Is electric really the answer?

[Spinney]

 

I drove this car this morning, the Polestar 2. I'd had no plans to test drive anything, but yesterday saw there was a Polestar driving event being held locally, so went online and registered, more out of curiosity than anything really. I've driven a Tesla S a few years ago, but that was the only other pure electric car I've driven, well apart from a golf buggy in Florida a while back! 

Anyhow, drove round to the exhibition hall where it was being held and had to go through all the usual COVID rigmarole before entering the building, where they had about a dozen Polestar 2s in various colours/specs. We were given a short presentation before being shown into the cars and having the various features explained, whereupon we were let out on the local roads in groups of 3 with the lead car driven by one of the staff and each of us alone in 'our' car.

My initial reaction to the car on entering it was I'm none too keen on the interior, far too many cheap looking hard plastic surfaces. The seat fabric looks and feels quite odd, so I asked the guy what it is and he proudly announced it's called 'Vegan' (I don't think he saw my rolling eyes nor heard my quietly muttered FFS!), and is made from recycled plastic bottles. I did mention that personally I don't think you can beat a bit of cow on a car seat, but not too sure if he heard that either.

The centre console between the front seats is rather large and almost seems to dominate the cars interior, which I didn't like, but compared to the Tesla, it at least doesn't have the huge dinner tray touch screen, which I detest, but rather an iPad sized screen instead. I'm always very dubious of tablet screens in cars but I have to say that this one really is rather good, with most controls you might want to use, being carried out by voice command alone and the main dials are still in front of the driver as in conventional cars. The range of features it has, such as eye movement detection, which brightens the dials as you look at them and dims them when you aren't are mind boggling. Having said that, whilst a novelty to start with, I'm not sure such features actually add to my driving pleasure, if I'm being honest. I find them all a bit gimmicky.

Driving impressions are quite good and I quickly adjusted to the 1 pedal regenerative braking mode. The first couple of times approaching a junction, my right foot instinctively moved to cover the brake, only for me to find I'd then stopped a couple of metres short of where I wanted to be. But as I said, I quickly adjusted to it and found it very easy to modulate the go pedal as necessary thereafter. As you'd expect, it is eerily quiet as you pull away and, at first, I did find myself just brushing the accelerator to slightly move forward whilst stopped, just to make sure it was going to go when I wanted it to. When you are stopped it feels just like the engine has died in a conventional car, hence why I needed a tiny confidence dab on the throttle to convince myself all is well. But, again, I quickly got used to that too.

Unfortunately, because we were playing follow my leader, there were precious few opportunities to boot it although on a couple of occasions, I did slowly drop back from the car in front (I was 2nd in line) and gave myself a chance to give it some welly, albeit briefly. I think the chap in the last Polestar behind me at first wondered why I was slowing down, but he soon got the idea and joined me! Anyhow, the first time I booted it, the car took off like the proverbial off a shovel, leaving me to exclaim "Farkin 'ell, this thing flies" and leaving a big smile on my face. No doubt about it, that kind of urge sure is addictive but, sadly, I didn't have the chance to try it on any twisty bits, but it did feel quite planted on the few roundabouts that I was able to take enthusiastically.

So, after a 30 minute drive, we got back to the start where the staff were eagerly awaiting our debrief and various verdicts.

Would I buy one? Nah, not a chance, at least not for the forseeable. It's a nice enough car but, for me, lacks all soul I'm afraid, which does make me a tad concerned about how Lotus will square that with their "For the driver" tag line. I think it true to say that dinosaurs like me probably aren't the target market and they are most likely aiming at the 'woke' (christ how I hate that expression!) younger 30 somethings and subsequent generations.

As it is a nice sunny day here, I went to the venue in my Evora and god how I loved getting into the cow covered interior, then opening the exhaust valve before pressing the starter button and startling a group of birds out of a nearby tree. Bloody lovely!

[Neal H]

They also forgot to make it stylish. Bit of a shame really as I quite like modern Volvo’s.

[C8RKH]

Looks a damn site better to me than any Tesla

[Bibs]

I test drove an e-Niro yesterday. Very impressive tech, on one corner alone it regenerated a mile of charge! Not the prettiest of cars but buzzes along well in sport and practical so would be a good replacement to the Scirocco. 

