wyx087

That's a massive reversal. As I previously said. UK are post industrial revolution whereas China is in later stages. UK's fantastic improvement comes from decoupling of economic growth from CO2 emissions. China is working on that this very moment. https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/uksectoraccounts/compendium/economicreview/october2019/thedecouplingofeconomicgrowthfromcarbonemissionsukevidence If UK was allowed to burn coal to get their industry going, why can't China? It took UK a century to arrive at this level of reduction (2000 to 2023), I bet it will take China a lot less time. At the same time, why shouldn't UK forge ahead with net-zero innovations?

It just says there, UK produces 3% of total human-made CO2. For such a small island, it's massive. 0.83% of (presumably current) global annual CO2 by UK. Why are you quoting everything based on total atmospheric CO2? By doing so, you are effectively saying human race (a tiny spec in Earth's history) must make a measurable change to total atmospheric CO2. Are you aware what you are asking?

Please re-read your handy screenshot: I am only stating the obvious. Your whole post in the screenshot effectively says China have nearly 36 times worse than UK for CO2 emission. But the fact of the matter is that they have MUCH bigger population, MUCH bigger land mass and MUCH bigger economic output. To say they are wrong to do what UK has done in early to mid 1900's is views of an oppressor. Plain and simple. To label above sentence as social justice is just unnecessary and putting words into my mouth. Citation needed. Is it just because you have calculated a small nation by population/land mass/economic output has a small-ish CO2 emission, it means the small nation will have zero impact? Did the development of internet by UK national have zero impact on the world? Just because UK is a small producer does not mean its innovation cannot change the world. You are saying Blair is talking facts, but the fact that was quoted does not have anything that can be pin-pointed, you don't know, I don't know. It is just "good" politician's way of speaking absolute tosh. So how can this politician's way of speaking be considered factual?

First, I don't expect to change your world view in this forum medium. So it's all a bit of fun exercise (and a pleasure as you eloquently puts it). As such, please don't take anything personally. This isn't the first time, you obviously have an axe to grind, please point out which bit I am asserting my opinion as fact? I simply expressed my opinion of the article you posted just like a few other posts after my post. Please find the post in question and revisit the social justice if you wish. This is not gaslighting, just you keep bring it up but I don't think that word was used. I honestly don't view climate action as social justice in literal sense. But some redistribution of wealth is inevitable to enable third world countries to skip over most polluting tech. As for CO2 issue, I refer you to the opening post for any counter point sources. Yes, it's a fact. But how much percentage of population truly believes that is questionable. A statement can be both factual and pointless at the same time if the percentage of people it covers is very low. This is his opinion and a questionable one. First, facts require more concrete information. Phasing out fossil fuel in the short term.... short as in today? of course that's not possible. Hint is in the article, article talks big about carbon capture, which has a long history of failures. Its failed history are factual: https://thebulletin.org/2022/09/plagued-by-failures-carbon-capture-is-no-climate-solution/ The idea of whether something is irrational in itself is an opinion. This cannot be more far from factual. Is basing a statement on opinion of people a fact? Sure it is factual. But whether net zero is losing public support is debatable. Actions of a mad-orange-man cannot be construed as public support. a. People, plural, are being asked to make lifestyle change that individually has minimal effect on global emissions. But billions of people's effect on global emissions are NOT minimum. b. How short is short term? Can this same carbon capture (as the article was pushing) be brought online in meaningful quantity in same time frame? c. I totally think the current climate "debate" is completely rational, only irrational part is posts like yours viewing it as a debate. Remain a sufficiently high percentage of public is still solidly behind net zero. We view the world differently, it doesn't require jabs at my comprehension skills if you think I'm not getting what you are trying to get using 3 line posts. An honest and nuanced discussion does not require this.

