Given how Toyota were pretty much the de-facto hybrid manufacturer for many years I'd assumed they had something like this up their corporate sleeve ⚡

 

I remember a few years an old friend who worked in automotive design saying there was a big focus on integrating motors into axles/hubs in order to save space and improve efficiency. 

 

That is now pretty much all the major manufacturers committed to an all- electric future, with the obvious exception of Mazda, who have recently released six cylinder petrol and diesel versions of their CX SUV range 🤷‍♂️

 

Both the projected range of the new battery technology and charge times may well be a game-changer I suspect?

 

Reuters

Toyota lost its electrification edge by sitting on their hands, waiting for hydrogen. 

Most Japanese manufacturer seems to have similar belief about hydrogen fuel cells, thus were late to adopt battery electric. 

 

I personally wouldn't believe any "we'll have this new miracle breakthrough in mass production by year X" promises. Certainly not from a follower in the industry who obviously have a lot to loose, if people were to buy existing solutions that they don't have. 

 

The way I see it, any EV with 200 miles real world any weather is more than enough. We already have those and they can recharge back beyond 120 miles in under 20min while I go to the loo. Take a 30min breather and it's back to at least 160 miles, ready for another 2.5 - 3 hour drive. Do people seriously drive regularly 3+ hours non-stop? 

 

So yes, we are at tipping point right now, the cars and some charging network is ready. 

1 hour ago, wyx087 said:

The way I see it, any EV with 200 miles real world any weather is more than enough. We already have those and they can recharge back beyond 120 miles in under 20min while I go to the loo. Take a 30min breather and it's back to at least 160 miles, ready for another 2.5 - 3 hour drive. Do people seriously drive regularly 3+ hours non-stop?

It's more the idea of 'refuelling' taking four times longer for every car, and having four times the queue length just to get to a charging point, which then drags your journey time out.

 

 

3 new Giga battery factorys are currently being constructed in Les Hauts de France and others are on the cards, lots of Chinese investment and involvement and also French government subsidies and investment.

 

They are claiming that it will be the Silicone Valley of Europe for EV battery production, - we will see.

 

It was very recently that I said on this forum that the Japanese were deliberately taking their time and playing the long game.

Edited 13 June, 20232 yr by J.R.

3 hours ago, Ttaskmaster said:

It's more the idea of 'refuelling' taking four times longer for every car, and having four times the queue length just to get to a charging point, which then drags your journey time out.

It's more about numbers of charger. There's usually 12 pumps at petrol stations, with much lower numbers of EV's, we are already seeing 8-12 rapid charging stalls as standard by Tesla.

The queues are growing pains, I'll just leave this early 1900's quote here:

"In England the automobile comes into favour less rapidly than on the Continent. A London writer calls it “a fad, and an extremely dirty, dusty, uncomfortable fad,” and a nuisance on the public ways. He thinks it will be many years before “these crude, impracticable machines” displace in the Englishman’s affections “a fine trotting-horse and a smart trap.” No doubt the horse is here to stay, and no doubt the automobile is still in its clumsy beginning; but just wait a little, till the problem of a light and cheap storage-battery has been solved.”

 

32 minutes ago, J.R. said:

It was very recently that I said on this forum that the Japanese were deliberately taking their time and playing the long game.

What have we heard from Mazda and Honda? the other big Japanese manufacturers.

How well does Toyota's current pure EV function in comparison to current market leaders?

That's where the sentiment came from.

Remember, charging is as simple as plugging in (for some cars). Unlike petrol pump, don't need to wait for the refuel. So if you usually take 10min to do a quick loo stop and 5min to refuel, recharge is only 5min extra to leisurely stroll back from the loo.

 

The famous Tebay queues reported during Christmas.

A few months later, 8x 150 kW (v2 where power were shared between 2 stalls) were removed. Upgraded to 12x 250 kW v3 dedicated no power sharing stalls.

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/uk-and-ireland-supercharger-site-news.91118/page-295#post-7632095

 

24 stalls on M25 near Heathrow T5:

https://www.tesla.com/en_gb/findus?v=2&bounds=52.03664989336715%2C0.37566186914063326%2C50.9127711509502%2C-1.4068698691406167&zoom=10&filters=supercharger%2Cparty&location=heathrowsloughsupercharger

And nearby Reading only had a single 2 stall location back in ~2019 when I was considering first wave of Model 3. Now has 3 locations, 4, 12, and 16 stalls.

