electric scooters

ferdi

http://www.evtamerica.com/evt4000e.htm

thinking of getting one of these bad boys - zero emissions, practically zero noise.

do you know if i get special treatment in terms of tax or insurance? i should bloody hope so, government should be bending over backwards to try and encourage people to switch to this type of transport.

cormie

Wow cool. Hope cars have the same in future. How do they work exactly though? You charge it over night? Does it take long to charge? So no fuel is needed at all? And for only $2,000 on that site:eek:

air

Based on the specs on the site it would take about 5-6hrs to charge. Its not a very high spec machine though but for the money I guess its not bad.
I'll stick to the bike for the time being though!
Edit - it says 3-4 hours on the site, this is a bit fast for a lead acid battery though, wouldnt do anything to prolong its life.
I wouldnt mind one with a brushless motor and LiPos
A guy in the US sells kits to convert normal motorbikes (Kawasaki Ninjas etc) to eletric for around 2k US.

On taxation, does anyone know the tax issues for fully electric cars? Are they exempt?
They are in the UK AFAIK.

FillSpectre

I'd buy one of those if the running costs would be OK

Misty Moon

According to the motor tax website (www.motortax.ie) annual tax for electrical cars is €146. Electrical cycles and tricycles are €31. Not really sure if a scooter counts as a car or a cycle. Might be worth a quick email to them to check.

alias no.9

ferdi wrote:

thinking of getting one of these bad boys - zero emissions

How is the electricity generated? Gas? Coal? Peat? Hardly zero emissions. I'm not trying to be negative or cutting but it's worth taking a look at the bigger picture.

bonkey

ferdi wrote:

do you know if i get special treatment in terms of tax or insurance? i should bloody hope so, government should be bending over backwards to try and encourage people to switch to this type of transport.

Insurance should be based on what insurance is always based on - the statistics for that type/class of vehicle. You shouldn't be given a discount for riding an electrical / zero-emission vehicle over a combustion-engine-based one if it carries the same risk.

As for tax...well...you already get special treatment. You don't pay fuel tax. Your running costs - if one is to believe the site - will be lower. What more do you want?

I'm always reminded of people complaining about the cost of low-watt alternatives for conventional light-bulbs. You could point out how over the lifetime of an average bulb, they saved significant amounts of money, more than off-setting the cost difference, and people would still come back with "but why do they have to be so expensive...why can't the government subsidise them".

Incidentally, have you considered the environmental impact of the larger amount of lead-acid battery which this will have compared to a regular moped / small mo'bike? If you believe you should be given an incentive to move off petrol, would you also accept an additional cost for using more environmentally-unfriendly batteries?

jc

pan

Great idea these! Will probably get one at some stage

I saw them all over south east asia (china and vietnam) and apprently they only cost about $400 dollars over there! How much is shipping to europe??

FillSpectre

bonkey wrote:

As for tax...well...you already get special treatment. You don't pay fuel tax. Your running costs - if one is to believe the site - will be lower. What more do you want?

Electricity isn't tax free is it?

I think you would have to put something on it to make noise as if it were too quite people would walk out infront of you.

air

Electricity is virtually tax free in comparision with fuel. I dont think the lack of noise would be any more of an issue than on a bicycle and its no faster than one. It is an issue on cars however.

gonk

ferdi wrote:

zero emissions, practically zero noise.

Not really zero emissions, the electricity you use to charge it will in all likelihood have been generated using fossil fuels.

air

In all likelihood yes, however the overall fossil fuel joules -> kinetic energy of vechicle joules is likely to be a bit better for an electric vehicle.
To the best of my knowledge the figures are roughly as follows:
Fossil -> Electric in your home ~ 30% efficiency
Electricity in your home -> batteries ~ 75% ish (22.5% overall efficiency)
Energy in batteries -> motive force in vehicle ~ 90ish% efficient for BL motors.
This gives an overall figure of roughly 20% for fossil > motive force for an EV

I have heard figures of 15 to 20 % quoted for fossil -> motive for IC engines.
However the efficiency of scale of transport of the fossils is likely to be a nice bit better to the power station rather than to your local petrol station (I.E. Refinery -> Ship -> Power Station Vs Refinery -> Ship -> Shore Depot -> Local Distributor -> Petrol Station).