Apart from the Guido Fawkes website, here's another source, but its source goes back to Guido Fawkes. https://highways-news.com/westminster-mps-lose-ev-charging-points/ from this google search: https://www.google.com/search?q=evs+banned+at+westminster+underground+car+park But no other reporting, is there any other report with different source? Not banned, as some still claiming. Only a small number of EV charging points are due to be removed. One can still park their EV in the underground car park. Edit: May be the banned idea came from some numpty on social media misunderstanding wording of this published debate? Misunderstanding talking about EV charge points and side note about cars banned from underground car park: https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2022-02-09/debates/5C59F88C-0538-4AE8-8201-3C0DA49E487D/ParliamentaryEstateElectricVehicleChargingPoints ChatGPT interpenetration, which I concur:

The market is getting bigger with more people looking to get into EV's. They, as dealer with limited resources, can't keep up. But at the same time there's more and more supply of second hand EV's. So AT's "market health" metric is down. From buyer perspective, it's great. Not so great from private owner perspective.

I don't view most of them factual. As I said: "Ex political leader voices their opinion without any scientific facts/reasoning to back up their statement." You are saying it contains facts and I should "correct them". So I am asking you to provide the fact statement (individually and clearly) that you believe are credible. End of the day, having a nuanced arguement is key in climate change discussions. But you are choosing to deliberately being obscure and create 3-liner posts polluting a thread.

Totally! Unfortunately this art of differentiating between fact checked information and third hand social media stipulation seems to be lost on armchair expert in this thread. Of course "experts" come in different flavours and levels, it's always best to get multiple articles from different spectrum of sources before forming one's own opinion. Again, the armchair expert seems to think single social media source is sufficient "expert". Not only general intelligence is going down. AI slurp may also spread incorrect information and the most people don't even bother verify it! Amen.

The Mini electric have whopping 11% buffer. https://ev-database.org/uk/car/1409/Mini-Electric ID4 have 6% and MY LR have 4%. https://ev-database.org/uk/car/1314/Volkswagen-ID4-Pro-Performance https://ev-database.org/uk/car/1183/Tesla-Model-Y-Long-Range-Performance So I think Mini regen at 100% displayed is simply using the top buffer above usable range. German cars like to do this, Audi Etron (the fat SUV) famously have a HUGE top buffer.

Complains not enough rapid charging infrastructure. Complains charging hub is a waste of space. There's no pleasing people......

Which statement (or part of) are you saying is factual?

Could you share which bits you view as facts?

Frequency response via inverters are a big opportunity for EV's and stationary batteries. V2G frequency response in Germany: https://www.v2g-hub.com/projects/nissan-leaf-to-stabilise-the-german-electricity-grid/ V2G frequency response in Copenhagen Papers researching V2G frequency response: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9869748 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8905679 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378779622009981 https://www.nature.com/articles/s44333-024-00010-8 https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/entities/publication/08f0aaa3-f3c9-437e-9bc4-6c0fdb754199 Stationary battery providing "inertial response" example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornsdale_Power_Reserve#Operation "After an upgrade in 2022, the battery has 2,000 MegaWatt-seconds (MWs) of grid inertia, about 15% of the state's total grid requirement." A battery like that most probably could have saved Spain from blackout. Experts must know what they are talking about, in comparison to armchair keyboard warriors watching youtube videos.

"Ex political leader voices their opinion without any scientific facts/reasoning to back up their statement." Amen to free speech. But opinion of an individual should always amount to nothing meaningful.

https://www.politico.eu/article/spain-portugal-power-blackouts-energy-electricity/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/what-could-be-behind-iberian-power-outage-2025-04-29/ Blindly push to renewable is good, but it creates unstable grid due to unstable renewables. Pretty obvious. You know what instantly solves any momentary dips in renewable production? Batteries. You know what is infinitely flexible to help with grid peaks and troughs? EV's. (see my earlier post regarding Octopus testing out grid-balancing schemes yesterday and today)

