wyx087

I THINK the petrol powered PHEV reference includes food, or at least stopping to refuel petrol followed by parking it up and running in to buy something to eat whilst driving in the next leg. But in the real world, most people wouldn't do it in such hurry in order to achieve 111 km/h average speed including breaks. Oh yes, totally agree. For UK, as toot said, getting on rapid chargers seems to be main problem these days. Driving overnight seems to be the best strategy. Not only few traffic, and no queues for the limited rapid charging infrastructure, it also means much cheaper rates at some chargers like Tesla supercharger.

Haha, no one is expecting you to watch it all. to be honest, I don't watch half the videos posted here. I was amazed he did this 1000 km challenge in first-gen Leaf. The vehicle is very first generation affordable EV with a tiny battery for local use. The video in OP is the live stream, hence 10 hours. There will be more watchable edited version in a few days. From what I've seen, it's about 40min driving and 20min charging. Today's EV are about 3-4 hours driving, 20-40 min charging, depend on charger. It shows how far we've come. If you want to see a proper EV doing this challenge: There is just 5min difference winter vs summer. Over 1000km, only 50min more than fossil fuelled PHEV as reference:

Tesla Bjorn is currently doing a 1000 km (600 miles) drive in a first-gen Nissan Leaf. It is the original 10 years old Japanese built version but with seats from later minor refresh Sunderland built car. It's looking like going to take around 20 hours. 🤣 over 20 charging stops.

There seems to be an increase in amount anti-EV coverage, which is driving more this kind of videos https://transportandenergy.com/2023/07/12/exclusive-leading-industry-figures-hit-back-at-anti-ev-stories-in-national-media/ "Exclusive: Leading industry figures hit back at anti-EV stories in national media"

I see you had very well trained mechanics working on your car. I had heard similar at a big chain tyre place to the reason why they wouldn't work on regular brake disk/pads on EV's: "they have their special regen brakes"

Can we get a didn't watch summary? What is the bad news? Instead of giving view count, a quick summary on the click-bait title would be useful and informative.

Haha, NOTE number 3 seems likes to remind you that they did EV health check and you get free engine oil top up's, all in the same note. Interest free is worthy of considering with today's high base rate. Stick the money somewhere to build interest.

Haha, okay. Let's break this down. You are saying I need to provide source for my feelings, but you don't need to provide source for your claimed facts/truth!? The source for my feeling is the quote directly above it, and a very simple thing call multiplication: vast majority of scientists * "reward if you do toe the line " (your words) "in fact" - "Also, in point of fact. In reality, in truth; actually. " https://www.dictionary.com/browse/in--fact Where in the 2 source article have they said that they lost access to their bank accounts? First is "revoking all titles and honors". Second is "stripped of ‘humanist of the year’ title". None is related to bank accounts that support your claimed facts. I am not trying to strawman you, I'm just pointing out that your claimed facts are false, but I'm happy to be corrected when provided with sufficient source. This is true. I never thought people needing to pay £500 in instalments. I recently bought a £400 Steam Deck and that's within my disposable income. But cars are assets, in the process to get rid of non-compliant vehicle, one will gain some liquidity towards buying the replacement asset. I sold my non-compliant 2013 diesel by doing a bit of legwork and finding a dealer outside Greater London. Got a reasonable price for it. My point is, the money I got is entirely possible to buy a similar condition compliant petrol. "In fact I'd say it's easier to control them now, as there's more money to buy them off and public defenestration is a common occurrence for people failing to adhere with the current narrative. " "In fact, you can even lose access to banking services, if you fail to toe the line. That's quite an incentive to say what should be said, and not say what must not be said. " Still no sources for either of those very bold claims. The data sources are solid, but the 0.000016% number is meaningless without context or trends. Which is problematic when using that out-of-context number in order to make your point.

I chatted to James at Fully Charged Live and saw him at Tesla members event. Very nice bloke, the company (Cleevey) does nation-wide EV mobile servicing. I asked about early Model Y suspension upgrade to Tesla's latest rev parts, they said they've already done it for one client. I also asked about Leaf servicing, it depends on work done, but the quoted prices is very reasonable. Comparable to servicing at cheaper independent garage, a lot cheaper than Nissan dealer prices. Next year, I will probably ask them to do a 2-yr servicing on my MY and maximum servicing, inc coolant and brake fluid change, on my Leaf.