If on the other hand you generate your own electricity yourself using renewable means (wind, solar, genset running on WVO / biodiesel) then the figures are massively weighted in favour of EV's from an environmental / emissions point of view.

Scruff

cant you change who the e.s.b supply you with energy from?
i thought i read somewhere that you could request that your electricty be supplied by one of the wind generating companies. I know you cant tell the difference when it comes down your line but it would show that you are on record as being supplied by a zero emission source and would be good in that you would be counted as one of the increasing number looking for eco friendly energy sources.
or was i dreaming all that...

air

Ah thats all an accounting exercise at the end of the day anyway. You could sign up with AirTricity at one point or another. They've since pulled out of the market AFAIK.

FillSpectre

air wrote:

Electricity is virtually tax free in comparision with fuel. I dont think the lack of noise would be any more of an issue than on a bicycle and its no faster than one. It is an issue on cars however.

So there is tax and becasue there is a higher tax on a poluting enegery source in limited supply the tax doesn't count :rolleyes:

As I cycle people don't see you or hear you so I would say you are moving at faster speeds would be an issue. Bicycles can move at the same speeds but can't accelerate as quickly and therfore don't reach the speeds as regularly.

It will be interesting when the government suddenly can't base their revenue so massively on fuels or if they try to keep it going regardless of the fuel type.

ferdi

alias no.9 wrote:

How is the electricity generated? Gas? Coal? Peat? Hardly zero emissions. I'm not trying to be negative or cutting but it's worth taking a look at the bigger picture.

gonk wrote:

Not really zero emissions, the electricity you use to charge it will in all likelihood have been generated using fossil fuels.

thank you for these inspired comments. here i was thinking electricity was made by giant gnomes on the dark side of the moon. eejits.

bonkey wrote:

As for tax...well...you already get special treatment. You don't pay fuel tax. Your running costs - if one is to believe the site - will be lower. What more do you want?

what more do i want?? well i want (but dont need) a bloody great insentive from the government to encourage me and everyone else to convert to low emmission transport so ireland has more of a hope of meeting its commitments on reducing its pollutant output. i dont think this is unreasonable, is it? its not like the tax man's coffers are about to run dry any time soon.

bonkey

ferdi wrote:

what more do i want?? well i want (but dont need) a bloody great insentive from the government to encourage me and everyone else to convert to low emmission transport so ireland has more of a hope of meeting its commitments on reducing its pollutant output. i dont think this is unreasonable, is it?

If the mode of transport you propose using already works out cheaper than conventional combustion-based systems, then you can want all you like, but the government would be fools to make the cheaper option even cheaper just because the public are either greedy or too dumb to work out the savings.

If its not cheaper, then the question is twofold:

1) Do we spend the money on environmental issues in the first place
2) If so, is this the most cost-effective use of the money to achieve environmental benefit.

Not to mention:

3) Would it be better to slap an "environmentally unfriendly tax" on the combustion-based systems, rather than an "environmentally friendly rebate" on the clean ones? People often react more quickly to avoid surcharges than they do to avail of benefits....and it has the net benefit of being revenue-positive, freeing up even more cash to be spent on other issues.

its not like the tax man's coffers are about to run dry any time soon.

And its not like there's any shortage of issues which the government could do with spending more money on.

Unless you can argue why your chosen issue desrves to be top of the pile, and why a rebate is better than a tax on the alternatives, then this is a hollow argument.

jc

air

FillSpectre wrote:

So there is tax and becasue there is a higher tax on a poluting enegery source in limited supply the tax doesn't count :rolleyes:

The tax on electricity is 13.5%, tax on fuel is 58% - see http://www.ipia.ie/Issues/upload/What_determines_pump-prices.pdf

So the tax on petrol is approximately 4.3 times higher, which in my view makes the tax on electricity (edit - freudian slip) comparatively negligible.

