8 hours ago, lol-lol said:

 

Sunshine and wind is in everyone's hands and not only if one has a bit of garden or roof as in many countries people are handing foldable solar panels off balconies.  

I bought a 200W foldable 4 solar panel (sub £90) travel array it can be put pretty much anywhere, hung from a fence etc.

Germany, Spain residence without either gardens or roofs are getting on to the solar train to slashing their annual bill.  Add a battery of a few kWhs and happy days and nights.

 

I can see certain peaks in energy consumption being expensive, possibly upto or over £1 a KWh being charged by suppliers, I think I read Octopus Agile customs can sometimes be hit with costs of that level but it is a freak occurrence and increasingly outweighed by free of negative cost sessions.   

Flat daily rates will increasingly be bad economic choices, they are already for EV households with home charging.  

 

 

It would take a long long to charge a car from a 200w panel, so thats not an option, and putting a wind generator on one of those balconies or the roof and getting the cables the flats is going to be a an expensive problem in its own right and of course the building owners permission has to be gained, and then there is the additional problem of getting the cables from the said flats to the respective cars, problems, problems, not an ideal situation at all, try solving that problem with something like London's Landmark Pinnacle block of flats, 25 floors Amenities Overview | Landmark Pinnacle. Some do have underground parking spaces, many do not though, and it is more than likely that electric cars could be banned from using them if recent events are an indication and of course, they are already banned from entering any of the UK government's own car parks in and around Westminster. Seems that they only care about their own well-being, not ours despite the claims that the electric way is the only way to go and we should and will have to eventually go that way.

18 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

It would take a long long to charge a car from a 200w panel, so thats not an option, and putting a wind generator on one of those balconies or the roof and getting the cables the flats is going to be a an expensive problem in its own right and of course the building owners permission has to be gained, and then there is the additional problem of getting the cables from the said flats to the respective cars, problems, problems, not an ideal situation at all, try solving that problem with something like London's Landmark Pinnacle block of flats, 25 floors Amenities Overview | Landmark Pinnacle. Some do have underground parking spaces, many do not though, and it is more than likely that electric cars could be banned from using them if recent events are an indication and of course, they are already banned from entering any of the UK government's own car parks in and around Westminster. Seems that they only care about their own well-being, not ours despite the claims that the electric way is the only way to go and we should and will have to eventually go that way.

 

I have been experimenting with both rigid conventional solar panels and now these foldable take anywhere portable panels. 

I will get another two of these 200W, four pane foldable panels, they only weight about 7 kgs so as easily moveable, then I will wire them in series.

 

The solar generator I feed the portable panel output in to can take up to 60v so three panels with a open voltage of 18v I think it is will go in series nicely giving me 600w max.

I could then put another three in series and mount them in parallel to the other three panels so giving a maximum of 1200w. One could keep doing this up to the limit of the solar generator's limit.  I would eventually like to put a sun tracking array where the washing post is to maximimise solar capture.

 

Those of us with this interest are watching the prices as they fall for solar panels, solar generator batteries, especially for discount events like Black Friday and Cyber Monday to get the bargains.  I rarely use main electricity during the day now knowing I can use the cheap night time electricity to top up the solar batteries if the day's solar electricity generation has been poor.   Electricity companies have to charge a daily rate which assumes the worse ie that people are going to come home at teatime and and use electricity which the electricity companies have to pay a premium from the electricity generators.

 

Those who can defer and advance download electricity, or/and alter there life style will naturally, under optimising economic conditions, save themselves a packet plus have resilience if the light go out.

 

2 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

Those who can defer and advance download electricity, or/and alter there life style will naturally, under optimising economic conditions, save themselves a packet plus have resilience if the light go out.

 

As long as they have a working smart meter.

1 hour ago, wyx087 said:

People who can afford to own cars.

People who cannot afford to own cars.

 

https://www.cinch.co.uk/guides/car-finance/cost-of-owning-a-car

 

There are many. Funny how this forum only focuses on car owning portion.

Again, taking my words completely out of context in order to make it appear as you're always right and have the last word.

Funnily enough, we were discussing the points around people who already own a car, and that ICE drivers do not have the means of making their own fuel or getting it at a fraction of the cost and fuelling their car while not having to leave their house. That is something can clearly be done if you have the means of getting your EV car on your land attached to your dwelling. But then you clearly already was well aware of these factors but chose to ignore them for the sake of defending your privileged position and lord it above others less fortunate and true to form also make it appear that you alone are the source of knowledge.

 

Why don't you now decide to change the narrative again and look at those who can afford to buy their residence and those who have to settle for social housing or house/room sharing or living with their parents in order to give you the last word and appear as the only person who has the answers?

Edited 18 September, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

15 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Again, taking my words completely out of context in order to make it appear as you're always right and have the last word.

Funnily enough, we were discussing the points around people who already own a car, and that ICE drivers do not have the means of making their own fuel or getting it at a fraction of the cost and fuelling their car while not having to leave their house. That is something can clearly be done if you have the means of getting your EV car on your land attached to your dwelling. But then you clearly already was well aware of these factors but chose to ignore them for the sake of defending your privileged position and lord it above others less fortunate and true to form also make it appear that you alone are the source of knowledge.

 

Why don't you now decide to change the narrative again and look at those who can afford to buy their residence and those who have to settle for social housing or house/room sharing or living with their parents in order to give you the last word and appear as the only person who has the answers?

 

Owning a car usually means settling for a car of more than 5 years old for most people.

 

Most use HP or PCP to get in to the car they want to use.  This means being in a car less than 3 years old that does not need an MOT and one that does not pollute as many 5 and 10 year old car which us important to some drivers.

 

As long as the economy is OK, there are jobs out there with good rates of pay and interest rates are lowish then new cars get taken out of the showrooms and the total amount of pollution are vehicles are emitting goes down. Maybe not so much fit moves from diesel to petrol as this can mean a bit more co2 rather than less but probably much less NOX.

 

Housing stock in the UK is on average old compared to some countries and is going to be slow to change so we have to look at retail parks and the like to provide cheapish EC charging under government plans but the have way less than no money ie a £3T national debt.

 

37 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Again, taking my words completely out of context in order to make it appear as you're always right and have the last word.

Funnily enough, we were discussing the points around people who already own a car, and that ICE drivers do not have the means of making their own fuel or getting it at a fraction of the cost and fuelling their car while not having to leave their house. That is something can clearly be done if you have the means of getting your EV car on your land attached to your dwelling. But then you clearly already was well aware of these factors but chose to ignore them for the sake of defending your privileged position and lord it above others less fortunate and true to form also make it appear that you alone are the source of knowledge.

 

Why don't you now decide to change the narrative again and look at those who can afford to buy their residence and those who have to settle for social housing or house/room sharing or living with their parents in order to give you the last word and appear as the only person who has the answers?

Again, I'm simply pointing out the bleeding obvious: ICE car is not the answer to everything. Many people cannot afford cars, out of car owning population, a subset don't have driveways.

 

It is obvious there's many social divides, driveway is a very small subset of many bigger social divides. It is indeed a problem for overnight total 100% EV adoption right now but it doesn't mean it would still be a problem in 10 years time.

 

If you have a problem with the way I point out obvious things, then find ways to word in such way so that your statements are clear and cannot be misunderstood.

 

1 hour ago, lol-lol said:

 

Owning a car usually means settling for a car of more than 5 years old for most people.

 

Most use HP or PCP to get in to the car they want to use.  This means being in a car less than 3 years old that does not need an MOT and one that does not pollute as many 5 and 10 year old car which us important to some drivers.

 

As long as the economy is OK, there are jobs out there with good rates of pay and interest rates are lowish then new cars get taken out of the showrooms and the total amount of pollution are vehicles are emitting goes down. Maybe not so much fit moves from diesel to petrol as this can mean a bit more co2 rather than less but probably much less NOX.