1. Car batteries are getting bigger, or more bigger battery cars are on the road. 2. 50 kW rapid chargers are no longer cutting it. What to do..... spend 0 money on improvements, just allow people to stay for longer. 3. ???? 4. problem solved?

Yes, the Made in China ones seems to be on-par with all other cars on the road. I'm feel the Made in Germany ones might be even better. I think it's only the American ones are problematic. (up to early 2021 for M3's)

How can the majority be bought? I get the feeling your view is that companies are spending more money on buying scientists than actually doing the work to bring us green tech. Is there any source to your claim that it is a fact "it's easier to control them (climate scientists) now"? Defenestration of sources seems to be used a lot by anti-EV individuals, for example: https://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/499506-the-truth-about-electric-cars/?do=findComment&comment=5762786 Please do share the source to that "fact". Where climate scientist "fail to toe the line" had lost access to their banking service. You can't make claims like the above 2 "facts" without sources. Similarly, you can't use numbers that seems to feel very small but without context to make you point. https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-search?advertising-location=at_cars&fuel-type=Petrol%2CPetrol Hybrid&include-delivery-option=on&make=&postcode=n11 3pw&price-to=3000&radius=100&sort=price-asc&year-from=2006 7000 choices for under £3000 petrol that is ULEZ compliant. Why does it have to be "a new car"? Cars are commodity, just sell the non-compliant diesel for a similar priced petrol. ULEZ is only strict on diesels. Petrols after 2005 are compliant, that's 18 years! So pretty much vast majority petrol car are compliant. Typical cars' lifetime is said to be 12-15 years old.

Every action has an reaction. The call to arms in all previous conflicts have had oppositions. In all those instances, if you were the opposition, you are very likely to feel this way: "they want to do this so they'll call it a crisis so they can force it through". You wanted an example to say a crisis that was solved satisfactorily, allies winning the war was one. ULEZ is entirely optional. I live and breath in this debate as upcoming expansion covers my neighbourhood. But public transport is adequate around here. ULEZ compliant cars are also not difficult to source. Yes, green levy is not optional but neither is everything else in the standing charge. Is it right to not have a say in this? I agree it's not right. In the standing charge, there's a lot of other things to get angry about, such as the money to prop up failed energy companies. I'm not claiming ALL claimed science is untainted by political expediency. I did not respond to COVID because 1. it is off topic and 2. I have nothing to say against points you've made. Although the COVID mask thing was not scientific consensus backed by majority, as you pointed out, it was presented by gov minister and quoted a single scientist's view. I am saying this scientific consensus about the climate change crisis is untainted by political expediency and business interest. What you seems to have ignored the tactics that big oil used around 40 years ago. Only recently climate change action has became dominant view in politics, why was the few big oil funded scientists not your concern? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchants_of_Doubt

World war isn't a valid example of crisis?!? There was oppositions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_World_War_II I am pretty sure for the oppositions, it sounds like "we want to do this so we'll call it a crisis so we can force it through". Problem is, participation is entirely optional. We've already seen so many people on many different social/mainstream media say that they plan to buy an ICE in 2029 and pollute with it for as long as possible. Same for gas boilers. Same for rejecting smart meters. If you think climate change crisis is due to politics, I don't think I can help you either. All throughout last 50 years, politics on climate change had been against any changes for climate change, mainly due to the money flowing from fossil fuel lobbies. Now that the science is finally heard and climate change actions are now mainstream, the old doubts planted by fossil fuel industry is still persisting.

Which post? Link? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus Scientific consensus is not politics. Climate change is scientific consensus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_climate_change#Consensus_points You need to read more carefully. Nowhere in stage 4 has mentioned the participation factor. I am saying when the critics cause poor participation rate could be be part of the reason why the result is closer to Z. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. World wars?

We have certainly got enough evidence to show the situation at hand is uniquely bad and are getting worse. The problem is that the qualified anointed outnumber the qualified critics many hundreds to 1. As an unqualified person such as myself, I know which side to listen. Whilst I agree it is highly unlikely we'll get Result A as promised. I don't believe it is a black and white world and get Result Z. It is more likely we'll get somewhere between D and Q, depending on amount of public support to the policies. Yet I don't see this important participation factor mentioned in this observation. All things considered, right now, the gains are marginal. But unlike the constant that is ICE emissions for the lifetime of the vehicle (15 years average), things are set to improve greatly as all things are electrified and the grid is decarbonized.

This is an EV called K10. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kandi_K10

In what way does climate crisis induced actions, such as charging to EV's, ULEZ, net-zero goals, renewable installs, etc, making countries poor? Is it not a wave of new opportunities?

Oh yes, I've observed this with Leaf. Charging to 100% seems to use more energy from charge point than stopping at 80%. I've not got enough data on the MY to say either way. There is also the design of the inverter. I've heard people say Renault Zoe are super inefficient at low charge rates because it has 3 large 32 amp inverters. Whereas Tesla (and probably other cars) that can only charge at 11 kW has 3 smaller 16 amp inverters. So its efficiency charging at 16 amp is better than Zoe. But either way, it's single digit, at most 12%, efficiency loss for charging. Compared to 24% hydrogen electrolysis and then 46% fuel cell. Until we have unlimited power, it's critical we make full use of every Wh generated.

This comes back to Mr Atkinson's view that we aren't keeping cars for long time. Cars are assets, after the first owner, there will always be second hand market. If 80% degraded battery no longer suits your needs, buy a newer one (made from recycled battery materials with solar on factory roof) or a second hand one that had a longer range. Your reduced range EV are still perfectly fine for other people. Battery replacement isn't needed. This is charging loss as reported by the car and pulled down into my own database (TeslaMate). I've measured what the charge point used using derived figures (difference between 2 CT clamps, rather than 1 CT clamp on the charge point cable), ever so slightly more than reported "used". I'd say it's definitely over 90% efficient. The figure you found is 88%. Whichever way we slice this charging inefficiency, it's hugely better than only using 33% of the energy originally produced. (when green hydrogen is used as storage and subsequent losses in fuel cell) https://cleantechnica.com/2021/02/01/chart-why-battery-electric-vehicles-beat-hydrogen-electric-vehicles-without-breaking-a-sweat/

Oh yes, I totally agree there need to be an energy mix..... for commercial, heavy vehicles and up. But for any other small passenger vehicle (private, taxi, <100 mi towing) , EV works perfectly. When payments are made to get people to use less, is that only during peak hours? Does that ever happen the whole 24 hours? Would mass adoption of Vehicle-2-grid be beneficial in those areas? Battery is the new frontier

Do people in those area have electricity at home?

The former is a continued waste of energy. The latter is a one-time mining followed by the battery being constantly in-use, then re-used, recycled into new battery. I don't have the data, but even if the latter is 10 times more harmful (both CO2 and ecological), it still makes sense to transition to the latter at a controlled pace in order to avoid waste. Not to mention the infrastructure argument for hydrogen doesn't work. Unlike EV that can charge at home. Who is going to buy hydrogen car that can only refuel 80 miles away and range is only 400 miles? Building new factories are only due to existing factories are still being used to produce ICE cars. Manufacturers need to stop the latter and commit. Check out this peer reviewed published scientific paper on total CO2 emissions: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122000867 (Audi g-tron 🤪 )

I was at Tesla owners club event at Bicester today. Test drove a 1.99s to 60mph Model S plaid with silly impractical unusable yoke steering wheel. The accompanying person didn't know the difference between autopilot HW3 and HW4. They can be everywhere. Though to be fair, Tesla HQ hasn't released any info. Everything I've learnt is from hackers taking apart the kit.

The problem right there! And people's unwillingness to learn new things. Are they tall stalls with short cable? CCS rapid chargers, 50-50 if they will support other BEV's. Or small wall-box with long cable? Type 2 destination chargers, there will always be a few bays supporting other plug-in vehicles.