As for your comments on a "polluting energy source", both fuel and electricity are polluting energy sources in this country as the vast majority of our electricity is generated from fossil fuels / nuclear.

FillSpectre wrote:

As I cycle people don't see you or hear you so I would say you are moving at faster speeds would be an issue. Bicycles can move at the same speeds but can't accelerate as quickly and therfore don't reach the speeds as regularly.

The top speed of the e-bike in question is 50km/h which is well within the operating envelope for a bike. I would guess that the cruising speed of the bike for decent range would be around 30km/h.

Finally based on the rated power of the bike, its weight and the inefficiency of the power system (3HP brushed dc motor - circa 40% efficient) I would be quite confident that any healthy cyclist could out accelerate it.
The stated power (480 watts) is less than a cyclist could maintain for the few seconds it takes to get up to speed, and he or she wouldnt have to contend with the weight of the e-bike (the battery alone weighs 5kg more than a decent road bike).

In the case of this e-bike, a bicycle would definitely accelerate faster.

ferdi

bonkey wrote:

If the mode of transport you propose using already works out cheaper than conventional combustion-based systems, then you can want all you like, but the government would be fools to make the cheaper option even cheaper just because the public are either greedy or too dumb to work out the savings.

If its not cheaper, then the question is twofold:

1) Do we spend the money on environmental issues in the first place
2) If so, is this the most cost-effective use of the money to achieve environmental benefit.

Not to mention:

3) Would it be better to slap an "environmentally unfriendly tax" on the combustion-based systems, rather than an "environmentally friendly rebate" on the clean ones? People often react more quickly to avoid surcharges than they do to avail of benefits....and it has the net benefit of being revenue-positive, freeing up even more cash to be spent on other issues.


And its not like there's any shortage of issues which the government could do with spending more money on.

Unless you can argue why your chosen issue desrves to be top of the pile, and why a rebate is better than a tax on the alternatives, then this is a hollow argument.

jc

cods wholop

bonkey

ferdi wrote:

cods wholop

<sarcasm>
With such a comprehensive refutation of my argument, I have no choice but to concede the point.
</sarcasm>

Dirk Gently

Anyone know if you can get electric bikes with better performance than this model. Would like to get one but the speed limit of 30mph and the fact that you have to recharge after 50miles is putting me off. The fact that you have to turn around after 25 miles or be stranded isn’t good. Also not happy with the spec on the website regarding slopes. Doesn’t look like one of these bikes would make it up a steep hill.
Is there a more powerful / efficient model out there.

bonkey

Interestingly, while reading up on this stuff, I noticed that lead-acid batteries - while not suffering from memory-effect are typically only rated for about 300 charges.

Also, while not suffering memory-effect, it suffers from almost the opposite - fully draining the battery puts strain on it and shortens the expected life.

The more I read about them, the more this current generation of electric moped/scooter/bike things look like a short-lived and/or niche-market thing to me.

As for better mileage/performance....doesn't look like it. Maybe keep an eye out for the hybrids that will appear on the market in the next 12-24 months.

air

Clown, they're are better models available see http://www.electric-bikes.com/Ninja.htm for example, a bit of googling is all you need.
Bonkey, just on a slight aside memory effect is pretty much a total myth. It was supposedly demonstrated by some study on ni-cd batteries years ago but I dont think it was ever proven conclusively to exist at any point.
See http://www.repairfaq.org/ELE/F_NiCd_Memory.html for more on that.

Furthermore fully draining any battery shortens its life.
Electric vehicles will have a big future ahead of them, the power to weight ratio and energy density of lipo batteries for example has improved incredibly in the last few years.

FillSpectre

air wrote:

The tax on electricity is 13.5%, tax on fuel is 58% - see

So the tax on petrol is approximately 4.3 times higher, which in my view makes the tax on petrol comparatively negligible.

