KAS-118
-
Posts
785 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Events
Forums
UPGRADE
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by KAS-118
-
-
@sailorbob I'm not sure the 'headline' is misleading.
Ads explained in this Article https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/70-cases-of-covid-19-at-french-schools-days-after-reopening-1.4943908 the spike occurred a week after the 1/3rd of the school children went back - the same minister said that the return "has put some children in new danger of infection" and he immediately closed the infected schools.
Yes - he did say it was "likely" they were infected before the opening of the schools - because he purported the incubation period of CV was long. However, that reasoning doesn't make sense as the incubation period is considered to be 2 to 10 days https://www.healthline.com/health/coronavirus-incubation-period - and the NHS advice that it can take UPTO 14 days for the symptoms to appear.
So the fact that these infections occurred within a week of the return actually fits in with the above.
@march - sorry posted at the same time as yours. Yes, a cynic could say that the French Government were trying to avoid responsibility by purporting there's a long incubation period - when in fact probable that the return did cause a spike.
France has had even a tougher lockdown than the UK, if the kids were all at home how did they get the virus beforehand?
-
3 minutes ago, Bibs said:
Isn't that what PHEV's are for? Once battery energy density improves they'll just get better at being the best of both worlds for now.
600 odd miles from a tank but for local runs, all on electric for about 25 miles which covers most daily short runs for most to schools/shops/work etc.
Yes and no.
For an A-B car that does the journeys you describe they’re probably fine and may be the best option.
But you could also say they’re the worst of both worlds - lugging around 2 propulsion systems - 1 of which is only being used, taking up more space - hence you don’t get the space savings you get in a BEV, nor do you lose having to go to a petrol station and fill up.
If you’re doing a journey of 600 miles then that’s likely to be an 8-10 hour trip. Surely you’d stop off for 45 mins to an hour. If that were the case you could recharge an EV.
Like you suggest, I used to think hybrids were the perfect answer - but now I think they’re an unsatisfactory compromise.
They will also be banned along with ICE’s - although obviously that’s a little way off.
For you and your described journey they may well work. But you might want to see if you can try a full EV out first as well, just to see how you get on?
47 minutes ago, machine7 said:They say that about plastics at the moment. If https://www.myheru.com/ devices are installed in all homes and businesses, then plastics and all waste becomes an energy source. (And based in Worcester too👍).
Great information - thanks 👍
-
@Mysterae - thanks for the info.
If I were your colleague then I’d wait for a couple of years (if he can put up with his current leaf) as I believe the cost of EV’s will be getting much more competitive with Petrol - even at the lower end of the market.
Likewise, if you need 500 miles, then there’s not an EV out there for you yet - so it’s either hold on to what you’ve got at the moment and review what’s available in 2 or 3 years - or buy another petrol.
Good luck in whatever you decide 👍
-
@Mysterae - clearly your friends car is no longer fit for his needs.
I'm not sure how old it is - but I believe the leaf came out about 10 years ago and only had an EPA range of 73 miles.
Battery Technology has moved on a lot since then.
I agree that a car of that range, and for the journeys your friends has to do - is not appropriate. But the question was about the forthcoming ICE ban; and whether EV's were the answer. That suggests you looking at what is available now and whether i'ts suitable for most people most of the time.
New EV's can now do 250-300 miles - so I think the tipping point probably has now been reached. However, when I last bought a car EV's were no-where on my list - I just didn't think they were suitable then. But jut because something was not suitable 10, or even 5, years ago - doesn't mean that they haven't been improved and are now suitable.
Is he thinking about replacing it - and if so with what?
17 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:They say that about plastics......oh
Hmmm.....a lot of plastics are recyclable - and those that aren't are getting banned.
What do they say about the waste from fossil fuels - and the combustion thereof.......oh 🙄🙄🙄
-
1
-
-
It's on....it's off...
