back to article European electric vehicle sales surged in Q4 2019 but only accounted for wafer-thin slice of total car purchases

Electric and fuel-cell vehicle sales in Europe jumped by over 50 per cent in the last quarter of 2019, but still make up only 4.4 per cent of total sales. The new energy vehicle (NEV) numbers from Canalys include plug-in hybrids, fully electric vehicles and fuel-cell machines. For the whole of 2019, some 520,000 NEV cars were …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The maths is strong in this one...

    "with improved ranges of between 200 and 500 kilometres (320 to 800 miles)"

    Ermmm, what?

    1. Pascal Monett Silver badge

      Indeed

      Is it just a coincidence that 500 miles is 800 kilometers ?

      I think not.

      1. Rameses Niblick the Third Kerplunk Kerplunk Whoops Where's My Thribble? Silver badge

        Re: Indeed

        See, this is why everyone should use the El Reg standards.

        If they'd have said 5747787 Linguine or 36610 Brontosauruses, we'd know what they meant.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The maths is strong in this one...

      Would love to see the compact car that can do 800 miles. That's some secret battery tech they've had under wraps.

      Someone mistook the multiply for a divide when doing the maths.

      1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge
        Joke

        Re: Would love to see the compact car that can do 800 miles.

        That's the one with three masts and 20+ sails...

        All set and trimmed by 'Autopilot' naturally.

        Oh wait, that's just another concept car.

        Yeah, nothing that makes it to production will get anywhere near that range.

      2. Marketing Hack Silver badge
        WTF?

        Re: The maths is strong in this one...

        @AC What, your car doesn't have a "Mr. Fusion" in it?

        (Don't mind me if you see me pulling old banana peels and cans of half-finished beer out of your trash can)

      3. Swiss Anton

        Re: The maths is strong in this one...

        A dodgem car can easily do 800 miles, although the distance from its starting point is never going to be more than a few feet.

  2. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    "would help to kick-start the market"

    Um, when you're selling over half a million units per year, I think it is safe to say that the market has been kick-started already.

    What actually mean to say is that you want to kick-start growth in the market, or something like that.

    And, apparently, COVID-19 means that that is not going to happen right now.

    1. Commswonk Silver badge

      Re: "would help to kick-start the market"

      What actually mean to say is that you want to kick-start growth in the market, or something like that.

      Yes but which market?

      I have no idea what the current percentages are but at one time a significant majority of new cars bought were for corporate fleet use, including those issued to various employees. (And no, I don't just mean the C - suite occupants) Personally - owned vehicles were those passed on when the original corporate owners bought new and released the previous vehicles on to the second hand market.

      If the above is still true then I can see why EV sales might be sluggish; not only would businesses have to provide charging infrastructure at company premises but also at the private addresses of those to whom the cars had been issued. On top of that there might well be a risk that the travelling requirements of those with company vehicles might be such that with no certainty of finding charging points at premises visited or at convenient places en route (coupled with time spent waiting for a vehicle to charge) the business model would have to accommodate the unknowns resulting from the above; not necessarily easy and effectively a cost to the business.

      Politicians being politicians they are unlikely to have spotted these possible risk areas, and very possibly don't want to spot them.

      There is a great deal more to increasing the number of EVs on the road than just announcing a cut - off date for the sale of ICE vehicles. A very great deal more...

      1. The Nazz Silver badge

        Re: "would help to kick-start the market"

        Re Increase in "company cars"

        IIRC, or near enough, there was a surge of company bought cars in the early to mid 70's when Labour brought in it's £6 a week pay rise limit. To get around this arbitrary and tight restriction, many companies significantly increased the numbers of, and levels of, managers to whom they provided fully expensed cars. Also IIRC there was no tax payable as a benefit in kind. Of course, three years later, they were replaced with new and the "old" cars released to the public at very reasonable prices.

      2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: "would help to kick-start the market"

        "finding charging points at premises visited or at convenient places en route (coupled with time spent waiting for a vehicle to charge)"

        This is pretty much my exact scenario on a regular basis. Site visits up to 150 miles away, often relatively rural smallish towns and the site has 3-4 charging points, almost always in use (relatively large site with many employees). My site visits are rarely more than an hour or two and the charge points are not "fast" charge. Out of curiosity at one site just last week, I noted the cars on charge in visitors car park were all charging. The ones in the Councillors/senior staff car park were all fully charged already. Somehow I doubt those "power people" would be coming down anytime soon to move their fully charged cars to release the charging point for others to use.

        At one Council site, there's a large, black plug-in BMW that is ALWAYS on the same charge point, no matter the time of day I arrive. I have no doubt that some senior bod has appropriated that charging point as his own personal parking space in what is actually a public pay and display car park operated by the Council.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    With government incentives (not subsidies) it could happen very quickly. Look at Norway and the Netherlands. Norway was selling over 50% electric last year.

    But the UK government have just reduced the plug-in car grant in the latest budget and simple but key measures they could do they haven't announced.

    They are loads of rapid charging stations that are currently being held up due to wayleave issues, planning or power company delays. These could all be sped up with regulation and legislation and still be fair to everyone.

    On street charging could be improved majorly - some areas do it very well. If you can park outside your house normally then running channels where requested for the charging lead could be done (similar to a request for a dropped kerb).

    However most of the stance taken seems to be - stick, stop the sales of ICE vehicles by 2035 and the rest has been left to industry and the free market to sort out with no proper help or guidance. Compare the rest of the UK with Scotland and the efforts they've made on public charging, night and day.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      " the UK government have just reduced the plug-in car grant in the latest budget"

      That's just the first step; to recover the lost fuel tax as more people go electric, at some point in the next 15 years there's going to either have to be a massive hike on the VAT paid on electricity, a massive increase in ANPR cameras to allow the detection of road use for taxes, or the introduction of a GPS based road use tax, together with crippling fines for people who tamper with the tax calculating black box that would need to be fitted to every car. I'm willing to bet that our current chancellor is hoping to leave the blame and cost of this mess for one of his successors, rather than trying to sort it out by preparing for the inevitable.

