EV Discussion thread

JKenH

Why ULEZ expansion is vital to the UK’s successful EV transition

By Adrian Keen, CEO of InstaVolt

Since the implementation of the initial ULEZ in London in 2019 and its subsequent expansions, the positive impacts have been considerable. In just four years we’ve seen a significant reduction in the levels of harmful air pollution in London – a 23% reduction, to be precise – by reducing nitrogen oxide emissions from road traffic by 13,500 tonnes across London. The biggest contributor of this reduction percentage occurred in TfL busses, showing the great importance of public transport in this transition. Comparing this region with the rest of the country currently without ULEZ demonstrates the regime’s success in action: with London showing a reduction of pollution five times faster than the rest of the UK.

It’s clear that the ruling of the ULEZ expansion to encompass all London boroughs – and in future, broader parts of the UK – is critical to protecting the health and welfare of our country. It’s also integral to the UK’s transition to electric as part of the wider net zero by 2050 regime. 

https://fleetworld.co.uk/comment-why-ulez-expansion-is-vital-to-the-uks-successful-ev-transition/


I don’t live in London and don’t drive into it so ULEZ doesn’t affect me, either from an emissions point of view or what I can drive. I wonder how productive, though, it is for InstaVolt’s CEO to promote ULEZ. Is linking a roll out ULEZ not simply adding to the polarisation between EV and ICE drivers. Yes it may be instrumental in driving people into EVs - the stick approach - but for those who aren’t so keen on the idea of giving up their ICE a it may impart a negative association. It may just infuriate small “c” conservatives (like me) that Instavolt and by implication the EV industry are championing metropolitan liberal (anti car) values and further stoking the culture wars. We already have Vince Dale funding JSO and ER. Will Instavolt be going down the same route?

While on the subject, an interesting observation was made by Mr Keen that “ The biggest contributor of this reduction percentage occurred in TfL busses”. It is absolutely no surprise to me that cleaning up buses makes a radical difference to emissions. Black smoke from the exhaust when pulling away is the order of the day with every bus I have been stuck behind and cleaning up buses (and lorries and taxis) is something that should have been done a long while ago. 

Obviously there are some statistics somewhere that refer to the contribution of the clean up attributable to buses but I can’t find them.

However I did find this from Imperial College who have been (controversially in the last few days it seems) advising the Mayor of London in connection with ULEZ.

Corresponding author of the research Dr Marc Stettler, from Imperial’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Centre for Transport Studies, said: “Our research suggests that a ULEZ on its own is not an effective strategy to improve air quality – the case of London shows us that it works best when combined with a broader set of policies that reduce emissions across sectors like bus and taxi retrofitting, support for active and public transport, and other policies on polluting vehicles.”

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/231894/london-pollution-improved-with-evidence-small/

1961Nick

JKenH said:

Why ULEZ expansion is vital to the UK’s successful EV transition

By Adrian Keen, CEO of InstaVolt

Since the implementation of the initial ULEZ in London in 2019 and its subsequent expansions, the positive impacts have been considerable. In just four years we’ve seen a significant reduction in the levels of harmful air pollution in London – a 23% reduction, to be precise – by reducing nitrogen oxide emissions from road traffic by 13,500 tonnes across London. The biggest contributor of this reduction percentage occurred in TfL busses, showing the great importance of public transport in this transition. Comparing this region with the rest of the country currently without ULEZ demonstrates the regime’s success in action: with London showing a reduction of pollution five times faster than the rest of the UK.

It’s clear that the ruling of the ULEZ expansion to encompass all London boroughs – and in future, broader parts of the UK – is critical to protecting the health and welfare of our country. It’s also integral to the UK’s transition to electric as part of the wider net zero by 2050 regime. 

https://fleetworld.co.uk/comment-why-ulez-expansion-is-vital-to-the-uks-successful-ev-transition/


I don’t live in London and don’t drive into it so ULEZ doesn’t affect me, either from an emissions point of view or what I can drive. I wonder how productive, though, it is for InstaVolt’s CEO to promote ULEZ. Is linking a roll out ULEZ not simply adding to the polarisation between EV and ICE drivers. Yes it may be instrumental in driving people into EVs - the slick approach - but for those who aren’t so keen on the idea of giving up their ICE a it may impart a negative association. It may just infuriate small “c” conservatives (like me) that Instavolt and by implication the EV industry is championing metropolitan liberal values and stoke the fires of division. 