You got that wrong. Approx a quarter is neglagible by you? Get off you high horse. 13.5% tax is not neglagible.

I believe a moped not making any "normal" noise traveling at those speeds is more dangerous. It would be unexpected.

Now you can run along and talk all technical now but your view on other matters is spotty and bias.

air

Do you mean biased? If you could run a spellcheck before you post it might make it easier to converse.

In fairness, I thought originally that the taxation on fuel was nearer to 80% or so, still I stand by my opinion that taxation of 13.5% is comparatively negligible in comparison to a rate of almost 60%.

In any case I was merely stating my opinion and I backed it up with references to factual information so its up to anyone reading to make up their own mind as to their interpretation of the various rates of taxation. I dont think having a debate on the ratios of two figures is going to serve much purpose.


The only way the moped could be more dangerous IMO is due to its increased mass which would make a bigger dent in a pedestrian or whatever. It should be able to stop reasonably quickly though (assumption here is that the increased contact area outweighs the increase in rolling mass).

Now if you wish to descend into diatribe work away, but if you want to accuse me of being wrong

FillSpectre wrote:

You got that wrong.

then you should support your statement with evidence of some facts that contradict one or more of my statements.
To say that someone is "wrong" because you have a difference of opinion with them doesnt reflect well on your intellect.

Furthermore if you wish to say that my views on other issues are

FillSpectre wrote:

spotty and bias

as you put it, you might care to mention where I have been "spotty" in order to give me an opportunity to clarify any ambiguity.

As for "bias" why do you perceive me as being biased? What perspective do you feel that I'm coming from that makes me biased on a particular issue?
Do you believe that I have some vested interest in rates of taxation on electricity or fuel perhaps?

FillSpectre

air wrote:

Now if you wish to descend into diatribe work away, but if you want to accuse me of being wrong then you should support your statement with evidence of some facts that contradict one or more of my statements.
To say that someone is "wrong" because you have a difference of opinion with them doesnt reflect well on your intellect.

LOL. You said "petrol taxation is comparatively neglagible". That means you are saying petrol tax is neglagabile compared to that of electricity! YOU GOT YOUR OWN POINT WRONG. I would also like to point out you have been name calling "Clown" for example and suggesting I am not intelligent. You are arrogant and offensive without the ability to comment in a civilised manner by constantly insulting others. I have reported you as an offensive poster for more than one insult that you think is acceptable. I don't and I doubt others see it that way either.

ambro25

Right. I guess ferdi is talking about my scooter, actually (check your pms, btw).

Time to put down what ownership of one of those is really like.

I bought mine second-hand in September '05, when petrol prices were going absolutely stupid (they're back there now, come to think of it).

I'd never owned or ridden anything 2-wheeled and self-powered in my life, but I had been considering two-wheel commuting for a while to improve my quality of life - that it did, rather splendidly: commute time with car, 1 hour each way vs commute time with my EVT, 15 mins each way

Given that Green Machines in Terenure is the only outfit in the whole of Dublin selling these, you'd better build a good rapport with them. It's easy, they are competent, likeable and don;t take the p*ss on parts. Be aware that they don't service, though, so for tyres and brake pads (which are the only parts that ever need maintenance/replacing - there's no moving parts, duh!), check out your local bike dealer, or do yourself. It's not hugely expensive (Motomax Rathfarnham has done both for mine, back tyre was €75 and brake pads front and back were €50-odd, parts and fitting - brakes are discs, front & back btw).

Again, given that Green Machines sell these for €2,500 new, I didn't want to spend that (owning 2 cars already), which is why I bought mine second hand: the beauty of electric scooters is that it doesn't matter if it's been ridden hard or not or if it's had a million previous owners - there's no engine wear!

So, with all that, what's it like to own and ride one?

* as stated, running costs are electricity + tyres + brake pads + batteries (maybe shocks, whenever? Dunno, must be every 4 or 5 years or maybe more? ). Based on my usage (2000 kms a year, estimated over period since September '05), batteries should be changed every two years or so (depends on mileage and therefore also number of charges really), it uses four 12V batteries (proprietary) and they're €90 a pop at Green machines. That's it for the hardware and the 'fuel'.