      Don't get me wrong, I like electric cars, but right now they are expensive and therefore are bought by the better off half of society. This means a decrease in the tax paid by people who can afford to pay it, whilst people who can't afford the up front cost of an electric car carry on paying.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        No they don't need to do any of that. They could just raise the income tax slightly or adjust the bands so that there is no net tax loss.

        There is no reason you 'have to' tax vehicles. You could just as easily tax gas boilers or ovens or wood burning stoves.

        The only reason people think that the cars must be taxed is because they currently are. It's no like road tax or fuel duty was ever ring fenced to do anything to do with roads or transport.

        1. Will Godfrey Silver badge
          Meh

          "It's no like road tax or fuel duty was ever ring fenced to do anything to do with roads or transport."

          Ummm, originally it was the Road Fund License Sneakily changed to Road Tax sometime in the 1960's if I remember rightly.

          Prolly about the same time the somewhat erratic but simple Purchase Tax was dropped in favour of the far more 'interesting' VAT.

          1. ICL1900-G3
            Headmaster

            Not quite sure what 'prolly' means, but VAT came in when we joined the EEC, as it then was.

      2. The Nazz Silver badge

        Look on the bright side, you never know the old fashioned "Walking" could make a comeback.

        "You know, i'm so poor i can't even walk anywhere." Oh really?

        A win/win?

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Electric cars

    They make cute second cars for the wealthy

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Electric cars

      ....and then the wealthy get to drive around feeling good, using roads whose upkeep they no longer contribute too.

      Worse still the rest of us are paying for the charging infrastructure they are using.....

      1. Thrudd the Barbarian

        Re: Electric cars

        Except all those transportation related taxes go into general revenue.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Electric cars

          ...and then all the transportation infrastructure is paid for out of the general revenue pot. What's your point?

  5. Smileyvirus

    I think the SMMT figures for the UK are perhaps already showing that this year could have been a hell of surge for BEVs etc.

    https://www.smmt.co.uk/vehicle-data/car-registrations/

    The c word might have the last laugh though.

  6. Totally not a Cylon

    Range & Time for a FULL charge

    When the range is 500miles and under an hour for a FULL charge then I'll be able to consider an electric vehicle.

    Also why are they all single lead charging? Why not have multiple leads?

    the more connections the lower the current per connection but the higher the total current.

    Plus thinner leads are lighter to handle

    1. Smileyvirus

      Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

      You must have a bladder like a camel, I can't drive for 7hrs non stop.

      Surely 150KW charging through a single cable is enough? I mean the very thought is terrifying and awesome.

      1. Cuddles Silver badge

        Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

        "You must have a bladder like a camel, I can't drive for 7hrs non stop."

        For some reason it always seems to need pointing out in these discussions, but there's a very big different between stopping occasionally for a five minute toilet break, and being forced to stop for an hour or more just so the car doesn't grind to a halt. That's especially true when the former doesn't need any more facilities than a layby with a convenient bush any time you fancy it, while the latter requires scheduling your stop only at a place with the required chargers at a time the car demands.

        Electric cars have a lot going for them, but they are simply not yet equal to traditional engines when it comes to long journeys, and it really doesn't make sense to argue otherwise. Yes, a lot of people don't need to make such journeys so electric cars may be more suitable for many people than they might think. But for those who do, trying to equate occasional short toilet breaks with regular lengthy fuelling stops is just ridiculous.

        1. xj650t

          Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

          That’s just not how it works. Why wait until the battery is nearly flat to recharge?

          Just stop like you would normally every hour or 2 for 5-10 mins and plug in.

          The latest Tesla chargers can add 75 miles in 5 mins so a 10 min break gets you another 150 miles up the road, by which time you’ll need another toilet break anyway.

          1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

            Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

            "The latest Tesla chargers can add 75 miles in 5 mins so a 10 min break gets you another 150 miles up the road, by which time you’ll need another toilet break anyway."

            Do Tesla allow non-Tesla cars to plug in now? Most non-Tesla chargers are not fast charge and you won't get anywhere near 75 miles of charge in 5 minutes.

        2. Smileyvirus

          Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

          500 miles takes approx 7 hrs at the legal speed limit, let's be generous and say 3 hrs between pee breaks, so thats 210 miles between pee breaks assuming 0 traffic and unless you are stopping to pee in a hedge, at which point you've not being doing 70mph any way, it'll takes more than 5mins just to walk to most toilets in a motorway services, let's be sensible and say 15 mins break, the Peugeot e208 has 200ish range and the ability to add 160 miles in 30 mins, so whilst it's not quite perfect, assuming maybe 2.5hrs stints and stopping for a cup of coffee and pee, it's already practical. Maybe not for 40,000 mile a year road warriors, but edge cases are always the ticklish bit. On top of I imagine a fair chunk of the SUV or business luxury pickups that are in fashion will need to be refueled at least once during that time too.

          1. Cynic_999 Silver badge

            Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

            Are you factoring in the 2 hour queue to use the charging sockets? I can see there will need to be charging bays that only allow 10 minute top-ups to avoid them all being hogged by those wishing to do a full recharge.

        3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

          "requires scheduling your stop only at a place with the required chargers at a time the car demands."

          In the not so long ago past, I posted here about all the Tesla-Only charging points at motorway service that never seemed to get used. I stopped recently at a services on the M1 in South Yorkshire and on leaving noticed all the Tesla-Only charging points, about 8(??) were all in use and at least one Tesla driver was parked up and standing there looking around, probably wondering/hoping someone would be back soon to free up a point for him. Planning your journey based on where charging points are doesn't account for whether one will be available when you get there.

      2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

        "I can't drive for 7hrs non stop."

        Neither can I, but I also don't want to stop for an hour+ every 2 hours. A 10 minute pee break is enough, then I want to be back on the road.

      3. Piro

        Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

        I've done about 11 hours without stopping for anything but petrol once, but that's reaching the limits

    2. Luiz Abdala Bronze badge
      Alert

      Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

      If you want thinner leads, you increase voltage, not add more leads. Or you will end with a bundle of thin leads on your hand, kinda self-defeating.

      The thickness of leads is directly proportional to the current *alone*. Increasing voltage, you drop current.

      power (stable) = current (-) x voltage (+)

      Another issue is temperature: lots of current in thin cables generates heat. Ohmic resistance and all that.

