3 minutes ago, Ootohere said:

The Truth is that Jeremy Hunt MP is very upset at being called a liar as he thinks politicians should not say that about another politician.

 

Well real world they should not be such lying and cheating barstewards. 

Time will tell how much of a con anything is with the drive to Net Zero, but what is obvious is many are making money and as i said money lost is not the Financial Establishments money.

It is savers, investors and pension funds, local authorities investments of tax payers money.  

Well, I wouldn't go as far as saying net-zero a con, it might well be for all I know, but it could equally be just a bunch of misguided people making decisions for the rest of us to follow that maybe or not, based on science that later is proven to be fatally flawed later on further down the track come back to bite us all and them firmly on the arse.

Sorry Net Zero is not a con IMO.  I fully support that and low emission zones and very much more.

It is the way the drive to Net Zero is being done and the way money is going to those and such as those and not enough being achieved.

eg. Charge Place Scotland and Transport Scotland and the millions thrown the way of some is ridiculous. 

 

There should be employment,  job creation and training going along with getting the Publicly Owned Facilities built for then Renting to Companies for Charging Hubs along with the National Grids co-operation & support.

The Community facilities like Emergency Services should be in these areas along with the EV,s that many use & other facilities like the Transport Hubs.

But then there are 4 countries of the UK and the one that most needs to be getting on with things due to the most of a population is the one that can not get their act together.

But NIMBY,s are every place.   Then the climate change deniers. 

 

@PetrolDave  This is what i read.  Remember posting this?

I never saw your other post.

EDIT.

I mis-read your 'Intercontinental' and was thinking Transcontinental. My bad. 

Long haul buses.

Clearly not suitable to use as an aeroplane.

Leaving the UK and crossing to continental Europe. The Magic Bus trips..

Obviously the busses are not boats or planes. 

 

Edited 30 July, 20241 yr by Ootohere

PS

The rightly arduous testing and approval of aircraft has got to where Boeing are prepared to plead guilty to a fraud charge for mis-leading U.S. Regulators who approved the 737 Max Jetliner. 

The families of the dead including the pilots widow i heard last night do not want that to be accepted. 

The argument i heard from someone last night was that Boeing is too big to fail & NATO are reliant on them as well as the many thousands of workers. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Ootohere said:

Sorry Net Zero is not a con IMO.  I fully support that and low emission zones and very much more.

It is the way the drive to Net Zero is being done and the way money is going to those and such as those and not enough being achieved.

eg. Charge Place Scotland and Transport Scotland and the millions thrown the way of some is ridiculous. 

 

There should be employment,  job creation and training going along with getting the Publicly Owned Facilities built for then Renting to Companies for Charging Hubs along with the National Grids co-operation & support.

The Community facilities like Emergency Services should be in these areas along with the EV,s that many use & other facilities like the Transport Hubs.

But then there are 4 countries of the UK and the one that most needs to be getting on with things due to the most of a population is the one that can not get their act together.

But NIMBY,s are every place.   Then the climate change deniers. 

 

Sorry, but I don't think you are reading my posts correctly either, I said ""Well, I wouldn't go as far as saying net-zero a con, it might well be for all I know, but it could equally be just a bunch of misguided people making decisions for the rest of us to follow that maybe or not, based on science that later is proven to be fatally flawed later on further down the track come back to bite us all and them firmly on the arse."" To my mind, nowhere in that post did I say it was a con, read what I said again.

You said you would not go as far as saying it is a con.  And neither do I, so that is 2 of us.  But I say the UK tax payers are getting conned or defrauded might be more accurate.   Friends and Sponsors of Boris Johnson have fond very well from public grants.     Were are we currently with Small modular  Nuclear.     How well are the Banford Family doing with Green Hydrogen Production and did they really require public money invested? 

12 minutes ago, Ootohere said:

You said you would not go as far as saying it is a con.  And neither do I, so that is 2 of us.  But I say the UK tax payers are getting conned or defrauded might be more accurate.   Friends and Sponsors of Boris Johnson have fond very well from public grants.     Were are we currently with Small modular  Nuclear.     How well are the Banford Family doing with Green Hydrogen Production and did they really require public money invested? 

We are in total agreement on that front now, I'm totally convinced that there are loads of fat cats getting fatter with public money as a result, whereas as you correctly said before there should have been many jobs created and investments in growing our green industries.

1 hour ago, Ootohere said:

@PetrolDave  This is what i read.  Remember posting this?