 

10 hours ago, wyx087 said:

"In England the automobile comes into favour less rapidly than on the Continent. A London writer calls it “a fad, and an extremely dirty, dusty, uncomfortable fad,” and a nuisance on the public ways. He thinks it will be many years before “these crude, impracticable machines” displace in the Englishman’s affections “a fine trotting-horse and a smart trap.” No doubt the horse is here to stay, and no doubt the automobile is still in its clumsy beginning; but just wait a little, till the problem of a light and cheap storage-battery has been solved.”

 

Original source please as it sounds like a made up quote.

 

"A London writer"................................

It is an early 1900,s quote supposedly so really who cares from what London writer it originated from or if it is saved on their 'WhatsApp Group' from over a century ago. 

"Supposedly being the word", as a very respected 14th century mathematician once said.

 

Probably!

Edited 14 June, 20232 yr by J.R.

According to Quote Investigator the original source is 

Quote

In 1901 “The Youth’s Companion” of Boston, Massachusetts published a short item about the reception of automobiles in England. 

 

On 13/06/2023 at 15:48, pinkpanther said:

Given how Toyota were pretty much the de-facto hybrid manufacturer for many years I'd assumed they had something like this up their corporate sleeve ⚡

I remember a few years an old friend who worked in automotive design saying there was a big focus on integrating motors into axles/hubs in order to save space and improve efficiency. 

That is now pretty much all the major manufacturers committed to an all- electric future, with the obvious exception of Mazda, who have recently released six cylinder petrol and diesel versions of their CX SUV range 🤷‍♂️

Both the projected range of the new battery technology and charge times may well be a game-changer I suspect?

 

Reuters

I don't think we're nearing a "tipping point". Maybe a "balance-point", and by that I mean that "tipping-point" implies an acceleration towards the inevitable dominance of the electric vehicle, whereas "balance point implies the change in direction could accelerate in a different direction.

It might be that the EV ends up becoming dominant, but I suspect that will have more to do with political intervention than market choice.

Good luck if your vision of the future relies on political intervention, because that's a house built on sand.

 

Talking of battery technology, did you know that a lot of EVs are run on 18650 batteries? I honestly did not know this until this week.

https://electricvehiclesfaqs.com/how-many-18650-batteries-are-there-in-a-tesla-electric-vehicle/

 

Long live the vape-mobile!

Glasgow city council have 600 vehicles not compliant with ULEZ and they are hiring vehicles to go into the area.  Even the vehicles required to uplift vehicles are non compliant.   Pith up in a brewery stuff.   Actually brewery deliveries are disrupted as is so much else.    Tipping point.  Not enough EV tippers, flat beds, bin lorries, just general vehicles for workers doing work. 

52 minutes ago, EnterName said:

I don't think we're nearing a "tipping point". Maybe a "balance-point", and by that I mean that "tipping-point" implies an acceleration towards the inevitable dominance of the electric vehicle, whereas "balance point implies the change in direction could accelerate in a different direction.

It might be that the EV ends up becoming dominant, but I suspect that will have more to do with political intervention than market choice.

Good luck if your vision of the future relies on political intervention, because that's a house built on sand.

Talking of battery technology, did you know that a lot of EVs are run on 18650 batteries? I honestly did not know this until this week.

https://electricvehiclesfaqs.com/how-many-18650-batteries-are-there-in-a-tesla-electric-vehicle/   Long live the vape-mobile!

 

The mass adoption of EVs, and inversely related therefore shrinking of the ICE and other mixed powered vehicles, petrol hybrid mostly, is processing at a different pace depending on the country and that country's government can accelerate or stifle that transition depending on the tax and credits/rebates that country has.  Really big markets like China and the US offer substantial part payment for EVs which can amount to 20% or so and literally in the last few weeks, along with the massive TESLA price drops and other EV manufacturers trying to compete with TESLA, the buy price of an EV, such as the Model 3, sedan/saloon has dropped to an effectively price of under £25k for quite a high performance car.  Even in countries which have now dropped the EV subsidies the increasing share of pure EVs continues to climb both at the expensive of hybrid and ICE as drivers see that lots of EVs have real ranges over 250 miles and even 300 miles.

 

Update on European EV versus Hybrid and ICE sales as May 2023 data starts to come out, the change is coming even more rapid that us EV fans expected and hoped.....

