1 hour ago, Ootohere said:

@lol-lolPS,

it really is not all about and your business miles and paid much more than the electricity costs you if we take the AVERAGE of your Offpeak & Public charging. 

 

Ah...   but you have to remember that, on the face of it based on his posts, as far as he's concerned it IS all about him, his mileage rates and money...   it seems to be all he ever posts about...   (well...   that and salary sacrifice and how much he puts into his pension each month)

 

All you need is things to go right with charging and the right BEV.

 

Has Bjorn Nyland done 1,000 km challenge in an ICE car to compare on his Statistic Table against the best time BEV ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 10 December, 20241 yr by Ootohere

34 minutes ago, Ootohere said:

 

All you need is things to go right with charging and the right BEV.

 

Has Bjorn Nyland done 1,000 km challenge in an ICE car to compare on his Statistic Table against an the best time BEV ?

 

Think he has with ICE and hydrogen cars which were some minutes faster.

 

Bjorn tends to boot it, driving at the legal maximum and beyond.  He is less focused on journey times than he could be say compared to someone like Batterylife guy who is down in Sothern Germany but despite having the world's fastest roads he has done good studies about optimum driving speed.  For the Zoe with its 45 kw charging rate, despite 52 kw battery, he reckoned that about 90 kph was optimum driving speed on long journeys.  I except my Scenic is not much more over 60 mph optimum both for time and cost ie avoiding as much public charging as possible.

 

The tortoise and the hare can still ring true, is it turtle 🐢.  

"You turn a turtle over on its back in the hot desert, your not helping it, why is that ? This are just questions, they are written down.

(Bladerunner)

 

2 hours ago, Stonekeeper said:

 

Thanks for that, I believe my enyaq can charge at 100kw possibly more the flap has a C K L in it which i think refers to AC + DC charge.

 

I think the C is AC type 2 and the K is DC ? and the L is DC more? but not sure of the actual limits.

These new labels indicate which charging plug fits in your EV

It's one of those useless labels pointing out the already obviously visible plug socket. 

 

L indicates up to 900v, Enyaq isn't a 800v car, so not sure why that's there....... 

 

The 60 kWh battery Enyaq is said to do 120 kW, 20-80% in 30min: 

ŠKODA Enyaq iV (2021) Charging Guide | Pod Point

 

 

1 hour ago, skomaz said:

 

Ah...   but you have to remember that, on the face of it based on his posts, as far as he's concerned it IS all about him, his mileage rates and money...   it seems to be all he ever posts about...   (well...   that and salary sacrifice and how much he puts into his pension each month)

He is not alone though, the same can be said for most members who have electric cars, the one person who sticks out a mile as someone who is both fair and balanced and can see both sides of the discussion is @Ootohere and long may that balanced view reign. 

1 hour ago, lol-lol said:

 

For the Zoe with its 45 kw charging rate, despite 52 kw battery, he reckoned that about 90 kph was optimum driving speed on long journeys.

 

 

At 56mph on the motorway you'd be a hazard and dangerous to other road users - and create a lot of congestion as wagons try to overtake you.

36 minutes ago, skomaz said:

 

At 56mph on the motorway you'd be a hazard and dangerous to other road users - and create a lot of congestion as wagons try to overtake you.

 

It an average figure, I like to flow along and that means letting the car freewheel down the hills doing well over 60, even 70 but then sometimes backing off to closer to 50 but never impeding trucks.

 

That would not be good form and potential hazardous to me and others. Working in logistics important to get the goods to the customer. Don't think I would even do it to a DSV truck. 

 

Best economy is got with some speed flexibility I reckon though last time I let my DQ200 free wheel in eco mode it ended up at over 80 mph and picked up a speed awareness course. Watch out for Gloucester A417 off the Air Balloon, even royalty get nicked on that road.

