Is electric really the answer?

[duncx]

You two gents know more than me, that's clear!

I can't help being sceptical; I remember as a youth being lambasted by the dad of my girlfriend (my god she was fit!) for having a petrol car. Diesel was being heavily pushed by environmentalists as the saviour of the planet (this was the early 80s) but I was unsure, I knew that we didn't know everything about it. That turned out well didn't it

Let's think about the good old compact flourescent lights, massively pushed by environmentalists, very difficult to recycle because they contain mercury vapour and completely outclassed within a few years by the far superior technology of LEDs. I wonder if anyone has worked out just how much energy we wasted and how  much environmental damage was done by that well meaning episode?

Batteries, they are heavy clumsy things, they have a limited life, these contain nasty chemicals and elements that are frighteningly finite and at the moment are very difficult to recycle. It doesn't feel like the answer to me, it feels more like a sticking plaster and maybe even a ticking time bomb, I hope I'm wrong

BTW, for vehicle use I thought that the principle of storing hydrogen by absorbtion was a promising avenue of research, significantly improved density over gas/liquid and achievable at room temp?

EDIT: Just to be clear, I don't have problem with electric vehicles as a principle, obviously better for city use and I remember (as an 18 yr old) learning that dc motors produce most torque at standstill and thinking how cool that would be in a car

Edited November 21, 2020 by duncx

[C8RKH]

You raise some great points @duncxand believe what we are both aying is " you don't know what you don't know" and "if you don't know you can't predict with certainty".

Apologies if I got that wrong.

An observation, not just about BEV's is that we seem to be praying at the altar of technology. In most cases the answer seems to be "yeah but the tech tomorrow will enable this and do that". To me it's simple. If it really is about the environment then we need to consume less and produce less humans to consume. Sorry but it really is that simple.

Every generation of humans is bigger than the last. So we have seen population growing constantly.

With every generation we develop more technology, that we must have, that consumes more "ingredients", takes more energy to produce, does more environmental damage. And so the cycle of consumption and damage repeats but accelerates.

Arguing the toss over a car, regardless of the fuel/propulsion system is a 1st world luxury that usually has the most impact in the 2nd/3rd World.

Cars and ICE in general have been demonised. Yet they are a sympton but won't be the cause.  The cause is our evolving way of life, our population growth and our consumption.

Humans have become a cancer for the planet. We're like the algae that grows on the pond. Our reach slowly spreading across the pond. Removing all oxygen and nutrients as we go, destroying all other life/habitats as we grow.   That is the fundamental REAL issue that as a race, a species, we need to address but we are too arrogant, tribal and selfish to acknowledge it, let alone address it.

 

Happy Sunday all. 😂🤣

 

[rjwooll]

22 minutes ago, C8RKH said:

You raise some great points @duncxand believe what we are both aying is " you don't know what you don't know" and "if you don't know you can't predict with certainty".

Apologies if I got that wrong.

An observation, not just about BEV's is that we seem to be praying at the altar of technology. In most cases the answer seems to be "yeah but the tech tomorrow will enable this and do that". To me it's simple. If it really is about the environment then we need to consume less and produce less humans to consume. Sorry but it really is that simple.

Every generation of humans is bigger than the last. So we have seen population growing constantly.

With every generation we develop more technology, that we must have, that consumes more "ingredients", takes more energy to produce, does more environmental damage. And so the cycle of consumption and damage repeats but accelerates.

Arguing the toss over a car, regardless of the fuel/propulsion system is a 1st world luxury that usually has the most impact in the 2nd/3rd World.

Cars and ICE in general have been demonised. Yet they are a sympton but won't be the cause.  The cause is our evolving way of life, our population growth and our consumption.

Humans have become a cancer for the planet. We're like the algae that grows on the pond. Our reach slowly spreading across the pond. Removing all oxygen and nutrients as we go, destroying all other life/habitats as we grow.   That is the fundamental REAL issue that as a race, a species, we need to address but we are too arrogant, tribal and selfish to acknowledge it, let alone address it.

 

Happy Sunday all. 😂🤣

 

You raise some worrying points.

On the plus side for humanity, as prosperity increases we consume less ‘stuff’ than we did before. IN the UK, material goods consumption has reduced compared to 10-20 years ago. This trend holds true across all developed nations. Population increase also slows with increased prosperity and the rate of global population increase is now very small. Also pollution in developed nations is much less of a problem these days as environmental concerns become more important in decision making as prosperity increases.

