Graham Butcher

I wonder if the use of a gearbox would be a way of extending the range as the electric motor would be spinning slower?

Exactly my point, I can produce papers to show something, you can and have done before, produce papers that take the opposite view and this is why it is so difficult currently to actually tell fact from fiction and hence why I also say, do I not, that only time will be able to show us which was fact and which was not?

Indeed, and on some of the classic cars that have been converted to electric, they have also retained the original gearboxes, presumedly to maximise the range / pulling power from smaller batteries? As shown in this conversion.

If you chose to bury your head in the sand, that is up to you, all I'm attempting to do is for those that are interested, is show that I believe that this policy of banning the sale of new ICE cars before the known issues with electric options are fully resolved is a dangerous pathway to take. Yes, I understand that these problems will, in the fullness of time, be solved, again this is something that I have indicated before, but we are not there yet.

@lol-lol you shouldn't have ever been able to smell gases from your batteries, under normal use. If you had watched some of the videos I have posted before you'd have known that much at least. It is only when they are in thermal runaway that they produce gas and the gas builds up under pressure within the battery casing. This pressure then manages to break the seals around the sides of that case and escapes. The friction created adds extra heat into the gas which then self ignites (petrol and diesel do not self ignite, they require external ignition sources), and produces the blow torch jets of fire emitted low down around doorsill level and can be a metre or 2 long, hence why charging bays are marked out very wide, extra fire gap. In the case of EV batteries, the BMS systems are located in the battery casing beneath the car so again, you don't know if they are getting hot or not. Like you and all of us, I have many Li-ion batteries myself in various power tools etc and never had any issues. The lead acid battery is not a major problem, yes the gas when charging is explosive (hydrogen) but these days the batteries are sealed and because most are of the SS type gel replaces the acid, are not a problem, when did you last have to top the levels in your battery with distilled water? The problem with EV batteries is that they contain 100s of times greater energy than even the largest 24v batteries fitted to trucks. Not only that, but they can deliver that energy over a sustained period of time, lead acid cannot. By the time you smell gases given off by a EV battery, it is already too late, the battery is in runaway mode and can burst into fire in a split second. The higher the voltage of a battery, the greater risk there is. Like, there is a higher risk of a leak with a high pressure hydraulic pipe then an unpressurised pipe. You need to understand that voltage is the pressure that forces the electrons to move, hence a flat battery has next to or zero volts, so unable to power anything. Tesla went to 48V in order to reduce the size of the cable thickness and hence use less copper, thus lower the weight as well. I also suspect that the change to 48V was also because there is so much cable required in an EV that physical space was also a major problem as there are so many other things to accommodate like battery cooling systems, pipes etc. EVs are not less complicated than ICE, just a different type of complexity.

What a flippant reply, it is not my fire department, or yours, or anybodies, it is fire departments anywhere around the world and fire research establishments that have not found a way to bring battery fires under control like a ICE fire. Do you seriously for a single moment believe all fire departments in the entire world are anti EV? 🙄