Off to Norway in a few days, EV heaven.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

 

The mass adoption of EVs, and inversely related therefore shrinking of the ICE and other mixed powered vehicles, petrol hybrid mostly, is processing at a different pace depending on the country and that country's government can accelerate or stifle that transition depending on the tax and credits/rebates that country has.  Really big markets like China and the US offer substantial part payment for EVs which can amount to 20% or so and literally in the last few weeks, along with the massive TESLA price drops and other EV manufacturers trying to compete with TESLA, the buy price of an EV, such as the Model 3, sedan/saloon has dropped to an effectively price of under £25k for quite a high performance car.  Even in countries which have now dropped the EV subsidies the increasing share of pure EVs continues to climb both at the expensive of hybrid and ICE as drivers see that lots of EVs have real ranges over 250 miles and even 300 miles.

 

Update on European EV versus Hybrid and ICE sales as May 2023 data starts to come out, the change is coming even more rapid that us EV fans expected and hoped.....

Off to Norway in a few days, EV heaven.  

 

Oh I agree, there's never been a better time to try and buy an EV.

Let's hope the increasing sales will lead to decreasing prices to make EVs more affordable (cash, credit or PCP etc.) for more buyers in the UK.

 

It seems without an unlikely policy change we are going to be forced into buying EVs by 2035 (hybrids by 2030) so unless EV prices drop substantially we'll see increasing numbers of 'old smokers' on the roads as those who can't afford an EV but need personal mobility (due to lack of public transport, disability, etc.) have to keep their existing ICE vehicles running.

Edited 15 June, 20232 yr by PetrolDave

1 hour ago, toot said:

Glasgow city council have 600 vehicles not compliant with ULEZ and they are hiring vehicles to go into the area.  Even the vehicles required to uplift vehicles are non compliant.   Pith up in a brewery stuff.   Actually brewery deliveries are disrupted as is so much else.    Tipping point.  Not enough EV tippers, flat beds, bin lorries, just general vehicles for workers doing work. 

The movement of freight is going to be an EV challenge for a while.

 

I think the cracks in the campaign to get us to  "net zero" CO2 are starting to show.

Awkward questions are being asked.

For example:

Q: How much of our air is CO2? A: 0.04%, I.E. 99.96% of out atmosphere is not CO2. (Multiple sources, here's one https://netl.doe.gov/coal/carbon-storage/faqs/carbon-dioxide-101)

Q: What proportion of that CO2 is man-made?  A: Under 4% of that 0.04%. I.E. 0.0016% of the air is man-made CO2. (Multiple sources available, but here's one https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-12/documents/02es.pdf)

Q: How much will it cost to get the UK to "net zero"? A: Awkward shuffling and some mumbling about sustainable energy sources. (Unless anyone can source a cost?)

Q: If we get to "net zero" in the UK, what impact will that have on global CO2 levels? A:  ̶I̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶U̶K̶ ̶g̶e̶t̶s̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶"̶N̶e̶t̶ ̶Z̶e̶r̶o̶"̶,̶ ̶w̶e̶ ̶w̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶r̶e̶d̶u̶c̶e̶ ̶g̶l̶o̶b̶a̶l̶ ̶C̶O̶2̶ ̶b̶y̶ ̶1̶%̶.̶ ̶i̶.̶e̶.̶ ̶G̶l̶o̶b̶a̶l̶ ̶C̶O̶2̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶r̶e̶d̶u̶c̶e̶ ̶f̶r̶o̶m̶ ̶r̶o̶u̶g̶h̶l̶y̶ ̶0̶.̶0̶4̶%̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶a̶i̶r̶,̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶0̶.̶0̶3̶9̶6̶%̶.̶

EDIT: Woah there! My maths are way out here. If we get to "net zero" in the UK, we will reduce man-made CO2 by about 1%. So that's not a reduction in global CO2 of 0.0004%, that's a reduction in MAN-MADE global CO2. So that's 1% of 0.0016% percent., or a 0.000016% reduction in global CO2 from 0.04% to 0.039984% Sorry about that. (Source https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/uk-and-global-emissions-and-temperature-trends/) There's some dispute about the UK's contribution, with my source stating 1.1%. I used 1% to keep things easy to calculate, but then I also upped the global CO2 figure from 3.xxx% to 4%, so I'm not trying to rig the numbers. If anyone has any definitive numbers, by all means provide them and show the correct calculations and percentages. 👍

Q: If we get to "net zero" in the UK, what effect will that have on climate change? A: More awkward shuffling with mumbling. (I would welcome a more accurate answer to this question.)