Looks like we may not have any Grand Prix(s) at Silverstone after all ☹️
-
1
-
-
@eUKenGB - thanks for another insightful post - clearly, despite what some people have said, recycling of EV Batteries will not be that difficult going forwards.
As to Private Car Ownership my observations would be that 'computer control/autonomous driving is not mutually exclusive. Indeed, look at Tesla - and we are not that far away from it now. But this is private vehicles.
It isn't to far removed to consider WiFi network on roads that will control he speed if cars (private or otherwise) speed, make cars stops at junctions etc - although it also has to be accepted that the testing of this hasn't always ended up well.
That is not to say you won't get Robotaxi's - indeed you can now https://www.abacusnews.com/tech/riders-shanghai-can-now-hail-robotaxi-alibabas-map-app/article/3081728 - but the fact that Taxi's have existed before the motor car, as has public transport - but people still prefer the ability use their own transport where that is reasonably possible.
So I have a different outlook to you in that respect. I can see 'big brother' controls being introduced - but these are just as likely to be on private cars as they are public taxi's. However, I'm optimistic we are quite someway off getting to that point.
For the sake of completeness I would also mention Public Transport - although you didn't really mention this - and I'm not presupposing what your view is on it.
As I said above, Public transport generally takes your from a place you don't want to depart from, to a place you don't want to go to - but you can also add to that it takes you at a time that you may not want to necessarily leave at, via a route you may not want to necessarily go and in the company of people you may not necessarily want to be with.
However, clearly in very densely populated areas, it has not always been possible to use a private car effectively. There may be no-where to park it, it may frequently get vandalised or stolen - and when you get in it, at the time you may need to travel, the roads may be so busy that it would take you longer to drive somewhere than walk.
However, IF more people work from home, then not only does that mean there are less people in the city at anyone time - freeing up the roads - people can live further out in the suburbs, where private transport can be used. Even where people do need to travel into city areas - then flexible working may mean they do so at different time . The reason why public transport is usually the preferred method in inner city is because the roads are so choked.
It is therefore bizarre if anyone thinks that less people moving around will necessitate more public transport and less personal transport - its likely to be the very opposite.
Clearly public transport will still exist - but as we get used to working more to our own timetables - more people will move out of the inner cities and want a flexible form of transportation which is convenient for them, rather then sets a timetable, and location, that they need to comply with.
However, as I said - I think this is all going out of the timeframe originally envisaged by the original question.
-
I see that there has been a spike in Coronavirus cases in France after the schools have re-opened https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/france-70-new-coronavirus-cases-schools-a4444061.html
Of course, its OK for people to sit at home, drinking their alcohol, smoking their tobacco, scoffing their faces with chocolate and honing up on their 'D.I.Y' skills - whilst arrogantly slagging off teachers for being cautious about returning - but its another thing for them to return themselves and have to deal with people (including children) who are unlikely to follow social distancing guidelines.
What's worse is the hypocrisy when those people who complain of a negative outlook of those at risk, then frequently display a 'can't do' attitude on other matters themselves.
Whilst I think people, and kids, do need to get back to work and school, I think those people do have a right to question and query about the precautions being taken to ensure their safety - we're talking about people's lives.
-
1
-
-
Just to make a point regarding the provision of Chargers where you do not have a parking space, I should mention that more forward thinking Councils have already addressed this - for example, London is one of the very worse places to try and park. But Westminster Council have incorporated EV chargers into lamp posts. https://cleantechnica.com/2020/03/24/siemens-brings-street-light-ev-charging-to-london-neighborhood/
There are also many other solutions to this problem https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/oct/05/electric-car-ways-to-charge
Indeed - I spend a lot of time working in other European countries - who have certainly embraced and/or are embracing the EV culture - and it never ceases to amaze me how some people in the UK are always saying things can't be done - when they are actually being done now. Frankly, as an English person, its embarrassing to be associated with such a narrow minded and nethanderal outlook - its as though the luddites are in full swing again.
