Is electric really the answer?

[C8RKH]

Interesting. You could argue that both O'Leary and Murdoch where visionary and innovative and yet you will not buy/use their stuff. But Musk you will. As I said, we're all wired differently. Personally I lump Musk with the other two.

[eUKenGB]

I wouldn't lump them all together in the first place. Different individuals and entirely different business practices. Apart from each being successful in their own field, I don't see any similarity whatsoever and only one of them I actively consider dishonest and despicable.

At the end of the day, I just buy/use the best products that suit my requirements, no matter the head of any particular company. I hate Sky with a vengeance after they screwed me for £5K over work I did for them many moons ago, but I used their satellite service for years as they were the only supplier of decent TV for me due to the hopeless terrestrial signal here in the wilds of Surrey. O'Leary is entirely up front about the service he provides. If you don't want that service, don't use it. I wouldn't not use Ryanair just because of their boss and I have no problem at all with Musk in any case as he has achieved so much of interest to me. I just don't generally like his cars.

Having said that, I cannot help but feel a desire for Tesla's forthcoming CyberTruck. Weird, but oh so desirable. YMMV.

[C8RKH]

I'm still not convinced that BEVs are the long term answer to our personal transportation needs, but as the Thread is entitled "Is electric really the answer" then we should not be fooled into thinking that electric being the answer means BEVs and megawatt connections to the grid to get uber fast charging. The simple truth is that NO connection to the Grid for private individuals would be the wiser strategy. Economically. Affordably. And sustainably.

There has been some great progress in battery technology however we really are seeing considerable breakthroughs in other technologies. Whilst at an early stage this device used to create hydrogen (what's not to like re a closed loop of water, device and sunlight to generate energy) to then power a coupled fuel cell could be a great solution. Sunlight acts to create the hydrogen that is stored locally then used to drive the fuel cell overnight to charge the battery in the BEV.  Self contained, isolated from harming the grid = more resilient grid, less chance for disruption etc.

https://newatlas.com/energy/artificial-leaf-hydrogen-fuel/

A long way to go but at least some sensible direction.

[KAS-118]

3 hours ago, eUKenGB said:

Having said that, I cannot help but feel a desire for Tesla's forthcoming CyberTruck. Weird, but oh so desirable. YMMV.

Apparently the design inspiration was the Lotus Esprit.....😱

https://robbreport.com/motors/cars/lotus-esprit-cybertruck-tesla-2884411/

[eUKenGB]

I have heard that. But they each had/have very different design goals. I doubt the Esprit was designed to be bulletproof (apart from in a Bond movie of course 🙂)

[scotty435]

I am a firm believer the way forward is EV, but at the same time always been happy to listen to the both sides of the argument, Harry’s latest video gives some great insight to the problem we are facing.

 

[C8RKH]

So a lot of what Harry's says is very similar to what I've been saying. Hmmm. Interesting.

[KAS-118]

2 hours ago, scotty435 said:

I am a firm believer the way forward is EV, but at the same time always been happy to listen to the both sides of the argument, Harry’s latest video gives some great insight to the problem we are facing.

 

It is likely that Lorries and other commercial vehicles may be more suited to to Hydrogen, but private cars suited to Battery  (which apparently is Mercedes current thinking) or Supercapacitors.

I think Hydrogen fuel cells may also be used to generate Electricity in power stations that can then be used to charge BEV.

I think the 'non-green' energy demand will ultimately be addressed by more green sources (which may include nuclear - if that could be classified as green!?). But I think Solar panels are getting better - and indeed, in my locality there are now am awful lot of 1930's houses that have solar panels on their roofs.

I don't buy this issue that just because a house or flat doesn't have its own off-street parking you can't have a BEV. There is electricity in every street - so ultimately it will be solved by providing charging points in the street. I also see that 'Wireless Charging' is also a hot topic of research https://news.stanford.edu/2020/05/04/wirelessly-charging-electric-cars-drive/

I also don't understand the argument where everything is compared to how much pollution China produces for 2 reasons:

1) Collectively, all other countries would result in a significant reduction - and every country should play their part; and

2) China are looking heavily into both BEV's and Hydrogen fuel cells - so, IMHO, we shouldn't drag our feet and be left behind.

I think he makes a fair point - in that you shouldn't necessary replace your petrol car now. We do seem rather wasteful in a number of ways, be it buying too many clothes that we hardly wear - or even having a number of cars - where maybe one would suffice. Not knocking anyone for that - as we've all done it - but maybe we should think more that there's an environmental impact on throwing things away before their time, and wanting 'new' things that maybe we don't need. 

Edited May 7, 2020 by KAS-118

[C8RKH]

The biggest single point that he eloquently made and will always be glossed over is that the issue of pollutants is directly proportional to the growth in the worlds population.  We are reaching or have surpassed, depending on how you want to look at, the point of planetary sustainability. It is all down hill from here on in if our population continues to grow at the current rates and the consumption across everything does not significantly start to fall. Everything else is like arguing over which colour of smartie tastes the best - pointless - as all we will do is slow the rate of decay in the planet, not stop it or reverse it.

[KAS-118]

Well IMHO I think the greater the population - the more the need to take action to limit the 'environment harm' that each individual does. 

The average number of children in the UK is now 1.89; - compared to 2.19 in 1945 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46303120. Of course, that decrease is off-set by the fact that usually, the population is living longer - although here again it seems that this has stalled (and not fallen as was once claimed) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48123323

The thing is I guess that people might take the 'We're all doomed' philosophy - and choose to sit on their hands and do nothing - which inevitably mean that we are all doomed.  Alternatively, people could try and take action and climb out of the hole that they find themselves in.