[pete]

Tesla has reduced it's warranty on used cars. Could have an effect on used prices

https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/19/21523278/tesla-used-car-warranty-reduction-model-s-x

[C8RKH]

2 hours ago, pete said:

Tesla has reduced it's warranty on used cars. Could have an effect on used prices

https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/19/21523278/tesla-used-car-warranty-reduction-model-s-x

Probably because the warranty claims are racking up and they need to reduce the cost to them of them. The more cars they sell the more warranty claims, the bigger the cost, the larger the drag on profits and cash.  Welcome to the real world Tesla.

[pete]

Do electric cars accelerate too quick for the average person

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1632160053652601&id=100005758656771&sfnsn=scwspmo

[MPx]

Clearly just a twat.  On the other hand, I do find that there's must less initial feedback from the throttle peddle which can make well judged getaways harder than with most ICE cars.  Gentle is easy but if going for a gap in traffic from a standstill its all too easy to overcook it - much as you can if you've got over 500bhp available.  The difference in pedal travel between not enough, a sharp start, and full on burnout is surprisingly small and there's no mechanical noise to give you an extra clue.

[Bibs]

Just had an e-Niro for a couple of days. Very impressed, loads of excellent tech and a very usable 282 mile range which can be eaked out to well over 300 with mainly town driving. Will be placing an order for a 4+ one on Monday! 

https://www.whatcar.com/kia/e-niro/estate/review/n18388

[Barrykearley]

Nice one @Bibs - you sure won’t regret that.

[eUKenGB]

On 07/02/2020 at 07:57, C8RKH said:

 

The issue with all Lithium batteries and high cycle frequencies due to top up charges is well documented and is a chemical issue.

So most of my information was gleaned from enthusiastic owner drivers, not manufacturers etc.

Hope this helps to clarify.

Final point is, buy a current EV to save on running costs. But please do not try to justify on current eco grounds as it just does not wash.

I disagree. The future is a mix of BEV for local use and green hydrogen with green hydrogen winning in the long term as it is cheaper and less environmentally damaging longer term.

But. It's OK to disagree.

Yes, degradation of lithium-ion batteries is well known and documented. That's why there's a huge amount of research into alternative chemistries that avoid this particular problem. Even the recently announced new Tesla cell is a significant improvement and there's way more to come with alternative chemistries yet to make it out of the lab. There are already battery technologies that do NOT degrade - ever. But difficult to scale and package into a vehicle. It's just a question of research into better ways to achieve what we need, store as much as possible, for as long as possible in as little weight as possible. It's not down to laws of physics, it's just modifying the materials used and they're getting better all the time

Unlike hydrogen which as I've explained here before suffers very badly from the laws of physics and will never be a viable solution for personal transportation, hence no car manufacturers are continuing to pursue this technology. For large scale commercial transportation where the scale makes production and storage of the hydrogen more possible, maybe. But households will never have their own hydrogen generating station, whereas they can generate their own electricity. I'm sorry but whatever you would like to believe, storage and transportation of hydrogen over a global distribution network is simply not viable due to the immense pressures and or low temperatures required. All of which makes hydrogen production very energy expensive, so the overall gain from its use is much reduced or even eliminated. In fact currently I believe it's negative. Takes more to produce and store the hydrogen than you get back in the vehicle. Not great for global energy usage is it.

As for nitrogen power? So unlikely I don't even see it worth considering. Similar problems to the storage and transportation of hydrogen (albeit less extreme) and of course takes a lot of energy to liquify and maintain in that state, reducing its usefulness. I think any possible use of this is simply wishful thinking. What real auto/engine maker is even seriously considering this? I suspect none.

Batteries are not yet perfect, sure. But they are getting better and will improve to the point that they are no longer seen as any obstacle to EV use. That's all it takes. Improve our method of electric storage. Being powered by an electric motor is awesome, driving is simply way better than ICE. I realise many of you will resist that, but stop clinging to the anachronisms of those parts of the driving methodology solely implemented to counter how bad the ICE is, i.e. gearbox and clutch. They're not sacrosanct and in reality add nothing to the driving experience.

Whatever, let's be realistic. Hydrogen and/or nitrogen will not be making it to your personal transport vehicle(s). So forget all this whimsy. EV is where it IS going, like it or not. Let's just concentrate on improving our electric production and storage processes and learning to recycle everything 100%. We need a solution that is INFINITELY SUSTAINABLE and one thing we can all be 100% sure of, that ain't fossil fuel.

