Electric cars

AdrianC wrote: »

It does help if you read what I actually write, y'know.

Yes, it's plug-in only.

Do you really count non-plug-in hybrids, with very limited electric-only ranges and performance, as even remotely on the same page as "pure" EVs? Unless it's for pure stat-massaging, then why would you?

Hi

On the contrary, I actually did read what you wrote "y'know" .... In response to mentioning that the 2017 global EV market (Note that's total EV market, not a subset of!) equated to ~4million units, you responded ... "Are you sure on that 4m? I'm finding 1.3m EV and PHEV - so "plug-in" EVs, both "pure" and PHEV." ... obviously leaving out HEVs for some reason or other, so, as you rightly mention, "Unless it's for pure stat-massaging, then why would you" ... so the relevant question is - why did you do it?

Regarding ... "very limited electric-only ranges and performance" ... yes, they may be limited, however the 'EV' in 'BEV', 'HEV' & 'PHEV' probably has a common meaning!. Anyway, the issue you raise is really subjective as what comprises 'limited' in terms of range or performance would depend on what's required of the EV component of the vehicle & how it's used ... my own definition of 'limited' range may be a few miles and this is likely the case for a substantial proportion of those interested, whereas someone arguing against the concept of EVs may say it's much close to 300miles!


HTH
Z

AdrianC wrote: »

Good-oh. Shame your reply seemed to show no sign of having done so, since your mention of Toyota's hybrid sales appeared to ignore the entirety past the ninth word.

To which you mentioned Toyota's 1.5m almost entirely non-plug-in hybrid sales, in wording that suggested my figure was a lie rather than simply based on different (albeit clearly-stated) criteria.

If you'd got as far as the second line of the post, you'd have known why - because that was the source I found, since you'd failed to be so kind as to provide one. <waits>

If non-plug-in hybrids are included, then I'm actually mildly surprised it's so low, since they're pretty mainstream these days - so much so that I'm not actually finding any stats sources who break them out from non-hybrids, with the split being at plug-in generally.

As for Toyota, they built 9m vehicles last year - so 1.5m "electrified" is not a huge proportion, given that they are the clear market leaders, and about the only manufacturer with hybrids available across almost the full range of models. Apart from the Prius, what plug-in hybrids do they offer? None in the UK, along with no pure EVs, although other markets may differ - so no wonder they're trying to muddy the waters. They're losing their lead.

Hi

Absolute waffle, as is obviously clear for everyone to see ...

It doesn't matter whether I read past the ninth word or not because your own interjection was erroneous, however, I can assure you that I fully understood what you wrote and very likely why you wrote it in that format too ... may I also at this stage suggest that it was yourself that challenged the mention of 4million EVs with a lower figure and continue to attempt to justify your error ...

Anyway, looks like Toyota is on your automotive brand 'dislike' list too ... careful, carry on like this and everyone will start to believe that you have some kind of affiliation to a particular marque ...

Lastly, regarding ... "that was the source I found, since you'd failed to be so kind as to provide one. <waits>" ... considering that a number of contributors to this very thread have requested & are still awaiting the provision of information sources to support a number of your own previous positions, don't you see the hypocrisy in that request? ... also, although the source you 'found' may be a source, it may have been more appropriate if the information contained within had been relevant, not simply one appearing somewhere near the top a search engine's results ...

There are plenty of EV owners that would (&do!) contest much of what you write and likely plenty more that simply shrug their shoulders or laugh at many of the 'considered insights' that are recycled time after time, however, although logic suggests that these insights may sometimes be correct, experience often suggests the opposite is more normally the case, especially so in times of rapid change ....

HTH
Z

AdrianC wrote: »

Hold on while I polish my crystal ball.

You don't really need a crystal ball when manufacturers are announcing cars with those ranges in that time period. How accurate they'll turn out to be is a different matter. But as with all technological advances (unless we've plateu'd which I don't think we have) it's just a matter of time. That time scale is likely within the next upgrade cycle for many motorists - their next new car could be an EV (if it isn't already)

Increasing charging provision will unleash a lot of increased demand, which will then swamp the increased provision, which when met will then unleash a lot of increased demand, etc etc. Given that the 1,000 space car park I was talking about can be used for up to seven days without revisiting the car (it's a large part of a "destination" city's main public parking), but is also heavily used for day and half-day parking, what proportion of parking spaces would need to have charging available to not run the risk of having to install further provision within a year or two? Given that you need to allow for 40-60kWh+ batteries to recharge within the day, what is the total current provision for that car park?

There will be some teething problems whilst we make the switch over, just as I assume happened when we moved from horses or leaded petrol. At some point it'll stabilize and some charging will be readily available for everyone that needs it.


Remember that not everyone in a car park will want to rapid charge or charge at all. Admittedly you're then relying on those that aren't charging to not block a charging bay - possibly by putting them at the back.


I'd assume some ratio along the lines of 50% non charging spaces, 40% slow charging spaces (free) and 10% fast charging (fee) would suit almost all use cases.

But we really are just rehashing exactly what I've said several times in this thread previously.

Indeed. We're just going to go round in circles, without you actually answering the question.


Assuming you were in an EV and had access to a charging space, you'd have been able to do that journey in an EV with no issues?

[QUOTE=zeupater;74548788For_ourselves_&_probably_the_majority_of_motorists,_the_ability_to_charge_an_EV_at_home_vastly_outweighs_the_need_to_charge_on_a_public_charging_point_for_the_vast_majority_of_the_time,_after-all,_there's_no_real_issue_or_concerted_effort_in_plugging_a_150-200_mile_range_EV_in_once_per_week![/QUOTE]

I would be happy with my 40KkWh Nissan Leaf if it would rapid charge to 80% several times consecutively. For me that would mean a comfort break every 110 - 130 miles due to bladder anxiety. I bought the car to do some long trips to Scotland and my pen friend in France who lives some 450 miles south of the channel. The poor charge rate means that it is not practicable to do such journies in one long day which is what I envisaged.

And when we've all bought electric, they'll bring out Hydrogen vehicles :wall: