EU buyers still shunning pure electric vehicles, prefer hybrids There was good news and bad news for electric vehicle (EV) makers in the European Automobile Manufacturers Association's (ACEA) latest figures: a modest rise in monthly registrations but a dip in year-on-year volumes. Overall, new car registrations were up in October across the EU, reversing the trend of the previous months. …
The ability to drive entirely on electricity isn't the major benefit. Toyota's system can only do it under light loads(*) and typically not for more than a mile. The main benefit comes from giving the ECU more options on how to operate the ICE.
Supplementary power from the electrical system coupled with a CVT means the ECU can keep the ICE at it's most efficient for longer. Toyota's HSD will even increase the load on the ICE beyond what is needed (but as a consequence moving it to a more efficient point on the performance curve) to move the vehicle and store the surplus energy in the battery. You might burn more fuel than is needed to move the vehicle but you're getting more energy out of the fuel being burnt.
For a good hybrid system it's all about the balance. That might actually be a good metaphor for life in general :)
(*)One exception to this applicable at the moment in the UK is that if the ICE is really cold the car will be moved purely on electric even under moderate loads. The ICE will be running with adjusted timing to reduce the warm up time. Even then the ICE will be charging the battery/powering the motor.
I've been running the Rav4 Hybrid for the past 7 years and, to me, it's the ideal configuration. It's a full hybrid (like the Prius) with an electric motor driving the front wheels, supported by a petrol engine and generator through the eCVT box; it has a separate electric motor for the rear wheels, when AWD is needed. The Rav4 has plenty of oomph with its 2.5l ICE and is quite brisk for the type of car - nowhere near sport car but a 0-60mph of 8 sec is plenty. The real benefit of this type of hybrid is combining the instant torque of electric with the range of petrol. Two cars ago I had a diesel Rav4, that I really liked (I've driven diesels for a long time as they were a good fit to my driving style). I only changed it when I needed something with more off-road ability, so I had a Hilux (3l diesel) for 6 years.
The old diesel Rav4 used to return 40-45mpg, my Hilux managed to average just over 32mpg - both close to the catalogue ratings. My Rav4 Hybrid manages around 40mpg - 45ish for long runs down the motorways, 50ish around the city, but 35-40 for cross-country on side roads. Overall, it matches the Rav4 diesel on economy - but is far brisker to drive. My driving style has changed a bit as a consequence - no point not using the improved acceleration when it's useful!
I've looked at changing to a plug-in hybrid as a lot of my local driving could be on electric (from a home charger) but the cost to change wouldn't be recouped by any fuel savings in my lifetime (as someone already well into their pension years). All electric is of no use to me - I live in a rural area and nothing in my price range currently has the driving range I need...
My wife's 10 year old Prius Plug-in still does about 9 miles on battery only (if the weather is reasonably warm - the ICE cuts in if you want the heater or if it decides the drive is too cold...)
Its almost enough to get into town and back home again but not quite.
The newer versions do 20+ miles on electric only
I’ve had 9 different hybrid hire cars for a month at a time this year and only one was any good. The worst, an MG, gave 32 miles range after charging all night and ICE gave about 13mpg due to being underpowered by about 60%, likewise for the rest they’re too heavy and consequently eat brakes and tyres too.
Makes me glad I have stuck with my Nissan Qashqai, I get around 70-84mpg (US) on a run and over 60mpg combined cycle out of it, over 1,100 KM out of a tank on average. Looking at the costs of new electrics and hybrids, I just don't see the economical viability of swapping...
No I live in the real world with cold mornings, undulating map contours and variable traffic flow. Optimised track ‘soft’ test results for most cars these days are unachievable and real use figures for a car in Kent will differ widely from a car in Gwent.
I found the Nissan Juke and Quashquai were at least usable but wouldn’t want town one. The big Volvo XC was lovely to drive but too expensive to run, The top of the range MG was good but of them all the Kia Exceed the best car for the money.
All, without exception, had fugly interiors with too much bloatware stuck on the dash.
Yes, it very much depends on how you drive. Beating the published mpg figures is easy. As is the opposite :-)
My car is officially rated at 49.5mpg average. Users online report more like 47mpg average. I mostly drive on motorways and get 60-70mpg easily[*], sometimes just cruising along with the lorries, other times in a bit of a hurry and doing 70. But then I'm not braking and accelerating[**] like so many others I see around me because I'm looking ahead at the traffic. Once, just as an experiment, I got from Scotch Corner filling station the Newcastle at 87mpg using every bit of skill and experience to be as efficient as possible. Not something I'd normally do or recommend, but proved to myself it was possible. It was after rush hour, no traffic delays, no roadworks delays other than the long running 50mph limit near The Angle (which conveniently has a very long gentle downwards slope that more than made up the the uphill section leading to it :-)
* I always reset the trip computer mpg etc when I fill the tank, and always to full. Makes it obvious if there's something up that might not be otherwise obvious.
** I've never been a "petrol head" and am long past the age where I feel the need for speed to hurry everywhere :-)
"and am long past the age where I feel the need for speed to hurry everywhere :-)"
I'm the same way. Now I have instant and long term fuel usage so I can find the speeds where the car is getting the most out of the petrol I pay dearly for. An electric would be great, but it's not financially going to work at the moment. If I can find a used Bolt for a good price at a point where I have the cash, I might just.
Yes, at a constant 75km/h in 6th gear over 100KM, I managed around 2,8L/100KM (84mpg US, gulp, 100.89mpg Imperial!) with my 1.5 Turbo diesel Qashqai, including another 30KM in town and at 100km/h, but the long run pulled the average down to just sipping diesel.
It was literally the constant flat run at a steady 75km/h that did it. I can get a good 80mpg Imperial running back from the shops, when the motor is already warm, but it is only about 15KM and some of it down hill. I get an average of 65mpg combined cycle out of it - cold starts, some town driving, a lot of country road driving (70-90km/h) and some Autobahn.
The 1.5L Turbo does very good mileage and is a lot more economical than the 1.6L and the current models. AFAIK, it is a Renault unit, it runs a 99g/km without a catalyser or AdBlu.
I do spend very little time in towns or on the Autobahn (both around 6L/100km), but spend a lot of time on A roads, where the fuel consumption drops to between 3L/100KM and 5L/100KM depending on how hilly it is and whether I can keep a good average speed without having to brake or accelerate heavily. (Over 100,000KM and the original brake pads are still doing well and don't need replacing.
Driving style also has a lot to do with it. I have always driven quickly, but economically - quick acceleration, but feathering the throttle once I get up to speed, for example.
Funny you should mention that. I rented an obscenely underpowered MG, pure ICE, last month. It has been many many years since I’ve driven a car that needed to be downshifted merely to maintain motorway speeds!
So I tested it a bit, starting at 65 mph on the level and flooring it:
Top/fifth gear: no acceleration.