[Bibs]

34 minutes ago, eUKenGB said:

They're not sacrosanct and in reality add nothing to the driving experience.

Really?

I've got an Evora for fun, I'm buying the Kia for transportation. 

[C8RKH]

55 minutes ago, eUKenGB said:

I realise many of you will resist that, but stop clinging to the anachronisms of those parts of the driving methodology solely implemented to counter how bad the ICE is, i.e. gearbox and clutch. They're not sacrosanct and in reality add nothing to the driving experience.

The driving experience is what YOU want it to be. That's why people spend a fortune on expensive HIFI's to put outdated vinyl discs on. It's why fathers flock with their kids to the local steam railway at bank holidays.  I have no problem whatsover with people embracing and celebrating the new. But not allowing us to enjoy what WE like about the experience is not on.  It's like a vegan pissing on that rib-eye you marinated for 6 hours before slapping it on the griddle, cooking to perfection, and then enjoying that good old taste.

[Barrykearley]

10 hours ago, Bibs said:

Really?

I've got an Evora for fun, I'm buying the Kia for transportation. 

It’ll get you around brilliantly. Out accelerate most things from the traffic lights while being quiet and comfortable. A sublime gearbox as well 🤭 - just be kind to the clutch.

when it’s flat - after a long time - you can get the Evora out.

[Neal H]

So, in summary battery electric is the only viable future option but unfortunately battery tech isn’t there yet. They have nine years to fix that.

280 mile range sounds great, but if it’s going to deteriorate to 150 miles over the next four or five years then that’s a problem, particularly given that changing the battery will likely cost more than the car is worth.

[ChrisJ]

14 hours ago, eUKenGB said:

hydrogen ... will never be a viable solution for personal transportation, hence no car manufacturers are continuing to pursue this technology.

Japan doesn't seem to believe you though.

https://www.ifri.org/en/publications/etudes-de-lifri/japans-hydrogen-strategy-and-its-economic-and-geopolitical-implications#:~:text=Japan’s Hydrogen Strategy and Its Economic and Geopolitical,and Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) in power generation.

https://www.meti.go.jp/english/press/2017/pdf/1226_003a.pdf

 

 

[eUKenGB]

1 hour ago, Neal H said:

So, in summary battery electric is the only viable future option but unfortunately battery tech isn’t there yet. They have nine years to fix that.

280 mile range sounds great, but if it’s going to deteriorate to 150 miles over the next four or five years then that’s a problem, particularly given that changing the battery will likely cost more than the car is worth.

Lithium Ion batteries don't simply deteriorate to that extent in that period of time. Down to 80% in twice that time is more realistic and maybe not even that far. Degradation also tails off rather than a linear line down to useless.

Old batteries can then be used for household storage which has no need for the extreme energy density as originally in the vehicle. Hugely extends the usable lifetime of the battery. Then when no good for anything, recycle all the materials for new batteries. Anything you burn in an ICE is 100% NON recyclable.

Sceptics always like to make claims based on current technology. But batteries will improve to extend range, reduce charging times and for much less cost. These factors have all improved massively over the last few years and most recently the new Tesla cell was announced that succeeds on all those counts. The ICE was a much derided power source 100 years ago with many claiming it would never replace the horse and look where we are now.

Battery tech certainly is there now as many thousands are proving by using EVs daily. Currently it requires more planning for a long journey, but less for short commute type journeys as every time you leave the house you have a full 'tank' and never need to charge anywhere else. Bear in mind that the average car journey in the UK is just 20 miles, with 99% of journeys less than 100 miles. So for most of the population, current battery tech does suffice and anyway is improving. For those who don't fit the above parameters, well, tough. You'll have to wait for improvements in the technology. But doesn't sound like that will be a problem for the diehards anyway.

[eUKenGB]

1 hour ago, ChrisJ said:

Japan doesn't seem to believe you though.

https://www.ifri.org/en/publications/etudes-de-lifri/japans-hydrogen-strategy-and-its-economic-and-geopolitical-implications#:~:text=Japan’s Hydrogen Strategy and Its Economic and Geopolitical,and Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) in power generation.

That is however 2 years ago and I think you'll find Japan has now moved away from Hydrogen use in personal transportation.