 

My point is, nobody is willing to state how much climate change will be reduced if we get to "net zero" in the UK and so managing to reduce the global CO2 levels by a heady 0.000016%, and the trade-off in terms of cost (not to mention the other issues that will undoubtably arise) are unpalatable to a lot of people given the uncertain benefits.

 

As I said before, coming to an unstable balance-point is more likely than a approaching a tipping-point towards EVs, IMO.

Edited 15 June, 20232 yr by EnterName

48 minutes ago, EnterName said:

The movement of freight is going to be an EV challenge for a while.

 

I think the cracks in the campaign to get us to  "net zero" CO2 are starting to show.

Awkward questions are being asked.

For example:

Q: How much of our air is CO2? A: 0.04%, I.E. 99.96% of out atmosphere is not CO2. (Multiple sources, here's one https://netl.doe.gov/coal/carbon-storage/faqs/carbon-dioxide-101)

Q: What proportion of that CO2 is man-made?  A: Under 4% of that 0.04%. I.E. 0.0016% of the air is man-made CO2. (Multiple sources available, but here's one https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-12/documents/02es.pdf)

Q: How much will it cost to get the UK to "net zero"? A: Awkward shuffling and some mumbling about sustainable energy sources. (Unless anyone can source a cost?)

Q: If we get to "net zero" in the UK, what impact will that have on global CO2 levels? A:  ̶I̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶U̶K̶ ̶g̶e̶t̶s̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶"̶N̶e̶t̶ ̶Z̶e̶r̶o̶"̶,̶ ̶w̶e̶ ̶w̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶r̶e̶d̶u̶c̶e̶ ̶g̶l̶o̶b̶a̶l̶ ̶C̶O̶2̶ ̶b̶y̶ ̶1̶%̶.̶ ̶i̶.̶e̶.̶ ̶G̶l̶o̶b̶a̶l̶ ̶C̶O̶2̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶r̶e̶d̶u̶c̶e̶ ̶f̶r̶o̶m̶ ̶r̶o̶u̶g̶h̶l̶y̶ ̶0̶.̶0̶4̶%̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶a̶i̶r̶,̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶0̶.̶0̶3̶9̶6̶%̶.̶

EDIT: Woah there! My maths are way out here. If we get to "net zero" in the UK, we will reduce man-made CO2 by about 1%. So that's not a reduction in global CO2 of 0.0004%, that's a reduction in MAN-MADE global CO2. So that's 1% of 0.0016% percent., or a 0.000016% reduction in global CO2 from 0.04% to 0.039984% Sorry about that. (Source https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/uk-and-global-emissions-and-temperature-trends/) There's some dispute about the UK's contribution, with my source stating 1.1%. I used 1% to keep things easy to calculate, but then I also upped the global CO2 figure from 3.xxx% to 4%, so I'm not trying to rig the numbers. If anyone has any definitive numbers, by all means provide them and show the correct calculations and percentages. 👍

Q: If we get to "net zero" in the UK, what effect will that have on climate change? A: More awkward shuffling with mumbling. (I would welcome a more accurate answer to this question.)

 

My point is, nobody is willing to state how much climate change will be reduced if we get to "net zero" in the UK and so managing to reduce the global CO2 levels by a heady 0.000016%, and the trade-off in terms of cost (not to mention the other issues that will undoubtably arise) are unpalatable to a lot of people given the uncertain benefits.

 

As I said before, coming to an unstable balance-point is more likely than a approaching a tipping-point towards EVs, IMO.

 

Do not recognise your figures.  CO2 increase since industrial age, mainly 1870 actually, 50% !!

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide

 

It is increasing about 1 or 2 parts per million but even small amounts of CO2, methane etc have a big effect on greenhouse effect. 

 

 

 

Love the data sources. 

 

1 hour ago, EnterName said:

Q: If we get to "net zero" in the UK, what effect will that have on climate change? A: More awkward shuffling with mumbling. (I would welcome a more accurate answer to this question.)

 

My point is, nobody is willing to state how much climate change will be reduced if we get to "net zero" in the UK and so managing to reduce the global CO2 levels by a heady 0.000016%, and the trade-off in terms of cost (not to mention the other issues that will undoubtably arise) are unpalatable to a lot of people given the uncertain benefits.

The question isn't "getting to net zero in the UK" and if that has any impact on climate change. 

