They are putting out numbers and statistics that they seem to get in various ways, but basically without defining areas correctly.

At a desk with computers rather than actualities. 

As it is it can be Rapid chargers that matter DC and then the AC.   This makes a huge difference. 

As it is the total population of Scotland is nothing near the total population of London, but it is cars / vehicles per population then how many are EV,s.  A third of the population of Scotland are in Glasgow and that surrounding area. 

Seeing a number like 25% of all new car registrations were electric might be true in an area where Cars are Prepared and Registered for distribution country wide for Dealerships, :ease Companies ect.  Not for drivers in that registration area. 

Electric including PHEV and also Mild Hybrid which have no plug.

Edited 20 July, 20241 yr by Ootohere

Maybe the DfT are going to confirm that the ban on the sale of new Petrol & Diesel cars being first registered in the UK is going to be 2030 again.

Maybe the UK Government are going to announce that there will not be the same tariff on Chinese Imports to the UK that there is to be in the EU.

 

Maybe the Transport Secretary can do the Transport statements and the Chancellor the Treasury / Import / export ones, tariffs, quotas etc. 

 

Maybe the Prime Minister can make sure that leaks and briefing stop and that announcements are made when they decide on what is happening and then those with insider knowledge are not tipping off friends, family, speculators, journalists and anyone they think should know before the general public.

23 minutes ago, Ootohere said:

Maybe the DfT are going to confirm that the ban on the sale of new Petrol & Diesel cars being first registered in the UK is going to be 2030 again.

Maybe the UK Government are going to announce that there will not be the same tariff on Chinese Imports to the UK that there is to be in the EU.

 

Maybe the Transport Secretary can do the Transport statements and the Chancellor the Treasury / Import / export ones, tariffs, quotas etc. 

 

Maybe the Prime Minister can make sure that leaks and briefing stop and that announcements are made when they decide on what is happening and then those with insider knowledge are not tipping off friends, family, speculators, journalists and anyone they think should know before the general public.

 

It is hard to imagine any mainstream car not having some hybrid, either full or mild.  It is such a cost saving tech, despite what Davetakesiton say who clearly has not fathomed.

 

All you electric car owners, can you confirm if this article is factual or not?

 

https://www.petrolprices.com/news/electric-car-insurance-proves-54-more-expensive/

3 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

All you electric car owners, can you confirm if this article is factual or not?

 

https://www.petrolprices.com/news/electric-car-insurance-proves-54-more-expensive/

Seems factual, a survey result and some averages. What do you think might not be factual? 

 

But on the other hand, there's clearly lots of selective statistical representation at play: 

- The (unrelated to headline) survey had ignored existing EV owners by only asking about switching. A different question would get a different response. 

- EV insurance price compared to diesel is 30% higher. Article elected to ignore price difference to diesel for the headline. Diesel is 18% more expensive to insure than petrol according to the article. 

- It is always more expensive to insure a more expensive car. On average there is more cheaper petrol vehicles on the road due to EV's being more expensive to buy in 2010's. Similarly diesel being more expensive to insure is also probably due to typically cheapest small cars are not diesel. This is just how statistical average works. 

 

Always think critically, factual is not the main problem here. I can go out and get completely different survey results or different insurance results using different methods, both are still factual. Inspecting and think critically about methodology is a basic scientific skill. 

22 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

Seems factual, a survey result and some averages. What do you think might not be factual? 

 

But on the other hand, there's clearly lots of selective statistical representation at play: 

- The (unrelated to headline) survey had ignored existing EV owners by only asking about switching. A different question would get a different response. 

- EV insurance price compared to diesel is 30% higher. Article elected to ignore price difference to diesel for the headline. Diesel is 18% more expensive to insure than petrol according to the article. 

- It is always more expensive to insure a more expensive car. On average there is more cheaper petrol vehicles on the road due to EV's being more expensive to buy in 2010's. Similarly diesel being more expensive to insure is also probably due to typically cheapest small cars are not diesel. This is just how statistical average works. 

 

Always think critically, factual is not the main problem here. I can go out and get completely different survey results or different insurance results using different methods, both are still factual. Inspecting and think critically about methodology is a basic scientific skill. 

Beyond this, EV lease costs have shot up, which may be a knock-on of the increased insurance costs. (Possibly due to a very cautious approach when repairing crash-damaged EVs. Even a whiff of a damaged battery and it's replaced.)