4th: minimal acceleration that you only really notice by keeping an eye on the speedo.
3rd: sluggish acceleration until you have to change up anyway.
I had to look up its specs, 1.5 VTi-tech, 106 ps. Horrendous to drive. I thought my boy-racing days of having to hit the rev limiter on the slip road just to join the traffic were over…
I thought my boy-racing days of having to hit the rev limiter on the slip road just to join the traffic were over…
I used to do that on my Honda Fireblade 900. Could be doing 100mph in 3rd by the time I got to the motorway.
These days, I mostly drive a 4mph electric scooter (arthritis is a drag!). Or a Toyota C-HR which, mecanically, is a really nice care. The controllers need a bit of work though.. Cold weather? Main battery goes flat and you have to go to the dealer to reset the controller. Hit a pothole? Yup - trip to the dealer to get the controller reset..
I wonder how the company pays for the "fuel" with plug-in hybrids? Do they pay for the company car driver to have a charging point installed and/or pay the electricity usage? I wonder if they pay for the petrol and not the electricity, or an "average" mileage rate. It may be beneficial for the driver to not pay for charging at home and just claim the petrol costs, especially if they have a company fuel card. Anyone here got a company plug-in hybrid and can report back?
According to UK gov, "Hybrid cars are treated as either petrol or diesel cars for advisory fuel rates.", so it may depend on whether you pay for fuel and claim it back, or have a fuel card and are charged for private usage. Whichever method the employer uses, I'd guess for some, it's better to never pay for charging.
I have a plug-in hybrid, which I do plug in regularly (proper charger in the garage). It's cheaper to run on domestic electricity, even at normal rates, than on petrol but running it on petrol for longer journeys is much cheaper than using public chargers. Despite the extra weight I still get good fuel consumption figures on pure petrol for long journeys, and of course it's much cheaper for local trips. For my use pattern of mostly 20-50 mile local trips, plus regular 400 mile trips and occasional 2000+ holidays it's almost perfect.
Sadly, when I replace it in a few years I'll probably go back to ICE to avoid the driver "aids" and crappy infotainment systems in all modern cars, including my current one.
Sadly, when I replace it in a few years I'll probably go back to ICE to avoid the driver "aids" and crappy infotainment systems in all modern cars, including my current one.
Yeah that's putting me off as well. At least with my '19 Corolla the aids can be switched off and they stay switched off. With the current models they switch back on at next startup and switching them off requires going through the dashboard menu.
"current models they switch back on at next startup"
Yup, the speeding alarm, lane sway beeper (and nudger) and sat-nav voice guidance all revert to "irritating mode" every time you start the engine.
It should be a trivial software update to make your preferences "sticky", but they probably won't :(
p.s. Another frustration is that they don't give you all the hardcopy manuals, expecting you to read how to "navigate the customer experience" via an app on your phone (which plod won't muchly approve of!).
I read somewhere that the main reason manufacturers are removing "off, and stay off" options for the driver assistance features is that NCAP won't award a 5* rating if that's possible (in much the same way that all models including the base [that no-one ever buys] must have all the safety features for a car to avoid a 0* rating [as recently happened to the Zoe]).
Yup, i heard that as well.
How NCAP could think that continuous beeps, klaxons, chimes, bells and flashing lights won't distract you from the more important task of drivng safely, i just don't know!
And as for the speed limit alarms, much of the time they are completely wrong - i just hope that they never connect the system to the PNC ;)
While I agree, if you are driving safely, none of those noises should happen :-)
The one that annoys me though is the speed camera beeping. I can't find a way to turn that one off. It's pretty pointless too, especially on faster roads, since it only pings a few 100yds away from the camera and then again as you pass it, which is even more pointless! Not sure if it turns off automatically in those countries where speed camera warnings are not allowed though. (France?)
While I agree, if you are driving safely, none of those noises should happen :-)
That presupposes the car has correct information.
The GPS in my car is wrong by ±10 MPH in towns all around Oxford, and on a recent French trip it was ±20km/h out on many roads around the south coast. Even on a road local to me, with a 60MPH limit, there's a section of about 500m where the GPS beeps at me and shows a 40MPH for no obvious reason. Allowing an automated system to control the speed would be annoying, dangerous and mostly useless.
Sorry, but I disagree vehemently. In recent rental of an MG HS it's "lane assist" repeatedly tried to push me into the side of a truck because it wanted me to drive between the white lines even though we were in a roadworks section and I was following the clearly marked red dashed lines. Luckily I could override it by physically manhandling the car, but it is REALLY unsettling when the car takes over like that and I F***ING HATE IT! It constantly triggered it's speed warning at 65Mph (indicated) which due to car speedo inaccuracies was actually 62Mph on my personal SatNav. On a section of the A1 it suddenly slowed the car for no obvious reason, but I suspect that there were roadworks there for a while and it probably didn't know that they were finished. On another occasion it decided I was too close to the car in front, (which was actually a windswept piece of cardboard) and braked sharply. These systems also lead incompetent drivers to rely on them and when they go wrong the incompetents don't know what to do because they don't know how to drive without them.
I am all for self-driving cars if they ever get them working reliably and safely, but these half-way house gadgets are a hazard and I will NEVER buy a car fitted with them, nor will I ever again be renting a car fitted with them, unless they can be PERMANENTLY disabled.
As for the "everything on a dashboard tablet" what a load of shite those systems are. Want to lower the air-con 1°C? Requires 5 button pushes just to get to the air-con menu and for all of that time I was not looking at the road ahead.
countries where speed camera warnings are not allowed though. (France?)
France is a strange one. Specific alerts about camera positions are illegal, but the government insists that cameras are only installed in areas with a high risk of accidents. GPS systems therefore warn you when you're entering a high-risk "danger" area, usually 200m or so before the camera, on the basis that it can't possibly be wrong to warn people if they're entering a potential danger zone.
AFAIK it hasn't been tested in the courts yet, probably because the government didn't want the embarassment of losing.
While I agree, if you are driving safely, none of those noises should happen :-)
My parent's car has taken to the habit of randomly beeping loudly and putting up a warning message (over the top of the rev counter I may add) to say "front braking assist effectiveness reduced" because it's got a leaf or raindrop or dirt or something on the front radar sensor.
This kind of thing is regardless of driving style or safety because it's essentially a mechanical "fault" with the car, which generates a loud warning and display, causing distraction and alarm.
'Fraid not. Overtake parked vehicles on a normal road with white markings without signalling first and you'll be wresting the wheel before you know it.
Ditto switching back to inside lane of motorway with nothing behind you other than the truck you've just overtaken.
I believe the Renault system allow a permanent switch-off when setting 'personal' preferences. Not sure what the crash testers thought about it.
