I use the bus when necessary, twice or 3 times a week usually. They are so so unreliable timewise, you have to allow an extra 30 mins, which is a lot of time wasted.
If buses could be 98% relied upon to be there within 5 minute window (allowing for traffic troubles), I'd use them all the time. They seem to have no authority to make sure buses leave at appropriate times, often one will go chasing another one rather than waiting for the next departure slot, and this is in very quiet off peak times.
It's a funding issue. Take the 41 bus as an example, it starts in Swords, goes through Swords, past the airport, then Santry, Whitehall, Druncondra and finally through the city to Abbey Street
Okay cool, it's covering a lot of the city, but that's a lot of stops, so anyone getting on in Swords is going to have to deal with a long bus journey and anyone looking for a bus in Drumcondra is going to find the bus jam packed
You've a few options, you could run more buses, or you could split the route so each bus isn't at full capacity and the Swords end gets a faster service
Unfortunately you've created a new problem which is that you've more buses heading into a city with a fixed amount of road space, so now you need to invest in bigger bus corridors and more efficient use of the roads you have
Or you can take the minimal spend option which is to make a few express buses from Swords at peak times, and not invest much in infrastructure leading to a poorly optimised system
That's not to say all the changes are bad, I think the bus gates on the quays are a great idea for example. But I do get the idea that a lot of the potentially great solutions are hamstrung by an unwillingness to invest more than the bare minimum
EDIT: Also running more buses requires more buses and drivers, both cost money. You can fund this with increased fares but then you aren't competitive with driving. Or the government can shoulder the cost and try to keep the fares low
The Luxury Tax is not based on the perceived premium of the car, its basically the price point. For example, you can have a particular car that does not fsll into the tax bracket, but if you spec certain items, then it brings you over it and thus, into the luxury tax bracket.
Indeed, even though cars may be slower than bikes many will choose the car, as they don't get wet, cold, can bring children to childcare, and have much more certainty over trip times than waiting on a bus, and ghost busses are common and show up on bus real time information systems. Long term there will be more disincentives to 4 wheel travel, there is new gantries on the M50 to allow junction by junction barrier free tolling, but government has that on hold for now, but gantries have been installed. Even peak and off peak tolls are a thing already on some roads.
I get you and maybe I'm being pedantic here but it is called the "luxury' tax which suggests that it refers to higher end product - and that more affordable and reasonably specced cars are (or should be) costed comfortably below the 40k threshold.
I think after 3 years of PHEV, i'm seriously looking at making the jump to BEV.
Does anyone have recommendations for a BEV under 40k ?
I'm seriously looking at the Ioniq 5 but wondering is there anything else I need to research?
Ioniq 5
Model 3
ID4 I think
BYD Atto
MGZS/4
Really
Depends what you like and what’s important. Range, efficiency etc
For example, would you buy a second hand car over brand new?
What PHEV do you have and are you looking for similar? Pretty much every EV launched since 2020 has a used example sub 40k now so if you're happy with used them huge options.
Some really good new options too under and around your budget
I have a RAV 4 PHEV on PCP and hope to continue with the same direction with a new BEV.
Model Y
Atto
ID4
BZ4X
MG ZS
Narrow down what you like and drive them all. Make a decision then.
Get a price off Toyota dealer to change. But be aware bz4x has 20% smaller battery than id4/ev6/ioniq5.
If long range is a regular requirement, maybe Toyota not the best option ( still not awful).
Under 40k new, you'll struggle to get the size of RAV4, probably look at used. But RAV4 phev is like 56k isn't it?
Its some easy politicking
Set a tax on new vehicles, call it luxury car tax and set the value fairly high in 2017 (£40k).
Because it's a luxury car tax only affecting wealthier people then it's an easy win
Do not alter the band to account for inflation over the next 7 years, so more cars come into the tax band
Also remove the exemption for EVs and you've magically increased tax revenues without increasing taxes
The 8years emanate from California and the US and was repeated pretty much worldwide so nothing to do with battery tech.
Also, LFP or not, cars can use way more power than their battery size, Model 3 on the Autobahn will be well over 60kW in power usage
Just on the BZ4X (saw somebody call it the buzzy forks 🤣), is it still the case that you're limited to three DC charges in a 24 hour period?
In all realism would anyone driving in Ireland manage to do enough driving to actually need to DC charge their car 3 times in one 24hr period? Two lads working flat out in a taxi back in the Tiger days would be hard pressed to need that much juice.
I fast charged 9-10 times a day a few times in my leaf 24 back in the day! But yeah, 3 times would be fairly rare now.
I think it's important to give some real world context to battery cycles, when talking about X more cycles it becomes somewhat meaningless unless we put it in real world context. Let's assume we have two batteries, LFP and NMC, which has 77kWh usable capacity, assume efficiency of 170Wh/km for each, and assume 25,000 kilometers per year average driven.LFP battery:
Minimum energy throughput: 77 kWh × 3,000 cycles = 231,000 kWh
Maximum energy throughput: 77 kWh × 5,000 cycles = 385,000 kWh
NMC battery:
Minimum energy throughput: 77 kWh × 1,000 cycles = 77,000 kWh
Maximum energy throughput: 77 kWh × 2,000 cycles = 154,000 kWh
Using the cars efficiency figures, I can estimate how many kilometers can be driven over the battery lifespan.