 

Housing stock in the UK is on average old compared to some countries and is going to be slow to change so we have to look at retail parks and the like to provide cheapish EC charging under government plans but the have way less than no money ie a £3T national debt.

 

Sorry, but this is coming from a privileged point of view which is totally not a reflection of the true state of the country at all. 

 

This shows that there are far more cars on the road that older than the 5 years claimed above, therefore for most people, car ownership only becomes a reality with the cars being  older than that figure of 5 years claimed.

 

This site claims 41.4 million cars on the UK roads, with 13 million of those being 6 years old or younger (figures from SMMT), leaves 69% of cars being older than 6 years and that means then taking the figure you gave of 5 years, make the 69% pushing well into the high 7os percent mark or higher of all cars being older than 5 years. Another clear example of "haves" v "Have nots"

 

The average UK vehicle is nine years old (revive-uk.com)

Edited 18 September, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

2 hours ago, lol-lol said:

 

I have been experimenting with both rigid conventional solar panels and now these foldable take anywhere portable panels. 

I will get another two of these 200W, four pane foldable panels, they only weight about 7 kgs so as easily moveable, then I will wire them in series.

 

The solar generator I feed the portable panel output in to can take up to 60v so three panels with a open voltage of 18v I think it is will go in series nicely giving me 600w max.

I could then put another three in series and mount them in parallel to the other three panels so giving a maximum of 1200w. One could keep doing this up to the limit of the solar generator's limit.  I would eventually like to put a sun tracking array where the washing post is to maximimise solar capture.

 

Those of us with this interest are watching the prices as they fall for solar panels, solar generator batteries, especially for discount events like Black Friday and Cyber Monday to get the bargains.  I rarely use main electricity during the day now knowing I can use the cheap night time electricity to top up the solar batteries if the day's solar electricity generation has been poor.   Electricity companies have to charge a daily rate which assumes the worse ie that people are going to come home at teatime and and use electricity which the electricity companies have to pay a premium from the electricity generators.

 

Those who can defer and advance download electricity, or/and alter there life style will naturally, under optimising economic conditions, save themselves a packet plus have resilience if the light go out.

 

I'm not denying that if you have the ability, the funds, the inclination and the space, the time etc to install these and enough of them, you could charge your car slowly, but that is not a practical solution for the vast majority of the population now is it, come on be sensible.

Edited 18 September, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

There was stuff during the night on the radio about the percentage of EV,s registered now in Norway and just how much tax relief was given to get to this.   Just how much the Government were wanting it and the charging infrastructure in place.  How much the fossil fuel vehicles are taxed.     There is just a half arsed drive to zero emission private cars or the much of Europe / EU / UK.    25% of BEV,s into Norway are from China.    As to the Hybrids they are all good and well but as is pretty much the case only as long as people do keep charging PHEV,s.      PS, fleets, company card, hire and agency owned, nhs, etc and how many older ones of those are more to do with 6 years or older getting replaced by BEV,s, and the light commercials.   Private owners are then split through many classes, income groups.  Statistics are just that.     At what numbers are cars scrapped every year? 

Edited 18 September, 20241 yr by Ootohere

@Ootoherethats interesting, can you remember the name of the radio station and also the programs name at all? I'd like to listen to that.

Headlined all papers.  Norway more EV,s than petrol.     Guardian etc.  world service radio  programme.  Business news about 4am this morning.      Ps. September 25th for the EU vote on the tariffs for cars from China I read. 

Edited 18 September, 20241 yr by Ootohere

Interesting, I found an article that not only confirms what I already knew that Norway is the leading country in the big EV push but more interesting is that they are having second thoughts about it. What this has achieved and the lack of achievement at the same time. In 9 years, 2014 to 2023 the levels of CO2 emissions from road transport dropped by 8.3%, so not a huge drop. Also because of the incentives given, it favours the already well off and widened the gulf between the haves and have nots as the EV cars are out of the price range of affordability for the lower income families, etc.