NCAP is welcome to borrow my G12 7-Series for a week or two. The one that seems to think a stretch of the M62 outside Hull is 5mph and often has similar issues elsewhere. Around 3-4x per year it decides I'm going to have a collision with an parked or oncoming car which I can deal with, but 1x per year it proceeds to stand on the brakes to avoid it and needing the driver behind to take evasive action. It often seems to happen with pavement-mounted pedestrians too. It it wasn't such a lovely car in every other respect, it'd be gone.
My wife's Golf has a similar repeatable collision issue on a road near home, even when there are no cars
Around 3-4x per year it decides I'm going to have a collision with an parked or oncoming car which I can deal with, but 1x per year it proceeds to stand on the brakes to avoid it and needing the driver behind to take evasive action. It often seems to happen with pavement-mounted pedestrians too.
Try driving round some narrow Cornish lanes, where you have to pull right over to let a delivery vehicle coming the other way go past. The collision detection spots a leaf sticking out of the hedge and slams on the brakes to prevent you hitting it!
only had a Nissan i was using while my car was in the shop brake for Casper. dropped me from 40 mph to 12 with nothing visible in site. of course it was night and maybe there was something i couldn't see. wildlife crossing the road is common. mostly deer, but have seen black bear, bobcats, turkeys, fox and coyotes. 2nd time was on a road in the morning in daylight. absolutely nothing in sight. dropped me from 25 to 5 mph. 3rd time almost stopped me in a garage while doing less than 10 mph. my personal car has warned me of impending disaster and helped with the braking when it decided i wasn't taking firm enough action, but has never braked with nothing in front of the car.
Yep liability lawyers will feature in this. It's easy to imagine a situation where the "safety" aids could have prevented or reduced the severity of the accident but didn't because they had been unknowingly turned off during some previous use of the car, so "failed" to operate. By making the driver turn them all off each time the manufacturer largely transfers this liability to the driver.
I hired a holiday car the other month. I was supplied with a Toyota Yaris. It beeped at me incessantly and most of the time I had no idea why. The last thing you want to do is study the dashboard when the car is warning you about some driving condition. That model of car is now on my "don't ever consider" list.
From the EU's site europa.eu:
Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 of the European Parliament and of the Council 1 mandates motor vehicles of categories M and N to be equipped with intelligent speed assistance (ISA) systems from 6 July 2022 for new vehicle types and from 7 July 2024 for all new vehicles.
and it gets even worse:
Article 4
Information on the use of intelligent speed assistance systems
1. Vehicle manufacturers shall provide the approval authorities with the following information:
(a)ratios of the time driven or the distances that are travelled with the intelligent speed assistance systems switched on and switched off;
(b)ratios of the time driven or the distances that are travelled with the perceived speed limits being observed and being overridden, respectively;
(c)the average time elapsed between the switch-on and the switch-off of the intelligent speed assistance system by the driver, when applicable;
(d)The information referred to in the first subparagraph for the cascaded acoustic warning function, the cascaded vibrating warning function and the haptic feedback function shall be provided separately from the information for the speed control function.
2. The approval authorities shall aggregate the information received in accordance with paragraph 1 and provide it to the Commission on 7 July 2024 and every 6 months thereafter.
It notes that Without prejudice to the provisions in Article 4 of this Regulation, the ISA system shall not continuously record nor retain or transmit any data related to specific incidents of exceeding the speed limit other than what is necessary for performance of the required ISA functionality or to comply with other Union acts regarding vehicle type-approval (e.g. event data recorder). so in theory this information will be anonymised and not used to track any individual driver, or affect their insurance, etc. I'm sure we all trust them completely...
This is seriously worrying, and explains why Toyota embed a SIM with cellular connection into all their new cars. Not just to provide the mandatory eCall system, but to monitor your driving style and movements via a spy that you cannot turn off!
Where is GDPR when you need it?
I don't have a problem with the speed warning system on my own car, as it can be set to warn at up to 5mph over the limit it sees (so, for example, if it reads 30mph it will allow me to go up to 35mph, per its speedo, before pinging). It's an irritation that, when passing slip roads, it often picks up the limit signs for those and pings even though I'm still on the main carriageway - but any irritation is offset by the warning when I let my right foot drift over the genuinely posted limit. I try to always drive within the limits, so I find it useful. My suspicion is that those who are desperate to turn off the warnings are those who regularly exceed the limits (some of which are annoyingly low, but should still be respected). Following the rules is a responsibility that comes with the privilege of driving; it's usually the failure to follow them that is the root cause of an RTA.
More annoying, though, is the system in my wife's car - that defaults to kph warnings each time the car is started (the speedo still reads mph but the pings come at kph - e.g. for a 30mph limit, it will warn when she exceeds 30kph, around 19mph on the speedo). Unfortunately, the local dealer doesn't know how to fix it, so it means diving into the settings panel on the screen before setting out, else the warning is pointless. If you know a warning is wrong, you learn to ignore it, which means you also ignore it when it is right.
</soapbox>
In much of Central Europe speed limits are announced by signs but almost never cancelled. You have to guess that whatever condition necessitated the reduction has passed and can speed up again. I usually have three different GPS systems in the car (built in, two phones) and they may all give different speed limits from the road signs.
"The last thing you want to do is study the dashboard when the car is warning you about some driving condition. "
I had that happen when I was driving a moving van for a friend moving a few states away. We stacked so much stuff in the back that it had that floaty feel and took all my concentration. Once I sorted out that it wasn't bonging at me for overheat, low oil or something actually important, I tuned it out, but it was never going to stop being really annoying. Since I was only going to have the van for 2 days, trying to learn the icons that popped up for 100ms wasn't going to happen. I couldn't find a way to turn off the "driver's aids" either whether they would stay off or not.
I'm wondering if control of the system can be had through the CAN bus or another port. It wouldn't be that hard to build a little box that could store settings and even if the car turned everything back on, one button could turn them all back off again. Switching off a beeper wouldn't be that hard, but I don't mind when I get a beep that I've left the headlights on or the key in the ignition. If there was some other critical fault, an audible alarm can be useful. If I could clear out the garage, I've wanted to buy a wrecked EV to disassemble. Affixing the electrical system to a sheet of plywood to allow some probing would be fun.
>p.s. Another frustration is that they don't give you all the hardcopy manuals,
Best one I came across was for snow chains. THIS PRODUCT IS FOR EMERGENCY USE ONLY said the label and underneth that line was for full instructions go to https://youtube.com/blahblah
I was in a blizzard, on a hillside and no mobile signal. Took me 3 days to escape.
We've got a family fleet of five cars - oldest is a 2002 E39 with a petrol V8, newest is a 2011 Giulietta with a peppy 2.0 diesel. None of the fleet has sat nav let alone "infotainment" whatever that nonsense is. Reasons I don't want an EV - hate automatics, can't get the spanners on it myself and all the computers and suchlike, oh and they cost more than £2k to buy.