Energy consumption per km: 170 Wh/km = 0.17 kWh/km
LFP battery:
Minimum distance: 231,000 kWh ÷ 0.17 kWh/km = 1,358,824 km
Maximum distance: 385,000 kWh ÷ 0.17 kWh/km = 2,264,706 km
Minimum distance: 77,000 kWh ÷ 0.17 kWh/km = 452,941 km
Maximum distance: 154,000 kWh ÷ 0.17 kWh/km = 905,882 km Using the annual mileage of 25,000 km/year, here's the estimated lifespan at face value:
Minimum lifespan: 1,358,824 km ÷ 25,000 km/year = 54 years
Maximum lifespan: 2,264,706 km ÷ 25,000 km/year = 91 years
NMC Battery:
Minimum lifespan: 452,941 km ÷ 25,000 km/year = 18 years
Maximum lifespan: 905,882 km ÷ 25,000 km/year = 36 yearsSo when you consider the real world lifespan for most cars is 15-20 years, I don't think it really matters whether it's LFP or NMC, but environmentally speaking LFP is better. I guess you could also consider what uses repurposed LFP batteries could have once a car is scraped due to wear & tear.
And to add to that.
The cycles of a battery is reached, the battery isn't dead. It's usually at 70-80% of design capacity.
It knocks out the splash and dash approach on long journeys though. Annoying. Especially since it has such a dismal charge curve.
That's an excellent analysis, pretty much puts to bed the idea of batteries being dead after 8 years (not that I was a great believer in that anyway)
I'm still struggling to see the advantage of NMC for most cars. Performance vehicles I get the idea, you've more power density so you save weight
For most hatchbacks and family wagons power isn't as big a deal so they should be fine with LFP cells. I also like the idea of the cells not having any risk of a battery fire. I know the risk isn't that much to start with but zero risk is better than low risk
So what happens if you plug in 3 times to a fast charger because it failed the first two times? Does it still charge or does computer say no?
No idea, but would assume if no charge started, you'd be fine. Would be very nervous going for a fourth though.
There's enough times that a charger has started and then sharted the bed after 1 minute that I'd be worried
No, like all EV’s I’d say it’s thermally managed.
Yeah probably, it does sounds like the kind of dumb idea that a car manufacturer with almost zero interest in EVs would come up with
It reminds me of Nissan's defense of the Leaf rapid gating, they'd only ever considered one fast charge per day so determined it didn't need any active cooling (and the bloody thing still overheats)
You would hope that is the case, otherwise its a joke. When I had my L30 first, and the range was still decent, I attempted a 350km journey on a few occasions. By the time I plugged into a dc charger for the 4 time the battery temp was in the red zone. I'd shudder the thing the battery temp if I was on my 10 charge. In any case I quickly gave up on the adventure when the last such journey took 7 hours and a considerable about of range anxiety
I think one of the primary reasons for keeping NMC in production is range due to its energy density. The new model 3 standard range RWD, and long range RWD is a good comparison to explain why. Model 3 LFP offers a WLTP claimed range of 513km, compared the long range RWD NMC of 702km. Difference of 189Km. Gross Vehicle Weight (GVWR)
Model 3 standard range RWD LFP weight = 2200 kg
Model 3 long range RWD NMC weight 2140 kg So the Long range RWD offers ~37% more range despite weighing 80kg less. It also translate to the NMC RWD being better value when talking about how many Kms(WLTP) you get for your Euro. Model 3 Highland Standard Range RWD (LFP): Costs approx €73.05 per km Model 3 Highland Long Range RWD (NMC): Costs approx €64.18 per km Cost difference per km: Difference = €73.05 - €64.18 = €8.87 (8.87÷73.05)x100 = 12.14% The Model 3 Long Range RWD (NMC) offers 12.14% lower cost per kilometer of range, and offers ~37%(189km) more WLTP range compared to the RWD (LFP) model. I understand that M3H is an exceptionally efficient production car, so its performance figures are not comparable to other brands’ models. However, I believe the underlying reasoning is similar - you can fit more range into same package, range sells.
Unfortunately the motors are going to give up every few hundred thousand kilometres resulting in the car probably being scrapped after the second motor blows. That of course is assuming motors remain prohibitively expensive...who's to say reconditioned or generic motors will not be available in a decade or so.
The motors don't have brushes that wear and most/all have thermal cooling so it's unlikely they will run too hot. Bearings may wear but I suspect if designed right they should last. Many EVs have 180,000 or higher motor warranty so I expect the manufacturers designed them to last more than that. A good designer builds something to last, a great designer builds it to last just beyond warranty!
the hairpin motors introduced in 2022 (or v late 2021) are supposed to have much longer life