      Either we make the cable superconductor (not gonna happen), or we make them thick (we don't want that) or we can increase the voltage from 220V to something like 380V and beyond.

      Power lines transporting *GIGAWATTS* are not much thicker than Tesla's cables, but power lines operate at 500,000 volts and beyond. 750,000 in not uncommon, and a few lines operate at one million volts. However, you must keep some 5 meters of distance from them before getting zapped.

      Up to 440V is hand-operable without issue, and without gloves. At a mere 20 amps, a 440V charging port would be dumping 8800 W in a car.

      Edit: Tesla operates at 480V on their supercharger. If they are rated at 150kW, that means 313 amps, on those THICK cables.

      1. Quando

        Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

        Your 440V @ 20amps giving a charge rate of 8800 W is not going to cut it. You get 7KW from a home charger.

        Roadside rapid or superchargers are 50KW up to 150KW these days, with 350KW coming soon. So at 440V that is 795amps - a chunky heavy cable.

        The Tesla 150KW chargers use 480V DC, the higher power ones will be moving to 800V.

        1. Luiz Abdala Bronze badge

          Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

          Exactly. 800V will allow thinner cables.

      2. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

        Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

        Most Electric Cars when using a DC charger use 400V. The only exception at the moment is the Porsche Taycan which uses 800V internally.

        50kW @400V is a good number of Amps (125A). That needs a pretty thick cable.

        My EV can charge at up to 100kW. There are some 350kW chargers in use in the UK now. Anything over 100kW requires water cooled cables because of the heat generated.

        1. Paul Crawford Silver badge

          Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

          The UK domestic supply is typically 100A max at 230V which is 23kW. Many homes have 80A or 63A fuses instead.

          Most of the supply grid was built on the assumption that no domestic customer can draw full power for more than a short time, and usually not all at the same time. Rewiring and upgrading transformers on that is going to cost a lot!

      3. Roland6 Silver badge

        Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

        >If you want thinner leads, you increase voltage, not add more leads.

        A few years back, I was surprised at the thinness of the leads used to connect an electric locomotive's pantagraph to the 25,000v overhead supply cable.

        1. Luiz Abdala Bronze badge

          Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

          It would be extremely easy for rail companies to use EV if they matched the maintenance vehicles to the rail voltage, but they would need their own pantograph for recharging-on-the-go.

          Trains use from 3000V to that 25000V you saw.

    3. N2 Silver badge

      Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

      And make body panels out fo solar cells.

      1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

        Re: And make body panels out fo solar cells.

        And actully contribute very little to the range unless you park it for a good number of days between journeys.

        The Average Solar panel that you see on houses and in use at Solar Farms generates in the order of 300W. That is 0.3kW.

        With car batteries of over 75kWh getting pretty common, 0.3W/hour would take an awful long time to charge the car. A small car might generate 0.5kW of power from its solar panels.

    4. RobbieM

      Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

      This excuse gets trotted out on a regular basis. The vast majority of motorist travel small distances and stop for a fair amount of time inbetween so range isnt that inportant. availability of charging points however is a more relevant issue.

      1. Dwarf Silver badge

        Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

        I recall seeing in this weeks budget a claim that there will always be a charging station within 30 miles of you. So, I drew a circle on a map and realised how many people that will be queuing for that single charging point. I then drew a couple of points on London, we can do the whole M25 with just four charging stations based on that metric, which is a complete bargain.

        Then I realised that a trip there and back to this magical point will remove 60 miles from your electric car's range, so, I thought - that's a heck of a lot of wasted trips with the resulting waste in generated power, hence not very green, it will also make it very busy on the streets in those areas with all the miles of queues.

        Yet more impressive sounding politics but without the meat to back it up.

        What I want to know though, where is all this new electricity going to be generated given that they are shutting power stations and not building new ones. Even if they started now, then there is no realistic likelihood of the infrastructure being there in the next 30 years.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

          "they are shutting power stations and not building new ones."

          Eh, what? Dunno about others, but Ferrybrdge coal fired closed and has been replaced with a couple of wood burners. I've not checked the rated output of old Ferybridge v new Ferrybridge though. Drax is also switching to gas/wood instead of cola, not closing.

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

      And yet in the real world it isn't actually an issue. Having driven thousand mile trips in an electric car the length of stopping and needing to charge was absolutely fine, genuinely.

      In fact the minor amounts of pre-planning to charge was actually helpful in breaking up the journey. And the fact that the cost of the charging was zero meant that paying an extra 50p for a coffee didn't matter at all.

      The fact that you can work, eat, watch TV, catch up on emails etc at the same time (in the warmth of the car) makes it quite pleasant.

      And that is only for long trips nearly every other time I can just charge overnight at home.

      I never liked filling up at a petrol station every week or so. It's one thing I still dislike every time I use a fuel car.

      It's really is one thing that, currently, I find a non-issue. It might get worse in the future when there are more cars sharing the chargers, or conversely it might get better with loads more charging points.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

        ""The fact that you can work, eat, watch TV, catch up on emails etc at the same time (in the warmth of the car) makes it quite pleasant."

        From that, I'd guess you are driving a Tesla with all mod cons and therefore have access to a fairly decent network of fast chargers. The rest of the EVs don't seem to have such a wonderful network just yet, hence the "problem" of longer trips, in particular for those who can't afford £40K+ for a car.

        1. werdsmith Silver badge

          Re: Range & Time for a FULL charge

          We have an EV as a second car and I've never needed a charger other than overnight. It covers off all those short trips and offsets those miles from the main car saving the money that way.

          If I didn't have the driveway then I would just take it to one of the town chargers once a week or so when the car is out on an errand. The car has to suit a purpose. You buy the type of car for the job you need it for and that applies to any type of car, not just EV vs ICE. I mean I wouldn't buy a Range Rover for short trips and commuting and I wouldn't buy a small Peugeot for lugging large loads up and down the motorways. If you have a 10 miles commute and do short journeys, then EV is better.

  7. Adelio

    I like the definition of "cheap"

    I just had a quick look at the list of cars available in 2020 in the UK. only a couple were as low as£25,000 most of them were substantially more expensive.