* about €0.15 per charge (worked it out from bills over the period), full charge takes about 3 and half hour. That's with an auto-timer and charge overnight. As for range, I get 20 to 25 kms out of a charge on a mix of economode (mostly) and powermode (for a 2 to 3 kms) in town. Note that I have two new/recent batteries, and two that are getting ready for a replacement.

* annual road tax is €30 or so. It's classed as a 50cc by the VRO/Tax Office (actual cc on the cert's is 34cc - God knows how they measure that!).

* my annual insurance is €230 TPFT with AON (on a car license, in my 30s, no bonus at all). Who the F* would want to steal an electric scooter, I don't know, but that's another one to think about as well. Not as if you could flog the parts easily either!

* riding experience is...mmm...how to put it? Second to none: a lot of owners refer to theirs as their 'Magic Carpets' - It is that silent. But it's a just that little bit too much to say it's totally silent - at 30 mph, it isn't, there's always road/tyre noise. But that's it - no electric whine, no nothing.

FillSpectre is right, silent running can be a problem during rush hour, as if you (riding it) can't hear nothing, well, guess what? Neither can other motorists, cyclists, motorcyclists and pedestrians (most of whom these days are either listening to their phone or their iPod on their merry way). So BEWARE and ANTICIPATE. That one is not a problem owners (or sellers) discuss frequently, and one which I feel I should outline particularly, because it's not light (120 kgs or so) and, although it breaks very good and hard, one against a pedestrian at 30 mph... well, my money's not on the pedestrian

It's very quick off the mark, because it's electric: an electric motor will always have more torque than a petrol motor at comparable displacement (or equivalent)... and max torque is available from the off, as opposed to a petrol engine which needs the revs for it.

...but don't expect to break speed records: it's limited to 30 mph on economode, it just about does 40 mph on powermode (but powermode seriously eats into your range and unless you have a Masters in electrics/electronics to tweak the boarsd and/or motor controller, that's your lot. Oh well, at least you can't ever get done for speeding

Unlike petrol engines, if you're stopped at the lights, you're not using any energy - so range with one of these is dependent on ambient temperature (as with all things "battery", warm is good and cold is not so good), gradients on the course (flat is notional, downahill is good, uphill uses more to get same speed), weight of the rider and that's it, apart from the lead acid batteries which do deteriorate over time (expect two years max range, given as 40 kms by manufacturer, out of a new set).

ednwireland

Scruff wrote:

i thought i read somewhere that you could request that your electricty be supplied by one of the wind generating companies. QUOTE]

yeh they switch you off when the wind stops blowing

ambro25

I feel that I should add that choosing electric over petrol for a moped is not so much a consideration of environmental and tax issues.

SIDE NOTE: although it is, to a point and after a fashion: from a ownership point of view, at the end of the day, taxation level is relevant (after a few hundred kms in terms of 'RoI' , so to speak) and EsB is still using as much fuel to produce KwH, whether you draw 48V for your scooter off the grid or not. Environmentally, it's one less vehicle which uses supplies of petrol-station-grade refined petrol, period.

It is a more an issue of convenience: if your commute (or whatever intended travel purpose) falls within the practical range of the thing, it's way cheaper to run than a petrol equivalent, it's just as safe (or unsafe ), it's close to a 100% more reliable in 'mechanical' terms (no cold starts, no moving parts, etc.), and it is -comparatively- maintenance free. So go about triming your edges and painting your fence instead of fixing the moped yet again -kinda thing.

And I should also add that I did look into setting up my own turbine (I won't because I'm not a house owner ) - guess what that would give you? save for road tax, insurance and the infrequent need to repace tyres and brake pad, an absolutely free mode of personal transportation!