I cannot overstate the problems of using Hydrogen due to the storage and transportation requirements. You must not glibly assume you can simply turn over the fuel oil infrastructure to the delivery and storage of hydrogen instead. Not only physical requirements, but the energy requirements to cool and pressurise are huge, making it impractical on the small scale.

Also another point I feel has been forgotten, hydrogen fuel cells are quite good at dribbling out electricity at a constant rate, but no good in a vehicle that requires sudden bursts of acceleration. So Hydrogen Fuel Cell EVs still need BATTERIES. So as an argument against BEVs, it doesn't really hold water (or Hydrogen very well either 😀)

As I said, I do still see a potential for Hydrogen use in aircraft and maybe commercial transportation, but I maintain we will not see it adopted as the main replacement for the ICE in personal transportation.

[eUKenGB]

14 hours ago, C8RKH said:

The driving experience is what YOU want it to be. That's why people spend a fortune on expensive HIFI's to put outdated vinyl discs on. It's why fathers flock with their kids to the local steam railway at bank holidays.  I have no problem whatsover with people embracing and celebrating the new. But not allowing us to enjoy what WE like about the experience is not on.  It's like a vegan pissing on that rib-eye you marinated for 6 hours before slapping it on the griddle, cooking to perfection, and then enjoying that good old taste.

Yes, I used to claim I would never get an automatic. But I never thought I would get old either. Turns out I was wrong on both counts.

Driving a car in the UK now is not as much fun as when I was growing up and first getting into cars and motorcycles. Way fewer cars and automatics were for dummies who couldn't drive. But as time passed with more and more draconian speed limits and the roads became more crowded, I found the best way to enjoy a blast was on a motorcycle, on which other road users simply become a moving chicane to make the ride more interesting. Riding my FireBlade down the A4 to Wales on a regular basis was sheer joy. Whereas using the NSX (my car at the time) was simply purgatory and just consisted of very brief spurts between each slow moving car, every few hundred yards. That car was so fantastic it was the most aggravating vehicle I ever owned, simply because I couldn't drive it the way it wanted to be driven and being a manual made that all the worse. Having an automatic it is easier to 'go with the flow' and arrive more relaxed at my destination.

I've never had a manual since and do not miss it one bit. Just find driving my wife's manual Mini Cooper S kindof annoying.

So while I understand the theory of a manual being so much fun etc, I found I grew out of that and driving was more than just proving mastery over the irascible ICE. Just like with motorcycles where I can no longer be bothered to wrap myself around the petrol tank to reach the handlebars. I now only ride more upright naked bikes that don't encourage me to ride so fast, yet provide so much more enjoyment at a lower speed. I've been shifting perfectly without the clutch for as long as I can remember, but I like the modern Quickshifter systems that make it, well, even simpler and comfort is the most important aspect when designing my motorcycle projects.

Much as I like the Evora, I wouldn't contemplate a manual. A whole load of faff for (IMO) no reward. In fact as I've said before, an electric Evora would be even better than auto ICE. Changing gears and all that clutch work? Nah, can't be arsed with all that any more. I can go just as fast and as much in control without all that.

Having said that, if a clutch and manual transmission is what you must have, nothing stopping you from having that in an EV. In fact one of my electric projects may well still have a gearbox. But you don't of course need to use the clutch when stationary. Best of both worlds maybe?

[C8RKH]

You cannot also understate the challenges that we face in rolling out sufficient chargers, in the right locations for the mass adoption. The cost of this switchover from one fuel source to another is enormous and the timescale to achieve it is short.

I don't think anyone really needs convincing that BEVs will be the future. However what pisses me off, and I think many others, is the evangelical zeal with which converts aggressively push the BEV is best at all cost messages. It's like dealing with bloody vegans and religious zealots who refuse to accept that someone can not "see the light".

Yup, BEVs are coming. Yup, at some point I'll have to buy one. Doesn't mean I have to like it. Though I have to admit having seen the new Polestar in the flesh, I can see the designs are getting better. Wouldn't buy a Tesla as can't stand Musk and the build quality is often shite. Also BEVs right now are overpriced for what they are and that's even with the subsidies.

It's similar to the hype with Smart Meters. I've complained to the Regulator re the current radio ads statements that Smart Meters" are helping the UK switch to greener energy. Absolute total bullshit. All they do is show your usage and estimated bill. Doesn't give any information on how your energy is produced/from what source.  The whole green agenda is fuelled with Bullshit and misinformation.  I fully accept we have an environmental issue we need to address, but be open, honest about it and don't resort to bullshit promises, statements etc.