 

Edited 10 December, 20241 yr by lol-lol

As is occuring around the world major hydro projects are being progressed so they can store the generated power from solar and wind for use by homes, industries and EV in the future to help make the UK economically a cheap energy place as low carbon.  Over three times larger than the UK's most impressive engineering feat so far, Dinorwig, Coire Glas will be super impressive and I hope it going to do tours as Dinorwig use to do of the main turbines hall. 

 

 

Edited 11 December, 20241 yr by lol-lol

20 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

As is occuring around the world major hydro projects are being progressed so they can store the generated power from solar and wind for use by homes, industries and EV

For the benefit of all it's important to be clear that NOT ALL hydro projects are pump storage ones such as Dinorwig, Pass of Brander, Coire Glas etc. In fact they are the minority, most hydro projects are purely generators not pump storage.

21 minutes ago, PetrolDave said:

For the benefit of all it's important to be clear that NOT ALL hydro projects are pump storage ones such as Dinorwig, Pass of Brander, Coire Glas etc. In fact they are the minority, most hydro projects are purely generators not pump storage.

 

Indeed and we get some hydro from Norway which i think is pure hydro in the main but the pump storage is very attractive if you get the right conditions. The Snow river 2 scheme is more than 10 time more energy storage than Coirs Glas, that is truly massive.

Some losses in pumping back up and then re releasing but I think I heard it was about 80% efficient cycle and better to do this than just turn off the wind turbines when they are generating. With battery storage and hydro energy storage we can hopefully smooth out both the daily peaks and trough but weekly and low wind dips too.

 

There would be more pumped storage in Scotland if there were not those blocking the developments.  Often Councillors.

Same with battery storage.

As it is there is so much possible electricity generation going to waste.  Not being used because the National Grid does not take it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_Scotland

 

 

 

 

Just yesterday these vids came online.

Where the communities do not want pylons do not compensate them if they go up, just triple their tariffs. IMHO. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just Hydro.

 

 

 

 

Edited 10 December, 20241 yr by Ootohere

4 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

He is not alone though, the same can be said for most members who have electric cars, the one person who sticks out a mile as someone who is both fair and balanced and can see both sides of the discussion is @Ootohere and long may that balanced view reign. 

This is a thread talking about truth of EV is it not?

 

Do you not consider owners sharing experience the ground truth for EV ownership?

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

 

 

As I keep saying, the electrical grid is getting cleaner..... and so will every EV in the country.

 

 

https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/uk-renewable-power-set-to-overtake-fossil-fuels-for-first-time/

 

Quote

UK low-carbon renewable power set to overtake fossil fuels for first time

2024 is set to be the first full year where UK low-carbon renewables generate more electricity than fossil fuels, with wind power close to becoming the single largest source of UK power for the first time.

 

 

 

And that is just the same as new fossil fuel cars, they are getting cleaner all the time, each generation of cars are cleaner than the preceding ones.

9 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

And that is just the same as new fossil fuel cars, they are getting cleaner all the time, each generation of cars are cleaner than the preceding ones.

Existing older ICE cars can never get to the same level as brand new cars.

A 10 years old Euro 5 diesel will never see the same level of emission as brand new latest ICE.

 

Whereas a 10 years old EV has its per-mile emission reduced to a fraction compared to the day it rolled off production line, because the grid has cleaned up.

 

And the grid will continue to clean up as time passes. Every single EV ever produced, regardless of how old, will see the same level of improvement. Doesn't need to buy/manufacture newer cars.

33 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

Existing older ICE cars can never get to the same level as brand new cars.

A 10 years old Euro 5 diesel will never see the same level of emission as brand new latest ICE.

Precisely what I said is it not?

2 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

Precisely what I said is it not?

 

Also as more evidence has emerged in has shown that those systems designed on the drawing board do not actually work. The Catalytic Convertor has been shown to not do what it is suppose to as on a cold winters day, with the rain splashing up from the road tge Cat I'd not up to temperature so whilst that ICE maybe able to be relatively clean is actually spewing out pollution at several times the allowed limits ie 80 mg/km for diesel and 60 for petrol. This was becoming a big issue pre Covid but went quite during Covid but now should be looked at again in companies insist on 5 days a week attendance in work IMO.

