Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

Martyn1981

New cars producing more carbon dioxide than older models

New cars sold in the UK produce more carbon dioxide than older models, according to new research that suggests the industry is going backwards in tackling the climate crisis.

Cars that reach the latest standards of emissions use cleaner internal combustion engine technology to combat air pollution, but the relentless rise in demand for bigger, heavier models meant that average emissions of the greenhouse gas rose, according to the consumer group Which?

The latest generation of cars produced 7% more emissions than those manufactured to earlier standards, testing of 292 models released in the UK since 2017 found. Cars account for just over 18% of UK emissions, according to government figures, and reining back pollution from the sector is seen as crucial to efforts to cut the country’s carbon emissions to net zero by 2050.

I think this has come up before, but basically, 'cleaner' cars are rolling out, but we are buying bigger ones, so more fuel consumed.

Perhaps whilst the percentage saved in fuel costs from going ICE to BEV will be the same, the 'volume' of savings from going from a big ICE to a big BEV might help to make them more attractive. But I suppose, first we need the volume and variety of BEV's, but that's looking good too.

Just a thought, but am I the only one that finds that 18% figure exciting? Basically, just through a natural transition to 'newer' cars over time (nothing new about that), we can remove that figure through normal spending, and end up with better cars that have a lower TCO. So huge problem, simple (dare I say) solution?

Coastalwatch

Err, sorry Mart not sure I do. Think I'm more disappointed at the lack of climate awareness that our fellow citizens are showing by purchasing such monsters. After all they're now too big for most car parking spaces and if parked next to one it's difficult to see over the bonnets of them to complete a safe exit. I can't see the present owners easily giving up their status symbols anytime soon.

I agree 18% is a great chunk, but unless the law changes, it's going to take 25 years or so before realisation.

On a more positive note I did find the ruling on the third Heathrow runway exciting. It apparently also has the knock on effect of bringing the governments new road building programme into doubt for similar reasons. Not that I'm against them, it's just that with technology such that many people could now work from home rather than commuting on a twice daily basis one has to question quite where we are heading!

Martyn1981

Coastalwatch said:

Err, sorry Mart not sure I do. 

LOL. Reading it back, I'm not sure I agree with what I typed, made quite a hash of that, didn't I.

What I meant was, cars account for 18%, 18% is a big old chunk, and BEV 's (cheaper in terms of TCO as a bonus) are now an inevitability, so we have the solution to a large chunk of the problem*. Though it will take a long time to roll out - totally agree with your 25yr figure, and that's dependent on a large ramp up of supply.

*I think the transport sector is actually responsible for about 1/3rd of emissions, which would tally with 18% from cars. I'd also guess that commercial transport, especially haulage is very responsive to cost savings, so if a cheaper BEV truck/van comes along, haulage companies may have to act fast or risk competiveness.

So 33% solved, HOORAY ........ over the next 25yrs ...... hooray!

Coastalwatch

jeepjunkie said:

Coastalwatch said:

Not that I'm against them, it's just that with technology such that many people could now work from home rather than commuting on a twice daily basis one has to question quite where we are heading! 

Working from home though is just not fun, ok now and again but not on a daily basis. Colleagues say the same, bar a minority.  

Hi JJ, have to confess that I never had the opportunity to work from home. But then again, not enjoying the extended travelling time of long journeys to and from work I ensured I was never more than a ten minute journey away so the need didn't seem to arise. Often though involved in video conferences and webinars with other sites to know what can be achieved without having to board planes, trains or to make extended motorway journeys.

My nephew was telling me this week that his company are finding these meetings equally as productive as the face to face variety so the expensive office in London is to be dispensed with.

Martyn1981

I have nothing against HEV's and PHEV's, they've done an excellent job of proving the technology, but perhaps it's time for car companies to focus on BEV's, not more PHEV's going forward ...... bite the bullet.

Hybrid carmakers accused of 'con' over zero-emissions claims

Separate data from the Miles Consultancy, which tracks fuel use by companies, found that in real life almost all plug-in hybrid cars failed to achieve the mileage found in lab tests, suggesting that many users do not charge them sufficiently. Updated analysis for the Guardian of 1,388 plug-ins used over eight months found they achieved an average of more than 40 miles per gallon when using a mixture of petrol and electric power, only a third of the 127 miles per gallon advertised by their manufacturers.

[Technically - achieved an average of more than 40mpg could be the same as 127mpg. Not the best written, nor proof read article, even by Guardian standards.]

silverwhistle

jeepjunkie said:

Working from home though is just not fun, ok now and again but not on a daily basis. Colleagues say the same, bar a minority.  

But you don't have to work from home all the time to have an impact. One day a week and you are reducing your work miles by 20%, and quite a number of companies are trying 4 day weeks anyway. Not a solution for all but it is at the margins where we can see a difference. The impact of school holidays on morning traffic helps illustrate this.

Like coastalwatch I was lucky enough to live close to work, close enough that in retrospect I feel guilty about not cycling more often. Trips to Head office to meet directors/managers were in a diesel Montego or Peugeot 309 as I wasn't senior enough for a company car, so they were no great incentive to organise any unnecessary meetings!

Martyn1981

Some extract(s) from this weeks Carbon Commentary newsletter:

10, The carbon impact of ride-hailing. Services such as Uber add substantially to carbon emissions, said a US science body. The main adverse impact comes from cars driving around waiting to pick up a new customer, which adds about 50% to the carbon cost of a trip above the level of a private car. In addition, the existence of ride-hailing services encourages more road travel rather that public transport use. This takes the carbon penalty up to 69%. Two factors don’t appear to be included in the study. First, Uber and its competitors increase the degree of congestion in towns and cities. This raises the fuel consumption for all other people driving at the same time, and thus further raises greenhouse gas emissions (as well as other forms of air pollution). But, to counter this, the existence of Uber may reduce the need for individuals to buy and own cars, possibly saving large amounts of carbon. Whatever the real carbon cost of Uber, improved public transport will almost always reduce emissions.

Personal thought - if (big IF) we can get people to share, especially if pick ups are on the route already happening, then TAAS might be able to reduce vehicles too, but I am, to a degree, starting to describe a small bus service.

Martyn1981

Article on Renault, mentions the Twingo EV, need for Renault and Nissan to join up properly (perhaps) and an interesting graph comparison of sales by type 2020 prediction v's 2019 (lot of LPG in there?)

Renault Lost €383 Million In 2019

Renault published its 2019 results on Valentine’s Day. It is unlikely the company made its shareholders happy. The company lost €383 million in 2019. Thanks to a €242 million bonus from Nissan, only €141 million was charged to the shareholders. That was about €3.5 billion less than in 2018. Half the difference is less profit from associated companies (mainly Nissan). The other half is headwinds in a shrinking automotive market.

From 2020 to 2024, the CAFE target becomes increasingly more challenging to meet. But the increases are small and should be easily met with increased electrification. The hardest part will be changing the trend of the last few years. The market and profits moved to bigger cars that produced more CO2 emissions. The whole past decade, the focus was on more efficient engines, but the only real progress that can be made with fossil fuel burners is with hybridization — costly and with small gains.

ASavvyBuyer

Not sure if this has been posted before, as I can't find a date on it, but thought it was worth posting:

https://www.nationalgrid.com/5-myths-about-electric-vehicles-busted

Edit: Just seen a date on it, Feb 2020.

EVandPV

Greener petrol at UK pumps to target emissions

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51731757

"The announcement of the consultation comes after the government announced that a ban on the sale of new petrol, diesel and hybrid cars would be brought forward from 2040 to 2035 - although Mr Shapps said it could happen as soon as 2032."