A colleague at work leases a Hyundai Tucson and his lease is up in January. There's no way he can afford to replace it with another under the lease scheme, as the cost of the new lease is ... Bah! I can't remember the exact difference and don't want to pull a number out of thin air, but I recall it was three figures/month more than his current PHEV Tucson when he showed me.

49 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

Seems factual, a survey result and some averages. What do you think might not be factual? 

 

But on the other hand, there's clearly lots of selective statistical representation at play: 

- The (unrelated to headline) survey had ignored existing EV owners by only asking about switching. A different question would get a different response. 

- EV insurance price compared to diesel is 30% higher. Article elected to ignore price difference to diesel for the headline. Diesel is 18% more expensive to insure than petrol according to the article. 

- It is always more expensive to insure a more expensive car. On average there is more cheaper petrol vehicles on the road due to EV's being more expensive to buy in 2010's. Similarly diesel being more expensive to insure is also probably due to typically cheapest small cars are not diesel. This is just how statistical average works. 

 

Always think critically, factual is not the main problem here. I can go out and get completely different survey results or different insurance results using different methods, both are still factual. Inspecting and think critically about methodology is a basic scientific skill. 

Hmm, yes you say all of that but seem to have missed the obvious points of the article and also my question.

 

We all get the point that a more expensive car will always cost more to insure than a less expensive one, that is a given fact.

 

The point is, that they are claiming that an EV is around 54% more expensive to get insured than a petrol car, but is an EV 54% more expensive to buy in the first place than a petrol car? I suggest that the answer is therefore a resounding NO.

 

Diesel was more than likely ignored because have you checked out the power plant options on most NEW cars? Diesel it seems is exceedingly difficult as an option these days. 

 

The reason why they never asked existing EV owners is also clearly stated in the article, it was asking people if they would be considering making the switch from ICE to EV, so why did you decide to thrown that curved ball into the equation?

 

I think by now we all fully aware of your thoughts about EV and how we should be driving them, but the article was after discovering the public response at this current time about if they would be switching from ICE to EV and the result seems to be again a giant NO, they will be sticking to ICE for as long as possible. 

11 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Hmm, yes you say all of that but seem to have missed the obvious points of the article and also my question.

It's wyx087's usual attitude of "I've made up my mind; don't bother me with the facts!"

42 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Hmm, yes you say all of that but seem to have missed the obvious points of the article and also my question.

 

We all get the point that a more expensive car will always cost more to insure than a less expensive one, that is a given fact.

 

The point is, that they are claiming that an EV is around 54% more expensive to get insured than a petrol car, but is an EV 54% more expensive to buy in the first place than a petrol car? I suggest that the answer is therefore a resounding NO.

 

Diesel was more than likely ignored because have you checked out the power plant options on most NEW cars? Diesel it seems is exceedingly difficult as an option these days. 

 

The reason why they never asked existing EV owners is also clearly stated in the article, it was asking people if they would be considering making the switch from ICE to EV, so why did you decide to thrown that curved ball into the equation?

 

I think by now we all fully aware of your thoughts about EV and how we should be driving them, but the article was after discovering the public response at this current time about if they would be switching from ICE to EV and the result seems to be again a giant NO, they will be sticking to ICE for as long as possible. 

Clearly your opinion was made up and asking for "factual" check on it was a bait. Sorry I fallen for it.

 

Your counter points are mostly valid, similar to the article, factual but not the whole picture, None of those methodology flaws I stated are curved balls, just pointing out plain simple logical flaws with the article. If you don't like it because it is different to your views of reality, then I'm very sorry for your distorted reality.

 

After all that, I still have not seen your question that you allege I missed. Your original question was "can you confirm if this article is factual or not? " Answer is yes, in a selected stat designed to fit the headline narrative on a website based on selling petrol.

 

 

 

Although it is interesting regarding the PHEV, where does PHEV sit within the table? I would have thought it sits in Petrol but obviously a website named petrolprices may view it differently.

Edited 25 July, 20241 yr by wyx087

1 minute ago, wyx087 said:

Clearly your opinion was made up and asking for "factual" check on it was a bait. Sorry I fallen for it.

 

Your counter points are mostly valid, similar to the article, factual but not the whole picture, None of those methodology flaws I stated are curved balls, just pointing out plain simple logical flaws with the article. If you don't like it because it is different to your views of reality, then I'm very sorry for your distorted reality.

 

 

Although it is interesting regarding the PHEV, where does PHEV sit within the table? I would have thought it sits in Petrol but obviously a website named petrolprices may view it differently.

Existing owners excluded, diesels excluded, clearly because the former already has made the switch...FACT Diesels excluded, again clearly because it is so much harder to be able to purchase a NEW diesel car in the same style as a new EV or even PHEV.. FACT.

