Electric vehicles miles per KWh

Martyn1981

GreatApe wrote: »

By comparison negligible



Shoes how much you know
What do you think was demand following before the 1990s dash for gas?
Nuclear or coal cos that's more or less all we had

Coal demand follows in China the world's biggest user of coal
It also demand follows in Germany

It doesn't in the UK now since it's almost all gone and we all await our coal phase out NHS divided....




Quite recnelty in the UK yes. For most of your lifetime no

.

I didn't do any emmissions calculations I said EVs are roughly on par on efficiency of converting chemical to kinetic energy and provided calculations to show it yet all you did was...once again...troll me and my threads



Which I agree with and already started soon the UK is marignal clean not marginal gas (at least a lot of the time)





In a logical world both nuclear and fossil fuel harm would be priced in correctly but we live in an illogical world where both harms are grossly exgerrated




Average UK demand is 38GW and soon we will have 7.4GW links to France. Two new links coming online in the next 12 months.




A study isn't conclusive and many studies contradict each other
Plus this study you talk of probably agrees with me
That combustion has a negative impact when Ch is negligible compared to normal human activities



But most importantly stop trolling my threads!!

So, in conclusion, you can't defend any of your statements, instead you have to spin around them with excuses based on then past (not present) and science denial.

Glad we got that sorted.

Martyn1981

1961Nick wrote: »

Mart, it's been common knowledge for years that if you put a VAG vehicle on a dynamometer you have to constantly wiggle the steering wheel to stop it running the "emissions test" map. It's inconceivable that with millions of people knowing about this, the authorities weren't also aware of it.

Dieselgate is no more than retrospective sanctions for a modern day interpretation of the rules. As for Americans getting all 'holier than thou' about their precious air being polluted by VWs.....don't make me laugh!

Sorry Nick that's complete VW apology(ism).

It wasn't common knowledge, until it was made common knowledge and VW were prosecuted. If you watch the Dieselgate episode of 'Dirty Money' you can learn the background. [Edit - It's available on Netflix and well worth a watch. I'm pretty certain that if you watch it, you won't try to excuse away their actions ever again. M.]

In fact it was so 'not' common knowledge, that the guys who found the cheat had been employed to find out how VW's were so 'clean' by the competition as they couldn't get close to the dyno emissions.

The point of course being that the dyno emissions were rigged and did not reflect anything close to real figures. When the investigators got closer, VW made it difficult for them to get any access to mobile testing kit.

So please don't pretend that what they did was minor, nor apologise for them, it wasn't, your claims are entirely false.

In fact your claims fly in the face of both 'green' and 'ethical'.

Martyn1981

JKenH wrote: »

The irony in all this is that the supervisory board of VW is made up of 10 worker and 10 shareholder representatives. Of the latter, two represent the state government of Lower Saxony. The head of the IG Metall union even served as interim chairman when the diesel scandal first broke. So we can’t just blame the capitalists.

Correct, and we can probably also add in the German Government too, since they appear to have become aware of the issue a year or two before it 'broke'.

A massive scandal, massive scam, massive emissions differential and massive fines. And now they appear to have been caught again with a fix, that only works in certain conditions, such as room temperature testing facilities.


I hope that VW stop releasing vast numbers of BEV concept cars, and start releasing vast numbers of real BEV's instead. They have the ability to literally change the World now, and they need a win to help with their sorely tarnished reputation.

1961Nick

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Sorry Nick that's complete VW apology(ism).

It wasn't common knowledge, until it was made common knowledge and VW were prosecuted. If you watch the Dieselgate episode of 'Dirty Money' you can learn the background. [Edit - It's available on Netflix and well worth a watch. I'm pretty certain that if you watch it, you won't try to excuse away their actions ever again. M.]

Complete twaddle....when something is widely known within the trade it is "common knowledge". Next you'll be telling me that the government didn't know about PPI or Libor rigging while they were collecting billions in windfall taxation. Take your blinkers off Mart!

In fact it was so 'not' common knowledge, that the guys who found the cheat had been employed to find out how VW's were so 'clean' by the competition as they couldn't get close to the dyno emissions.

More rubbish.....at the time of the "discovery", other car makers had emissions equal or better than the VAG group. Yes they were cheating as well, just not as blatantly.

The point of course being that the dyno emissions were rigged and did not reflect anything close to real figures. When the investigators got closer, VW made it difficult for them to get any access to mobile testing kit.

Volkswagons weren't exactly hard to get hold of if you wanted to attach a mobile testing kit to one. Why would you want to use a manufacturers testing rig rather than an independent one.....seems rather stupid if you suspect a manufacturer of cheating.

So please don't pretend that what they did was minor, nor apologise for them, it wasn't, your claims are entirely false.