Yes,electric is the answer. But it's going to a very costly, bumpy ride to get there.

[eUKenGB]

3 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

You cannot also understate the challenges that we face in rolling out sufficient chargers, in the right locations for the mass adoption. The cost of this switchover from one fuel source to another is enormous and the timescale to achieve it is short.

I don't think anyone really needs convincing that BEVs will be the future. However what pisses me off, and I think many others, is the evangelical zeal with which converts aggressively push the BEV is best at all cost messages. It's like dealing with bloody vegans and religious zealots who refuse to accept that someone can not "see the light".

Yup, BEVs are coming. Yup, at some point I'll have to buy one. Doesn't mean I have to like it. Though I have to admit having seen the new Polestar in the flesh, I can see the designs are getting better. Wouldn't buy a Tesla as can't stand Musk and the build quality is often shite. Also BEVs right now are overpriced for what they are and that's even with the subsidies.

It's similar to the hype with Smart Meters. I've complained to the Regulator re the current radio ads statements that Smart Meters" are helping the UK switch to greener energy. Absolute total bullshit. All they do is show your usage and estimated bill. Doesn't give any information on how your energy is produced/from what source.  The whole green agenda is fuelled with Bullshit and misinformation.  I fully accept we have an environmental issue we need to address, but be open, honest about it and don't resource to bullshit promises, statements etc.

Yes,electric is the answer. But it's going to a very costly, bumpy ride to get there.

Yes Andy, you're right on all that. Don't get me started on smart meters. Ours is so smart it cannot even connect to any network here so totally fails to communicate any information. So we have to do the meter reading and that's an appallingly badly designed process. They really thought that through didn't they. Damn, I said don't get me started…

As for all these claims about showing how much you've saved. As you say, BS. Our Smart heating system constantly tells us how wonderful it is and how much it's saved us, but since they have NO idea how much we would be using had we not installed their system, there is no possible way they can calculate any savings or otherwise. In any case, any savings we might be making will be more than offset by the cost of the batteries (damned batteries again 😀) in each thermostat that require such frequent replacement. So yes, totally agree, the green agenda is full of BS and downright lies.

I love technology. And I hate technology. I don't see any resolution to that.

[duncx]

17 hours ago, eUKenGB said:

Let's just concentrate on improving our electric production and storage processes

That's the whole point of hydrogen for vehicles isn't it? Use 'excess' electricity (wherever and whenever its generated) to produce hydrogen and then distribute the hydrogen a bit like we do petrol - tried and tested system. Sure it's not easy, there are problems with production/storage/distribution etc, but it's all doable and definitely NOT a physics pipe dream. It has many of the advantages of battery power (both are ultimately electric) but you're not dragging a half ton battery around and you can refill in a couple of minutes.

Edited November 21, 2020 by duncx

[C8RKH]

Green hydrogen has its "issues as you say @duncx but you can also use the BEV Evangelists "own argument about fossil fuels" right back at them. Hydrogen is the most abundant element on the problem and you don't have to "mine it", in a hugely destructive process and efficient process in the way you do with fossil fuels AND the core elements you need for batteries. Both these "fuel" sources are extracted in a way that is often unethical (to the local people affected), exploitative (the rich get richer the local poor get f@@ked over again and exposed to disease, chemicals, environment destruction, etc) and requires the movement of minerals/base product over thousands of miles for processing etc.

For green hydrogen, you can use wind power to generate the electricity (and you do need a lot of energy currently to extract and prepare the Hydrogen - I accept that) to extract the Hydrogen from sea water. Indeed, I've been looking at one project were we have been looking at the business case around using existing oil platforms and repurposing the topside structures to move from oil extraction to hydrogen production. You can even stuff the stuff back in the depleted wells and with an expensive upgrade (you have to replace/line the pipes as Hydrogen is super corrosive) you can then pump when it you need it from there to the mainland (the same as we do currently with natural gas). Indeed SGN have been running a pilot for some time now piping in the Hydrogen to Aberdeen where it is used to run a section of the local authority bus fleet as a trial.  That is a super efficient way of doing things and avoids many of the pitfalls with having to install the EV facilities (though of course you do need local storage/pumping for the Hydrogen).

