nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Random EV thoughts.....

Old diesel

The main motors forum has the motors chat thread for the little things one would like to say but might not justify a thread.

Thought it might be an idea for here re hybrids and EV stuff.....

To kick off - i wonder if a new measurement for EVs might be assuming a start trip at 100 percent......

A how much range do you get with a 15 minute stop.

With a 350 kw charging a Porsche Tayman might do very well with getting on for 400 miles...

A Leaf 62 not so good.

Obviously where a car can do more then 50 kw charging we would need both a 50 kw and a whatever the cars top rate is figure*.

*IF chargers are available

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Busman Paddy Lasty

cruisey1987 wrote: »

I feel like a mileage based road tax would be best for EVs, or a flat rate and an overhaul of motorway tolling to do it on a per exit basis

Mileage based tax will create red tape and penalise efficient cars if it's not linked back to motor tax category though.

Fuel tax is a proxy for mileage, efficiency, driving style or any factor that increases consumption. Administering this is passive when paying it at the fuel pump. More elegant solution.

the_amazing_raisin

Busman Paddy Lasty wrote: »

Mileage based tax will create red tape and penalise efficient cars if it's not linked back to motor tax category though.

Fuel tax is a proxy for mileage, efficiency, driving style or any factor that increases consumption. Administering this is passive when paying it at the fuel pump. More elegant solution.

True, but it won't work for EVs, so in the end something will have to replace it

Exit based tolling is probably simpler to implement and more difficult to evade. That'll only find the motorway network though

I think the whole "motor tax pays for roads" argument doesn't really work anymore since it's all lumped into one budget, but the road network needs to be maintained and if they eliminated road tax then the money would just be taxed in a different way

Busman Paddy Lasty

cruisey1987 wrote: »

True, but it won't work for EVs, so in the end something will have to replace it

Exit based tolling is probably simpler to implement and more difficult to evade. That'll only find the motorway network though

I think the whole "motor tax pays for roads" argument doesn't really work anymore since it's all lumped into one budget, but the road network needs to be maintained and if they eliminated road tax then the money would just be taxed in a different way

Oh intended as a method to promote EVs and gradually get rid of ripping off the motorist for no good reason.

MJohnston

cruisey1987 wrote: »

I'm not sure I buy the whole road wear argument, especially when there's hundereds of HGVs doing much more damage.

For me it's about cost to society. Motor tax is wholly a carbon tax currently, but there are other costs to society of someone using a vehicle that need to be accounted for.

Health costs of NOx emissions (and Eamon Ryan should be hung by his party for pushing diesels early in the 2000s, which has massively contributed to the rise of these) and potentially micropollution.
Safety costs due to the presence of vehicles.
Costs to local authorities due to road maintenance.
etc.

I love EVs, but they only solve the local macro-emissions problem, so I don't think us EV owners should ever be let fully off of the annual taxation hook. A mileage-based tax would work for me, given that a lot of the non-emissions costs accrue due to vehicle usage, rather than their mere existence.

[Deleted User]

MJohnston wrote: »

Health costs of NOx emissions (and Eamon Ryan should be hung by his party for pushing diesels early in the 2000s, which has massively contributed to the rise of these) and potentially micropollution.
Safety costs due to the presence of vehicles.
Costs to local authorities due to road maintenance.
etc.

it is a misapprehension that cars destroy road surfaces, lorries and especially overloaded lorries destroy road surfaces.
the new regulations from 2022 mean that for new cars you will need to try very hard to crash in to someone or something else. the car will prevent or mitigate many accidents.
EVs produce next to no pollution(dependent on electricity source). brake pads barely engage to produce brake dust.

the_amazing_raisin

Fastned just procured some cash

https://www.electrive.com/2021/02/26/fastned-closes-financing-round-with-e150-million/

€150 million (10 times ESB eCars funding) should buy a lot of chargers with that amount

Fingers corssed they come to Ireland soon, they're already looking for locations

KCross

cruisey1987 wrote: »

Fastned just procured some cash

https://www.electrive.com/2021/02/26/fastned-closes-financing-round-with-e150-million/

€150 million (10 times ESB eCars funding) should buy a lot of chargers with that amount

Fingers corssed they come to Ireland soon, they're already looking for locations

Fastned seem to be very focussed on an ever increasing circle around their home country (Belgium, Switzerland, Germany).

I'd see them going into France in particular but also Spain, Portugal and Italy before they moved into our uneconomic proposition, we can but hope!

[Deleted User]

MJohnston wrote: »

The emission component of an EV is not zero, not yet. Otherwise fine - although EVs are currently heavier than the comparable ICE, contributing more to road wear (which isn't what motor tax is for, but there has to be a recognition of that somewhere).

I'd imagine scrappage is a post-2030 project, I'd say there's no chance that should happen before that.

Much as I'd love to switch everyone to EVs within a year, there's no country on Earth that could manage that. The gradual adoption is intentional.