The question is "getting to net zero by everyone on Earth" and what we, as older generation, leave behind for younger generation. Given now that we have scientific consensus about the lasting impact of man-made post-industrial revolution CO2 emissions. 

 

With that in mind, what is the reason for not aiming for net-zero 2050, given it's the global direction and it also create jobs. Costs are only one side of the coin. 

5 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

Love the data sources. 

 

The question isn't "getting to net zero in the UK" and if that has any impact on climate change. 

The question is "getting to net zero by everyone on Earth" and what we, as older generation, leave behind for younger generation. Given now that we have scientific consensus about the lasting impact of man-made post-industrial revolution CO2 emissions. 

 

With that in mind, what is the reason for not aiming for net-zero 2050, given it's the global direction and it also create jobs. Costs are only one side of the coin. 

What are the correct figures, if I am in error?

30 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

 

Do not recognise your figures.  CO2 increase since industrial age, mainly 1870 actually, 50% !!

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide

 

It is increasing about 1 or 2 parts per million but even small amounts of CO2, methane etc have a big effect on greenhouse effect. 

 

 

 

What percentage of the air do you think is CO2, @lol-lol?

12 minutes ago, EnterName said:

What are the correct figures, if I am in error?

Your sources look legit, I didn't question your numbers. 

 

I questioned validity of your questions, only thinking about cost vs reward for UK. 

Pre-industrial levels of CO2 were around 280ppm and current measurements put the CO2 level at around 420ppm, which is far below the peak during the Ordovician period 500 million years ago of 3000-9000ppm.

 

Earth survived those amazingly high levels of CO2 without burning up, albeit with some well documented mass extinctions (cause still open to debate) so it is difficult to understand that levels around 10% or less will be so destructive to Earth - humanity maybe but not Earth.

 

A Graphical History of Atmospheric CO2 Levels Over Time

 

Edited 15 June, 20232 yr by PetrolDave

21 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

Your sources look legit, I didn't question your numbers. 

 

I questioned validity of your questions, only thinking about cost vs reward for UK. 

Ah! Fair enough.

Of course the big question is how will reducing man-made CO2 globally from 0.04% to what was it, 0.0396%, effect climate change?

And if we don't know the answer to that, what's the rush, given the costs.

22 minutes ago, PetrolDave said:

Pre-industrial levels of CO2 were around 280ppm and current measurements put the CO2 level at around 420ppm, which is far below the peak during the Ordovician period 500 million years ago of 3000-9000ppm.

 

Earth survived those amazingly high levels of CO2 without burning up, albeit with some well documented mass extinctions (cause still open to debate) so it is difficult to understand that levels around 10% or less will be so destructive to Earth - humanity maybe but not Earth.

 

A Graphical History of Atmospheric CO2 Levels Over Time

 

I'll have to have a look at that later Dave, I struggle to get my head around the PPM data, as I can't convert that into impact on the climate, and that is the stated driver for the push to net zero.

On 13/06/2023 at 21:41, wyx087 said:

Remember, charging is as simple as plugging in (for some cars). Unlike petrol pump, don't need to wait for the refuel. So if you usually take 10min to do a quick loo stop and 5min to refuel, recharge is only 5min extra to leisurely stroll back from the loo.

Who takes 10 minutes to go for a slash??!!

Most people will take 5 minutes to refuel, then 2-3 minutes to pay for it, before they're off.

A 20-minute quick-charge means you're taking four times longer and, for simplicity's sake, if everyone drives an EV that's then four times the queue during busy times. This also assumes that everyone is quick-charging, rather than the full charge of however long that is - 30 minutes? An hour?

 

On 13/06/2023 at 21:27, wyx087 said:

It's more about numbers of charger. There's usually 12 pumps at petrol stations, with much lower numbers of EV's, we are already seeing 8-12 rapid charging stalls as standard by Tesla.

 

But until recharging is as quick as refuelling, you'll need several times the number of charge points as pumps, even with some of those drivers charging overnight at home.

The problem is that it will impact the roads as it conflicts with the ever-increasing number of vehicles out and about on other business - Costco round our way opened a fuel station at their place, with nice cheap fuel and pay-at-pump only. The issue is that traffic queueing tails back out onto the roundabout, then down all the roads of the industrial estate, before finally spilling onto the main A33 route into Reading... on a busy Saturday, that can reach all the way back round Junction 11 and onto the M4. 

Now imagine if this were all 20-minute charge-points instead of 5-minute ICE pumps.