While on the subject, an interesting observation was made by Mr Keen that “ The biggest contributor of this reduction percentage occurred in TfL busses”. It is absolutely no surprise to me that cleaning up buses makes a radical difference to emissions. Black smoke from the exhaust when pulling away is the order of the day with every bus I have been stuck behind and cleaning up buses (and lorries and taxis) is something that should have been done a long while ago. 

Obviously there are some statistics somewhere that refer to the contribution of the clean up attributable to buses but I can’t find it. 

However I did find this from Imperial College who have been (controversially in the last few days it seems) advising the Mayor of London in connection with ULEZ.

Corresponding author of the research Dr Marc Stettler, from Imperial’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Centre for Transport Studies, said: “Our research suggests that a ULEZ on its own is not an effective strategy to improve air quality – the case of London shows us that it works best when combined with a broader set of policies that reduce emissions across sectors like bus and taxi retrofitting, support for active and public transport, and other policies on polluting vehicles.”

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/231894/london-pollution-improved-with-evidence-small/

I you discount the reduction in emissions from public transport & the reduction seen in other areas of the country without a ULEZ, I wonder how much is left?

It's also possible that a couple of trips on the underground a year will negate any benefit from the improvement above ground?

JKenH

1961Nick said:

JKenH said:

Why ULEZ expansion is vital to the UK’s successful EV transition

By Adrian Keen, CEO of InstaVolt

Since the implementation of the initial ULEZ in London in 2019 and its subsequent expansions, the positive impacts have been considerable. In just four years we’ve seen a significant reduction in the levels of harmful air pollution in London – a 23% reduction, to be precise – by reducing nitrogen oxide emissions from road traffic by 13,500 tonnes across London. The biggest contributor of this reduction percentage occurred in TfL busses, showing the great importance of public transport in this transition. Comparing this region with the rest of the country currently without ULEZ demonstrates the regime’s success in action: with London showing a reduction of pollution five times faster than the rest of the UK.

It’s clear that the ruling of the ULEZ expansion to encompass all London boroughs – and in future, broader parts of the UK – is critical to protecting the health and welfare of our country. It’s also integral to the UK’s transition to electric as part of the wider net zero by 2050 regime. 

https://fleetworld.co.uk/comment-why-ulez-expansion-is-vital-to-the-uks-successful-ev-transition/


I don’t live in London and don’t drive into it so ULEZ doesn’t affect me, either from an emissions point of view or what I can drive. I wonder how productive, though, it is for InstaVolt’s CEO to promote ULEZ. Is linking a roll out ULEZ not simply adding to the polarisation between EV and ICE drivers. Yes it may be instrumental in driving people into EVs - the slick approach - but for those who aren’t so keen on the idea of giving up their ICE a it may impart a negative association. It may just infuriate small “c” conservatives (like me) that Instavolt and by implication the EV industry is championing metropolitan liberal values and stoke the fires of division. 

While on the subject, an interesting observation was made by Mr Keen that “ The biggest contributor of this reduction percentage occurred in TfL busses”. It is absolutely no surprise to me that cleaning up buses makes a radical difference to emissions. Black smoke from the exhaust when pulling away is the order of the day with every bus I have been stuck behind and cleaning up buses (and lorries and taxis) is something that should have been done a long while ago. 

Obviously there are some statistics somewhere that refer to the contribution of the clean up attributable to buses but I can’t find it. 

However I did find this from Imperial College who have been (controversially in the last few days it seems) advising the Mayor of London in connection with ULEZ.

Corresponding author of the research Dr Marc Stettler, from Imperial’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Centre for Transport Studies, said: “Our research suggests that a ULEZ on its own is not an effective strategy to improve air quality – the case of London shows us that it works best when combined with a broader set of policies that reduce emissions across sectors like bus and taxi retrofitting, support for active and public transport, and other policies on polluting vehicles.”

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/231894/london-pollution-improved-with-evidence-small/

I you discount the reduction in emissions from public transport & the reduction seen in other areas of the country without a ULEZ, I wonder how much is left?

It's also possible that a couple of trips on the underground a year will negate any benefit from the improvement above ground?

I wonder how much of the reduction since 2019 is down to WFH.

michaels

JKenH said:

Why ULEZ expansion is vital to the UK’s successful EV transition

By Adrian Keen, CEO of InstaVolt

Since the implementation of the initial ULEZ in London in 2019 and its subsequent expansions, the positive impacts have been considerable. In just four years we’ve seen a significant reduction in the levels of harmful air pollution in London – a 23% reduction, to be precise – by reducing nitrogen oxide emissions from road traffic by 13,500 tonnes across London. The biggest contributor of this reduction percentage occurred in TfL busses, showing the great importance of public transport in this transition. Comparing this region with the rest of the country currently without ULEZ demonstrates the regime’s success in action: with London showing a reduction of pollution five times faster than the rest of the UK.