    If I compare an electric car with the equivelant petrol car the difference seems to be AT LEAST £10,000!

    That is a LOT of additional money to find. And the cost of second hand Electric cars are equally as expensive.

    When I look at my town (Huddersfield) there are only a few places to charge. most with only 1 or 2 charging points. all the OTHER side of town from me. For my Journey to work (Huddersfield to Tankersley, using A roads) there are NO charging points. Certainly None where i work!

    Charging points for cars REALLY needs to be addressed, as well as distance per charge and time to charge and the cost of the cars when new before many people are going to buy new Electric Cars.

    Now the TCO of a Electric car may be quite good. Assuming you do a lot of miles, but the Upfront cost will put off a lot of people.

    I am sure when I look to replace my current car I will have a look at electric cars, I am pretty sure though that by the time I look I will probably have retired so will not be able or willing to pay the premium.

    1. Mike 137 Silver badge

      Re: I like the definition of "cheap"

      I entirely agree Adelio.

      Most of my neighbours drive second hand cars that typically cost less than GBP3k (I've asked). Mine cost me much less before I restored it. Many of these people are on low incomes or retired (and that's a growing percentage of the population), but all need their cars as there's no convenient public transport locally (the buses to the rail station come twice an hour and just miss the trains). In any case you can't carry much more than a single suitcase on a bus these days (no bikes, no furniture, no sacks of garden compost). All the more, my work often requires me to travel at hours where there's no public transport running.

      To assume that the only people eligible to drive will be those who can fork out ten times the price or more is to divide society still further into the "haves" and the "have nots". It's bad enough that increasingly one has to do prior research and pay a fee to drive into towns one wants to visit just because one drives an older car. Shortly the entire area of Greater London within the North Circular Road will be chargeable to enter 24/365, typically more than doubling the cost of driving to work.

      While I think we all agree that we must reduce emissions pollution, just putting a tax on it may not be the most equitable way. Reducing the need for the "rush hour" and bringing local shops back to neighbourhoods instead of relying on remote "shopping centres" would make a huge difference, but of course those who profit most from the status quo would object.

      Point fixes to the problem, real though it is, will not even partially work without causing serious damage to the social fabric. If we want to clean up our act for the environment without creating social discord we need a complete change of culture that ensures everyone is treated fairly and equally, not measures that only the wealthy can take advantage of. It's all very well for politicians to whom "25 grand is peanuts" to assume that if you can't pay you don't deserve, but that's not how a fair society is supposed to operate and it's not in practice likely to maintain a stable one.

    2. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

      Re: Places to Charge

      Where I live there are very few chargers that actually work. If there are any they are 3.5kWh.

      I charge at home (7kWh) and with a range of 200+ miles I don't need to charge very often.

      I was sceptical about the viability of EV's. Having had mine a year and 12K miles I don't have that any longer. As for long trips, I toured the far north of Scotland last summer and I live south of London. Getting there was no problem provided you plan your trip and are sensible.

      I now avoid IONITY chargers. They rob you blind £0.69/kWh.

      1. Cynic_999 Silver badge

        Re: Places to Charge

        "

        I charge at home (7kWh) and with a range of 200+ miles I don't need to charge very often.

        "

        I might well have got an electric car if that was a possibility for me. Almost all my car use is 50 mile office commutes or short trips to the supermarket etc, and on the rare occasions I need to do longer trips I could make alternate arrangements (such as hiring a petrol car).

        But I have no driveway and have to park on road, so home charging is a non-starter. Unless a reliable charge point were to be provided within walking distance of my house or work place (that was almost guaranteed to be available when I need it), an electric car is for me completely impractical.

        My situation is pretty commonplace.

      2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: Places to Charge

        "I charge at home (7kWh) and with a range of 200+ miles I don't need to charge very often."

        That puts you right at the peak of the bell curve and the ideal target market for current small/medium EVs.

    3. Def Silver badge

      Re: I like the definition of "cheap"

      Regarding charging points, after watching this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEyfCcAbtKU my conclusion was that Tesla are the only real option when it comes to EVs right now. Their supercharger network is second to none, and they literally do just work. Not to mention having a car actually know and inform you if it will make it to the next charging station or not and if not where the alternatives are located seems invaluable information.

      As a commentator on that video pointed out: "Turns out EV's aren't actually most challenged by technology, they are most challenged by the fragmentation and data hoarding greed of energy companies."

  8. werdsmith Silver badge

    @Adelio

    "I like the definition of "cheap"

    I just had a quick look at the list of cars available in 2020 in the UK. only a couple were as low as£25,000 most of them were substantially more expensive."

    ---

    Cars are not cheap. There is a Corsa on display at the Costco near hear (old fashioned ICE engine version). £20K price on it. Corsa can be considered an entry-level car. The E-Corsa is £26K so the gap is narrowing. Then if you remember that most cars are "owned" on PCP or PCH deals, the buyers are not spending £20-£30K anyway.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "the gap is narrowing."

      Not really, here's a more realistic comparison:-

      Renault Clio:- RRP: From £13,825

      Renault Zoe:- RRP: From £28,470

      And I for one prefer to buy a car and own it outright, keeping it for at least 10 years. These rental schemes that are all the rage are designed to keep a steady income for the dealers, rather than represent good value for money to the consumer.

      1. Smileyvirus

        Mildly skewed there, the cheapest Clio model you can buy versus the cheapest Zoe would be £26,170, yeah still double, but you should probably spec up the Clio a bit. For the moment electric cars tend to come with a better spec even in their base model.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Rough calculations:

        10 years at 12k miles per year

        = £15,700 in fuel (at 45mpg and £1.3 per litre average)

        = £4,680 in electricity at 15p per kWh

        So saving over £10k in fuel costs along with the fact that Elctric cars need almost no servicing (tyres, washer fluid and air filters). Unlikely to need brakes. That is likely to be another £1,500 saving. Add another £1500 for 10 years tax.

        The electric one is likely to work out cheaper and also you wont be pouring toxins and gases out of the rear of it.