Personally, I could probably get away with one of these (if it were available). And if I needed regularly to travel longer distances, it would still probably be cheaper to have one for local journeys and a conventional ICE vehicle too than an electric vehicle that tries to do everything. Of course that won't be universally true. However, we probably need (needed) to think of lower carbon transport options beyond simply swapping out the traction technology of existing vehicle types.
I find it real hard to like the looks of most EV and hybrid cars, if the designers would stop trying to make them look futuristic and actually put some effort into making them look good that'd probably help.
Having said that, I do really like the Toyota CHR but am a tad too tall to get in one without sustaining a concussion
I find the opposite. It's not immediately obvious which cars are EVs, HEVs, PHEV;s or ICE when driving down the road. Most xEV's look just like their ICE equivalents. I'd have thought the manufactures would have taken the opportunity to design new and revolutionary shapes. There are limits, of course. The shapes out there are mostly already optimised for drag coefficients against the utility of the vehicle.
Tesla being the exception, but even they stayed pretty much traditional, barring that abomination of the Cybertruck! I've not especially noticed the Chinese EVs on the road here in the UK much, so either they aren't there in force or just blend in with the standard "look". There's probably exceptions, but I can't think of any right now.
I was out car shopping recently and the vast majority of cars an the 2nd hand car sales places seemed to have the SUV body shape in the majority. Maybe it's more about focus groups and marketing and what the manufactures think we want (or want us to buy) than being revolutionary :-)
The early Japanese entries to the European markets were actually of very high quality and their quality and reliability was the principal reason why they very rapidly took a very large share of the market in only a few years and made life suddenly very 'real' for the existing indigenous car manufacturers (remember that prior to this, in the UK at least, something like 75% of all new cars sold to UK buyers were UK manufactured). Early entries (such as the Datsun 120Y, Toyota Crown) were very 'Japanese' in their styling, this rapidly gave way to a more worldwide look as replacements came along.
By comparison, the quality and appearance of current Chinese EV offerings appears to have a long way to go.
It is also interesting that in the case of MG, which was formerly a UK brand, and that SAIC (initially at least) employed a significant portion of the ex-MG Rover designers and engineers, that the looks of their cars has moved away from what European eyes would find aesthetically pleasing and have become increasingly far Eastern in appearance. Whilst the front ends of some of their most recent offerings (MG3 and MG4) have returned to a more sporty European style, the back ends look as though they have been sexually interfered with by a freight train.
The early Japanese entries to the European markets were actually of very high quality and their quality and reliability was the principal reason why they very rapidly took a very large share of the market in only a few years
A lot of the traditional Japanese car manufacturers started life as importers of British cars (since they drive on the proper side of the road like us) which is why a lot of their early designs used the standard A-series engine mount points. Some still do on their smaller cars which, if you are in to living a short life, means you can fit a much, much more powerful engine into the MM than the suspension and brakes can cope with..
>>Have you seen how many people don't have their own drives to charge fully electric cars?
Yup - by here (which means you will know where abouts) most people live in terraced houses and many working families have 2+ vehicles - judging by the number of Range Rover Evoques they aren't short of a bob or two either.... so, viewed by disposable income, locals should be prime targets for fully electric Cowbridge tractors but because no drive, no spendy.
As it happens I have a drive - no Evoque - and don't have a fully (or even PEHV) electric chariot cos I don't have the odd £20-30k lying around to depreciate on my drive.
Home chargers for EVs tend not to add that much load - typically 7kW so less than an electric shower and about the same as 2 kettles. Neighbours are normally on different phases so even less of an issue. People with home EV chargers are also incentivised to use off peak power, so even less of an issue - 6p/kWh overnight vs 24p/kWh during day.
Er, a kettle boils in a couple of minutes. A shower takes 10-15 mins depending on who's in it.
Therefore the chances of all the neighbours on a street being in the shower and/or boiling a kettle at once is pretty low. And even in the event where multiple people do put the kettle on or step in the shower at once, the overlap is going to be a few minutes at worst, and underground cables are pretty heavy and have enough thermal mass to cope with a few minutes of overload. That's why the 'diversity' argument works for sizing distribution cables.
However, EVs are not charging for a few minutes at a time, nor are Heat Pumps running for minutes at a time. They run for hours, so the diversity argument breaks down completely.
nor are Heat Pumps running for minutes at a time
We have one of these - it pulls less than a SuperMicro 1U server under medium load.. And no - it's not all 'all the time' as some people imagine. It goes on when it needs to top up the hot water in the heating/hot water tanks. Which, in summer, isn't very often.
Even now it's not on that much.
The irony is that we also have PVs and the time when the ASHP could really do with the power from them is the time when the PVs are generating the least power (ie now - yesterday we got just over 0 kw/h from the PVs..)
However, EVs are not charging for a few minutes at a time, nor are Heat Pumps running for minutes at a time. They run for hours, so the diversity argument breaks down completely.EVs are not going to be charging for hours on end. Or most won't anyway. Not unless the owner is thoughtless and clueless (okay so some will be). Anyone with a home charger can (and I think probably will) plug it in as soon as they park up. It'll become part of their habit. The average UK car journey is 10 miles miles so most cars will arrive home after having been driven less than 20 miles. That's half an hour to top the battery back up.
Plus people don't all arrive at home at the same time. If those with home chargers are putting the cars on charge every time they park up then most of them will be done charging in half an hour. That should stagger the demand quite nicely. Mind you if I were designing the chargers I'd want them to have the ability to talk to each other and/or the power company so that they can help spread the load.
With a typical charge time of half an hour it should be easy to charge an entire street over the course of an evening without stressing the supply.
Have you never heard of "Rush Hour" ? The evening one comes right before the peak electricity usage due to cooking dinner and heating houses. And the morning one comes right after a lot of showers and kettles too.
And as soon as someone makes chargers "talk to eachother", someone will say something very mean and nasty to them and cause them to stop working.
Now, funny you should ask that.
I'm a volunteer first responder. There's a couple of response vehicles used that require special training*: They're all EV's. The Volvo EX40 at @2.5 tonne has a 0-62mph of 4.8 seconds. The driving familiarisation course has the trainer vehicle on a concrete launch pad with a good space in front of it before the crash barrier. I've seen drivers get out of that car shaking and white as a sheet having tried driving forwards for the first time. They very nearly hit the crash barrier, and only avoided that due to the duel controls the vehicle has and a VERY experienced instructor.
So yes, on a standard drive, if you're not familiar with an EV and their acceleration (e208, 0-62 in 8.4 seconds for example, compared to the 1l 208 ICE with a 0-62 of nearly 12 seconds) then it can be something of a shock.
Once you know what you're doing, however: Tends to be less of a problem save for those who like the idea of screeching off their drive like a lunatic (and there's ample examples of that kind out there) who would rip their driveway up (and the road surface, too) due to aggressive acceleration.