It’s clear that the ruling of the ULEZ expansion to encompass all London boroughs – and in future, broader parts of the UK – is critical to protecting the health and welfare of our country. It’s also integral to the UK’s transition to electric as part of the wider net zero by 2050 regime. 

https://fleetworld.co.uk/comment-why-ulez-expansion-is-vital-to-the-uks-successful-ev-transition/


I don’t live in London and don’t drive into it so ULEZ doesn’t affect me, either from an emissions point of view or what I can drive. I wonder how productive, though, it is for InstaVolt’s CEO to promote ULEZ. Is linking a roll out ULEZ not simply adding to the polarisation between EV and ICE drivers. Yes it may be instrumental in driving people into EVs - the stick approach - but for those who aren’t so keen on the idea of giving up their ICE a it may impart a negative association. It may just infuriate small “c” conservatives (like me) that Instavolt and by implication the EV industry are championing metropolitan liberal (anti car) values and further stoking the culture wars. We already have Vince Dale funding JSO and ER. Will Instavolt be going down the same route?

While on the subject, an interesting observation was made by Mr Keen that “ The biggest contributor of this reduction percentage occurred in TfL busses”. It is absolutely no surprise to me that cleaning up buses makes a radical difference to emissions. Black smoke from the exhaust when pulling away is the order of the day with every bus I have been stuck behind and cleaning up buses (and lorries and taxis) is something that should have been done a long while ago. 

Obviously there are some statistics somewhere that refer to the contribution of the clean up attributable to buses but I can’t find them.

However I did find this from Imperial College who have been (controversially in the last few days it seems) advising the Mayor of London in connection with ULEZ.

Corresponding author of the research Dr Marc Stettler, from Imperial’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Centre for Transport Studies, said: “Our research suggests that a ULEZ on its own is not an effective strategy to improve air quality – the case of London shows us that it works best when combined with a broader set of policies that reduce emissions across sectors like bus and taxi retrofitting, support for active and public transport, and other policies on polluting vehicles.”

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/231894/london-pollution-improved-with-evidence-small/

Hmm - surely anything that results in a premature scrappage of a vehicle with embedded co2 is bad for the climate even if it is good for local pollution?  ULEZ the offending vehicles can be used outside of London where perhaps their emissions are less concentrated and less damaging.  If they can not be use anywhere then we are back to premature scrappage being the only option.

Grumpy_chap

JKenH said:

Why ULEZ expansion is vital to the UK’s successful EV transition

By Adrian Keen, CEO of InstaVolt

Always good to see a nice, balanced article from an author who could not possibly be considered to have any bias in their position.

JKenH said:

While on the subject, an interesting observation was made by Mr Keen that “ The biggest contributor of this reduction percentage occurred in TfL busses”. 

Buses are (were) exempted vehicles under the original ULEZ. I note that exemption no longer seems to be listed.
The real drive on changing buses was political desire by Khan to rubbish the Boris Routemasters which forced the scrapping / redeployment of a large number of virtually new buses.

JKenH said:

I wonder how much of the reduction since 2019 is down to WFH.

It will be none at all.
Just the 20 mph blanket speed limit introduced in 2020 and then proudly declaring in 2021 it had been a success because the number of road deaths had fallen in the first six months of the scheme.

JKenH

Businesses face bottlenecks for EV servicing work and replacement parts

In its Market Summary for August it said: “In areas such as service, maintenance and repair, the imbalance between fleet and retail demand for electric vehicles is having serious consequences.

“Dealers and workshops are understandably keeping their investment in the tools and training to support EVs in line with market uptake.

“But with fleet adoption of battery-powered vehicles running three times ahead of the market as a whole, leasing companies are experiencing bottlenecks in trying to access SMR work,” it said.

“This lack of capacity is exacerbated by supply chain delays in sourcing replacement parts, with one leasing director commenting that everything on an EV appears to be bespoke, including tyres and windscreens.”

“Moves are afoot to expand maintenance networks, but leasing companies still report that some tenders are trying to impose service level agreements that reflect yesterday’s SMR provision, rather than today’s curtailed capacity.

“The reality is that the market is not yet able to provide the service that our customers would like, and that impacts negatively on our customers’ perception of us,” said one director, referring directly to EVs.

https://www.motortrader.com/motor-trader-news/automotive-news/businesses-face-bottlenecks-ev-servicing-work-sales-accelerate-24-08-2023

I don’t understand why the imbalance between fleet and private purchasers would impact service standards. Any thoughts?