 

I am not anti full hybrid. We have the Clio hybrid in the family and when my lad and I went to see Swansea FC at Swansea we took tge hybrid.  Heads of the Valleys road.  Distance a bit much for my EVs on roads I could not see had good charging stops. The hybrid did lots of driving on battery, recharging down those big Welsh hills, the waste heat from the engine gave us all the heat we wanted and more. Yes it was relatively expensive on fuel but we are both insured to drive it and it was a pleasant drive.

 

I am not anti ICE engined cars but I would like all new ones to have a big dose of hybrid like the new Superb with its 20 kwh battery and I like the 1.5 TSI engine.

 

As much as Dave annoys me, here he is.

 

 

11 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

And that is just the same as new fossil fuel cars, they are getting cleaner all the time, each generation of cars are cleaner than the preceding ones.

And let's not forget that even if/when we get to a 100% 'clean' National Grid and 100% EVs there will still be the PM2.5 particles from the EV tyres -l et's not kid ourselves that EVs will remove ALL pollution from where they drive to where electricity is generated.

9 minutes ago, PetrolDave said:

And let's not forget that even if/when we get to a 100% 'clean' National Grid and 100% EVs there will still be the PM2.5 particles from the EV tyres -l et's not kid ourselves that EVs will remove ALL pollution from where they drive to where electricity is generated.

I guess you could take the PM2.5 particles even further and say that anywhere where some sort of friction is occurring that there will be particles being emitted, walking, cycling, flying, trains etc, even our clothes, volcanic eruptions, fires, explosions, wars etc, all generate emissions.

 

Makes me at least view things in a different light, these emissions have always been there, so could it really be down to the fact that mankind has only fairly recently been able to measure these particles and seeing as the vast majority of people will accept whatever those people who they see as being better than themselves, say as being the defacto truth and not challenge them in any way whatsoever?

10 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

Precisely what I said is it not?

Indeed it is what you said. But that is utterly completely missing the point. What about that 10 years old Euro 5 vehicle that is still driving around?

 

ALL EV will get cleaner, unlike ICE cars, every single EV will have its pollution reduced over its lifetime. Including 10 year old ones, will get cleaner as electrical grid cleans up.

 

37 minutes ago, PetrolDave said:

And let's not forget that even if/when we get to a 100% 'clean' National Grid and 100% EVs there will still be the PM2.5 particles from the EV tyres -l et's not kid ourselves that EVs will remove ALL pollution from where they drive to where electricity is generated.

As do ICE vehicles.

 

Let's make it really simple, we have:

- pollution A: tail pipe emissions.

- pollution B: tyre particulates

- pollution C : brake dust

 

Which is worse?

A + B + C 

or   Centralised and ever decreasing A + B + much smaller C

or   in your "if/when" example:   B + much smaller C

 

 

9 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Makes me at least view things in a different light, these emissions have always been there, so could it really be down to the fact that mankind has only fairly recently been able to measure these particles and seeing as the vast majority of people will accept whatever those people who they see as being better than themselves, say as being the defacto truth and not challenge them in any way whatsoever?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead#History

Leaded fuel started in 1920, it was only in 1970 people started noticing adverse effects.

Do you think during the phasing out period in 1990, people had the same comments?

 

PM2.5 particulates emitted by cloths, walking, cycling, and per passenger mass transit is far less than cars.

Volcanic eruptions, fire, explosions and wars are not everyday occurrence. In those instances, most people would cover their mouth whenever possible to avoid breathing in harmful air.

Only volcanic eruption and forest fire are natural, everything else is man-made and most of it are only present since industrial revolution.

 

Just because those man-made pollution had always been there in your lifetime, why does it need to continue to be there for future generations?