 

 

You have an amzing talent for taking threads "off piste" (in this case taking a discussion about electric aircraft and posting about electric buses) and then when people respond to your "off piste" post (as I did in the quoted post) making it seem like the other person was the one who took it "off piste"?

 

In the last few days ALL my posts in this thread have been related to electric aircraft despite your attempty to confuse the discussion with electric buses and HGVs.

@PetrolDave

Sorry it was about electric transport, roads, then it went air, but when the busses not being suitable for long distances as i wrongly read i showed the Battery Swaps.

 

How the Horses for Courses and Busses got to only being useful in the UK and not for Intercontinental travel was where i misread. 

I never did think the Electric Buses were to take people from one continent to another.

Not even the Electric Planes really, but within the UK or between mainland and islands then eventually. 

 

PS

Discussion about planes from the Air Shows and emissions. From planes, then from the vehicles of those attending. 

Edited 30 July, 20241 yr by Ootohere

ULEZ outperforming expectations.
6 months. TfL has exceeded their own #pollution ambitions:-
📉 Nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from cars = 13% lower than projected (if the scheme hadn't expanded)
📉PM2.5 exhaust emissions from cars in outer London are an estimated 22% lower

https://www.london.gov.uk/media-centre/mayors-press-releases/new-data-shows-mayors-ulez-expansion-working-better-expected-bringing-cleaner-air-five-million-more

The above isn't surprising really as we all know people have been changing their vehicles or avoiding the areas - which is what the ULEZ was designed to for.  However, the question on many people's minds, especially those who have had to scrap or change a perfectly good older vehicle will be at what personal cost to them.  I note no mention of that impact in any of the statements or links provided...

5 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

ULEZ outperforming expectations.
6 months. TfL has exceeded their own #pollution ambitions:-
📉 Nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from cars = 13% lower than projected (if the scheme hadn't expanded)
📉PM2.5 exhaust emissions from cars in outer London are an estimated 22% lower

https://www.london.gov.uk/media-centre/mayors-press-releases/new-data-shows-mayors-ulez-expansion-working-better-expected-bringing-cleaner-air-five-million-more

Well now who never saw that coming, take that with a huge pinch of salt, the key takeaway fact about this whole report is the extensive use of the word estimated. It is probably not worth the paper it is printed on.

 

Every time the report makes a bold claim that the levels of pollution are lower in every aspect and is beating the performances of all other low emission zones across the country, that dreaded word  estimated appears.🤥

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, skomaz said:

The above isn't surprising really as we all know people have been changing their vehicles or avoiding the areas - which is what the ULEZ was designed to for.  However, the question on many people's minds, especially those who have had to scrap or change a perfectly good older vehicle will be at what personal cost to them.  I note no mention of that impact in any of the statements or links provided...

Indeed, it has achieved what it's designed to do.

 

On personal impact, it would be hard to estimate. I mean, I decided to sell off my 2013 Skoda diesel partially because of it. It only costed me £50k...... of course, cheaper options are available, I could have swapped car with my parents, driving their 2008 Volvo petrol and not incur ULEZ. (though at cost of more CO2 emissions)

 

5 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Well now who never saw that coming, take that with a huge pinch of salt, the key takeaway fact about this whole report is the extensive use of the word estimated. It is probably not worth the paper it is printed on.

 

Every time the report makes a bold claim that the levels of pollution are lower in every aspect and is beating the performances of all other low emission zones across the country, that dreaded word  estimated appears.🤥

If we don't estimate, is there an identical city with identical residents/visitors without ULEZ that we could take measurements from?

21 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

Indeed, it has achieved what it's designed to do.

 

On personal impact, it would be hard to estimate. I mean, I decided to sell off my 2013 Skoda diesel partially because of it. It only costed me £50k...... of course, cheaper options are available, I could have swapped car with my parents, driving their 2008 Volvo petrol and not incur ULEZ. (though at cost of more CO2 emissions)

 

If we don't estimate, is there an identical city with identical residents/visitors without ULEZ that we could take measurements from?

The report states it is estimated on every measurement regardless of where that is, even within London itself and that is not an actual scientifically proven statement of fact, which means it carries zero credibility.

 

So using some rough and ready maths based on 53,000 applications for financial support and 90,000 non compliant vehicles removed per day and @wyx087's £50,000 cost to change the ULEZ expansion has cost Londoners anything from £2.65trillion to £4.5trillion...

 

OUCH!

 

 

I read yesterday that Edinburgh City Council are £2,000 a day hiring LEZ compliant vehicles.