 

Also evidence shows that the vast majority of PHEV cars sold on the second-hand market still have their original charging cables still sealed in their plastic packaging, indicating that most have never been plugged in and are company cars, chosen because they can benefit from tax concessions by virtue of them being PHEV, they have the ability to be driven for a short distance on electric only.

 

The insurance aspect I can't vouch for without doing a lot of requests for insurance quotes, which may be biased because of my age, hence why I was asking about the article being factual or not, but again you seem keen to put your point across and looking for flaws in it when the writer was looking for a specific type of owner/driver because they were trying to gauge the likely take-up of EVs with the deadline coming up of not only the existing 2035 date, but also the threat of it being brought forward to its original date of 2030.

 

If you are only looking to do research for a narrow target with a simple yes / no from ICE drivers, why on earth would the researchers bother asking current EV owners/drivers the question when they are not the ones being targeted in the survey. 

 

Keep up at the back. 

'Even a whiff of a damaged battery and it is being replaced.'

 

Rightly so. 

 How many replacement batteries are there being done.  Or actually how many just written off as beyond economic repair.

 

But then how many vehicles that are not EV,s or Electrified are being written off and nothing to do with batteries.

 

Head of the SMMT this morning was speaking on the reduction on cars manufactured in the UK and he said a crossover point from models being discontinued and new ones being introduced.

Very true.

 

As to the increase in costs of producing & he said lots of investment in producing batteries and the cost of this investment in building more.

?

Are more EV batteries actually being manufactured in the UK?

 

Re PHEV Evidence,

 

You have nail on the head.  Government let business take the P!$$.

Is it the vast majority of PHEV,s with unopened packages with Charger Cables from the handed back Lease cars from Business / Fleet use that has the vast majority because mostly they leased these vehicles for the tax advantage?

 

Are Private Buyer / Leasing private drivers getting PHEV,s and not charging them.   Less private drivers than business use ones, so even if 100% use the cables the higher number comes from the Business users?

Edited 25 July, 20241 yr by Ootohere

3 hours ago, Ootohere said:

Re PHEV Evidence,

 

Is it the vast majority of PHEV,s with unopened packages with Charger Cables from the handed back Lease cars from Business / Fleet use that has the vast majority because mostly they leased these vehicles for the tax advantage?

 

Are Private Buyer / Leasing private drivers getting PHEV,s and not charging them.   Less private drivers than business use ones, so even if 100% use the cables the higher number comes from the Business users?

Correct, mostly it is those business / fleet cars that make up majority of sales for as you rightly said for tax concession reasons.

Edited 25 July, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

Re asking non EV drivers about being an EV driver.

 

EV drivers will have heard many many ridiculous things from people that ask them about having an EV and tell you nonsense.

 

Common is the price of replacing a battery.

Common is how much it costs to charge and when you agree that public charging is expensive and really you need to be able to charge at home, then they say but they can and do not go far.

Do people know that many with a BEV will never look at the Type 2 AC cable as they have tethered at home or work or never use a public 7 or 11 kW AC.  Same with PHEV,s.  Have a tethered cable and no public charging at 3.6 kW.   There are more bigger battery PHEV,s now at tethered AC though charging at 11kW.  Or are some even 22kW now?   Range Rovers. /Land Rover. 

Edited 25 July, 20241 yr by Ootohere

34 minutes ago, Ootohere said:

Re asking non EV drivers about being an EV driver.

 

EV drivers will have heard many many ridiculous things from people that ask them about having an EV and tell you nonsense.

 

Common is the price of replacing a battery.

Common is how much it costs to charge and when you agree that public charging is expensive and really you need to be able to charge at home, then they say but they can and do not go far.

True, but I still suspect that they have been classified as petrol cars as opposed to a BEV which has to be charged or it goes nowhere, a PHEV does not ever need to be plugged in if the owner/driver decides not to, they can just manage on pure petrol power alone.

We all suspect.

But that does not mean so.   Also best to know how it is out there and not just go by articles that seem to miss obvious stuff. 

 

As to OWNER, 

well an Owner or even a driver is a term. 

Renter / driver is often the case of given a car or told what they are getting by whoever runs a company.

 

It was a con, is a con and will continue as a con.   Thankfully with Public Charging Costs there are not too many 13kWh PHEV,s sitting plugged in for hours that i see..

 

When i was free charging at Tesco so where plenty PHEV,s.  Private Owners charging cars and walking home then coming back sometime for the car.