If anything, for the physical vehicle then BEV is probably the easiest option, but requires a mahoosive investment in infrastructure for the national rollout.  Hydrogen is a bit harder from the vehicle perspective but a lot cheaper from an investment in infrastructure perspective, and, by reusing/repurposing current facilities you don;t have to spend a huge amount of time, money and effort re-educating people that they now need to do things differently.

As ever, the arguments used against fossil fuels can all be used against BEV's with the exception of you cannot reburn a fossil fuel. But we cannot also remake the minerals we need for batteries and we don't really know what the impact of having all these batteries around (after they have been used in cars then homes) will be in say 50 years time. It's a bit like the 1950's when Nuclear was the future. 40 years later we started to get f@@ked by the waste that it produced and what we need to do with it - store it and recycle it a la Sellafield.

However the evangelists never really want to think about that, as they are part of society and today society as a whole struggles to plan for tomorrow, yet alone 30, 40, 50 or more years into the future.

 

[eUKenGB]

Whoah there Andy, it's a bit of a stretch to compare old batteries with nuclear waste. There's no reason why batteries cannot be completely re-cycled, whereas nuclear reactive waste is what it is and will only change according to the half-life of the isotopes involved and again, laws of physics come into play and there's nothing we can do about that. So not really comparable at all. C'mon.

I realise we're not there yet, but ultimately we need to re-cycle everything. Just using up anything that cannot be replaced is a short term solution and by short term I don't mean a few years. I mean in relation to the future of the human race which we hope will continue as long as the universe can support such life. Or do we simply shrug our shoulders and say 'not my problem'?

Needless to say, it's all driven by money, but there's no physical reason why we cannot fully re-cycle battery constituents into new batteries. The fact we are not yet doing this 100% does not negate the validity of using batteries at all.

I don't see the grid infrastructure being such a big problem. It was recently calculated that if every car in the US was transformed into electric power, it would require an additional 30% of electricity production. That's not insurmountable and I don't see why it should be a bigger problem here. Not only that, but with increasing home generation, the actual overall additional requirement is reduced, so less extra needs to be produced and easing the amount that has to be carried by the grid.

We all know that the manufacture of even EVs involves emissions we need to reduce and even eliminate, but production of those emissions is centralised and hence easier to deal with and clean up, compared to every ICE vehicle on the planet simply chucking it all into the atmosphere. We've obviously improved that massively, but decentralised emissions, just spewing from every vehicle will always be harder to control.

I long thought Hydrogen would be the answer (although hating the demise of the ICE in any case), but despite being a massive climate change sceptic, I do see the need to reduce our pollution of the planet and having experienced the thrill of driving a good EV, I can't wait to get shot of the ICE in my cars. However, I came to realise the shortcomings of the Hydrogen solution. Real 'laws of physics' problems, whereas battery tech is improving to the point it is a real viable alternative for almost everyone now and still with plenty of improvements yet to come.

Surely a car with e.g. 600 mile range, full charge in less than half an hour, easily recyclable batteries  and costs no more to purchase than the ICE equivalent answers all the technical objections? That is all achievable within the near future. Not next year for sure, but it's not that far away. Making Hydrogen storable in liquid form at room temperature and pressure? No way, never, not in this universe. I wish it were different, I still love my original concept for a closed loop production system with microwave stations in orbit, collecting the sun's energy and beaming it to earth to electrolyse water into Hydrogen and Oxygen, on a massive scale. But the reality is that dealing with that Hydrogen is too problematic to be viable for personal transportation. Not when batteries are proving to be the better option. Auto manufacturers have no hidden agenda here. They have no reason to use batteries rather than Hydrogen Fuel Cell (also with batteries of course), apart from the fact that they are proving to be the better solution. Hence they've all dumped their Fuel Cell plans.

I'm a realist. EVs are coming, no more ICE from 2030 looks like. So rather than complain and object about it all, prepare for it by rejoicing in the advantages of a good EV and look forward to it. They are not necessarily boring. Is the Evija going to be boring? I doubt it.

[C8RKH]

What I was comparing Ken was the lack of knowledge/forsight/thought that there would be a problem, as opposed to the materials potency.

Same issue we have had with fridges/freezers and many other things. At the time no one thought there would be an issue etc...

Same with aerosols.

You get my drift, we don't know what we don't know and heaven help us if these batteries catch a light.....