It's one problem with EV's - we need to upgrade the road surfaces to handle the higher stresses they create through the higher acceleration combined with their larger mass (aka the torque they produce is a lot higher, combined with the heavier weight means more force being applied to the road surface, which most roads aren't designed to handle, hence the rapid deterioration of road surfaces. See, I remember something from my Civil Engineering days!).
Or... and I'm pretty darn sure I've suggested this before: Put a launch control and/or torque limiter in to keep things to a more sensible pace. But that would just take away one of the EV selling points (Sportscar handling in a town car! Enjoy the rush!. Followed by the crash and ensuing EV fire...)
* I've not touched those yet - only trained as far as moving Ambulances so I can help deploy them - and NOT on blue lights, thanks.
It's very easy in an EV to pull away at lights and junctions and leave just about any dino-juice vehicle for dead, even fancy sports models and supercars (for about a second to a second and a half before their ICE get going and they shoot past me in a roar of noise and indignation).
OTOH, if the conditions aren't perfect, pressing hard on the accelerator from stationary just tends to spin the wheels (there's usually more torque available than they can handle).
I am a part time emergency first responder so understand what training you have done for blue light training etc.
With regards to acceleration of EV's - I can see why some people would see it as a problem but I used to mess about and modify motorbikes - 180 kg bike with a 225 BHP engine was my best one so an EV feels pretty sluggish after that..
Not to mention that many private driveways in the UK were built to handle average private cars. So we should probably have some evidence of BMW X5 and similar already causing those sort of problems on road and driveway surfaces. Way bigger and more powerful than most people could even dream of 30, 40, 50 or more years ago when their driveway was built :-) Does anyone know if this is an actual issue? Or is just guesswork that even heavyer and more torquye EVs might have "crossed the line"? I'd think an average EV is probably equivalent to an ICE BMW X5 in terms of weight. A quick check shows a Tesla model 3 as being notably lighter than an ICE BMW X5.
It's not necessarily about on-street parking. I live in a block of 10 apartments, each of which has an assigned parking space and there are two spares. The apartments are all rented. There is no infrastructure and no way of creating the infrastructure to charge EV's in those parking spaces, even if the landlord was inclined to do so. If you add the households living in similar apartments to the households living in terraced housing with no off-road parking, you are looking at significantly more than a third of households.
There are also a good few in the old industrial villages of the West Riding. As the mills have disappeared - largely replaced by more housing as a doubly whammy - so the local jobs are gone they've become a big commuter belt. Combine that with crappy public transport and the demise of the ICE car would make those houses it fit only for the retired and the unemployable unless, of course, WFH saves the day. Either that or the public charging infrastructure gets to match todays fossil-fuel infrastructure.
> but it's still true to say that most properties in the UK have off street parking.
Come to my town (Long Eaton, UK) and have a look around the streets then, yeah the newer stuff on the outskirts tends to have parking for a car or 2 but the majority of the housing stock is streets of terraced housing which is all on-road mayhem.
"Battery electric vehicles are perceived as expensive compared to their traditionally powered counterparts"
Er, no. Battery electric vehicles *are* more expensive. I would love to own an electric car, but the only thing that makes an electric car look reasonably priced is because their price gets compared against a hybrid with all the bells and whistles. For example, at the cheap end of the market, you *can't* buy a new Ford Fiesta any more, and ICE cars are now quite expensive compared to (say) 5 years ago.
Ah yes, The tesla sub. It can save me almost 50% on charging costs, so long as you ignore it's 68 miles to the closest charger, and 72 miles back again. So call it £100 in my time to get there and back, the time of charging. I am failing to see the savings here, but I can see lots of driving, increased tyre wear etc.
But this is you of course, your tune never changes.
True, but anyone in a position to buy new is very likely to be fortunate enough, especially as most buy on some kind of finance or hire-purchase deal, and therefore the medium term monthly cost is the most important factor.
If my monthly finance repayment goes up by £50 but the running costs drop by £100, I'm better off from month one.
Most people are still buying second hand of course, which is another matter - how does one check whether the battery is good or has been hammered half to death?
That's exactly the scenario I was in. Owned a petrol car, and the lease plus fuel on a new EV was less than the fuel alone for the petrol car. No big outlay required.
For second hand: The ODB port on EVs gives you a load of stats (total energy used, total charged split by fast and regular, individual cell health etc) so as long as that information is reliable...!
I don't understand these "it doesn't work for everyone/me, therefore it shouldn't work for anyone" attitudes. We can have multiple solutions, we can solve problems. Some streets near us don't have driveways, so I've advertised my chargepoint and let people use it at cost. Got a few regulars, one who actually has a driveway but has decided it's cheaper to use mine than buy a charger!
Fuel can be cheaper if you charge at home, but servicing is a bit of a problem: There's still not that many places that can service an EV (they're still training the people to do that). Yes, there's less moving parts to go wrong, but the increased weight causes some elements to wear out faster. Tyres, for example: They don't last as long and they produce a lot more particulates than an ICE does. Also, because the parts that do wear out need to handle a heavier load, they're more expensive meaning repairs can cost more than the equivalent ICE. So a bit of a mixed bag there.
There's a fair few EV advocates out there reporting on what to expect when moving to an EV. They're trying to manage expectations of drivers making the switch, and those I follow have given warts and all analysis of their costs. And they do give some damn good tips and tricks on how to get the most out of the EV. That they're still advocating for EV's does indicate they're serious on the subject, which is one reason I'm willing to listen to them.
And your tax incentives? A lot of EV's fall foul of the added VED for the more expensive cars, and they can all look forwards to paying VED soon, even if their EV is below that expensive car line (think it's £40,000 as one EV I was looking at was just over that amount and so subject to this VED enhancement). So... yes, EV's need to come down in price. But worse is their depreciation as people looking at 2nd hand are nervous about a car whose drive train (battery) may not last that long, or might be a fire risk. It's something time will settle, but right now, you lose a lot on an EV, and that's another factor that puts people off EVs.
EVs are not currently liable for the £40k+ list-price VED "Expensive Car Supplement" (more accurately, the DVLA vehicle tax tables state "You do not have to pay this if you have a zero emission vehicle").
That exemption will end for new EV registrations from 1 April 2025 and they will be liable for the expensive car supplement on the same basis as ICE vehicles (ie £40k+ list price) from then on. Although there is a small chance that the list-price threshold may be raised just for EVs (Budget 2024 item 5.87), such that the supplement would apply at different price points (we'll find out soon enough).
"Tyres, for example: They don't last as long and they produce a lot more particulates than an ICE does."
They don't actually - my last EV had some tyres replaces after 37k miles (but not all four), and that was triggered by one tyre getting knocked off the rim on a kerb (don't ask) - not by an MOT/service replacement.
KwikFit reckon they last ~30% longer... but you'd probably expect that for a premium tyre.