 

Anyway - a nearly here BEV from a company that is owned by the Lotus owner. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48123323

I must say, it reminds me a bit of a Saab 9-3, and I quite like it.

One thing I don't get is that, reading the power specs, it seems the same as a Volvo XC40 Recharge. But even although Polestar are Volvo's performance brand - the Polestar 2 is actually cheaper (unless you specify the fancy suspension). 

Edited May 14, 2020 by ramjet
Please check the link on quoting at the top of the page. Thanks

[KAS-118]

Apparently the Government are doubling the funding for on street charging points - and want to make recharging as easy as filling up with petrol.

https://www.taxi-point.co.uk/post/government-doubles-funding-available-for-electric-vehicle-residential-chargepoints 

[C8RKH]

This is all well and good but without proper coordination with for instance, the DNO, then you are creating as big a problem - with an associated cost to fix - as the one you are solving. Yet again, well intentioned but poorly informed political decisions = good PR but long term problems.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We need an independent infrastructure authority that takes an informed, LONG TERM, view and approach to optimise the speed, drive the efficiency, and deliver change at an affordable cost 

It's not rocket science.

[KAS-118]

Interesting article on the BEV v Hydrogen Fuel Cell arguments for Cars http://Why We Still Can't Deliver on the Promise of Hydrogen Cars

[KAS-118]

I see Lucid is ramping up for the launch of the Air. https://www.teslarati.com/lucid-air-prototype-fleet-video/

1,000bhp, 217mph top speed, 400 mile range.

It will be interesting to see how accurate these figures are - as it will its projected price of $60,000!!! 🤔

[eUKenGB]

It does look interesting and the interior is certainly more appealing than a Tesla, but 217 mph? Really? Do we actually need that sort of performance when it cannot be driven at more than 70 mph (or thereabouts, depending on country) and keep ones driving license. I'm all for decent performance, but this is entirely unnecessary and more importantly, completely UNUSABLE. It's not even intended to be a track car.

Keep the torque, limit power and top speed to half that, extend range to more than 500 miles and make it even cheaper. That would be even more interesting.

Edited May 14, 2020 by ramjet
Please check the link On quoting at the top of the page. Thanks

[Bibs]

Err, I think 99% of cars available now can exceed 70mph. While I agree that 217mph is a tad excessive, cars that can break the law litter every forecourt and driveway in the world! 

[KAS-118]

1 minute ago, eUKenGB said:

It does look interesting and the interior is certainly more appealing than a Tesla, but 217 mph? Really? Do we actually need that sort of performance when it cannot be driven at more than 70 mph (or thereabouts, depending on country) and keep ones driving license. I'm all for decent performance, but this is entirely unnecessary and more importantly, completely UNUSABLE. It's not even intended to be a track car.

Keep the torque, limit power and top speed to half that, extend range to more than 500 miles and make it even cheaper. That would be even more interesting.

I think you make a very fair point - although I still believe there are some areas that have unrestricted speed limits, it does make you wonder if any country should permit that in todays environmentally astute world?

I believe Volvo have recently limited their cars to 112mph?

[eUKenGB]

1 hour ago, Bibs said:

Err, I think 99% of cars available now can exceed 70mph. While I agree that 217mph is a tad excessive, cars that can break the law litter every forecourt and driveway in the world! 

Yes of course. However, I did not say cars should have a max. speed of only 70.

[C8RKH]

Iirc correctly Geely's Volvo cars now come with max. speed restrictions fitted to all new models - restricted to 112mph I believe.

Let's hope that's one parts bucket Lotus don't reach into....

[Barrykearley]

6 hours ago, Bibs said:

Err, I think 99% of cars available now can exceed 70mph. While I agree that 217mph is a tad excessive, cars that can break the law litter every forecourt and driveway in the world! 

I agree - limiting it to say 180 would certainly be more sensible and open up a wider choice of tyres.

[C8RKH]

Wife has just said she quite likes the Tesla Model X's.

 

FFS, I thought that after 25 years of training I'd got her trained at last. Anyone know a good divorce lawyer as I would like to keep the Hethel cars?

[Bibs]

https://clunyguns.co.uk/ can help!

[C8RKH]

Oooof, some lovely hardware there. I could get into shooting if I had me some of that gear. Lovely stuff!

I'm sure the carbon weave on this matches my 410 Sport!

[electro_boy]

Totally agree thats a ridiculous amount of power and top speed for something that not intending to be a sports car etc ... 

But I think the ability to "detune" the system to work in a more reasonable area has very little cost.  Sure the motors and accompanying systems will be bigger than they need to be if they limited the speed and power a little bit but I imagine (I'm not expert on the matter) the difference in weight isn't much on a EV with 500bhp and 1000bhp.

The range of the car won't be calculated with the car in full fat mode so the batteries won't have to give full range and full power at the same time, it'll be one or other.  So I think its a case of "we can do it ... so we did".  It'll grab headlines and create hype and sales orders.  Power and speed of that amount has little useful value in the real world but if it doesn't cost much in performance, development costs etc... might as well stick it in.

Kinda of like the way most Teslas or other high end EVs can do 0-60 faster than pretty much any ICE car out there.  I don't think that was an intended goal when they started the project.  Its just a by-product of trying to make a very efficient motor that can regeneration to high levels and battery systems that can charge very quickly.  They just also happen to accelerate really quickly too.

Still have the argument of is it reasonable to give an average Joe 1000bhp and instant torque and rely on traction and stability control so they don't hurt them selfs and others... ?

[KAS-118]

As you say, they’re a new company - so have to out-Tesla Tesla