Electric cars

Martyn1981

Gloomendoom wrote: »

Because pushing EV ownership past a couple of million isn’t just a matter of being able to generate enough electricity, as some on here seem to naively believe (see above).

So 2m EV's is a problem again now, or not? I'm sorry but I simply can't keep up with your Schrodinger approach to debate .... actually I can, no I can't, yes I can ..... jeez this is hard work, how do you make it look so simple?

Perhaps you could kindly explain if you really are claiming a problem with 2m EV ownership, or perhaps (more sensibly) 2m EV's being charged during the evening, reflecting more like 10-20m EV's in ownership? And if the later, does that mean you don't believe there would be perhaps 8m EV's offering up some of their charge to compensate?

zeupater

almillar wrote: »

... OK - so it works in Australia because they get loads of sun and they have loads of land. Are you claiming that we simply shouldn't bother with solar panels in the UK because we don't? Plenty of people are able to offset their electric bills in the UK with sold-back solar. Solar panels are getting cheaper and more efficient all the time. It might work BETTER in Aus, sure, but it sounds like you're claiming it doesn't work in the UK at all. Maybe you've always got a dark cloud over you!

Hi

Yes, they 'get loads of sun and they have loads of land', but in the UK we average around 60% (on a kWh/kWp basis) of their generation, so it's not as if we get no sun at all! ... as for the land, well, in addition to solar there's wind, tidal, hydro, pumped hydro etc which can all be leveraged in remarkably short timescales compared to the EV roll-out, but importantly, in this cold, damp, dark high latitude northern hemisphere part of the world that we live, the solar panels on our roof have not only powered & helped heat the house today, it's also produced enough excess electricity to run an EV for going on two days at our average weekday mileage ... and that's January, so what's all this extra space needed for?! ...

HTH
Z

Gloomendoom

zeupater wrote: »

Hi

It's a thread to discuss EVs, originally seeded by this post ...

... so, considering that EVs are not only coming, but here already I can't really understand why people who don't like the idea continually raise issues which are important enough to comment and claim concern over, then, when the relative significance is highlighted, justify those comments with remarks along the lines of .. "I have not said or implied that the the problems cannot be overcome, just that they exist at the moment" ... fine, if there are insurmountable issues they must be raised, but like the problem in the breathing example provided above, why worry about issues which don't really exist because the solution is obvious & straightforward .... take a breath, then concentrate on what really matters ...

I assumed that you were referring to me there but then I noticed that you had said “people that don’t like the idea”.

Gloomendoom

Martyn1981 wrote: »

So 2m EV's is a problem again now, or not? I'm sorry but I simply can't keep up with your Schrodinger approach to debate .... actually I can, no I can't, yes I can ..... jeez this is hard work, how do you make it look so simple?

Perhaps you could kindly explain if you really are claiming a problem with 2m EV ownership, or perhaps (more sensibly) 2m EV's being charged during the evening, reflecting more like 10-20m EV's in ownership? And if the later, does that mean you don't believe there would be perhaps 8m EV's offering up some of their charge to compensate?

Martin dear.

You win. There is absolutely no reason why 40 million EVs couldn’t take to the roads tomorrow and there would be absolutely no problem keeping them charged. As a bonus they will all handle like McClarens.

Happy now?

Martyn1981

I'm pretty convinced by the EV 'argument' going forward now, and whilst appreciating that the ground work was done by hybrids and PHEV's, I kinda think it's time for EV's now, but this article raises an interesting question - what if the PHEV is the same price as the ICE?

So long as it doesn't hamper EV's, then I'd see it as a positive move making ICE's 'better' than they otherwise would be. Thoughts?

If A 2018 BMW 530e Plug-In Hybrid Meant No Extra Cost, Would You Own One?

Martyn1981

Gloomendoom wrote: »

There is absolutely no reason why 40 million EVs couldn’t take to the roads tomorrow and there would be absolutely no problem keeping them charged.

That isn't the issue, there will not be 40m EV's in the UK tomorrow (or possibly ever) so once again you seem to be trying to create an argument for the sake of an argument.

Is this another attempt 'to wind me up', so that you can then play the victim if I politely disagree with you?

AdrianC

Gloomendoom wrote: »

As a bonus they will all handle like McClarens

http://www.maclaren.us/ ?

Gloomendoom

Martyn1981 wrote: »

I'm pretty convinced by the EV 'argument' going forward now, and whilst appreciating that the ground work was done by hybrids and PHEV's, I kinda think it's time for EV's now, but this article raises an interesting question - what if the PHEV is the same price as the ICE?

So long as it doesn't hamper EV's, then I'd see it as a positive move making ICE's 'better' than they otherwise would be. Thoughts?

If A 2018 BMW 530e Plug-In Hybrid Meant No Extra Cost, Would You Own One?

I need two cars, so, at the monent, I would go for the PHEV simply because I regularly make a 150mile journey to a destination with no mains electricity. Once the charging network expands I would go for an FEV. I would have a Mitsubishi PHEV now if they weren’t so pig ugly.

If a small, affordable sports FEV, in the mould of the Smart Coupe, was currently available, I would buy one tomorrow.

Gloomendoom

AdrianC wrote: »

http://www.maclaren.us/ ?

Errrrr... no.

McLaren Automotive

Martyn1981

AdrianC wrote: »

http://www.maclaren.us/ ?

I don't think you are taking this seriously!