Thelast time I could afford to have proper premium tyres on a car (Michelin Pilot Primacy on a 1.8 litre MG ZR), I thought they were going to crack up and fall apart before they wore out - I think the fronts covered over 35k before I changed them, and the rears still had about 1mm of useable tread when changed at over 60k - rotating them to even the wear would probably have given around 50k for the set.
I wouldn't take much notice of Kwik-Fit - after my only experience of that company, I would not allow them to change the tyre on my wheelbarrow.
Depends on your circumstances as well. Me and the wife are lucky to be retiring soon and plan to go down to one car which will be a newer one....but what?
Electric is expensive and unless you do a lot of miles (which we won't!) it has a horrible return, Hybrid sounds like the best (economy) but also worst (double complication of electric and ICE systems - and still quite expensive) whilst ICE is cheapest, no range or charging issues...
Still we have a bit of time to look around and test drive them
I recently bought a second hand 2014-model Nissan Leaf for cheaper than an equivalent ICE (in Australia the second hand car market hasn't yet completely recovered to sane price levels post-covid).
For about double that I could have bought a 2018 model with double the range (and a bit). Depending on how the 2014 model goes for the next 6 months, we'll be getting one of them as well, to replace one of our aging ICEs. Feels like a bargain given the aforementioned second hand car prices.
The unexpected thing is, despite the Leaf being a 10-year-old car already, the battery is in magnificent condition and can still reach its originally advertised range. It's really the perfect car for us, as we take very frequent short trips all over the place (having kids and being somewhat active).
And running the heater as little as possible (only that which is necessary to demist the screen, and yes, it's otherwise brass monkeys), the car gets me to work when it is freezing weather with the same amount of charge that the entire journey there and back would do when it's warmer. Oh, and it struggles with the hills in the cold, just not as nippy.
Summer - three full commutes on one charge.
Autumn - two full commutes on one charge.
Winter - I charge it every night as I don't trust it to manage two commutes, the battery consumption is not linear.
Now, you're probably saying "why not charge it in town?". Well, the charging stations are the wrong type / out of service / require subscribing and giving bank info to some sort of app.
I like the concept. Not so keen on the implementation. It would be fine if I lived in a city, but out rural I need a car I can depend upon and my available travel distance being <rolls dice> isn't that. I think I'll be back to an ICE for my next car.
Our car is coming up on 10 years old. 3 years ago I was looking at replacing it with an electric car. But now, I'm looking at running it into the ground instead.
Doing the calculations, if I bought a new petrol or electric car today, I'd have to run it for at least the next 25 years, before it would reach the breakeven point. With a change of job location (10 minutes by bike from home), I am no longer doing the kilometers to warrant driving a car. I'm pretty much just using it for the weekly shop and picking up large packages I have delivered to work and my wife uses it to take our grandkids swimming and the odd day out. The rest of the time we are riding to work and walking or taking the train or bus.
Once this car dies, I'll probably look at car sharing and rentals going forward. What is the point of having several thousand Euros invested in a hunk of metal that spends all week sitting on the driveway rusting away? I could rent an awful lot of cars or use taxis for bringing the shopping home, before I even get close to the cost of a new car...
I keep looking.
I like Ford.
Ford do not have a single model of electric vehicle that "starts at" significantly under £40,000 (including their new re-released Ford Capri which is not a name I'd be resurrecting if I were Ford). Even the Ford Mustang Mach-E is only £45k, but you want £40k for a basic car?
By comparison, the Mondeo hybrid - which has the exact same chassis and interior etc. as my Mondeo Mk5 ICE car - was panned as the worst electric hybrid ever. How can you go so wrong that you can't even just change the drivetrain in a popular model without turning it from one of Clarkson's [1] favourite cars to a trash heap?
They don't care, and they've just sacked another few hundred workers and closed sites because of "poor electric vehicle sales". I wonder why.
My dad, a lifelong motor mechanic / petrol head has hit retirement and his Volvo 740 (300k miles!) was retired with him. He bought a cheap Dacia hybrid, and he keeps encouraging me to do the same. If you've lost THAT audience too, to a cheap Romanian brand now owned by Renault (and my dad HATES ALL FRENCH CARS)... wow... I mean... come on.
Western ICE car manufacturers are ekeing out every ounce of their tooling, factories, patents and parts and they will not change until the market is absolutely dead. They have no interest, even though they could sell a reasonable electric vehicle right now if they wanted to. I can only imagine that, like Ford - and like many Fords! - this will backfire over time.
I'm in the market for a car, and I would absolutely go all-electric (desperate to do so - I have solar installs, perfect place for a charging point, etc.). But there's nothing there of enticement to me. I'll keep the Mondeo another year, and another, and another, until it's untenable to keep running.
I spent £22k - brand new from Ford - on the Mondeo 9 years ago. It's been great. For TWICE THAT PRICE I still can't buy something comparable and electric from Ford. And I'd struggle to get something even vaguely comparable from most Western manufacturers, in fact. I eyed up the MG offerings, which are the closest I can get, but still everything is tiny or hybrid.
If my car died tomorrow, I'd probably just buy an electric car. But at this rate, it'll be some cheap, tiny Chinese model because nothing else is enticing at all.
Nobody is "shunning" electric cars. You're literally not offering anything vaguely attractive because you want to sell your ICEs.
[1] I hate Clarkson, but I presume he knows something about cars at least.
Re the Mondeo hybrid, if I heard correctly it has a built-in timer for the battery to expire, not based on condition but just elapsed mileage.
So it has a hardcoded lifespan 'just because'.
Apparently with the right tools you can reset it but why should you have to? That's just bad engineering.
The Mondeo Mk4 was a great car. For the Mk5 they cut corners and moved production from Belgium to Spain, the Mk5 was ok, but flimsier (try the door slam test) and more plastic-y. It didn't sell as well, so Ford seems to have assumed that nobody wants that sort of car, and they dropped it. I replaced my Mk4 with an Audi A5, probably the best car I've ever owned. The new A5s, built on VW's common platform are acquiring a very poor reputation for reliability. No wonder people are going for cheap Chinese and Romanian cars, they're better.
> Nobody is "shunning" electric cars. You're literally not offering anything vaguely attractive because you want to sell your ICEs.
I disagree here..
I don't think the manufacturers really "want" to sell more ICEs. They have to because they are cheaper to make, so they are more competitive on price compared to EVs. And many customers just won't ever buy an EV because they are just not suitable for their needs, or perhaps they don't trust them to have any second-hand value.
But they shouldn't particularly "want" to sell ICEs, because they are being threatened with massive fines if they don't meet arbitrary targets: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/22/electric-shock-carmakers-battle-strict-uk-electric-car-rules-as-big-fines-loom
It isn't so much a case of the manufacturers 'want' to sell ICE vehicles, it more a case that they really <don't> want to build and sell electric vehicles, but are being forced to by politics.