Further into the future there is of course wireless charging https://www.technologytimes.pk/2020/05/19/china-to-introduce-wireless-charging-for-electric-vehicles-ties-with-mit-startup-witricity/
Fortunately, despite the luddites, the British Government is actually trying to lead the way - in pushing ahead with EV adoption. So hopefully, at least, we can begin to lead the way in technology again.
Of course this is a little way off but then I think its clear the ICE is certainly dead - so what's going to replace it?
Some people obviously say the private car is dead and we'll all be using public transport soon. Well, you can never say what the future holds - but I think that is way way off, if at all
I think the Coronavirus has made people very weary of public transport and, given the current social distancing, it is not particularly efficient. I think it should also be realised that Public Transport effectively takes you from somewhere you don't want to leave from - to somewhere you don't want to go to.
In more suburb and outer-city areas I very much doubt public transport is going to grow - at least not in terms of the percentage of the working population.
Of course in city centres, like London, you do need public transport - but from the various webinars I attended both last week and this morning - the consensus seems to be more and more people want to work from home, adopting flexible working practices. Of course this isn't possible for everyone - but it certainly is for a significant portion.
So what you may get is people actually wanting to attend fairly close-bye shops or going on leisure trips - where it is possible to drive and park, and not a commute into work and city areas by public transport.
Of course, like the theatre and cinema - the death of the motor car has previously been predicted - but its still very much here and (to date) in ever growing numbers.
Time will obviously tell - but in the foreseeable future - the Car is still alive and kicking - and is likely to remain so for a good number of years to come.
-
1 hour ago, dave excell said:
While I was taking part in L'Eroica bike event in Italy we spent a day in Florence where a majority of vehicles in the center were electric. The noise was dreadful, as all electric vehicles were emitting beeping signals to warn pedestrians of there approach. Atmosphere was cleaner though. However as more contamination is produced in the manufacturer of the batteries than running an ICE for the lifetime of the vehicle moves the crap to a different part of the world. A bit of not in my back yard syndrome.
David - you're perfectly entitled to have a view on Electric Cars - but It would be handy if we tried to keep this discussion based upon some kind of factual research (and yes, I accept 'paid' research may be used to slant one way or another to whoever's political agenda - but even so the source of an opinion would be useful).
Otherwise discussion just becomes reduced down to lies - like saying there isn't a storage and transportation problem with hydrogen, or you'll need an immense power supply if you're going to charge at home, or there's space for you to park your car on the street but apparently not to charge it.
There are clearly pro's and con's with electric vehicles - but whether you like it or not, ICE's are currently set to be banned whereas EV's aren't - and perhaps you should consider why many governments have taken that stance if the majority of the factual evidence demonstrated the opposite was true and EV's were overall worse than ICE's!?
So, I would respectfully suggest that over the lifetime of the vehicle EV's are not more damaging to the Environment - and to support that proposition I'll refer you to this piece of research, which suggests that EV's are approximately 1/3rd as harmful https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-how-electric-vehicles-help-to-tackle-climate-change
Indeed, since this Report there has been an indication from Tesla that it intends to re-use its batteries, once their life in a car is at an end, as home and/or grid storage devices - so if anything EV's environmental impact assessments are going to be improved even more.
If you've got any scientific research that suggests the opposite then please provide a link - as I'd for one be interred to see it.
-
1
-
-
One of the things 'petrol heads' often complain about Electric Vehicles is the lack of sound.
I think a lot of what sounds 'right' is due to conditioning - i.e. we associate certain sounds with certain things and the louder the sound the more powerful we think whatever is making it is.
Whilst I would agree that a 'throaty' roar of a V8 or V12 can sound intoxicating - and add to the sense of occasions - noise itself, especially loud noise, can be considered to some extent undesirable. Take for instance the next door neighbour who plays music loud - it may be heaven to them, but less so to those who live adjacent them.