On the negative side, the narrative you relate is being used globally to create a society that is undemocratic and totalitarian in nature. The UN agenda 2030 is a good policy example, and the Great Reset being proposed by the World Economic Forum (ably assisted by the supposedly apolitical Prince Charles) aims to enforce policies that threaten free enterprise, prosperity, the independent nation state and property ownership - amongst others - in the name of sustainability and the environment. This is a nightmare situation. Free enterprise, democracy and prosperity have driven the massive improvements we have seen In poverty eradication, healthcare, longevity and environmental improvement we have seen since the second world war and they want to throw it away? As Aleksander Solzhenitsyn said: ‘to do evil a human being must first of all believe that what he is doing is good.’ He witnessed and was victim of one of the biggest totalitarian massacres of innocent people in the 20th century.

I haven’t provided any references but you can easily google anything you want to look into further.
 

Richard

[C8RKH]

@rjwooll you've read far too much into my post which is a non political view but based on my own views based on my own observations.

I think if anyone does not believe that the accelerating growth in human population is THE biggest risk this planet faces then quite frankly they are deluded. End of. And that is just my view.

I also find your pov re that as we get more wealthy re consume less to be totall rollocks in my very, very humble opinion. But I will admit I am not basing that view on any credible research/data.

The wealthier, more prosperous we are the more we consume. As technology advances, we consume more as we do less ourselves and let the tech do it for us.

In the 50's few households had white goods. Every decade since then saw new goods being brought into the home until say the late 80s early 90's when things like TVs and computers arrived in multiple numbers in a single household. Then for the past 20 years we had had the home tech explosion with phones, smart phones, tablets, computers, gameboxes whatever.

At the same time in 50's most households has no car. Now, most have 2, and it is not uncommon to see households with 3-6! Many even buy cars as toys just fir fun 👍😜

Shall we talk about holidays, air travel and year round availabilty of food items (i.e. non seasonal non local) and the explosion in the global movement of goods and materials to fuel consumption.

Nope sorry. Absolutely do not and cannot believe that prosperity delivers in a reduction in consumption.

Also yes, technology and advancements are prolonging lifespans which, with a booming birth rate, provides a population double whammy.

We humans don't want to face the reality that we are the problem. I'm sorry you find that worrying.

As for political groups, global agendas, secret agendas etc I tend to leave that for Bond films. I don't subscribe to any of it.

Human population growth will ironically be the cause of our species demise. Hopefully it happens before we leave the planet a barren, infertile and desolate wasteland for every other species. From 1927 to 1960 it took 33 years for the global population to grow from 2-3bn people. 14 years 3-4bn. 13 years 4-5bn. 12 years 5-6bn. 12 years 6-7bn and a potential 11 years 7-8bn.  If you want to celebrate that as a "reduction in growth rate" fine by me. Fill your boots. But fill them quick as in 20 years with 10bn people there may not be enough boots to fill.

So conspiracy plots and political motivations apart. Honestly tell me we are not the problem! And to keep on topic not even BEVs will save the environmental impact of 10bn people on this planet.

 

[duncx]

If we want to keep personal transport then EVs of some sort are the future, of that I am an convinced.

However, I'm far from convinced about BEVs. At best they are an imperfect (and hopefully benign) stop-gap and at worst they will end up being yet another environmental disaster.

I'm 61 now so I'm not sure that I will be around to see the eventual outcome, but 50 years from now I can see them saying "WTF were they thinking ?" However, I have no kids and I will be dead so I'm not going to worry about it too much, if I can get still hold of petrol (and keep my Elise for fun) for the next 20 years I reckon that's me done

 

 

Edited November 22, 2020 by duncx

[mg4lotus]

I think most of human kind are starting to realise the impact we are having on the planet and we are starting to develop more technologies that are sustainable. Things will change because they need to change. People will still want things and experiences. It's just a case of making those desires more planet friendly. I just hope we have not gone over the tipping point. I generally have a positive attitude about the future and technology.

The dinosaurs and deniers are a worry but they are surely the minority?

The number of people on the planet is increasing and at some stage we will reach saturation point. What will happen then? Soylent Green?

Best wishes for the future.

Greta 

Soylent Green set in 2022

😱

[C8RKH]

5 hours ago, mg4lotus said:

The dinosaurs and deniers are a worry but they are surely the minority?

Many of the dinosaurs and deniers are avid adopters of technoly including the need to have a new Apple "product" when it comes out.  It seems that their "rage" is reserved for selective "things".

As for Soylent Green. Great film and been a reality for the past 10 years. What? You really thought it was made from mushrooms! Ha, your a fun guy!