Cable locked into car.

Not always to the charge post though.

Edited 25 July, 20241 yr by Ootohere

Stellantis CEO demanded a re-examination of vehicle manufacturing in the UK. That is about Zero Emissions and mandates.

 

Not unexpected really is it. 

But then all Car Manufacturers and manufacturers of anything, home market, imports / exports, are going to be tapping the UK Government for Grants, Support & hand outs.

 

 & UK Car workers with jobs at risks will be wanting pay rises and will be holding ballots on industrial action.

Just like Steel Workers, Power Worker, Transport workers land sea and air. 

 

The New New Labour years are here, back to the future, 

One day, sometime into the future, the real truth will escape into the world about whether the whole net-zero thing was the truth or an elaborate con that has been years in the planning, just like the dreaded event of the 31st Jan 2020.

 

 

Edited 25 July, 20241 yr by wyx087

13 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

 

 

That is part of the problem for most people, for every video like this there is an equally convincing video putting the opposite views and tacking the financial backers of them can reveal some dubious links to huge global companies with vested interests in all manner of things. There is a school of thought that claims that JSO is actually funded indirectly by big oil, after all, it is claimed that there is no such thing as bad publicity. 

 

The lines between truth and hype, just like those of politics, for the benefit of people and the globe and those of self-service and greed have become so blurred that it can be near to impossible to decide who is telling the actual truth. 

 

This is the reason why I said "One day, sometime into the future, the real truth will escape into the world about whether the whole net-zero thing was the truth or an elaborate con that has been years in the planning"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchants_of_Doubt

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty,_and_doubt#Examples

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politicization_of_science

 

Truth of the matter is that opposite views to climate change and net zero are exactly "financial backers of them can reveal some dubious links to huge global companies with vested interests". This has been proven time and time again as evidenced above. 

 

"Sometime into the future" will be too late. 

It's like we know the house is burning, but we sit around and debate useless things like "is it burning", "may be we can stop the burning using some asbestos, that asbestos seller backed thinktank says so", "we shouldn't use water to put out the fire, it's an elaborate con set up by the neighbour to get water for their plants"

 

As I said before, not here to change people's minds. I'm just pointing out the bleeding obvious, in this case previous history and facts. 

I needing 110 miles range later on, no Rapids in town only a 22 kW and several 7kw,s. 

The 50 kW rapid still out of order since i reported it on the 24th of June.

So my battery was at 50% so that i could at least get the £5 worth of electric i have to pay. 

Went to charger, Red Lights so the AC is down as well as the DC.

Called CPS / Swarco & it worked last night so just reset.  It took me 10 minutes of doing the sequence and it reset. So instead of charging later i am plugged in and charging now.

8.57 - 11.05 am the car says.  started at 50% and 51 miles, now at 95% 103 miles. 10.46 am.  Fair enough, going to get the car.  200 yards away.

31 pence a kWh. If i was on the DC it would have been 38 pence.

If i want on the 7 22 AC post i would not have got 11 kW, maybe not even 7 kW, often it is set at 3,6 kW max.

 

This is how it can be anywhere any time in Scotland if you want to Public Charge and be full before setting off with a Small Battery EV or a bigger  battery.

I am going 99 miles to Edinburgh City Chargers and not wanting to stop on the way, and then charge to 90% @ 58 pence a kWh.  EDIT   Charge took 2 hours 8 minutes.   CPS south Ayrshire council. £5.33.   car says 18 kWh 50% to 100%. Range 114 miles now.  Just under 18kW because 31 pence a kWh    ok for 50 and a bit miles of  go go electric.  But then the next 58 pence is so so.  Going to MFG or BP or even PodPoint is too much. 

Edited 26 July, 20241 yr by Ootohere

 The red pickup is on the AC which counts as a Rapid and 90 minutes max then £30 fine.  The notice says applies to all connector types.  So 2 1/2 hours charging and has got only 25 kWh.  There are 7 kW, 11 and 22kW AC with long allowed charging times it could have been on.  And a lower tariff.  I am on a 50 kW DC and started with 10% / 12 miles and it is charging at a not very good speed.   No other rapid charger to use as the are out of order.   So I will get enough for 90 miles range and bog off.   This is how things are quite a lot.    Enyaq, 2 1/2 hours, 55 kWh, MG 70 mins 35 kWh.   Crap. 

Edited 27 July, 20241 yr by Ootohere

Me. 27 minutes and not even 10 kWh yet.     Truth. Is paying 58 pence a kWh for a crap power supply.