Personally, I would prefer if they didn't do scrappage, instead give tax incentives to de-ICE vehicles that are recent and viable to convert.

timsey tiger

Deleted User wrote: »

Personally, I would prefer if they didn't do scrappage, instead give tax incentives to de-ICE vehicles that are recent and viable to convert.

Only ever going to be niche, given the immense expense and design compromises meaning the vehicles are going to be of limited utility.

No point in giving incentives to things that will ultimately never achieve scale. imo

[Deleted User]

timsey tiger wrote: »

Only ever going to be niche, given the immense expense and design compromises meaning the vehicles are going to be of limited utility.

No point in giving incentives to things that will ultimately never achieve scale. imo

Depends on the vehicle, with a decent tax incentive and low resale value of the ICE, the de-ICE'd vehicle could still be worthwhile doing, crossovers & SUV's make the perfect platform with their already raised floors.

MJohnston

[Deleted User] wrote: »

it is a misapprehension that cars destroy road surfaces, lorries and especially overloaded lorries destroy road surfaces.
the new regulations from 2022 mean that for new cars you will need to try very hard to crash in to someone or something else. the car will prevent or mitigate many accidents.
EVs produce next to no pollution(dependent on electricity source). brake pads barely engage to produce brake dust.

None of that suggests that anything I mentioned will be completely eliminated by a switch to EVs.

the_amazing_raisin

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Personally, I would prefer if they didn't do scrappage, instead give tax incentives to de-ICE vehicles that are recent and viable to convert.

Offer scrappage on older vehicles starting with euro 4 and 5 first. Get the most polluting cars off the road. As we get towards 2030, extend it to euro 6 which will be getting old by then anyway

It's worth considering there are other improvements besides emissions. The safety systems in modern cars are a big improvement over cars from 10 years ago. Moving to newer cars could improve overall road safety

[Deleted User]

MJohnston wrote: »

None of that suggests that anything I mentioned will be completely eliminated by a switch to EVs.

I can't help if you want people to be wrapped up in cotton wool from cradle to grave.

JohnC.

I know some here would like better signage for EV parking. Let's hope for better than this.

the_amazing_raisin

JohnC. wrote: »

I know some here would like better signage for EV parking. Let's hope for better than this.

I wouldn't even call that green, more of a turquoise

redcup342

Ah Americans ..... I guess this is comparitively clean :pac:

Took this when I was in San Francisco

timsey tiger

redcup342 wrote: »

Ah Americans ..... I guess this is comparitively clean :pac:

Took this when I was in San Francisco

They are all clean when they are parked up

[Deleted User]

At least it has an NCT :P

liamog

I may have seen the worst ever picture of EV charging from an automotive mag AutoExpress

Citroen%20e-C4%202021%20UK-14.jpg

Markcheese

What am I missing ?

innrain

Markcheese wrote: »

What am I missing ?

Follow the lead

liamog

Markcheese wrote: »

What am I missing ?

Follow the charging cable, notice they've plugged the type2 - type2 cable into the cable holder on the charging unit, meanwhile the AC43 Type 2 has been hidden behind the offside rear wheel.

This car is only plugged in at one side

pdpmur

liamog wrote: »

This car is only plugged in at one side

Definitely one for a Zoom quiz!

liamog

My guess is they told the photographer to get a picture of the car charging, when the cable couldn't stretch to side of the car they gave up and staged it to make it look like it was plugged in.

AndyBoBandy

liamog wrote: »

My guess is they told the photographer to get a picture of the car charging, when the cable couldn't stretch to side of the car they gave up and staged it to make it look like it was plugged in.

This is exactly what happened.

The photo probably needed to be taken from that angle due to light......

MJohnston

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

This is W at what happened.

The photo probably needed to be taken from that angle due to light......

Also presumably they wanted it staged with the charger and the charging port of the car visible in the same shot.

Still, if that car was parked flipped 180 degrees, I bet even then the built-in charging cables wouldn't stretch the 2 metres or whatever.

Kramer

To add insult to injury - an eCars charger too

DrPhilG

What speed does a Model S P90 get on the fast AC side of a triple head?

AndyBoBandy

DrPhilG wrote: »

What speed does a Model S P90 get on the fast AC side of a triple head?

If it's got the dual AC chargers (as most seem to), it should get 22kW max from AC.

Not too shabby if waiting for the CCS/CHAdeMO to become free..

DrPhilG

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

If it's got the dual AC chargers (as most seem to), it should get 22kW max from AC.

Not too happy if waiting for the CCS/CHAdeMO to become free..

Saw one today that had taken 61kWh, but had been there almost 4 hours.

That charger will allow a simultaneous DC charge but wont share the load until one has slowed down, so chances are that anyone plugging into the DC would get the "charge delayed until power is available" message.

It's up north by the way, hence overstay fees not an issue.