There are many engineers in the automotive industry who don't see electric as being the way forward to start with, but in the absence of a currently viable 'green' alternative they are having to go with what they are told to.
It is debatable (I think) as to whether it is actually 'green' or 'saving the planet' to buy electric vehicles built thousands of miles away in countries where the predominant source of energy for manufacturing continues to be electricity generated from fossil fuels, and the vehicles themselves are transported across several thousand miles of ocean in ships burning 'bunker fuel' (which is basically the thick tarry residual crude oil containing all the crap and contaminants left over from refining crude into petrol and diesel etc.).
I don't know how much this can be applied to anyone else, but, for me at least, a significant deterrent is all the news about major improvements to EVs that are in the lab, or hitting production lines, or trickling down from high-end models. Things like solid state batteries, otherwise better batteries, working V2G, or even the plausibility of lower prices as scale picks up. Not all of this is going to pan out, but some of it will. And there's the infrastructure; the number of charging points might grow faster or slower, but it's not going to go down.
All of this tells me, if you like the idea of an EV - hold out for a while longer, and you might get a substantially better one. Or, same thing from another point of view, get an EV right now and you might see its resale value plummet as the next generation is much better and/or relatively cheaper.
ICEs, on the other hand, are as good as they're going to get.
I think that this is where I am at. I have a minivan/people carrier and it was great when the kids were young but these days (despite being very handy hauling stuff with the seats out) it is incredibly uneconomical and is starting to get a little old in the tooth.
Like you, I am holding out for better battery tech and a simpler vehicle. The practicalities of charging seem to be the main issue for most people but would not be an issue for me. For me, the issues are:
- Too expensive because they are all big and contain electronic gizmos that irritate the heck out of me.
- Battery life is still a big issue.
- Parts availability when they go wrong.
I have a minivan/people carrier and it was great
I'm trying to find one where:
1) It has sliding rear doors [1]
2) You can take out the seats behind the front seats [2]
3) is, preferrably, electric that been around for a few years so that I can buy a decent second hand one [3]
As far as I can see, they don't exist. Closest is some of the rarer Chinese marques (I really, really don't want a Chinese car - putting aside the data questions and the "does it have a remote killswitch" question, I have my doubts as the the longer term support that will be offered..).
I like the VW ID.Buzz (basically a smaller electic campervan without the camer stuff) but, as far as I can see, the row 2 seats are not removable without a toolkit. Whatever car I buy I'd ask the following:
"What data does it collect? Where is the data stored and/or transmitted? Is it somewhere where GDPR applies?"
[1] Trying to get an electric buggy, even a bootscooter, into a modern saloon is a pain in all the wrong places. Sliding rear doors means using loading ramps become usable.
[2] Middle seats is where the buggy would need to go since the dogs would be behind a dog guard in the back..
[3] I've only ever bought one car brand new (the current C-HR and don't want to take the "you've lost 20% off the full price just by driving it off the forecourt" again.. Plus, if you buy a high-spec second hand then some other mug punter has already splashed out for the upgrades.
Somewhat repeating an earlier comment of mine, I recently bought a second hand 2014 Nissan for, what I feel was, cheaper than the equivalent ICE car. It's not a big car, it's from 2014 so it's not infested with electronic gizmos, and despite being 10 years old the battery is still capable of it's originally advertised range - an admittedly small 120km, but it's perfect for our use case.
I haven't had to deal with the potential parts availability problem, so can't speak to that, but the place we purchased it from does a cheap annual service.
Use Case is, I think, the most important thing, and it's a differentiator that didn't exist quite as much with ICE cars. Basically, a couple of additional variables: charge range and ability to charge at home overnight. We tick both of those boxes, so we're loving it.
Most people who can realistically operate with an EV - own drive for charging, wealthy (to afford the purchase) and not a "road warrior" - have already got one, to cash in on the tax and other incentives offered by government subsidies (money transfers from the poor to the rich, whodathunkit!). To the amazement of nobody at all, the bottom then drops out of the new EV market.
While electric vehicles will probably one day be the norm, the technology just isn't there yet apart from a few special cases such as buses which spend their day running relatively short city routes and can return to the depot overnight for charging. For most people the main problems are
Range - until you can do a few hundred miles on one charge people aren't going to replace their petrol/diesel cars
Recharge time - they might be able to get away with 5-10 minutes to recharge when you pull in on your way somewhere, but not much longer than that.
Recharge availability - I live near the centre of a medium-sized city and there's only a tiny handful of available recharge points. I can't recharge at home since I only have on-street parking; if I had an electric vehicle I'd have to run a cable out of my lounge window and across the pavement to it.
Battery pack lifetime
Horses for courses. Apart from the issue of off street charging, most recent EVs amply cover the driving needs for a substantial proportion of the driving public; and the 'battery pack lifetime' argument is basically FUD.
Currently, EVs are definitely not suitable for everyone, but a lot of the arguments people put up against them are nothing more than ignorant/malicious social-media trash talk
Currently, EVs are definitely not suitable for everyone, but a lot of the arguments people put up against them are nothing more than ignorant/malicious social-media trash talk
By jove, I think we've found joGuqr's one new customer! I'm sure EV sales results will be exactly what they need to reverse these fortunes-
In the first half of fiscal 2025, Jaguar sales fell over 40% to roughly 14,000 cars, accounting for just 8% of Jaguar Land Rover volumes.
And their all-EV, 'copy nothing' campaign (ask Anheuser Busch or Harley Davidson's shareholders how well woke marketing went) will have people salivating at the chance to buy one of their EVs. Shame the campaign didn't err.. show any cars. But they'll have a new logo! And probably best not to mention dead cats to any investors, or Tata execs.
However, a lot of the arguments are very real, and will get worse. So the removals of subsidies, addition of duties, challenges with finding charging points in the UK, insurance and servicing costs, risk of house fires. Oh, and as David Viner Day has come early this year, how well they'll handle the cold. Ok, that one is probably more down to UK drivers not handling ice and snow very well, but the prospect of torque meets ice might prove more entertaining than it does watching BMW drivers.
Or the one that intrigues me will be the inevitable 'motorists stranded by snow' stories because dealing with a lot of EVs with dead batteries is going to be a whole lot harder than with ICE vehicles. Plus if the EV battery is dead, then the driver and passengers will also need to be evacuated to avoid them freezing to death. And yes, I know Scandanvia has snow, but Scandanavians are used to it, unlike the typical UK motorist.
"Currently, EVs are definitely not suitable for everyone, but a lot of the arguments people put up against them are nothing more than ignorant/malicious social-media trash talk"
People know what their personal requirements are. They can decide for themselves whether those criteria are met or not. If the industry can't meet them for enough people then it's up to the industry to sort that out. In order to do that they need to realise that there are two competitions going on: one is EV vs ICE. The other is the EV charging infrastructure vs the petrol/diesel distribution infrastructure. Simply sticking their head in the sand, in the clouds or elsewhere and pretending potential customers' concerns are trash talk won't help at all.