EDIT: ferdi, you need to clear your pms, I can't send mine.

ambro25

@ cormie

French manufacturers have been at fully-electric versions of their cars for decades now. I remember test-driving fully-electric versions of a Pug 106 and a Renault Clio back in '93 or '94, and they were impressive: 70 mph-capable, 60 mile range, and a retractable power cable with a standard wall plug came out of the petrol tank. Problem back then was batteries (already... and still!), which made the car half-as-heavy and half-as-expensive again as a standard petrol version (i.e. 1500 kg Clio for €15000 instead of 1000 kg/€10000, basically). But they sold a few and are still to this day experimenting, testing, commercialising etc. (mostly for public sector, e.g. FR equivalent in Paris or elsewhere of Dublin Council).

See this report for a study of electric clios used in Sweden in a test program and check this page for further links and info, if of any interest.

air

FillSpectre wrote:

LOL. You said "petrol taxation is comparatively neglagible". That means you are saying petrol tax is neglagabile compared to that of electricity! YOU GOT YOUR OWN POINT WRONG. I would also like to point out you have been name calling "Clown" for example and suggesting I am not intelligent. You are arrogant and offensive without the ability to comment in a civilised manner by constantly insulting others. I have reported you as an offensive poster for more than one insult that you think is acceptable. I don't and I doubt others see it that way either.

Hilarious. I put the word petrol in the place of the word electricity. I think in the context of my other posts on the subject it was pretty clear what I meant.

As for your "name calling" in the post to which you refer I was addressing user Clown Bag who posted regarding performance in post number 21 of this thread.

When exactly have I been arrogant or offensive? I have never had a single complaint from another user or a mod on the content of anything I have posted.
Do you have anything worthwhile to contribute and / or any relevant experience in the area?

FillSpectre

air wrote:

Hilarious. I put the word petrol in the place of the word electricity. I think in the context of my other posts on the subject it was pretty clear what I meant.


Do you have anything worthwhile to contribute and / or any relevant experience in the area?

Did I miss the appology for your lecture on how I said you were wrong? No! Your arrogance on how I should conduct myself overrides your ability to say sorry it appears. :rolleyes: I knew what you meant and I pointed out your mistake yet your arrogance led you to give out about me personally. THere is your arrogance and offensive is below.

I admit I misunderstood your Clown comment but you certainly did suggest I was stupid which incase you don't know is an insult. THe funny thing is you accused me of being stupid after I highlighted a mistake you made and told you you made a mistake and you still didn't see it.:D

The contibution I am making is telling you to stop being rude and arrogant to everybody which is what you have done.

P.s.

Just like to point out somebody who actually uses such scooters agrees with me that the silent running is an issue which could mean
a) You were wrong
b) You made the incorrect assumptions
c) They know more on the subject than you
d) I was right in my speculation
e) All of the above

I just wanted to discuss the bikes instead I got to listen to your arrogance and misrepresentation such as a quarter to a fifth of something is comparatively neglagible. So you know generally people would consider negalagible to mean less than 2% of something not over 20%.That is comparitively by the way.

air

The point which we were debating had nothing to do with the typo I made and it doesnt alter the original debate (which was I believe the relative taxation on electricity versus petrol), I dont see what I should be apologising for?

I never called you stupid at any point, I just pointed out that your poor spelling was making it difficult to interpret what you were talking about.
Again, where have I been rude or arrogant?
I never made any personal comments about you, indeed I know nothing about you.

With respect to the above tirade.
a) Why? I just said that in my opinion silent running on this particular scooter wouldnt be a huge issue due to the points I made already. Is there a particular point I made which you feel is invalid?

b) What assumptions did I make which were incorrect?

c) I cycle up to 300 miles per week on a bicycle so I think I've got some right to speak on cycling / two wheel related topics.

As for d) and e) - What age are you?

As to the negligibilty issue I stated the figures for both levels of taxation and said that in my opinion it was negligible. My opinion is a matter for myself and I wasnt forcing it down anyones throat, indeed I provided the figures to let people make up their own minds.

P.S. As you feel the need to be pedantic - negligible is mispelled in your previous post, as well as contribution and apology.