However, what sounds we may associate with certain objects can change - perhaps an obvious example from the 20th Century is the aeroplane, I'm sure we all love the sound of a Merlin Engines Spitfire - but we now associate the (perhaps more unpleasant) sound of a jet as something which is faster and more powerful.
Whilst sound may, in some cases, be undesirable, it is still one of the human senses - and enables us to 'hear' danger. Hence, there are requirements for EV's that are travelling less than 20-30km/hr to emit some type of noise.
I therefore think its interesting what the engineers at Polestar (who like Lotus are owned by Geely) are doing. The sounds (both forward and reverse) can be heard here https://www.polestar.com/uk/news/the-sounds-of-the-polestar-2?utm_medium=crm&utm_source=em&utm_campaign=pcid_3483_41263_85343_206342_o_hq_1local_crm_em&utm_content=ad
To my ears, the 'forward' has a futuristic 'space-ship' sound - similar to what you might hear in a Sci-Fi mover such as a Star Wars Landspeeder - so I guess Fiction is becoming Fact.
I'm sure its not going to be to everyones liking - but I can't help but think that similar to the planes of the past, compared to the present, it may be something that we'll get used to.
-
More information about Tesla's new battery - which is anticipated to be released in China, later this year - with then a further improved version to be released to the rest of the world after that.
This should hopefully enable the complaints about EV's being to expensive to be addressed.
-
1
-
-
Looks like a possible 2nd Wave in Jilin, China
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/millions-chinese-back-lockdown-fears-22048026
-
I thought it was Starmer who was head of the DPP when they investigated the failings over the many years that this had happened - and found that the CPS were at fault.
I also believe he was the one who said that people who know about such matters - but fail to raise them - should also be held to account. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/04/child-abuse-keir-starmer-prosecute-professionals
Indeed - Paul Gambaccini has issues with Starmer because of the investigations made, following false allegation, carried out when Starmer was head of the CPS - so it seems you're dammed if you do; dammed if you don't - and I guess hindsight is a wonderful thing. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8211355/BBC-DJ-demands-Keir-Starmer-apologise-role-historic-sex-abuse-scandal.html
In any event - the failure to investigate properly went over many years - with various different Governments and DPP's in place.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
@Colin P - I have to agree with you. As you say London clearly does pay it's way - and the ONS figures identify it subsidies the rest of the UK.
Clearly it needs considerable more money for Public transport - because it is so densely populated (Manchester has a population of 2.7m whereas London is over 8.9m).
Not only that but a considerable number of people travel from quite far outside of London to work, and when they get to a mainline station they the use TfL facilities. For example I know people who travel down from near Norfolk and Wales. There's no one that I know who lives in London but travels the other way. to work in those places and therefore put an increased burden on their Public Transport system
Because of the density, there is limited facilities for private transport - and indeed travelling by car is not only is a lengthy process - its actively discouraged.
Clearly, people have a choice - and for those who live outside London and, according to the ONS are effectively subsidised by Londoners, I think it absurd that they complain about it. As you suggest, if they don't like it they could move to London, pay the extortionate property prices, put up with the noise and the pollution and very high costs of living.
I'm not knocking anyone whop doesn't want to live in London and put up with these things - and there are clearly some benefits from living in London. However, whatever choice you make there is a 'quid pro quo'.
Those who I am exasperated with are the ones (who are a very small minority) who appear tom have some form of 'chip' on their shoulder and, when London gets money (that not only does it need, but actually deserves considering the surplus it creates) resort to childish whining saying it's unfair and suggest it shouldn't be given - failing to explain how the economic benefit would be greater if that money was spent elsewhere.
It should also be pointed out that the bus services out of London have received £400m and were receiving an Operators Grant of £251m - so its not as though they've received no money at all.
Clearly, if it were more efficient, and would create better economic sense, to use the money that TfL got for other places then I'm sure the Government would have done so. But at the end of the day, not only is the use of private transport much more easier in those places - they don''t create the wealth for the County as a whole that London does.