        1. vilemeister

          It may work out cheaper but as someone who can afford to run a golf R in my salary I can't afford the initial upfront cost of an electric car. Its a shame, I really would like to move to electric, but the upfront cost is just too much.

          And I cycle to work, so my car is used for a longer proportion of longer journeys than others, so I need one with longer range, which adds even more expense.

        2. Jimmy2Cows Silver badge

          All well and good, but most people don't buy a car based on TCO.

          They look at what they can afford to pay now, or over 2-5 years. The extra up-front cost of electric cars simply puts them out of reach for many people, even if that cost can be recovered over the ownership period.

          1. Thrudd the Barbarian

            Sadly the purchase price is what limits the lower oncomrs to end up spending more over all on any durable goods.

            Those 300$ boots will last a lifetime with care while the 25$ pair will barely make two years before needing to be replaced.

            Same goes for appliances or vehicles in general.

            Mind there are exceptions... I'm looking at you GE.

            1. stiine Silver badge

              That would be Sam Vimes' Boots Theory of socioeconomic unfairness.

        3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          "10 years at 12k miles per year"

          What's the expected battery life and range degradation over it's lifetime/10 years?

          1. Francis Boyle Silver badge

            Typically

            something like 5%.

    2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      "£20K price on it. Corsa can be considered an entry-level car."

      I think you'll find that model is not an entry level version. It sounds more like top of the range, all options fitted for that price.

  9. herman Silver badge

    Real low cost electric cars

    Italcar Emoke: http://www.italcar.com/en/product/e-moke

    Good for driving around a village in Europe. I asked and they said it will be available by summer 2020.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Real low cost electric cars

      "Italcar Emoke:" .... "Good for driving around a village in Europe"

      Now there's a car from before people had heard of crash regulations... It might be interesting getting hold of one for use on the road in the UK, unless it's sold as a kit car, or unless the manufacturers can somehow persuade the DVLA that the original Mini-Moke production line was never shut down.

      I've got no idea about most of europe, but I suspect that in France at least, the e-moke would be sold as a "Vehicule sans Permit", which could be in effect be driven by a child without a driving licence...

      1. Tom 38 Silver badge

        Re: Real low cost electric cars

        Now there's a car

        It's considered as a "Heavy Quadricycle", which actually has to follow the same regulations as a trike moped. So maybe not a car :)

      2. Jimmy2Cows Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: Real low cost electric cars

        It's just trying to outcompete that paragon of electric vehicular safety, the G-Wiz.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge
          Happy

          Re: Real low cost electric cars

          Or the Sinclair C5 :-)

    2. Fred Dibnah Silver badge

      Re: Real low cost electric cars

      I am not a number, I’m a free man!

      1. Cynic_999 Silver badge

        Re: Real low cost electric cars

        Obviously Sinclair had a product that was before its time. I wonder how many would sell if it were to be marketed these days?

  10. uro

    Vehicle cost is a barrier to entry for the majority

    With average UK salaries ranging between £19,000 - £34,000 (dependant on job, age, experience, etc) and with BEV's anywhere from £30,000-£60,0000++ and Hydrogen Vehicles's starting around £50,000++ they are too expensive and out of reach of the majority population, until the purchase prices come down to parity or less than the current prices of fossil fuel vehicles they will be reserved for above average earners.

    In my area we have plenty of EV charging points and a few hydrogen fuelling stations all fuelled by renewable energy sources (excess energy is diverted to hydrogen production when the grid can't take anymore juice), for me it is not a lack of recharging or refuelling points but the cost of the vehicles that are a barrier to entry for all but the richest in society.

    With this high cost to entry the new green revolution is going to be very slow indeed to transition away from fossil fuels.

    1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      Re: Vehicle cost is a barrier to entry for the majority

      In my area we have plenty of EV charging points and a few hydrogen fuelling stations all fuelled by renewable energy sources (excess energy is diverted to hydrogen production when the grid can't take anymore juice), for me it is not a lack of recharging or refuelling points but the cost of the vehicles that are a barrier to entry for all but the richest in society.

      It's a way for the middle classes to virtue signal amongst themselves, aided and abetted by regressive taxation.

      Curious about your claim of all-renewable power because unless they're on an isolated grid, they'll be pumping electrons from coal/gas/nuclear as well as 'renewables'. Especially at night on a calm day, ie no wind/solar, in which case it'll more likely be gas powered electrons.

      Problems with mass adoption are many, especially in the current market. So in the UK we've had regular electricity price gouging as oil went over $100/bbl. It's now $30/bbl but prices haven't fallen for some strange reason. Then there's gas, which has also fallen especially as we've had a mild winter. But in a free market, ICEs are currently far cheaper, especially if fuel prices are passed on.. Which they're not, partly due to policy (fuel duty) and greed.

      So policy is to decarbonise transport and heating. So that means a massive increase in electricity generation. 'Renewables' are the most expensive/least efficient way to generate that, but heavily subsidised so business and consumer electricity prices have been climbing. Currently there's a 'sin tax' on ICE, ie the more fuel you use, the more duty/VAT you pay, but there's no equivalent for EVs. And as electricty prices continue to rise, EV's get increasingly more expensive.

      I'm guessing at some point, there'll be road charging and an EV duty, and EU requirements for 'black box' systems will support that. But something needs to be done to correct the 'free rider' problem, where costs are externalised and not charged to the things that are generating the extra cost.

      1. Fred Dibnah Silver badge

        Re: Vehicle cost is a barrier to entry for the majority

        "Currently there's a 'sin tax' on ICE, ie the more fuel you use, the more duty/VAT you pay, but there's no equivalent for EVs."

        Although there's no fuel duty on EVs (yet), the more miles you drive the more electricity you buy. The cost includes VAT so there is an equivalence, but at a lower tax rate.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Vehicle cost is a barrier to entry for the majority

        What a load of baloney.

        "It's a way for the middle classes to virtue signal amongst themselves, aided and abetted by regressive taxation."

        Or it's a way to drive a nice car and do something to help reduce carbon emissions and pollution. Doesn't mean you're doing it for anyone else - pretty sure drivers of Range Rover Evoque are more likely doing it for status than an EV owner.