[eUKenGB]

22 hours ago, C8RKH said:

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.....

Yes agreed. There is a tendency to gloss over potential future problems, just because it suits the zeitgeist.

12 hours ago, C8RKH said:

You raise some great points @duncxand believe what we are both aying is " you don't know what you don't know" and "if you don't know you can't predict with certainty".

Apologies if I got that wrong.

An observation, not just about BEV's is that we seem to be praying at the altar of technology. In most cases the answer seems to be "yeah but the tech tomorrow will enable this and do that". To me it's simple. If it really is about the environment then we need to consume less and produce less humans to consume. Sorry but it really is that simple.

Every generation of humans is bigger than the last. So we have seen population growing constantly.

With every generation we develop more technology, that we must have, that consumes more "ingredients", takes more energy to produce, does more environmental damage. And so the cycle of consumption and damage repeats but accelerates.

Arguing the toss over a car, regardless of the fuel/propulsion system is a 1st world luxury that usually has the most impact in the 2nd/3rd World.

Cars and ICE in general have been demonised. Yet they are a sympton but won't be the cause.  The cause is our evolving way of life, our population growth and our consumption.

Humans have become a cancer for the planet. We're like the algae that grows on the pond. Our reach slowly spreading across the pond. Removing all oxygen and nutrients as we go, destroying all other life/habitats as we grow.   That is the fundamental REAL issue that as a race, a species, we need to address but we are too arrogant, tribal and selfish to acknowledge it, let alone address it.

 

Happy Sunday all. 😂🤣

 

Completely agree. It's a difficult matter to address as most people seem unable to think objectively about a problem. I may think that electric vehicles are our best route forward, but as you so succinctly put it, what we need is less humans. No argument there.

[mik]

There is some fantastic info and opinion in this thread. 😎

I remain EV sceptical in terms of overall environmental impact, and strongly detest the way that politicians need to dumb down hugely complex issues to suit their manifestos and self-interest. But Mrs mik has firmly tipped over the knife edge to the pro-EV side. So since this is her car..... she calls it.

We are now an Evora + Audi E-Tron 55 Launch Edition family.

It’s an SUV - not a sports car. At more than 2.5 tonnes it weighs more than our old (a couple of cars back) Disco4. Batteries be heavy!

There is no denying it is a very refined drive though. Steering feel is woolly and you can’t hide the weight. But I don’t expect it to be a sports car.  Performance won’t worry the brisker Tesla variants, but 5.7 to 62mph (or 5.5 to 60mph on independent tests) is plenty quick for a chunky SUV IMHO. 
 

A new chapter.....
 

[jonwat]

Manufacturing green vehicles churns out more CO2 than making fuel models

Not that it will stop the Environmentalists who've already made up their stubborn minds on what will save the world 

[Kimbers]

On 22/11/2020 at 11:52, mg4lotus said:

Soylent Green?

Best wishes for the future.

Greta 

Soylent Green set in 2022

😱

Urh! Any Soylent Green with her as an ingredient will be full of piss and vinegar!

[C8RKH]

4 hours ago, Kimbers said:

Urh! Any Soylent Green with her as an ingredient will be full of piss and vinegar!

Bit like a used chip shop "punnet" behind the Royal Oak...

[C8RKH]

A real life experience, that I suspect will become more common to balance out all the fanboy marketing guff we always get rammed down our throats. No doubt not the norm I accept but nevertheless...

 

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2020/nov/28/electric-cars-porsche-charging-network

[Bibs]

It took them 9 hours to travel 130 miles in their car which has a 250 mile range?

[Barrykearley]

What an utterly ridiculous article.

it’s very clearly an issue with the intelligence of the Porsche owner not having the ability to plan the trip or charging.

however - the charging network is shit - it’s been that way forever. You should not need an App or a members card to access chargers - they should all be chip and pin like the self service petrol pumps. 

[DarrylV8]

The future looks pretty good for Hydrogen;

Go-ahead for first hydrogen-to-homes network

1 day Clearance has been given for the construction of a pioneering hydrogen-to-homes demonstration network in Scotland.

/img-cache/e0ec9cd9e07af928ea5a00ba334d1e98/750x500_top_1606726489_30nov20-sgn-h100fife---methil-fife.jpg

 

The hydrogen will be produced through electrolysis powered by an offshore wind turbine

Gas network company SGN says that customers in Fife will be the first in the world to heat their homes and cook their food using 100% zero-carbon hydrogen. The hydrogen, which will be produced through electrolysis powered by an offshore wind turbine, will be supplied through a new network connected to 300 homes. 

