EV Discussion thread

shinytop

JKenH said:

Somewhat bizarre regulation being introduced in Greece. Can anyone explain the logic behind it? Does the state of charge affect the likelihood of a battery catching fire or make it burn longer/more fiercely?

You Can't Use Ferries in Greece if Your Electric Car Has More Than 40 Percent Battery

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/you-can-t-use-ferries-in-greece-if-your-electric-car-has-more-than-40-percent-battery-234555.html

A bit of digging comes up with this document

https://www.ecgassociation.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/EMSA-AFVs-Guidance-final.pdf

and a quote.  Looks to me that it's aimed at cargo ships but this is the thinking behind it.

"While the SoC does not influence the total energy released from a battery fire, it directly influences the growth and peak heat release rate, meaning that it is expected that batteries with higher SoC levels will tend to release heat in higher heat peaks and much faster than batteries with lower SoC levels.

Furthermore, SoC is also related to the occurrence of a Thermal Runaway (TR), meaning that lower values decrease the likelihood of TR significantly. It should be noted that a SoC<30% implies TR to be very unlikely. This refers to the actual SoC of the battery, which is seldom the same as the SoC displayed in a vehicle.

Taking the above points into consideration, particular attention should be given to the maximum SoC values recommended by car manufacturers when loading EVs. It is noted that these may vary among car manufacturer, car model and length of route to end destination. In general, EVs should have displayed SoC values within the respective 20%-50% charge range.

Vehicles showing only a Full to Empty measurement gauge should have a level indicating within the 20%- 50% charge range. Vehicles which can be set in to a ‘transport mode’, which run on a ‘power down’ modus throughout the logistics chain, must have sufficient battery power to safely operate the basic functions of the vehicle. All hybrids with possibility to drive on the ‘ICE’ with the electric mode disengaged, should do so."

JKenH

Interesting pricing strategy by Tesla in Turkey where a physically identical but software limited lower powered model Y is being sold at a 40% discount to the full fat version. Could we see Tesla offering software limited models elsewhere as part of the plan announced to produce cheaper models on the existing platforms. I believe other manufacturers have done something similar in the past, quite successfully, offering the same cc engine in various states of tune. 

It might not appeal to everyone but I could live with a software limited/same battery Tesla for a 40% lower price. 

The Base Tesla Model 3 Has Just 148 HP In SingaporeTesla has limited the power of the Model 3 to 110 kilowatts (148 horsepower) in Singapore and the Model Y to 159 kW (213 hp) in Turkey.

This means that in Turkey, you can get a base Model Y Standard Range RWD for about 60% of the cost of the next model up, the Long Range AWD. 

https://insideevs.com/news/721286/low-power-teslas/

Grumpy_chap

JKenH said:

HMRC cuts AER electric car reimbursement rate to 8p per mile

HMRC has cut the Advisory Electric Rate (AER) for fully electric cars by 1ppm as it also announces new Advisory Fuel Rates (AFRs) for the upcoming quarter.

The AER falls to 8ppm from 1 June 2024 

The rates are HMRC’s recommended amounts to reimburse employees for business travel in their company cars. Employers can pay higher rates where employee costs exceed them but must prove this is necessary to avoid the excess being subject to tax.

https://fleetworld.co.uk/hmrc-cuts-aer-electric-car-reimbursement-rate-to-8p-per-mile/

That is a regular quarterly adjustment applied to petrol, diesel and electric cars.  Different energy costs per mile for each type of engine.  The AFR / AER is to cover the cost of fuel only and not any other expenses - typically applies for company car or car allowance drivers.

The linked article comments "concerns that the AER is not fit-for-purpose".  

I have found that the AER / AFR is one of the most thoroughly and well-calculated allowances there is.  Rates can move up or down depending upon energy cost.  It seems logical that the electric rate per mile would drop as the energy cap rate is also reducing.

JKenH

Grumpy_chap said:

JKenH said:

HMRC cuts AER electric car reimbursement rate to 8p per mile

HMRC has cut the Advisory Electric Rate (AER) for fully electric cars by 1ppm as it also announces new Advisory Fuel Rates (AFRs) for the upcoming quarter.

The AER falls to 8ppm from 1 June 2024 

The rates are HMRC’s recommended amounts to reimburse employees for business travel in their company cars. Employers can pay higher rates where employee costs exceed them but must prove this is necessary to avoid the excess being subject to tax.

https://fleetworld.co.uk/hmrc-cuts-aer-electric-car-reimbursement-rate-to-8p-per-mile/

That is a regular quarterly adjustment applied to petrol, diesel and electric cars.  Different energy costs per mile for each type of engine.  The AFR / AER is to cover the cost of fuel only and not any other expenses - typically applies for company car or car allowance drivers.

The linked article comments "concerns that the AER is not fit-for-purpose".  

I have found that the AER / AFR is one of the most thoroughly and well-calculated allowances there is.  Rates can move up or down depending upon energy cost.  It seems logical that the electric rate per mile would drop as the energy cap rate is also reducing.

I suspect part of the concern is that public charging costs have not followed wholesale electricity costs downward. The AER is still quite generous if you mainly charge at home on an EV tariff but not so if you have to rely on public charging. The employer has the option to reimburse actual costs but where there is a mix of home and public charging that becomes complicated to administer. The AFR banded for different fuels and engine sizes on the other hand does seem quite practical and easy to administer. 

Grumpy_chap

JKenH said:

I suspect part of the concern is that public charging costs have not followed wholesale electricity costs downward. The AER is still quite generous if you mainly charge at home on an EV tariff but not so if you have to rely on public charging. 

As is mentioned many times (in this thread), the need for public charging is practically zero.
The thread needs to take a consistent stance.
Can't use that argument when extolling the virtues of EV's yet flip to "public charging is expensive" when the matter suits.

The real winners, of course, in the AFR / AER are PHEV drivers who manage to use mostly electricity from home solar but can claim the respective petrol / diesel rates.

JKenH

Auto Express squarely behind EVs but also suggesting PHEVs may have a role. I like the idea of allowing PHEVs post the ban linked with punitive taxation on petrol/diesel to discourage people from just getting them for tax reasons.

“Electric cars are the future; we’ve gone too far for there to be any other dominant tech”

Any technology that isn’t electric has been dismissed, maybe too quickly. My suspicion is that, while synthetic fuels were maybe a decade too late in development, they could still have some applications and save the petrol engine from extinction. But electric cars are the future; we’re too far down the path for there to be any other dominant tech, and we need a clear direction as soon as possible post-election about what is going to happen and when.

There’s a big grey area around hybrids, which are an increasingly popular transition technology as buyers resist the move to full electric. So what level of hybrid will or won’t be allowed needs clearing up. In an ideal world, Plug-in hybrids with an appealing real-world electric range of around 100 miles – about that of the original Nissan Leaf – and the back-up of a petrol tank would help reduce anxiety about going electric and bring people more gently into the future.

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/opinion/363292/electric-cars-are-future-weve-gone-too-far-there-be-any-other-dominant-tech

JKenH

Grumpy_chap said:

JKenH said:

I suspect part of the concern is that public charging costs have not followed wholesale electricity costs downward. The AER is still quite generous if you mainly charge at home on an EV tariff but not so if you have to rely on public charging. 

As is mentioned many times (in this thread), the need for public charging is practically zero.
The thread needs to take a consistent stance.
Can't use that argument when extolling the virtues of EV's yet flip to "public charging is expensive" when the matter suits.

The real winners, of course, in the AFR / AER are PHEV drivers who manage to use mostly electricity from home solar but can claim the respective petrol / diesel rates.

Maybe that is behind the increased uptake of PHEVs. Get a 2litre plus PHEv and you’re quids in. Charge at 3p a mile and claim back 26p. No wonder JLR is doing so well.

CKhalvashi

Grumpy_chap said:

JKenH said:

I suspect part of the concern is that public charging costs have not followed wholesale electricity costs downward. The AER is still quite generous if you mainly charge at home on an EV tariff but not so if you have to rely on public charging. 

As is mentioned many times (in this thread), the need for public charging is practically zero.
The thread needs to take a consistent stance.
Can't use that argument when extolling the virtues of EV's yet flip to "public charging is expensive" when the matter suits.

The real winners, of course, in the AFR / AER are PHEV drivers who manage to use mostly electricity from home solar but can claim the respective petrol / diesel rates.

It's not zero, though. We've taken the Ioniq (which will be leaving my ownership very shortly) to Poland twice and the Enyaq has made it as far as Lviv (from where we've taken trains to curfew bust, knowing where to leave a car so it won't be stolen/damaged/broken into is always a wonderful thing). The Enyaq will make it as far as Belgium without charging, the Ioniq won't although that's not really a problem as these days neither will my bladder.

Granted, most won't do such drives, however with public charging, such drives are possible. These aren't cheaper than petrol/diesel, but also aren't more expensive either.

Grumpy_chap

CKhalvashi said:

Granted, most won't do such drives, however with public charging, such drives are possible. These aren't cheaper than petrol/diesel, but also aren't more expensive either.

The formulation used to calculate the AFR / AER rates is quite involved and takes into account the mix, on a driver-friendly basis, of fuel / energy costs and the spread of fuel / energy costs.  It does not assume every fill / charge is at the cheapest rate and does make an assumption that some fills / charges will be "caught short" motorway services top-end rates.  Overall, I think this is one of the figures worked out by the Civil Service that is fair.

CKhalvashi

Grumpy_chap said:

CKhalvashi said:

Granted, most won't do such drives, however with public charging, such drives are possible. These aren't cheaper than petrol/diesel, but also aren't more expensive either.

The formulation used to calculate the AFR / AER rates is quite involved and takes into account the mix, on a driver-friendly basis, of fuel / energy costs and the spread of fuel / energy costs.  It does not assume every fill / charge is at the cheapest rate and does make an assumption that some fills / charges will be "caught short" motorway services top-end rates.  Overall, I think this is one of the figures worked out by the Civil Service that is fair.

I completely agree with you here Grumpy. The cost of the cars is consistently below the rates that apply and we both rarely rapid charge unless on a serious run. The Enyaq will go from home to Gatwick and back easily (the only trip that OH can make a claim), the Ioniq falls about 10 miles short of that figure.

The Ioniq is a fantastically economical car, but will be going to my brother. I'll be changing to a 77kWh ID4 next month more for the long distance convenience aspect than anything else. I'm averaging around 4000mi/month at the moment but this isn't evenly spread, however I'm largely able to use client facilities to charge. An EQS for a little more was tempting, the overall running costs (and I consider such a car almost wasteful for our needs) were not. In April I spent 9 days on client sites, 7 days in the office and 5 days working from home. In May (and we were away until the 9th) it's 10,5 days on client sites, 4.5 days in the office and 1 day working from home so far.