        ". 'Renewables' are the most expensive/least efficient way to generate that"

        No they aren't. They're one of the cheapest way's of doing it and fairly efficient. But it depends if you are including nuclear, which is one of the most expensive. And once again it is the Nuclear plants that are heavily subsidised not wind for instance. Counter that with the billions poured into oil companies and firms around the world...

        Coal plants are already more expensive to build than a renewable plant and according to a recent report will soon be more expensive overall to keep running.

        The proof of this is in Australia and the hornsdale plant with a massive battery storage facility which is providing massive energy savings as well as regulating the supply and stopping blackouts.

        "... the more duty/VAT you pay, but there's no equivalent for EVs..." There is VAT on electricity at 5%

        "I'm guessing at some point, there'll be road charging and an EV duty, and EU requirements for 'black box' systems will support that. " Nope, not needed. You don't 'have to' tax a car. It's a choice. The tax can come from anywhere.

        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          Re: Vehicle cost is a barrier to entry for the majority

          Or it's a way to drive a nice car and do something to help reduce carbon emissions and pollution.

          That rather assumes that carbon emissions are actually a problem. And EV's are themselves pretty carbon intensive and polluting from their production through to their eventual disposal. Especially as major components like the batteries can't currently be recycled, and have a limited life. But it's easier to drive a Tesla to a pipeline or coal mining protest than it is to somewhere like Macundo or S.America lithium extraction sites. Then of course there's particulate pollution, which can be worse for EVs on account of their weight. And 'Renewables' themselves aren't immune given stuff like this-

          https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-07-31/turbines-in-landfill-trigger-debate-over-wind-s-dirty-downside

          Carbon fibre blades have much the same problem, although I guess you could argue that dumping those is simply 'carbon capture and storage'.

          No they aren't. They're one of the cheapest way's of doing it and fairly efficient. But it depends if you are including nuclear, which is one of the most expensive. And once again it is the Nuclear plants that are heavily subsidised not wind for instance. Counter that with the billions poured into oil companies and firms around the world

          Incorrect. Greens like to state that oil companies are subsidised, and yet they're also very heavily taxed and regulated. 'Renewables' are the most expensive and least reliable. Greens and the 'renewables' lobby spin that they're not, and whine when subsidies are reduced. But since 2002, the 'renewables' lobby has been given £38bn, and currently around £10bn a year under just the 'Renewables Obligation' scheme. That's being phased out, but massive subsidies remain. Hence why our electricity prices haven't fallen, despite reductions in oil (not used in UK) and gas. And then onshore wind costs around £1.5m/MW, offshore, £3m/MW. But then there's the additional costs of landing that power, transporting it, providing back-up capacity and grid stabilisation.

          All of those costs will increase if 'renewables' grow, along with increased demand due to decarbonisation.

          The proof of this is in Australia and the hornsdale plant with a massive battery storage facility which is providing massive energy savings as well as regulating the supply and stopping blackouts.

          Incorect. The battery is to provide grid stabilisation & frequency control. So a massive energy cost and pretty useless for stopping blackouts given it could only provide enough power for about 10 minutes. Even less if Aussies are trying to fill their EVs..

          Nope, not needed. You don't 'have to' tax a car. It's a choice. The tax can come from anywhere.

          Well, I guess there's the magic money tree. Otherwise tax comes from taxpayers. So governments will lose fuel duty & VAT, and governments hate losing money. They are however keen to waste other people's money, so the cost of building roughly 3x current electricity generation will fall on businesses and consumers. But then Green has always been a color of decay and corruption..

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Vehicle cost is a barrier to entry for the majority

            Once again what a load of baloney. You are clueless - just search for EV Car myths but to address some of your more uninformed points.

            "And EV's are themselves pretty carbon intensive and polluting from their production through to their eventual disposal. Especially as major components like the batteries can't currently be recycled, and have a limited life"

            No they aren't production is no more carbon intensive than a regular ICE. Batteries have a limited life, currently a Tesla battery pack should last 400,000 miles, soon likely to be a million miles. However after that they can be put into power storage projects and have another few decades of use (often currently used as battery backup and power storage systems). When they finally become useless there are recycling plants that will extra the usable components from them (battery recycling plants DO already exist). Compared to a care, ho many miles do they usually last?

            "lithium extraction sites"

            So a Tesla has a few Kg of Lithium in their pack. Lithium is not normally mines but is dried off salt lakes similar to how salt is extracted. The biggest producer by far is Australia. It is a myth that Lithium is all nasty, dangerous mining. Compare the fact that those few Kg are for the life of the battery (see above) and petrol is used and burnt every second of driving an ICE.

            Your comments about renewable subsidies is an historic subsidy to increase the commercial viability of renewables. You are confusing the schemes. Most of the costs are to allow lower income households to install energy saving systems, such as efficient boilers, cavity wall insulation and previously energy meters. The renewable obligation obliged energy companies to get more energy from renawables and some minimum contract money was given to companies providing renewable energy. This contract has had very little need to be used due to the major costs of renewables becoming so cheap to install and run. It is unlikely a contract will be needed in the next round of funding.

            "Incorect. The battery is to provide grid stabilisation & frequency control. So a massive energy cost and pretty useless for stopping blackouts given it could only provide enough power for about 10 minutes. Even less if Aussies are trying to fill their EVs.."

            It is not incorrect it has been used and used regularly saving hundreds of millions of dollars. They are expanding it and creating new plant s purely because of the savings and efficiency it is providing. It has stopped blackouts - you on't need to run on 100% battery, you just need enough to stabilise the grid and get the frequency back to normal operating frequency - this is what it has achieved.

            "Otherwise tax comes from taxpayers"

            Who do you think pays fuel and road taxes? The tax payers. The money goes to general taxation. The money can come from general taxation. There is no need to tax cars, it was just a way of trying to hide a tax and pretend that it is optional. It's as optional as income tax, you can always choose not to work and not pay it.

            Also your 3x figure? Na wrong again.

            I see you are an anti-environmentalist. But even if you don't believe in man made global warming, the stats about burning fuel in towns and cities must be a good reason to reduce it. If it is corruption you are worried about, then I'm sure that the Big Oil companies have none of that at all, nope clean as a whistle.