Edited 11 December, 20241 yr by wyx087

9 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

Indeed it is what you said. But that is utterly completely missing the point. What about that 10 years old Euro 5 vehicle that is still driving around?

 

ALL EV will get cleaner, unlike ICE cars, every single EV will have its pollution reduced over its lifetime. Including 10 year old ones, will get cleaner as electrical grid cleans up.

 

As do ICE vehicles.

 

Let's make it really simple, we have:

- pollution A: tail pipe emissions.

- pollution B: tyre particulates

- pollution C : brake dust

 

Which is worse?

A + B + C 

or   Centralised and ever decreasing A + B + much smaller C

or   in your "if/when" example:   B + much smaller C

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetraethyllead#History

Leaded fuel started in 1920, it was only in 1970 people started noticing adverse effects.

Do you think during the phasing out period in 1990, people had the same comments?

 

PM2.5 particulates emitted by cloths, walking, cycling, and per passenger mass transit is far less than cars.

Volcanic eruptions, fire, explosions and wars are not everyday occurrence. In those instances, most people would cover their mouth whenever possible to avoid breathing in harmful air.

Only volcanic eruption and forest fire are natural, everything else is man-made and most of it are only present since industrial revolution.

 

Just because those man-made pollution had always been there in your lifetime, why does it need to continue to be there for future generations?

So how do you explain that life expectancy is also on the increase and has been all the time since the industrial revolution then? Surely with all the increased man-made PM2.5 and all other pollutants life expectancy should be reducing not increasing???? You cannot have increased life expectancy without considerably greater living conditions overall. 

Edited 11 December, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

49 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

So how do you explain that life expectancy is also on the increase and has been all the time since the industrial revolution then? Surely with all the increased man-made PM2.5 and all other pollutants life expectancy should be reducing not increasing???? You cannot have increased life expectancy without considerably greater living conditions overall. 

Just like ICE manufacturers, you are using 1 metric to measure everything. We now know CO2 emission from combustion isn't the whole story.

 

For life expectancy improvement, there are many factors. Air quality is a very small part. There is also huge advances in medicine and health care, improvement in overall living conditions and reduction of manual labour.

An average longer life expectancy is guff. Only time will tell if the scientists have that wrong.

Just check out now how many are getting to over 75-80 year old compared to those over 90 that were born before WW2 and lived in the UK when there was less sugar in foods. 

Go into nursing / care homes and see how few much older men there are compared to women.

See just how poor health some are in that were born in the 1950,s and 60,s.  There are people doing better that were born late 1930,s early 40's.

 

Really the pollution is not so much about on our way to death having breathed in what we have and maybe healthy or on our way to health issues, cancers, lung or heart disease etc.

Maybe work related or lifestyle or just location location location.

Those generations before's behaviour and practices. Transport, Coal fires, Coal / Oil / Gas Power Stations etc.

 

Maybe even the young are on their way to what ever, lack of exercise, food / drink / sugar, environment, circumstances, smoking / vaping etc.

 

The future generations so these being born in the next decades should not suffer because of those that could not give a damn now.

The 'I like Rolling Coal',  I love my gas guzzler or my supposedly low emission vehicles which in cold weather is likely not green. 

Edited 11 December, 20241 yr by Ootohere

12 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

Just like ICE manufacturers, you are using 1 metric to measure everything. We now know CO2 emission from combustion isn't the whole story.

 

For life expectancy improvement, there are many factors. Air quality is a very small part. There is also huge advances in medicine and health care, improvement in overall living conditions and reduction of manual labour.

Oh, so now, all of a sudden it's all about CO2, well in that case we do know that plants take CO2 and convert it back into Oxygen, so let's stop concreting over masses of land to create charging hubs etc, let's stop chopping down huge forests, let's stop starting bush fires (we know that some are natural, but most are started by people either through careless behaviour or on purpose). Let's stop wars from happening, etc. We can achieve so much more if we could all learn to exist in peace with each other.