 

The well off went out and purchased EV cars in addition to their gas guzzling cars which they kept and in just a decade they discovered that the car ownership per capita had increased by 10% or more as the well off took advantage of the incentives to buy a second or more cars.  Cities planners don't want people to be able to drive as it prevents them building high density housing with local facilities, removing the need for many journeys, instead opting to use mass transit systems. The country now has approximately 25% of all its cars being electric.

 

Also what is interesting is that nearly everything I see and hear anywhere, states about the whole concept is to try and reach net-zero on CO2 emissions, not the levels of NOX etc, it is predominantly this country and the cities linked to the C40 cities organisation of which the London Mayor is the chairman, are fixated on air quality (which I have long suspected was more about raising revenue then anything else).

 

The thing with cramming as many people into a high density environment as possible is that not only will people's lives be worse because of it, it makes it far easier for any enemy or terrorists to do massive damage to lots of people and infrastructure and should another epidemic like CV19 for instance happen, enable it to move through the population like a dose of salts. Could even lead to the use of chemical warfare by potential enemies with devastating results.

 

Why Norway is rethinking its reliance on electric cars | Vox

Edited 18 September, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

9 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Interesting, I found an article that not only confirms what I already knew that Norway is the leading country in the big EV push but more interesting is that they are having second thoughts about it. What this has achieved and the lack of achievement at the same time. In 9 years, 2014 to 2023 the levels of CO2 emissions from road transport dropped by 8.3%, so not a huge drop. Also because of the incentives given, it favours the already well off and widened the gulf between the haves and have nots as the EV cars are out of the price range of affordability for the lower income families, etc.

 

Why Norway is rethinking its reliance on electric cars | Vox

 

Privately owned transportation is never the correct answer to mobility. I've been saying this for a while.

 

EV are the answer to reducing road travel related emissions within current privately owned transportation usage model that already encourages inequality. The article is very clear, their mistake is not promoting more eco friendly solutions that is available to everyone, such as e-bike or mass transit.

 

From that article:

"At the same time, Norway offers a warning about the dangers of promoting EVs at the expense of modes that are more beneficial to the environment as well as urban life. "

"“The mistake is to think that EVs solve all your problems when it comes to transport,” said Ruohonen, the Oslo mayoral adviser. “They don’t.”"

2 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

Sorry, but this is coming from a privileged point of view which is totally not a reflection of the true state of the country at all.    This shows that there are far more cars on the road that older than the 5 years claimed above, therefore for most people, car ownership only becomes a reality with the cars being  older than that figure of 5 years claimed.

This site claims 41.4 million cars on the UK roads, with 13 million of those being 6 years old or younger (figures from SMMT), leaves 69% of cars being older than 6 years and that means then taking the figure you gave of 5 years, make the 69% pushing well into the high 7os percent mark or higher of all cars being older than 5 years. Another clear example of "haves" v "Have nots"    The average UK vehicle is nine years old (revive-uk.com)

 

Many newish cars on the road are not a choice of jonny done well splurging their wealth but on having a car allowance and an expectation that the car allowance is spent on a suitable car and my company, largest mover of finished cars in the world and top three shipping line, expects one has a car that that has 4 doors and is kept tidy.  There are occasions where one will be expected to collect and take high ranking international business persons and one's own international Directors in the car from airports, where I oft work, to our local offices.  One's own Directors would take a dim view if you turn up in a car over 5 years old. A previous employer of mine, specialist customs software company, would not let me have a Skoda company car as they thought it brought the company image down.  Oddly they would let me have a SEAT but also had Audis and Volvos.

 

15 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

 

Many newish cars on the road are not a choice of jonny done well splurging their wealth but on having a car allowance and an expectation that the car allowance is spent on a suitable car

 

 

I think you'll find that in the vast majority of cases car allowances have been or are being removed...   there are still some areas where they are provided but generally they have been, or are being, rolled up into overall salaries.

 

As to the comment about 'brand' etc. - that appears to be a rather elitist and snobbish attitude of it still exists.  I know of many people who actually consider a supplier, or similar, turning up in a 'flash' or 'premium' marque to be a big 'neagitive' in terms of employing them, as it potentially indicates paying over the odds for their services.