I have no idea how much they spent per day pre LEZ just hiring vehicles though.

They have spent £4.1 million replacing 172 vans to ensure compliance.  But then the article does not say how often they replace vans or how much that costs normally.

 

The article in Fleet News never mentioned the reduction in the cost of fuel or maintenance if there is any.

96.5% of the fleet were compliant for the LEZ. 

 

Many are Specialist LEZ vehicles that they require.     But then that will be the case with many workers and businesses that are not the Council. 

King Charles is going green...

 

King Charles' Bentleys will undergo a green makeover | Regit

 

As i posted last week, we are paying for the Royal Cars to be converted to run on Bio- Fuel.

Expensive conversion and fuel.

 

KC3 as Charles the Prince of Wales has had a Tesla loaned by Elon Musks brother for years and that was at Dunfries House.

Elons brother doing business with the now KC3 for Wine.

 

Then KC3 has already been using an Audi EV as has his son and Heir.   Keep the Heritage Connection, that could have been any EV from a German owned company so a Rolls Royce or Bentley BEV. 

Edited 1 August, 20241 yr by Ootohere

Long pockets, short arms and fat fingers.

  Never spend your own money when other people will just give you stuff!

Edited 1 August, 20241 yr by Ootohere

What are ZapMap playing at, giving out duff information, apparently, according to Dave.

 

 

Zapmap has been hopeless for accuracy, but so is Electroverse. 

 

INSTAVOLT and others are ripping off then. 85 pence.

GeniePoint 85 pence.

Osprey 79 pence at Starbucks, & 85 pence someplaces .

Fastned 85 pence   all as shown on Shell Reach App for Dundee. 

Evyve 75 pence.

Highland Council Chargers Scotland 70 pence.

BP Pulse 150 kW 83 Pence.  BP App.

MFG 79 pence.

SSE  Dundee 69 pence.

 

When talking average price Rapid and Ultra-rapid no idea why he mentions prices that he did there which are for 'Fast chargers' SLOW 7 / 11 kW AC.

 

Shell Recharge 7-22 kW AC 75 - 79 pence. 

(But these people get Shell Recharge Cars for Business use, even with a PHEV.)

 

Roaming. Up to as much as 93 pence.

 

 

Edited 2 August, 20241 yr by Ootohere

Having looked at where and what i might have to pay if i Public Charge where i am going from tomorrow the tariffs are accurate. 

When you mess about and an app does not work and you get no answer on the phone or they are no help and can not get the chargers started you might well just use Pay & Go and the expensive tariff if you have messed about for 20-30 mins already.  Vow not to use them and then when needs must you do. 

 

My first port of call is Electroverse RFID card. The charging location may not be accurate on the app, but Electroverse has so many partners the RFID works most of the time.

Even CPS is now on Electroverse. But there's report of RFID only working after 4th/5th try. May not work if charger has poor mobile reception.

Only big 2 not on Electroverse are BP Pulse and Podpoint for me, so I tend to not bother with those 2. I'm in debt on both accounts, apps no longer on my phone.

 

Shell Recharge RFID is another card that is accepted by a lot of networks. Worth signing up for free and having in back pocket. Came in useful in Portugal at the hotel chargers for my friend who didn't rent a Tesla.

 

The rapid charging hub at A1M Stevenage is coming along nicely:   (my photo from a plane, visible to the right of motorway)

 

 

TBH public charging is easy now and improving at staggering pace. Price may not be competitive though.

 

Need more destination charging points like these. This very long off-peak pricing is reasonable and allow overnight parking for full charge. Wording is precise and on point. "plugged in vehicles only"

https://www.speakev.com/threads/east-lothians-mature-and-reasonable-pricing-for-ac-chargepoints.186257/?post_id=3641741#post-3641741

I have Credit on PodPoint as my default chargers. The easiest to add credit to as needed and the chargers I really have had no issues with.  62 or 65 pence Rapid charging.  I still occasional plug into the AC sockets and can get maybe 10 miles added range in 15 minutes. Free.    @ Tesco PodPont it is 44 pence a kWh AC 7 or 11kW.    Angus Council 55 pence per kWh for any charge, AC or DC

Edited 2 August, 20241 yr by Ootohere

Charge speed is pathetic and paying 59 pence a kWh for this.  No price on chargers bit says 40 minute max stay.  It is actually 50 mins.  EDIT max speed reached 36kW.    45 minutes to get 21.10 kWh, £12.47.    that was to recharge for just 65 miles driven. 

Edited 3 August, 20241 yr by Ootohere