I never said that they were insurmountable, but currently there is NOT a viable solution if the battery does go into thermal runaway, all they do now is allow it to burn itself out, then tackle the remaining fire. Meanwhile, releasing the following gases, some of which are fatal if inhaled or come into contact with skin. The source for evidence is here Review of gas emissions from lithium-ion battery thermal runaway failure — Considering toxic and flammable compounds - ScienceDirect Oh and also for the record this report also states that LFP is even more toxic in the event of a thermal runaway then NMC batteries, this is an extract from the Conclusion in the linked to documentation "While NMC batteries release more gas than LFP, LFP batteries are significantly more toxic than NMC ones in absolute terms." Table 2. Common LIB off-gas components, hazards and exposure limits. Substance Hazarda Exposure Limit, 8 h (mg/m3 )b Exposure Limit, 15 min (mg/m3 )b Carbon dioxide, Cause headaches, dizziness, confusion, loss of consciousness, and asphyxiation at high concentrations [52]. 9150 27 400 Carbon monoxide, CO Toxic if inhaled, may damage the unborn child, causes damage to organs through prolonged or repeated exposure and is an extremely flammable gas. 23 117 Hydrogen, H Extremely flammable. See noted Hydrocarbons Flammable. See noted Hydrogen fluoride, HF Fatal if swallowed, is fatal in contact with skin, is fatal if inhaled and causes severe skin burns and eye damage. 1.5 2.5 Hydrogen chloride, HCl Severe skin burns and eye damage, is toxic if inhaled, may damage fertility or the unborn child, causes serious eye damage, may cause damage to organs through prolonged or repeated exposure, may be corrosive to metals, may cause respiratory irritation and contains gas under pressure and may explode if heated. 2 8 Hydrogen cyanide, HCN Fatal if swallowed, is fatal in contact with skin, is fatal if inhaled, causes damage to organs through prolonged or repeated exposure, is very toxic to aquatic life (with long lasting effects) and is an extremely flammable liquid and vapour. 1 5 Nitrogen dioxide, NO Fatal if inhaled, causes severe skin burns and eye damage; and may cause or intensify fire (oxidiser). 0.96 1.91 Sulphur dioxide, SO Severe skin burns and eye damage and is toxic if inhaled. 1.3 2.7 Solvents Highly flammable liquid and vapour [53]. Very irritating to eyes, skin and airways [44]. DEC 700, PC 8.5c DEC 1000, PC 8.5c a Cited from the European Chemicals Agency [53], unless otherwise stated. b Cited from the HSE [47], unless otherwise stated. c Cited from the IFA [54] for the solvents DEC (Romania) and PC (Germany), other common electrolyte solvents (e.g. EC and DMC) are not listed. d Hydrocarbons, such as CH, are described as acting as simple asphyxiants without other significant physiologic effects when they are present in high concentrations, hence are not given limit values as the significant factor is the availability of oxygen [55]. This is assumed for H as well.

The ones that have got the fire authorities highly concerned, and that is not just restricted to fires, but the problems in tackling any fire with the available equipment and the hazards presented both in any fire and toxic hazards that they produce afterwards.

Deleted by me as I had crossed two things over, sorry

@skomaz Not ever having been to Greece, I can't on this, but while you were there, did you observe what the average house was like? For instance would many people be able to actually home charge as that could be one factor I expect that could explain why you saw so few EVs.

Yes, the private buyer can take advantage of the pre-registered cars with only delivery mileage on and save a packet, but that is only part of the storey, there is still the high cost of public charging and possibility of unreliable chargers and the ongoing depreciation to be factored in, so even those pre-registered cars might still in the long run be more expensive in real terms to the owner?

Oh come on now, surely that is precisely the message that they are already and have been sending to the politicians by pi55 poor adoption of BEV,s over the last few years and still today, ICE cars are selling the most, followed by hybrids and PHEVs. Are the politicians so thick that they cannot see the evidence for themselves? Now, my Kodiaq (nicking @lol-lol s phrase) wiesel 2L car which is averaging around 40mpg, then at ^.45 a gallon for that wiesel fuel, then 2000 miles would cost £322.50, saving a massive £148.50. What's more, I don't think that 0-60mph figure of around 9.3seconds is perfectly adequate, it keeps up with all the other traffic and sometimes have to lift my foot off the gas when following some BEVs who are clearly attempting to drive economically to max their range. Also, as you get older, it is a fact that your reaction times also slow down, so being exceptionally fast off the line can be dangerous then.

@classic That is pretty impressive, but at the same time, was also predictable as well. As long as you can charge at home, and complete all your journeys on the single home charge and your overnight charge provides sufficient power for the next day. A more compelling test would be one where you cannot do home charging, and you then have to rely solely on the public charging infrastructure, which, sadly, is the true situation for millions of car owners across the UK. I suspect, judging from reports that I have seen, the cost of doing so is higher, and is not going to endear itself to more potential EV owners. There may be lots of people out there who would love to sport their green badge of honour and say that they are doing their bit towards Net Zero and climate change, but simply cannot afford to do so. That financial burden is highly likely to increase substantially in the forth coming budget. If they can get the costs down to parity with an ICE or preferably significantly lower, then we might see a large uptake of EVs.

@lol-lol yes, you are correct, I remember that bombing and the opening scene was indeed shot there.

Or of course, do your own research instead of perpetuating the arguments, even if solid sources are given each time, some people will always endeavour to disprove things, when in reality, it's like I say, time will tell.

Amen to that.

It will get better, it has to if the electric car is to survive. At school, they tend to teach you more about things that are more local to you, you never learned about East Anglia did you? The same as we never learned about things local to you.

And there was me thinking that the learning process never stopped, just hope that your teachers managed to cram all the available history, geology etc. along with all the maths etc into the limited time we have at school and to gain access to and read the encyclopedias from cover to cover, when did you ever manage to fit day-to-day living in I wonder? Incidentally, how are the dogs doing, I don't recall seeing any posts of them lately?

Wow, I never knew we had any extinct volcanoes here in the UK, yet another example of how we can learn from each other😉

Thanks, that's why I said in the first post about it being the government's car park, to make it clear to those reading it that it was not a public one. Hence my comment earlier about double standards.

And likewise, it was available to anybody else at the time, so if I couldn't find it (thought I did) anybody else could have done and discovered I was right? Sometimes you and others post things and make some passing reference/comment to something, what do I do, I try and find it myself so I can actually understand what people are talking about, I try and usually succeed to do my own research instead of having it handed to me on a plate 😒

It is the underground car park, this is also made clear by the fact that the article also makes reference to chargers in speakers court area of the estate. This plan view shows the areas and a quick look on Google Earth Pro will also show the New Palace yard to be open-plan area behind large security fences which is the public entrance. The same view will also show the barriers to the underground car park as I indeed previously mentioned. I have spent many hours on crown estates in my working life, including Buck House and HOP and the surrounding offices of MOD etc, I would not make things up.

Source was posted at the time, and @Stonekeeper and I have once again posted some sources, of which are all on Google, a few simple clicks and you have it.

Oh doubter, I think you will find that I actually posted the link to the UK government removing charging from their HOP underground car park, anyway a quick search on Google revealed these snippets of golden nuggets. You know, I'm beginning to think that the MacMaster has it right about some of the EV owners! Not Zero! Parliament scraps its own EV chargers due to 'health and safety' | This is Money Electric vehicle (EV) charging points in the New Palace Yard car park at the Houses of Parliament have been removed for health and safety reasons, following a review by safety and fire teams. The decision was made because of concerns about potential fire risks and the inability for EVs to be charged overnight. Four charging points in Speaker's Court are still available but require a special charging card. Reason for removal: Safety and fire teams reviewed the charging points and determined they posed a health and safety risk. A key concern was that EVs could not be left to charge overnight, reports Safer Highways. Where they were removed: The chargers were removed from the underground car park in New Palace Yard. What remains: A limited number of charging points remain in Speaker's Court, but these are only accessible to those who have a charging card obtained from the Speaker's Office. Future plans: The House of Commons has stated its intention to increase charging capacity in the long term, but future provision will depend on the latest EV and fire safety guidance and the availability of infrastructure. There is somewhere a Hansard document also to this effect. So it would seem that the government were at the time concerned about the possibility of them catching fire, oh, no, hang on, but I think you'll find according to the stats that diesels are far more likely to catch fire 🤣

Well that is really welcome news for many I'm sure, however, as it is also law that nobody has the exclusive rights to park outside their own house, it being very often a free for all, first to the spot gets it, that news about the gully is little comfort unless they also make illegal for anyone other the owner, to park where a gully is installed. Does anyone remember the sitcom of the 1980s called Bread, where the Boswell family used to put out traffic cones to keep their space outside the house clear so Joey could park his Mk2 Jag there, that could become a reality in some areas and fights in the street. For example, I live in short close (no through road) I live 2nd from the dead end, my neighbour on the right, has 2 cars, my neighbours on my left, thats 5 houses in a row, have 3 cars to each house, so thats a total of 15 cars to fit in, so there is little chance of being able to park adjacent to your own gully in order to charge your car, unless you make sure the first one to get home. Seeing as the UK government also had the charging points removed from their own covered car park in Westminster, that news you linked once again smacks of hypocrisy, its not good enough for them, but it is for everyone else. A clear example of dual standards.