22 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

 

Privately owned transportation is never the correct answer to mobility. I've been saying this for a while.

 

 

 

 

And yet, and yet...   you own two private vehicles...   in a city that has just about the best Public Transport available in the UK or even Europe...

 

Apologies - I just couldn't resist passing comment 😉

45 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

 

Many newish cars on the road are not a choice of jonny done well splurging their wealth but on having a car allowance and an expectation that the car allowance is spent on a suitable car and my company, largest mover of finished cars in the world and top three shipping line, expects one has a car that that has 4 doors and is kept tidy.  There are occasions where one will be expected to collect and take high ranking international business persons and one's own international Directors in the car from airports, where I oft work, to our local offices.  One's own Directors would take a dim view if you turn up in a car over 5 years old. A previous employer of mine, specialist customs software company, would not let me have a Skoda company car as they thought it brought the company image down.  Oddly they would let me have a SEAT but also had Audis and Volvos.

 

I can accept that view point, especially as all the companies I have worked for where I had a company car, they were replaced every 3 years, and in fact the last company did not like me selecting a Skoda because of the portrayed image of the company. That said however that whenever we need to move people about to attend dinners and other outside events following national sales meetings etc it was odd that the directors and senior management seemed to elect me as their driver in my Skoda Superb rather going in the far smaller Ford Mondeo's, BMW 2 series cars and the other popular cars Audi A4's, so I'm guess it was down to the increased internal space and the extended wheelbase providing a smoother ride. One thing is for sure, that they did appreciate the lower leasing costs of my Skodas, even though they had all the extra creature comforts that were not in the other cars because that would have pushed their cars beyond the budget boundaries, my cars were cheaper because they held their values better than the main stream ones as they were more common so their 2nd hand value was lower. 

As to taking a dim view if you had to take directors in your own personal car, then they if they don't like what you have, then they should provide you with a suitable company car

Edited 18 September, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

17 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

I can accept that view point, especially as all the companies I have for where I had a company car, they were replaced every 3 years, and in fact the last company did not like me selecting a Skoda because of the portrayed image of the company. That said however that whenever we need to move people about to attend dinners and other outside events following national sales meetings etc it was odd that the directors and senior management seemed to elect me as their driver in my Skoda Superb rather going in the far smaller Ford Mondeo's, BMW 2 series cars and the other popular cars Audi A4's, so I'm guess it was down to the increased internal space and the extended wheelbase providing a smoother ride. One thing is for sure, that they did appreciate the lower leasing costs of my Skodas, even though they had all the extra creature comforts that were not in the other cars because that would have pushed their cars beyond the budget boundaries, my cars were cheaper because they held their values better than the main stream ones as they were more common so their 2nd hand value was lower. 

As to taking a dim view if you had to take directors in your own personal car, then they if they don't like what you have, then they should provide you with a suitable company car

 

Did you ever pull the umbrella out of the door ?   One of my favourite things in the whole world is blowing people's preconceptions away. 

1 hour ago, wyx087 said:

 

Privately owned transportation is never the correct answer to mobility. I've been saying this for a while.

 

EV are the answer to reducing road travel related emissions within current privately owned transportation usage model that already encourages inequality. The article is very clear, their mistake is not promoting more eco friendly solutions that is available to everyone, such as e-bike or mass transit.

 

From that article:

"At the same time, Norway offers a warning about the dangers of promoting EVs at the expense of modes that are more beneficial to the environment as well as urban life. "

"“The mistake is to think that EVs solve all your problems when it comes to transport,” said Ruohonen, the Oslo mayoral adviser. “They don’t.”"

You can achieve similar results by encouraging motor makers to continue developing more efficient and cleaner engines like they have been doing and by reducing the maximum engine size that cars can have, which will by sheer definition drive down the levels of CO2 and all the NOX levels at the same time as well as making public transport fit for purpose and cost-effective by using joined up thinking rather than thinking how can we shift this onto the private sector all time when profits become the governing thing.

