what I've said repeatedly - both have a strong and necessary place.
All I've ever "argued against" is the wilder claims and marketing made. When I've made an error, or have been mistaken, I've been only to happy to stand corrected.
Then you obviously have no issues with, for example, addressing the scale error made regarding the US F150 production/sales vs the Tesla model 3 - a point which must have been noted by almost every regular visitor to this thread ... maybe even a statement or two regarding the existence of the Tesla truck & possibly even a nod to the fact that your business expansion & funding acumen may possibly be a little underdeveloped? ...
Regarding ... 'happy to stand corrected' ? ... utter fudge, bordering well within the bounds of being considered as balderdash!
Z"We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. " ...... Aristotle0 -
As someone who is interested in second hand electric cars, I don't think it is! Can you give an example?
£7295 for a two year old car with only 17k miles seems an extraordinary good deal on the surface.. I haven't seen it, but I'm tempted to have a look.
https://drive-green.co.uk/product/2016-white-renault-zoe-dynamique-intens-7/I used to think that good grammar is important, but now I know that good wine is importanter.0 -
No, it's a thread started by someone who"Just wanted people's opinions on buying an electric car", and which has wandered some way off-topic.... why else would anyone continue to argue against EVs and renewable energy on a thread dedicated to discussing EVs and their positive contribution towards future carbon emissions reductions0 -
No issues at all around the post I actually made, with all the information contained in it to back up the comments I actually made. I've linked back to it often enough.Then you obviously have no issues with, for example, addressing the scale error made regarding the US F150 production/sales vs the Tesla model 3
That has gone awfully quiet, hasn't it, since all the hype over the unveil. Guess they've got bigger fish to fry atm.... maybe even a statement or two regarding the existence of the Tesla truck0 -
All I've ever "argued against" is the wilder claims and marketing made. When I've made an error, or have been mistaken, I've been only to happy to stand corrected.
Hmmm ......
No evidence to support your claims that the Tesla trucks on display were only stage locked mock ups.
No explanation as to how those trucks were giving test rides on the night, nor your denial that they had done so, nor an explanation as to how come there was video evidence, one example supplied by you!
No evidence to support your claims that the two trucks travelling around America weren't the same one's on display at the launch. Just a claim that it's quick and easy to build a test mule ...... though apparently not for a launch occasion?
Your claims over the scale of generator needed to keep an EV going, v's the actual tiny size of the range extender motors fitted in many such vehicles - I think your excuse was that you hadn't said that! [In fact you often claim not have said something, when that something is shown to be false. Spin and wordplay.]
Your false claims about the size of the Toyota PHEV batts, a strange claim given most of us knew they were small. Your continued false claims, then finally blaming Toyota for your inability to understand the difference between Ah's and kWh's, despite your (claim of) having such a large knowledge/understanding of such stuff!
Your claims that the TM3 wasn't being delivered, which when shown to be false were claimed to mean not in significant numbers, which when shown to be wrong was changed into not being delivered if you personally couldn't walk into a showroom and buy one then and there.
Your claims about the scale of TM3 production and ramp up, which was actually of a significant pace, but you tried to hide that fact by comparing to Elon's over hopeful estimations, rather than the reality of Tesla's BEV production.
Your claims that the majority of the 4m BEV's sold were actually hybrids, and the majority of those non plug-in, when in reality the 4m was PEV's only. You blamed your false statements on the article and the California graphs, despite your statements being worldwide "facts".
Your inability to admit you are wrong about Tesla profitability, preferring to simply move the goalposts from one quarter to three quarters, and I presume later on it will be four quarters, then all profit/loss results.
Your attempt to falsely mislead by claiming that Tesla would have to increase production of the TM3 (then approx 4-5,000 / week) by a factor of 35 to meet US F-150 sales, later revised to a factor of 22 when I had to explain to you the difference between F-series and F-150's. By my estimations for the TM3 at 4-5,000 per week to match US F-150 sales of ~500,000pa, they would need to ramp up production by a factor of 2.
Given your claims of being truthful and acknowledging errors (I see only obfuscation and wordplay), you will be happy now to admit that the 22x was false, and so were all the subsequent times you've stood by it whilst refusing to provide any calculations to support it.
And now you move into RE and start yet more false claims and unnecessary FUD. Good luck with that.Mart. Cardiff. 8.72 kWp PV systems (2.12 SSW 4.6 ESE & 2.0 WNW). 20kWh battery storage. Two A2A units for cleaner heating. Two BEV's for cleaner driving.
For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.0 -
That has gone awfully quiet, hasn't it, since all the hype over the unveil. Guess they've got bigger fish to fry atm.
Nope they've been in the news touring the US, you can't possibly have forgotten already ......... easy to build mules ring any bells?
Smoke and mirrors, spin and FUD, or perhaps now Dunning-Kruger.Mart. Cardiff. 8.72 kWp PV systems (2.12 SSW 4.6 ESE & 2.0 WNW). 20kWh battery storage. Two A2A units for cleaner heating. Two BEV's for cleaner driving.
For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards