Practical/affordable electric cars?

Grumpy_chap

Martyn1981 said:

The 'self charging hybrid' and 'we choose not to plug in' campaigns

These campaigns are the most misleading marketing ever.
At least , so I thought, until the new Nissan Qashqai adverts for "drive electric" which is basically an electric car with a petrol generator on board.  You'd genuinely think that was a joke if it were not for the big company behind the statement.  It at least ties for the misleading scale with the "self-charging hybrid" waffle.
Quite shocking really given that Nissan were one of the leading companies for the conversion to EV.

Jenni_D

CoastingHatbox said:

BikingBud said:

If running costs only consisted of servicing charges

You really need to consider whole life costs, purchase, potential resale, cost per mile covering all aspects and especially as VED will now come into effect.

We'll be sticking with a small zero rated petrol ICE for now, and the market seems to appreciate that as the used prices remain very strong.

Also, if we actually have any concern about environmental emissions,

Hasn't this already been discussed Ad nauseum, probably in the other EV thread, where it was shown that people making such comparisons are being economical with what they're factoring into the whole lifecycle? (i.e. ignoring the energy requirements of creating petrol/diesel, transporting it, and the efficiency of an ICE vehicle itself in terms of energy usage of the total potential of the fuel itself, yet including those comparable things for an EV)?

Martyn1981

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

The 'self charging hybrid' and 'we choose not to plug in' campaigns

These campaigns are the most misleading marketing ever.
At least , so I thought, until the new Nissan Qashqai adverts for "drive electric" which is basically an electric car with a petrol generator on board.  You'd genuinely think that was a joke if it were not for the big company behind the statement.  It at least ties for the misleading scale with the "self-charging hybrid" waffle.
Quite shocking really given that Nissan were one of the leading companies for the conversion to EV.

I hope I'm not making this up, but I also seem to recall a Toyota ad, showing a HEV (or PHEV) driving past a BEV with the owner standing there holding the charge nozzle like a petrol pump. Coz that's what we do ..... all night outside the house I am sometimes.

silvercar

Martyn1981 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

The 'self charging hybrid' and 'we choose not to plug in' campaigns

These campaigns are the most misleading marketing ever.
At least , so I thought, until the new Nissan Qashqai adverts for "drive electric" which is basically an electric car with a petrol generator on board.  You'd genuinely think that was a joke if it were not for the big company behind the statement.  It at least ties for the misleading scale with the "self-charging hybrid" waffle.
Quite shocking really given that Nissan were one of the leading companies for the conversion to EV.

I hope I'm not making this up, but I also seem to recall a Toyota ad, showing a HEV (or PHEV) driving past a BEV with the owner standing there holding the charge nozzle like a petrol pump. Coz that's what we do ..... all night outside the house I am sometimes.

Seriously? Expect that on a Twitter meme rather than a Toyota ad  

Grumpy_chap

Jenni_D said:

Hasn't this already been discussed Ad nauseum, probably in the other EV thread, where it was shown that people making such comparisons are being economical with what they're factoring into the whole lifecycle? (i.e. ignoring the energy requirements of creating petrol/diesel, transporting it, and the efficiency of an ICE vehicle itself in terms of energy usage of the total potential of the fuel itself, yet including those comparable things for an EV)?

There was one set of data that I was referenced recently (but I can't share a link as it was a conversation at the coffee machine).
An individual at work who drives a massive petrol (diesel) guzzling SUV was denying the environmental benefit of switching to EV as a figure similar to the 93k miles referenced by CoastingHatBox.  IIRC, the actual number used in that conversation was 73k miles.  It was also a comparison of a brand new EV versus existing SUV.

Well, comparing the life-cycle of an existing ICE vs new EV is always going to give a daft outcome as the comparison would have to be new EV vs new ICE to be a fair one.

I am also confused as to where this concept originates from:

CoastingHatbox said:

Low mileage users of vehicles relying on batteries may find themselves having batteries replaced in order to maintain capacity and range, before they've done anything like the mileage required to justify the use of the vehicle.

CoastingHatbox

Jenni_D said:

CoastingHatbox said:

BikingBud said:

If running costs only consisted of servicing charges

You really need to consider whole life costs, purchase, potential resale, cost per mile covering all aspects and especially as VED will now come into effect.

We'll be sticking with a small zero rated petrol ICE for now, and the market seems to appreciate that as the used prices remain very strong.

Also, if we actually have any concern about environmental emissions,

Hasn't this already been discussed Ad nauseum, probably in the other EV thread, where it was shown that people making such comparisons are being economical with what they're factoring into the whole lifecycle?

People or studies?

The reality is all sorts of things factor into the environmental impact of vehicles, including the extraction, refinement, manufacturing and transportation of materials, components and in the case of ICE vehicles, fuel. Driving style, type of use and even the weather affects the results of such studies, the authors of which of course have made assumptions. Some studies take into account particulate emissions generated from tyre wear and friction materials. Others don't.

There are posters in this thread contemplating or using EVs covering a relatively small number of miles each year. I am highlighting in that particular scenario, an ICE vehicle may be a better choice environmentally ... at least until we get more sustainable battery technology.

My personal preference? Using other modes of transport whenever practicable (either feet or bicycle) and keeping motorised vehicle use to an absolute minimum.

DrEskimo

Jenni_D said:

CoastingHatbox said:

BikingBud said:

If running costs only consisted of servicing charges

You really need to consider whole life costs, purchase, potential resale, cost per mile covering all aspects and especially as VED will now come into effect.

We'll be sticking with a small zero rated petrol ICE for now, and the market seems to appreciate that as the used prices remain very strong.

Also, if we actually have any concern about environmental emissions,

Hasn't this already been discussed Ad nauseum, probably in the other EV thread, where it was shown that people making such comparisons are being economical with what they're factoring into the whole lifecycle? (i.e. ignoring the energy requirements of creating petrol/diesel, transporting it, and the efficiency of an ICE vehicle itself in terms of energy usage of the total potential of the fuel itself, yet including those comparable things for an EV)?

This^

Usually the higher end mileage estimations will favour the ICE by:

- using the reported emissions from a WLTP testing procedures, ignoring that real world emissions per mile are substantially higher,

- as you say, completely ignore the footprint of extracting, refining, and transporting fossil fuels, which typically use the dirtiest forms of electricity generation,

- perpetuating common myths about batteries needing replacing way before reality. 

- taking European or US averages for the electricity mix, ignoring where and when EVs are charged. 

As usual, the answer is “it depends”, but from my reading if you take a EV manufactured in a UK or US factory which are heavily run on renewables, where the EV is charged on UK energy mix over night, the carbon deficit is usually paid within 15-20k miles relative to the full real world emissions of an equivalent ICE.

Grumpy_chap

Martyn1981 said:

I hope I'm not making this up, but I also seem to recall a Toyota ad, showing a HEV (or PHEV) driving past a BEV with the owner standing there holding the charge nozzle like a petrol pump. Coz that's what we do ..... all night outside the house I am sometimes.

You mean this
https://insideevs.com/news/342794/new-toyota-ad-again-attacks-plug-in-electric-cars-video/


You must have the UK specification, which varies from the picture, so don't have to stand there all night

Martyn1981

CoastingHatbox said:

Jenni_D said:

CoastingHatbox said:

BikingBud said:

If running costs only consisted of servicing charges

You really need to consider whole life costs, purchase, potential resale, cost per mile covering all aspects and especially as VED will now come into effect.

We'll be sticking with a small zero rated petrol ICE for now, and the market seems to appreciate that as the used prices remain very strong.

Also, if we actually have any concern about environmental emissions,

Hasn't this already been discussed Ad nauseum, probably in the other EV thread, where it was shown that people making such comparisons are being economical with what they're factoring into the whole lifecycle?

People or studies?

The reality is all sorts of things factor into the environmental impact of vehicles, including the extraction, refinement, manufacturing and transportation of materials, components and in the case of ICE vehicles, fuel. Driving style, type of use and even the weather affects the results of such studies, the authors of which of course have made assumptions. Some studies take into account particulate emissions generated from tyre wear and friction materials. Others don't.

There are posters in this thread contemplating or using EVs covering a relatively small number of miles each year. I am highlighting in that particular scenario, an ICE vehicle may be a better choice environmentally ... at least until we get more sustainable battery technology.

My personal preference? Using other modes of transport whenever practicable (either feet or bicycle) and keeping motorised vehicle use to an absolute minimum.

My bold - The estimates for BEV battery recycling is ~97%. See Redwood Materials.

In fact, BEV's will hopefully result in a massive increase in Li-ion battery recycling which at present is absolutely tiny. Basically the small batts are a pain to recycle as there aren't places or systems typically to deal with them, but large automotive batts make it worthwhile setting up recycling facilities ..... facilities that can then recycle all the other batts (that folk forget to mention)

If we look at Cobalt (though it's used in less BEV batts as companies move to LFP, but I assume (may be wrong) that that smaller market is still currently growing IYSWIM), we see that  around 24% is used for BEV's, about 25% for small electronics, and about 10% for refineries to produce petrol and diesel. Obviously the 10% for refineries is due to system losses, whereas the batteries can be recycled.

Steel and aluminium is already well recycled, so recycling BEV batts helps to close the circle.

Is the crude oil recycled?

CoastingHatbox

Other estimates for BEV recycling are not at ~97% and there is a study that puts forward a best case scenario of 95% recycled, with the recycled material meeting 40% of the demand for new batteries.

In terms of battery life, again, there are factors that come into play - BEVs used for higher mileages with more frequent charge/discharge cycles are thought to see less degradation in battery capacity, relative to EVs used more seldomly. How the batteries are re-charged is also a factor.

The real problem with the studies, the assumptions, data points exposed and the interpretation there of, seems to be in most cases a lack of objectivity.

However, I don't want to divert this thread any further. My point has been made.

And personally, I'll do what I can to reduce my consumption of fossil fuels and batteries.