Logic dictates if the services run where and when people need them, are cheap to access, comfortable, clean, frequent services covering the largest possible areas of any city/town thus reducing the amount of walking and waiting around in all kinds of weather, then more people would elect to use it. There would be far less wear and tear on the road surfaces so they would last longer and more frequent rural routes would also have the same effect of taking cars off the road so they only tended to be used for when the whole family need to go somewhere, or at hours when buses don't operate or on longer trips. Its a no-brainer, and that is exactly how it was when the buses were nationalised, these days the school run brings traffic to a crawl, that never used to happen, schools were more common and smaller than they are now, and they tended to have a very local catchment area, just a few streets away from the school, and you would be into the catchment area of another school, so most children walked to and from school, and those who came in from rural areas would have a school bus provided for them.

Edited 18 September, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

3 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

 

Did you ever pull the umbrella out of the door ?   One of my favourite things in the whole world is blowing people's preconceptions away. 

Only a couple of times as the only other car at the time (might still be the same) that had that was the Rolls Royce and the reason why the Superb has that today, is because back in the day (1930s etc) they were used by Royalty and the Czechoslovak government ministers as official cars and the umbrella a nod back to those times, I read that in one of their early superb brochures.

 

Škoda Superb (1934–1949) - Wikipedia

59 minutes ago, skomaz said:

 

I think you'll find that in the vast majority of cases car allowances have been or are being removed...   there are still some areas where they are provided but generally they have been, or are being, rolled up into overall salaries.

 

As to the comment about 'brand' etc. - that appears to be a rather elitist and snobbish attitude of it still exists.  I know of many people who actually consider a supplier, or similar, turning up in a 'flash' or 'premium' marque to be a big 'neagitive' in terms of employing them, as it potentially indicates paying over the odds for their services.

Indeed, many companies are shifting the responsibility of sourcing a car in order to do your job, onto the employee and paying them an allowance to try and cover the lease payments, servicing and tyres, taxing and insurance becomes the employee's liability. The cars have to be approved by the company especially in a customer facing role so that a good image is projected of the company and the car always has to spotlessly clean inside and out and you have to ensure that you always have a suitable car at your disposal in the event of the car being serviced, repaired or having bodywork done as a result of an accident and all of these costs have to come out of your allowance. Fuel was covered by a fee per mile basis, which of course favoured staff with a rural part of the country to cover and penalised those, like myself who had the task of covering cities, mine was London.

 

This was a large factor in my decision to take retirement as the company I was working for at the time were just introducing this system, I was over retirement age anyway and I did not want to take on a millstone around my neck potentially giving me a black hole in my budget (I'd done my number crunching), coupled with the fact that my face didn't fit with the new sales director who was gunning to oust me, I threw the towel in and quit, effectively retiring and purchased my old company car which had 3 months lease left on it, from the leasing company and got a decent deal.

1 hour ago, skomaz said:

 

And yet, and yet...   you own two private vehicles...   in a city that has just about the best Public Transport available in the UK or even Europe...

 

Apologies - I just couldn't resist passing comment 😉

I own because I like and I can. Does not mean I don't walk the talk. My whole family had been using public transport whenever it is more suitable (eg. into the city). We use micromobility for most local things.

 

Despite owning 2 cars, total annual mileage they do is less than 12k, including long drives such as the one earlier in the summer and many weekend day trips.

 

Remember, car ownership does not mean using it to clog up the roads. It's parked on private land (a small driveway) when not being used.

 

56 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

You can achieve similar results by encourage motor makers to continue developing more efficient and cleaner engines like they have been doing and by reducing the maximum engine size that cars can have, which will be sheer definition drive down the levels of CO2 and all the NOX levels at the same time

So 25% of total fleet are BEV achieved 8% reduction in Norway's total road transport emission, remembering last few years around 80% their new car sales are BEV and their electricity mostly comes from clean hydro.

 

But you are saying a gradual reduction in ICE emissions is going to make a dent on the same emissions?