As you say, those who appear to be so 'jealous' and don't want to 'miss-out' on the money that TfL getting are welcome to move here - but they certainly shouldn't consider it's all 'pro's' and no 'cons'.
At the end of the day I hope the Country can try and pull together to beat this pandemic (and the economic crisis that exists and will no doubt last longer). The Government has limited funds - and therefore will have to spend them the way that provides the most benefit to the country as a whole. I've seen no evidence to suggest its not doing that.
-
3
-
@Chillidoggy - one Report says that the Congestion Charge narrowed the house price difference between inside and outside https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/4050/1/MPRA_paper_4050.pdf although arguably you'd say that the house prices inside the zone, prior to its implementation, would have been more expensive - hence its adversely affected those.
Another one, by the London School of Economics, says that people are prepared to pay a £30k premium to live within the zone. https://www.cityam.com/londoners-pay-30000-premium-live-congestion-charge-zone/
-
@jep - wow, .that does look lovely 😎
-
1
-
-
@Chillidoggy - what type of cat is that - apart from 'cute' obviously 🙂
-
Anyway - enough about Piers and his personality problem(s).
I see the UK are backing calls for an Investigation into the source of Coronavirus. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-backs-calls-for-coronavirus-investigation-xwtrzxv38 although I would have thought it was obviously needed.
-
Well in defence of the Teachers and the BBC, my daughter has regularly received lessons on line from her school and has been provided with links to various academic books etc and has been phoned regularly by her teachers. Likewise, other colleagues of mine who have kids, have had no complaints - so although I accept there may well be instances where the school isn't doing a reasonable job - it may well be these are in the minority.
As for Piers Morgan - he's certainly a controversial character - but the very few times that I've ever him (what admittedly isn't very often) he does appear to be able to back up his arguments with at least some research and wide read point of view (whether or not you particularly agree with it) - and not the narrow minded ignorance of some self proclaimed 'experts' - who heads permanently seemed stuck up their own backsides and get so many basic fundamentals of there so claimed field of expertise wrong. For instance his 'spat' with Dr Shola Mos-Shogbamimu.
However, I don't like the way he approaches his task. He seems to have a rather infantile mentality - that is to try and 'bait', goad and insult, rather than present his arguments in a more considered and constructive manner. Indeed the way that he resorts to insults at a drop of a hat may demonstrate that he has some serious psychological issues, and needs help with anger management.
So from that perspective - he's a rather sad and pathetic character; and I guess I should feel some pity for.
The timing is though, that what he's alway been like - and GMB knew what they were getting when they took him on - and indeed the viewers must know what they going to get when they chose to watch.
I appreciate that people do have a right to complain - indeed its good that we have the opportunity so to do - but I can't but help wonder why they tune-in - and not turn over and watch one of the other channels instead?
-
It's sad to see it like that ☹️
-
@PAR - very true - in fact London subsidises the rest of the UK https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/may/23/uk-budget-deficit-grows-to-more-than-10bn-as-people-spend-less
-
@Neal H - it looks good - but unfortunately is fake.
-
More on the Alonso to Renault rumour https://www.planetf1.com/news/fernando-alonso-to-renault/
Looks like Liberty may be paying part of it.
I wonder what this would do about McLaren's Indy Programme?
-
You might also find this interest https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/utilities/free-solar-panels/
Coronavirus
in General Chat
Posted
@sailorbob - from the news articles it appears the French Government minister identified the spike on Monday - by confirming the 70 cases linked to schools.
As its reported as a 'spike' then that suggests there was an increase. Clearly, as the schools weren't open prior to them being opened then you wouldn't have had any infections at schools.
There were 492 new cases on 18 May, compared to 456 on 11 May. Given that the infection rate was supposed to be reducing - I would have thought that was something to be concerned about?