Well, yes and no. It depends on what you want it to do. Same as grid-tied solar inverter, there is nothing wrong with grid-tied V2H where it only operates as home battery when the car is connected. Should the grid goes dark, so does everything grid-tied. My V2H install will not work if isolated from the grid, before I got home battery with Gateway. In that sense, the biggest stumbling block is the cost of DC V2H charge points. Where it needs to convert from car's 400v DC to 240v AC. The 2 Chademo products are at ~£3000 for the charger only, excluding install. Hopefully AC V2H like advertised by Renault 5 and Zappi charge point supplier will go towards solving that. Second stumbling block is CCS charging standard and lack of implementation by car manufacturers. But also, yes because when people get any battery system, people normally expect able to run everything off it when grid goes down. But to be safe (not output power to the grid), these grid-tied systems won't operate unless 50 Hz can be sensed and phase locked. Cheap way of doing a sort of V2H without the grid, whilst also being safe, is to: (as per this person's thread on SpeakEV: https://www.speakev.com/threads/thanks-bonnet-that-powers-the-house-for-a-week.170649/) install an earthing rod for grounding (the being safe bit) manually isolate from the grid via a switch (the being safe bit) use V2L vehicle and be careful not exceed its output limit I think this is what you had in mind when you talk about relying on a human to flick a switch?

Indeed, although V2H alone isn't enough, also need some sort of "Gateway" as Tesla and GivEnergy calls it. It isolates home from the grid allowing inverter to work by itself. Hopefully those with V2L capable EV's can keep their fridge and lights running. In sunny days like this week, I'd have zero problem living without grid. With energy to spare for local car use. But tonight, I charge everything, because Octopus:

Gotta remember it's a VW ID5 under there, I'd much prefer ID5 over that.

Realistically how long would you rest stop for a 12.5 hour drive? At a guess: Rest stop every 2.5 hours mean 5 rest stops, at 20min for 1st, 3rd and 5th, 40min for food at 2nd and 4th => 2.33 hours stopped anyway. Slower speed = higher efficiency = less need to charge. Let's also not forget we live in a small island with really over crowded roads. Driving 500 miles takes just as much time.

1 material being used in lots of stuff, but just became EV include a small portion of it => EV is a con. Well done, very perceptive, certainly not anti-EV (!)

Is it the old shape Y? https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/my/order/XP7Y282_0086e3eeb8fa2599fe938d9cf5eb540a?titleStatus=new&redirect=no#overview There had been 3 versions of red over the years. Regular red from 2022, cherry red from German factory and newest ultra red. I think the new shape comes in ultra red.

I test drove the Dolphin at EE London. It's a very good car, good material inside, drives well, got all the toys (except heated steering wheel, so that's a no go for wife's car). The only thing it absolutely sucks is the artificial pedal delay. There is about 0.5-1 second of delay before motor responds, it's unacceptably long. Sports mode reduces it slightly but still not driveable. I don't know if it's the same for more expensive cars in their line up. If it is, I would have a very dim view of BYD as a brand to do such a thing.

How about solve your problem with....... more batteries! ;) Stationary battery can be used as buffers to power dump into EV's. Many sites are already doing this right now. Stationary battery massively reduces cost of grid connection and allows faster roll out of rapid charging hubs without waiting for site upgrade. I seem to remember you are in favour of battery swap stations. It's the same principle. Both require more battery to be manufacturered than vehicle, both doesn't require huge grid connections and both would not be able to deliver the speed if turn over rate exceeds buffer charging capability. Finally, BMS in cars does not need to handle the power. Battery Management System does not go anywhere near the power cables. BMS only manages the battery. To allow this kind of power delivery, it is the battery cells that need to be able to accept high C rating. Then it's a simple matter of updating the charging curve parameters in the BMS.

I've already created a thread for climate change discussions: The truth about EV is that the tech is advancing and all the problems that anti-EV peeps used to swear by are disappearing one by one.

German ADAC (similar to AA/RAC) has published stats about EV vs ICE vehicle breakdowns, broken down by vehicle year. So the data is comparable and really old vehicles wouldn't skew results. ADAC Pannenstatistik 2025: Sind...ADAC Pannenstatistik 2025: Sind Elektroautos zuverlässiger?Die Bilanz der ADAC Pannenhilfe zeigt, welche Pkw am häufigsten liegen bleiben. Elektroautos erscheinen zunehmend solider als Verbrenner. Auto translation: Speaking of AA, I spoke to them at Everything Electric London a few days ago. They have developed a hub extender that allows the wheel to rotate freely. So any vehicle can be towed with its wheels on the ground whilst internal gearbox is still in P.