More Mart trying to put the past right rather than just accepting history as it is.

In fact your claims fly in the face of both 'green' and 'ethical'.

Sure, it wasn't "Green" & it wasn't "Ethical", but it was something everybody was doing because those that could enforce the rules were turning a blind eye to it. VAG (& subsequently others) were caught out only because the goalposts moved.

They say that "the truth hurts".....but it seems to hurt you more than most Mart.

NigeWick

JKenH wrote: »

Is it unreasonable to discuss how green an EV is compared to an ICE on this forum? I am pro EVs but open to the views of others even if they suggest in some circumstances EVs may not be as green as I had first thought.

No vehicle (this includes pedal cycles & shoes) is perfectly "green" as its manufacture will cause some pollution. But, BEVs are much cleaner than any ICE vehicle even if they were to use the dirtiest Polish coal for energy.

My car uses nothing but renewable energy, either from my solar system or where I choose to charge when away from home.

EricMears

NigeWick wrote: »

No vehicle (this includes pedal cycles & shoes) is perfectly "green" as its manufacture will cause some pollution. But, BEVs are much cleaner than any ICE vehicle even if they were to use the dirtiest Polish coal for energy.

My car uses nothing but renewable energy, either from my solar system or where I choose to charge when away from home.

Alas, whatever your supplier tells you they're giving you, if their chargepoint is connected to the National Grid the electricity you get will come from a mix of sources that may or may not be 'green' !

BTW, can anyone explain why a 'green tariff' usually costs more than a general tariff when it's fairly clear from these pages that green generation is now cheaper than the 'ungreen' alternatives ?

ASavvyBuyer

EricMears wrote: »

Alas, whatever your supplier tells you they're giving you, if their chargepoint is connected to the National Grid the electricity you get will come from a mix of sources that may or may not be 'green' !

BTW, can anyone explain why a 'green tariff' usually costs more than a general tariff when it's fairly clear from these pages that green generation is now cheaper than the 'ungreen' alternatives ?

In my experience, you don't have to pay more for a "green" tariff. We are on one with Octopus and the average cost of ALL our electric works out at about 8p/kWh.

I do recall receiving a survey from E-on at one time asking if I was willing to pay more for having a "green" tariff. My reply was that there was no need to, as it was cheaper to produce it using RE in the first place.

Also, as Octopus and other companies supply, invest & purchase the electricity from renewable energy sources, even though what comes out of the socket is a mix, all is payed for that is produced by RE.

silverwhistle

JKenH wrote: »

I’m not defending GA, only his right to post without you attacking him because of who he is rather than what he says.

Come on Ken, it's my opinion that you are being a little naive. The threads he starts, their value judgement laden titles, where he posts them, their quantity, the nature of their content: all give pointers to what he is doing here.



But even if he has a right to an opinion we also have a right to express our opinion that it's utter *******s. Frankly I wouldn't bother to do so: I see below he posted 6 posts in sequence. My opinion is that it would be a waste of my time opening and reading them. He doesn't add anything to a constructive debate.



The fact is, many of us take that view, and it's largely only Martyn who can be *rsed to actually respond to his blunderbuss approach.

Martyn1981

1961Nick wrote: »

Complete twaddle....when something is widely known within the trade it is "common knowledge". Next you'll be telling me that the government didn't know about PPI or Libor rigging while they were collecting billions in windfall taxation. Take your blinkers off Mart!



More rubbish.....at the time of the "discovery", other car makers had emissions equal or better than the VAG group. Yes they were cheating as well, just not as blatantly.



Volkswagons weren't exactly hard to get hold of if you wanted to attach a mobile testing kit to one. Why would you want to use a manufacturers testing rig rather than an independent one.....seems rather stupid if you suspect a manufacturer of cheating.


More Mart trying to put the past right rather than just accepting history as it is.


Sure, it wasn't "Green" & it wasn't "Ethical", but it was something everybody was doing because those that could enforce the rules were turning a blind eye to it. VAG (& subsequently others) were caught out only because the goalposts moved.

They say that "the truth hurts".....but it seems to hurt you more than most Mart.

Watch the video. Your claims are entirely false. You can not defend VW, dieselgate was enormous and that's why they got prosecuted all over the World, and still are.

The other companies, even with their 'tricks' for testing, couldn't get close to VW as VW's operating on the road had vastly higher emissions than when tested.

Please stop apologising for VW, what they did was utterly disgusting.

EricMears

silverwhistle wrote: »

The fact is, many of us take that view, and it's largely only Martyn who can be *rsed to actually respond to his blunderbuss approach.

Alas, that also means that a further response (or set of them !) results. I'm sure that runs counter to arguments expressed on these pages by (the same) Martyn.