Even if 100% new cars sold for last 2 years has 50% reduction CO2 emission (impossible and worse than Norway's 80% BEV). It will not make a dent in overall road transport emissions. Just like 80% BEV sales didn't make a dent in Norway.

 

1 hour ago, Graham Butcher said:

Logic dictates if the services run where and when people need them, are cheap to access, comfortable, clean, frequent services covering the largest possible areas of any city/town thus reducing the amount of walking and waiting around in all kinds of weather, then more people would elect to use it.

This ^ I am 100% in favour.

 

It is the exact concept behind 15 minute cities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15-minute_city

3 hours ago, wyx087 said:

So 25% of total fleet are BEV achieved 8% reduction in Norway's total road transport emission, remembering last few years around 80% their new car sales are BEV and their electricity mostly comes from clean hydro.

 

But you are saying a gradual reduction in ICE emissions is going to make a dent on the same emissions?

Even if 100% new cars sold for last 2 years has 50% reduction CO2 emission (impossible and worse than Norway's 80% BEV). It will not make a dent in overall road transport emissions. Just like 80% BEV sales didn't make a dent in Norway.

 

Think about it in more sensible manner instead forcing people into EVs, if restricting the engine sizes of cars to reflect the real world around them, that would make more sense, e,g, where in this country could you do 162mph legally on any road other than a racetrack, or indeed my car can do 137mph, but the legal limit is just 70mph, so why do I or anybody need that capability? My car emits just 107g/km 137mph but a V8 Range Rover is over 255g/km, 162mph and there are many similar cars on the road here in the UK chucking out way more pollution than my car does. Add in the mpg figures and yet even more savings to be had, that example Range Rover at best on a long run could with a bit of delicate foot work on the throttle return a figure of 24mpg, whereas mine has been doing 64mpg, so for every litre of fuel, my car can do almost 3 times as many miles while producing nearly 2.5 times less pollution, fact. and these points are totally ignored, if the worlds existence was totally dependant on such reductions, then ask your self in all honesty, why has nobody introduced these simple to make rule changes? 

 

Given the huge numbers of these status symbol cars we have in the UK all emitting similar figures, if they were to adopt engines like mine I really think that we could achieve far greater reductions. Norway if they had a 100% fleet of BEV, then their emissions reduction be 4 times the 8% with just 25% BEV fleet, so making a total of 32% (based on their own figures) There is no reason to doubt that we could achieve similar or better results without the additional loading globally with extra production and transportation of the electric vehicles which is currently adding to the total pollution levels worldwide alongside that for the existing production of ICE vehicles. Now that makes more sense to my mind and we could be still be working on solutions for and if the world runs out of fossil fuels, and if electric does turn out to be the best solution, we should also by then have learnt how to remove all the negative side effects of the batteries.

 

Nobody needs to be an Einstein to see the bleeding obvious is stareing us in the face all the time. The wealthiest among us are the worst about caring for the planet, but are the ones most likely to rant on about it and expect those below them to give up everything and downsize their cars or use mass transit systems. Don't believe me, look at Royalty, top politicians and they way that they use helicopters, private jets even when going from London to Scotland etc Look at the these super yachts etc etc. They could take a leaf out of the business world and use zoom or similar for a lot of meetings.

Edited 18 September, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

1 hour ago, wyx087 said:

This ^ I am 100% in favour.

 

It is the exact concept behind 15 minute cities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15-minute_city

If you want to live in a cramped 15 minute city and never needing to leave it, then fine be my guest and just be like all the other people toeing the line because they are told to. I doubt that you will find many if any of the top wealthy or important people willing to submit to such a life, they will no doubt be enjoying large palatial estates away from prying eyes living it up. 

Re more efficient engines / vehicles.    VW group have an issue.  Their usual.   They were more interested in test results than driving behaviour or longevity.     They need to get a grip of the problem too many are having with 1.5 TSI ACT,s even very new ones.   It is not driver error if they cut out or misbehave.     Then there is the failing MCU,s with DQ381 DSG,s.        Sorting their sh!t out is Simply Clever.