            1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

              Re: Vehicle cost is a barrier to entry for the majority

              Batteries have a limited life, currently a Tesla battery pack should last 400,000 miles, soon likely to be a million miles. However after that they can be put into power storage projects and have another few decades of use (often currently used as battery backup and power storage systems).

              Ah.. perpetual motion! Limits on battery life are down to duty cycle, not range. So range claims can be misleading, as well as being 'forward looking statements'. The million mile battery does not exist, and may tie with fusion for entering commercial use. Or you get the million mile by simply towing it with a Tesla semi. But the limits on batteries are down to charge/discharge profiles, which lead to range reduction due to holding less charge. And as that's due to chemical & physical changes inside the batteries, leads to futher decline. So although you could sift through the thousands of cells in a typical EV battery pack for good ones, putting failing batteries into power storage systems isn't necessarily a good idea. Other than for commercial reasons if you can sell the batteries twice.

              So a Tesla has a few Kg of Lithium in their pack. Lithium is not normally mines but is dried off salt lakes similar to how salt is extracted.

              It can be mined, ie hard-rock extraction where lithium rich rock is extracted, then the lithium extracted. But that's more expensive than the salt lakes. Of course that means creating those brine lakes which means you need a lot of water. And salt lakes being where water was rather than is, means diverting water away from populations, agriculture etc. And then there's pollution if waste water & products aren't well managed. There are however some neat side effects from increased lithium demand-

              On 16 July 2018 2.5 million tonnes of high-grade lithium resources and 124 million pounds of uranium resources were found in the Falchani hard rock deposit in the region Puno, Peru

              See also-

              https://www.xkcd.com/1162/

              But then there are other environmental impacts from 'renewables' and EVs, so the need for stuff like copper and cobalt, which comes from massive mining operations in the DRC.. But out of sight, out of mind..

              The renewable obligation obliged energy companies to get more energy from renawables and some minimum contract money was given to companies providing renewable energy. This contract has had very little need to be used due to the major costs of renewables becoming so cheap to install and run. It is unlikely a contract will be needed in the next round of funding.

              You are confused. ROCs are/were a direct subsidy. It's a financial instrument where 'renewables' operators are given ROCs. Non-'renewables' companies have to buy ROCs. Different scams attracted different rates, ie the MeyGen tidal scheme gets 5x. Selling those ROCs generates the windfall, selling the power generated is then distorted by priority market access, thus inflating the price of electricity. And 'renewables' aren't becoming cheap, otherwise there would be no need for subsidies at all. There were some interesting bids in the last round of CFD auctions, where wind farmers entered low bids, but that's more to gain access and not firm pricing.

              Then of course you have all the costs inherent in most 'renewables' being unreliable/intermittent, along with interconnection costs. So the costs of ensuring grid stability, which includes simple stand-by power for those calm days, and constraint payments for windy when there's no demand. So for every GW of wind, we might need 700MW of gas generation, assuming there'll be some output from wind. And instead of gas generated electricity being far cheaper than wind, it becomes more expensive due to variable hours, and of course having to buy ROCs or carbon credits.

              It is not incorrect it has been used and used regularly saving hundreds of millions of dollars. They are expanding it and creating new plant s purely because of the savings and efficiency it is providing.

              That's BS. But that's 'renewables' for you. So you decide to base your energy security on an unreliable, intermittent generation system like wind. You get problems, and inconvenient blackouts, along with higher energy prices. You then decide the solution is to spend millions more on batteries to deal with the inherent problems of wind, adding yet more cost. And thanks to a bit of spin, this is translated to 'saving hundreds of millions', even though users see no reduction in electricity prices. And if Australia wanted efficiency, it could have built modern supercritical coal power stations instead, it being a coal producer after all..

              Who do you think pays fuel and road taxes? The tax payers.

              Nope. Which is back to road charging. Road users pay those taxes, and pay more if they use the services more. EV users don't pay fuel taxes, and reduced road tax. Increased costs from increased EV usage is then a mix of direct, and indirect, ie every electricity user paying more to cover increased electricity supply, and any subsidy to fund roll-out of charging stations.

              Also your 3x figure? Na wrong again.

              I see you are an anti-environmentalist.

              Wrong on both counts. The increase in electricty to support decarbonisation is a simple fact. Environmentalism is a more curious argument given environmentalists seem to encourage covering the landscape (and seascape) in windmills & solar panels, and never mind the impact on things like birds, bats, insects, fish etc. So a strange world where a dead common duck in an oil/gas settling pond may lead to a large fine, but bulk deaths of protected species like bats or birds of prey is just a cost of going Green..

      3. uro

        Re: Vehicle cost is a barrier to entry for the majority

        "Curious about your claim of all-renewable power because unless they're on an isolated grid, they'll be pumping electrons from coal/gas/nuclear as well as 'renewables'. Especially at night on a calm day, ie no wind/solar, in which case it'll more likely be gas powered electrons. "

        I live on a windy island in the north of Scotland, we have been exporting 100% renewable energy for a good few years now by using a mix of wind, tidal, wave and some solar energy generation.

        SSE have a 2MW battery installed for storing excess energy as well as load balancing the local grid (fyi it was the first grid connected battery installed in the UK back in 2013).

        It's very rare we have to import any electricity, should that need ever arise then with the volume of renewable generation in Scotland any imported energy will come from the nearest generation outside the local grid - which is the 398MW Maygen tidal generation array on the seabed between us and the Scottish mainland where it connects to the national grid.

        We actually have to turn off generation at times due to lack of interconnector capacity to the national grid (should be rectified when OfGem stop argueing amongst themselves).

        So instead of turning generation off we divert it into hydrogen production locally - it's pretty daft in anyone's book to turn generation off and not collect free energy from non-fossil resources.

        That hydrogen is then used for the heating of some Schools & Community Centres, used to power ferries when docked overnight, by some council vehicles, to fuel hydrogen refuelling stations and there's even a gin distillery prototyping it's use for heating their stills instead of using LPG.

        I hope that satifies your curiousity a bit, now we just need the price of vehicles to come down to sane levels so everyone here can benefit and not just the middle-upper classes.