1961Nick

JKenH said:

Businesses face bottlenecks for EV servicing work and replacement parts

In its Market Summary for August it said: “In areas such as service, maintenance and repair, the imbalance between fleet and retail demand for electric vehicles is having serious consequences.

“Dealers and workshops are understandably keeping their investment in the tools and training to support EVs in line with market uptake.

“But with fleet adoption of battery-powered vehicles running three times ahead of the market as a whole, leasing companies are experiencing bottlenecks in trying to access SMR work,” it said.

“This lack of capacity is exacerbated by supply chain delays in sourcing replacement parts, with one leasing director commenting that everything on an EV appears to be bespoke, including tyres and windscreens.”

“Moves are afoot to expand maintenance networks, but leasing companies still report that some tenders are trying to impose service level agreements that reflect yesterday’s SMR provision, rather than today’s curtailed capacity.

“The reality is that the market is not yet able to provide the service that our customers would like, and that impacts negatively on our customers’ perception of us,” said one director, referring directly to EVs.

https://www.motortrader.com/motor-trader-news/automotive-news/businesses-face-bottlenecks-ev-servicing-work-sales-accelerate-24-08-2023

I don’t understand why the imbalance between fleet and private purchasers would impact service standards. Any thoughts?

All the more confusing when you consider that the market leading brand in the UK doesn't require any routine servicing. As far as windscreens & tyres go, sell enough vehicles & the supply chain will respond to the (profitable) demand.

JKenH

Someone didn’t get the memo.

Parcel delivery fleets to trial hydrogen fuel cell vans

First Hydrogen’s vans are equipped with hybrid engines (hydrogen fuel cell and battery), which suit shorter drives in urban and suburban areas as well as being able to sustain longer journeys. Regenerative braking helps to recharge the battery, particularly during journeys with lots of starts and stops, such as driving in built-up areas, or routes with multiple stops – including the journeys delivery drivers make with frequent drop-offs and pick-ups.

Steve Gill, CEO of First Hydrogen Automotive, said: “Fleet managers are realising that battery electric vehicles alone will not provide the reliability and operational flexibility required to meet customer demands. Future fleets require a mix of BEV and FCEV to overcome these obstacles and hit net zero targets. The large, growing parcel delivery sector desperately needs to build environmentally friendly and commercially viable fleets, and our hydrogen LCV can help to do that. This presents us with an exciting opportunity to explore a new customer base, enabling us to further accelerate business growth and potentially bring our vehicles to market quicker.”

https://fleetworld.co.uk/parcel-delivery-fleets-to-trial-hydrogen-fuel-cell-vans/

JKenH

I have posted this specifically because of the situation in Brighton where on street charging costs have been hiked to levels comparable with fuelling an ICE car. If Brighton can do this then what is to stop other councils doing the same in the future? Having enticed people to buy EVs with on street charging provision, no doubt the argument will go along the lines that we have a duty to other council tax payers to recoup the cost of installing the chargers, aka let’s fleece the car owner. 

Home charging costs drop 12% but public charging prices rise, finds AA

Slow charging in residential areas through lampposts actually remained largely static across the country – but due to the council-announced increase in Brighton and Hove (up 56% from 39p/kWh to 61p/kWh), the average kerbside cost across the country went up 4p per kWh

https://evfleetworld.co.uk/home-charging-costs-drop-12-but-public-charging-prices-rise-finds-aa/

Grumpy_chap

JKenH said:

everything on an EV appears to be bespoke, including tyres and windscreens.”

I don't understand that comment.

The tyres on my car are round black rubber rings just like every other car.  A quick online search reveals I can get tyres of the same size 235/45r18 for under £50 if I so choose.  The like-for-like Michelin tyres as the car was supplied new will cost more.  But, the tyres are not particularly bespoke.

Windscreens, on the other hand, are bespoke for every model of car from every manufacturer.  Some manufacturers even have different windscreens for different trim levels in the mode line-up to reflect varying tint, heated elements, insulation specifications etc.  I fail to see how windscreens for an EV are any more bespoke than windscreens for any other vehicle.

JKenH said:

I don’t understand why the imbalance between fleet and private purchasers would impact service standards. Any thoughts?

I assume this is not related to a difference between fleet and private purchasers for EV's.  If there is a shortage of servicing capacity for EV's, this would at the current time disproportionately impact fleet operators since the EV market penetration is higher for company cars than private cars.