The commitment from SGN follows confirmation that energy regulator Ofgem will award up to £18m from its annual Network Innovation Competition to support the development of the new network. Ofgem’s decision triggers a further investment of £6.9m from the Scottish government. SGN’s shareholders and Britain’s three other gas distribution networks are also providing funding for the project.

Participating customers will use hydrogen boilers, heaters and cooking appliances in their homes during the 4.5-year initial trial, providing insight into how 100% hydrogen can support day-to-day living all year round. 

Phase one of the H100 Fife project will connect an initial 300 homes in Levenmouth to a new hydrogen network from the end of 2022, with potential expansion of up to 1,000 homes following a successful completion of phase one. 

 

H100 Fife hopes to deliver the critical evidence base that proves hydrogen as a viable and zero-carbon alternative to heat the 23 million homes currently fitted with natural gas boilers.

 

click to enlarge

 

SGN’s director of energy futures, Angus McIntosh, said: “H100 Fife is the UK’s priority project in this area and is designed to demonstrate hydrogen distribution and in-home performance in a real-world setting. It’s an exciting opportunity to revolutionise the way millions of people heat their homes. The hydrogen appliances will connect to the existing pipes in the home for zero carbon heating and cooking with minimal disruption and with no need to replace existing radiators or plumbing.”

Ofgem chief executive Jonathan Brearley said: “The winning projects were those which showed the most potential to make the game-changing leaps in technology we need to build a greener, fairer energy system at the lowest cost to consumers.”

[pete]

https://auth.voxmedia.com/login?community_id=372&return_to=https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/8/22158573/quantumscape-solid-state-battery-ev-range-charge-vw

[Bibs]

My EV is arriving shortly so don't panic world, I'm saving you all. 

Can anyone recommend a home charger please? I can use the supplied 3 pin but would rather a decent one stuck on the outside of the house. Tethered ideally for convenience. Ta

[ChrisJ]

2 minutes ago, Bibs said:

Can anyone recommend a home charger

 

[Bibs]

Have a 'W' to go with your suggestion

[C8RKH]

That IQ of 3 symbol just about sums up the average EV buyer....

[Bibs]

Oh dear. 

Anyone got an old mobile phone they can talk to me about please?

[MPx]

Depends what you want/need to do Andy.  I've managed since Aug2018 with the granny lead plugged into a single socket run direct from its own RCBO in the CU in the barn.  Its a good enough answer for us at next to no cost, but it does take many hours to charge from flat if you will be doing significant daily milage.  We only need to charge a couple of times a week and it just runs overnight to take it from ~40% to 100% charged.  At night rate that's ~ 3p/mile.

What I will put in when I get around to it is a Zappi.  https://myenergi.com/product/zappi/   Downside is its one of the more expensive chargers.  Upsides are: I can feed our PV through it for a free charge in the summer.  Its the only charger that doesn't need an earth rod (this is a big deal often glossed over.  Not particularly expensive to have one, but many "professionals" don't actually do it, or so it seems from much online chatter.)  But its USP that is needed here is that it can manage current limiting effectively.  I only have a 63amp service going to the outbuildings and the GSHP takes a fair old whack when it and the ground loop pump fire up.  The Zappi can be set up to monitor the total draw and operate within a set limit by ramping down the charger draw until the GSHP stabilises and more amps become available.  

If you are going to try to manage your leccy actively with Octopus Agile then many have used an OHME charger effectively, although it is a bit ugly.  You can get a deal through Octopus.

Other than that there are a myriad of standard 7kW chargers available and if its your first you can get it installed with an OLEV grant.  My experience is that prices by those authorised have been loaded by approx the value of the grant or even more so I don't see any advantage of using that route over just buying a charger from a discount wholesaler and getting a decent electrician to install it - completely outside of the OLEV rules/scheme.  I'm sure Barry or Dan would whack one in for you.

[Bibs]

Thanks Mike. I think I'll buy a charger as you say and get one of the local sparks in the village to fit, there are 2 who are friends in my street and another locally too so that should be easy enough. I did think that the ones I've seen with the grant seemed pretty pricy. 

I'm with BG at the moment and they do have an EV tariff but it makes the daytime rate pretty chunky so will switch to Octopus and set a charge schedule for overnight. With my driving profile, I should only need to charge it once a week unless I've some work trips but getting that at 4p overnight seems pretty sweet. 

[Barrykearley]

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/164064034120
 

we got one of these - cheap and works great - even has an app I think