        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          Re: Vehicle cost is a barrier to entry for the majority

          I live on a windy island in the north of Scotland, we have been exporting 100% renewable energy for a good few years now by using a mix of wind, tidal, wave and some solar energy generation.

          Cheers.. And I think the Orkneys had the UK's first grid-sized wind turbine back in the 1920s.. which was obsoleted once the islands got better connections to the mainland. Thus demonstrating windmills are nothing new. But an interesting test bed, although if it was expected to stand on it's own, islander's wouldn't be able to afford the energy costs.

          which is the 398MW Maygen tidal generation array on the seabed between us and the Scottish mainland where it connects to the national grid.

          MeyGen has a lease for 398MW, but only installed 4x1.5MW turbines initially, and plans to expand capacity to 80MW. Last year, it produced the equivalent energy of around 7hrs that Hinkley's nuclear power station will produce once they go critical.

          But the prospects for that project may look.. interesting-

          https://simecatlantis.com/2020/02/05/future-energy-bond-ends-subscription/

          Atlantis, a global leader in the sustainable energy sector, is pleased to announce that further to the announcement on 6 August 2019, the bond offer has successfully raised £3.79m and is now closed. The five-year bond has a coupon of 8%, payable semi-annually, and matures in 2024.

          That's quite a premium.. Which is also one of the challenges for 'renewables' in general, especially with less generous subsidy structures.

  11. Flak
    Joke

    No net zero carbon by 2050 then (or 2045 in Scottish money)

    What am I saying - those targets are still 30 years away!

    Let's worry about that nearer the time then...

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Electric cars

    They have positives and negatives

    1. MyffyW Silver badge

      Re: Electric cars

      @AC the arguments can be rather polarized, can't they?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Electric cars

        Currently they are

        1. Cynic_999 Silver badge

          Re: Electric cars

          I prefer an electric megacycle.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Electric cars

          Joules better believe it

  13. DJO Silver badge

    Still not convinced

    I don't think electric cars are the future of transportation, they have their place but it's not at the top of the sales chart.

    Biofuel would seem a better but, more specifically the new second generation biofuels which use agricultural waste instead of food as feedstock like the first generation (mis)used.

    As I see it a big obstacle to wide scale adoption of electric cars is that a lot, possibly the majority, of homes in the UK do not have parking close enough to the house for a safe power lead and we really don't have the generating capacity for really widespread adoption. Also biofuels can use the existing petrol & diesel infrastructure which would save billions in costs.

    Also as soon as electric cars make a noticeable dent in the duty the exchequer collects on fuel, they will introduce a mileage tax or some similar way to recoup the lost income which will remove a major incentive driving the sales of electric cars.

    1. Jimmy2Cows Silver badge

      Re: Still not convinced

      BEV are sort of a stop-gap solution. The tech mostly works, for some people it's inconvenient and/or doesn't suit their needs, and numbers are low enough now that vastly increased generating and charging infrastucture isn't yet essential. But it will become essential, and that's where things get tricky.

      Ethanol (carbon neutrally sourced) or hydrogen fuel cell seem better for convenience in the long term, and existing fueling infrastucture can (with some effort of course) be adapted more easily than a massive generating capacity build-out and rewiring everyone's home and street to handle the current demand.

      But the tech really isn't there yet for widespread adoption, so BEV fills the gap. The question is can the gap be closed fast enough.

      1. DJO Silver badge

        Re: Still not convinced

        Hydrogen is probably the worst possible fuel imaginable, apart from containment issues which are a nightmare you have to get the damn stuff from somewhere, yes it's the most abundant element in the universe but here on the Earth almost all of it is chemically bound to other elements.

        Currently there are 2 industrial scale ways to make it:

        Electrolysis, really inefficient and the power has to come from somewhere.

        Catalytic breakdown of natural gas, produces just as much CO2 as burning the gas and needs a lot of energy because the reaction (with super-heated steam) needs to run hot.

        OK so you've got your gas made, you now need to compress it and guess what, that uses a shit load of energy.

        There is research ongoing for biological production of Hydrogen but scaling that up will be tricky.

    2. Cynic_999 Silver badge

      Re: Still not convinced

      How about steam cars? They will run on just about anything. Petrol, diesel, coal, wood, charcoal, hydrogen, alcohol, bottled gas, battery powered electric heaters ... Pick whatever the flavour-of-the-month preferred fuel is today.

      Just a bit of a hassle waiting to generate a head of steam before you can move.

      1. Chronos Silver badge
        Joke

        Re: Still not convinced

        So no stupid stop-start nonsense, then? Where do I sign up?

  14. Cynic_999 Silver badge

    4.4% is not bad

    I would have guessed a far lower figure for the proportion of electric cars in total car sales. Thats nearly 1 in every 23 car sales.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The answer to the impatient long-distance electric car driver is finally here...

    No spare time to wait for a "fast" charge? No available charge ports on your journey?

    Do we have the answer for you...install the Car2car recharge-me app now!

    Just fit our rear-charge port in your vehicle and one our drivers will deliver the power to you ... while you just keep on driving!

    (PS. bank switchable batteries able to charge and discharge individual banks simultaneously are required. E&OE)

  16. Will Godfrey Silver badge
    Unhappy

    Wrong Target

    The poorly maintained buses, along with delivery and haulage vehicles that chuck out thick clouds of half burned diesel are the ones that should be aimed at, and for these it it is very practical indeed.

    1. Atomic Duetto

      Re: Wrong Target

      I’m not so sure they’re poorly maintained. Most diesel buses, large haulage transport, etc., were originally designed to chuck out large clouds of black smoke.. ie. operating as originally intended.

  17. Chronos Silver badge

    The point

    Everyone is fixated on range (which changes as the car ages) and initial purchase cost.

    The real point of this cynical exercise in Being Seen To Be Doing Somthing™ Gretaism is ongoing cost, that of replacing the cell pack when it fills with rocks and stopping your goolies catching fire when the battery does. Ecological it ain't (the batteries die just about the time you break even on ecological cost of manufacture) and it's an awful lot of faff.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020