All well and good, but I'm not talking about honest and valid reasons, I'm talking about the bullshit and FUD, the edge-cases that are presented as being the 'general experience', e.g. EVs are more likely to catch fire (when the opposite is true), early battery pack demise (when all the evidence to date indicates battery packs will generally outlast the average lifespan of the car), they all die in cold weather (excepting those being driven in Nordic countries). All that kind of dishonesty and ignorance that merely muddies the waters and benefits those who value their bank balance more than the welfare of living creatures. Not that EVs don't have their issues in that regard.
But, the petro-chemically backed bullshitters have no shame, wallowing in their ignorance and greed. It's the lying, the exaggeration, the deliberate misinformation, the FUD - that is what I'm on about.
<......."......EVs are more likely to catch fire (when the opposite is true)"....>
I think that is debatable to be honest.
The difference is that when ICE cars catch fire they can be relatively easily be extinguished, and in any case will usually burn out completely and therefore extinguish themselves usually within half an hour or so. Fires involving the lithium batteries powering EVs by comparison are not only vastly more problematic to extinguish, but they continue to need attention for several hours after the initial extinguishment, and continue to represent a significant risk of reigniting for some time afterwards once damaged.
The batteries can also become damaged due to impacts in a collision, contact with speed humps and potholes or generally rough usage, and can then randomly ignite later. Not a common occurence, but quite frankly, neither is an ICE car catching fire all that common when you compare the number of fires with the total number of ICE cars that are around. It is also a fact that petrol and diesel cars very rarely burst into flames when involved in a crash.
I can actual see a very real possibility that houses with an integral garage may become very expensive/difficult to insure in the future;)
The misinformation isn't 'what kind of fire', it is 'the frequency/probability of vehicle fires' - there is a difference. The statistics to date make it very clear that the chances of a vehicle burning out, or even having a minor conflagration that doesn't write off the vehicle, are considerably higher for an ICE than for an EV. Of course the vast majority of us will see out our entire driving life-times without ever experiencing our car going up in flames (regardless of type) - so the issue is largely moot (so long as we don't get sucked in by the the EV doomsayers' bullshit).
considerably higher for an ICE than for an EV.
But does that take into account the relative numbers and ages of the vehicles? There are many more ICE cars than EVs, and most ICE cars that suffer fires are older, poorly maintained ones. EVs haven't been around long enough to get figures for old ones. I don't think the figures are clear either way at the moment.
It's not hard to do your own research (you should try it), but let's try a popular source, but academic and technical studies are readily available, Top Gear:
'The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) reported 23 fires in 611,000 EVs during 2022, or 0.004 per cent in a year, which makes it 20 times less likely to happen than ICE car fires, which burned 3,400 times in 4.4 million cars, or 0.08 per cent.'
Not too likely in either case, but a clear distinction as well.
The difference between 0.004% and 0.08% is pretty small, really to the point of being considered as ''not statistically significant' in such a sample size.
When taking into account the probable age and maintenance of the cars involved in the 3400 ICE fires compared with undoubtedly lower average age and better (dealer) maintenance of the EVs that have caught fire, the figures become even less significant (which is what Phil O' Sophicle was sugesting earlier, but which you don't seem able to comprehend).
I don't have any particular prejudice against EVs, but neither I am donning rose-tinted spectacles when I look at the arguments for and against ;)
My words: 'Not too likely in either case, but a clear distinction as well.'
Your words: 'The difference between 0.004% and 0.08% is pretty small'
There is a difference between 'overall probability' and 'relative probability'. In this case the 'overall probability' in either case is low; but the relative probability between the two cases is significant, and that is what counts in this argument.
There are some who either ignorantly do not understand this, and others who wilfully do not understand this because they have an agenda to pursue—FUD to spread.
Take a million EVs and a million ICE, on the basis of the Swedish figures in one year there will be 800 ICE fires and 40 EV fires. I don't know about you, but I think most people would decide that was a significant difference—a x20 difference—in favour of EVs, even if the overall probability of a fire in either type is pretty low.
Take a million EVs and a million ICE, on the basis of the Swedish figures in one year there will be 800 ICE fires and 40 EV fires. I don't know about you, but I think most people would decide that was a significant difference—a x20 difference
But when that is "Take a million nearly new EVs and a million ICE that could be up to 30 years old" the difference becomes irrelevant unless you break them down by age. If car fires are 20x more likely with 20+ year-old cars then the difference is insignificant, simply because there are practically zero 20-year-old EVs.
There are some who either ignorantly do not understand this, and others who wilfully do not understand this because they have an agenda to pursue
Indeed so.
Of course the vast majority of us will see out our entire driving life-times without ever experiencing our car going up in flames
Had that (well, it was actually my mums car - she'd put a (polyester I think) blanket over the engine to stop it freezing and forgot to remove it before starting the engine..)
Cue a nice under-bonnet fire that comprehensively trashed all the non-metallic stuff under the bonnet. .
Her insurance company were actually pretty good about it - but then, it was the 80s so they probably had much more interesting things to obsess about (which drug dealer to patronise today was probably top of the list!).
> People know what their personal requirements are
I know two sets of couples that irrationally hate electric as a source for vehicular motion. Their rationalisations don't make logical sense beyond one set being old and essentially disliking / distrusting anything modern that they're not personally familiar with, and the other set essentially attaching 'who they are' to the sounds of the car engines. As such, neither are able to see past the ends of their noses.
So I respectfully disagree. Humans are not rational.
But what this means is that EVs have to advertise as a replacement for penises.
Range: My EV can do a few hundred miles in warm weather, and about 260 in cold months. It's much more than I need in a typical week.
Recharge time: Overnight when I'm sleeping, usually. On a long trip, a half-hour break after a couple of hundred miles is exactly what I need.
Recharge points: Not nearly enough ultra rapid points. Yet.
> Recharge points: Not nearly enough ultra rapid points. Yet.
It is not even the rapid charging that is the problem, it is the home charging (lack of driveways for many people) and destination charges (what chance is there to charge at a hotel?).
We have a plug-in hybrid that works for us (we have a driveway, my wife’s commute is short enough and I commute by public transport). We would have an EV if we needed a second car, but we are a one-car family.
The ability to just drive using petrol makes things much easier. I can’t imagine how stressful our recent journey to France would be if we did it in an electric car.
We did a holiday to France recently in our EV. There was hardly any stress, there's so many chargers around it's easy to find one, and the Electroverse card & app were great. Also it's sooo much cheaper than the UK - worst I paid was I think €0.59/KWh and for a small detour I was able to get €0.25/kwh for a lot of it!
I can’t imagine how stressful our recent journey to France would be if we did it in an electric car.
A friend did that two years ago in the opposite direction, from S. France to Yorkshire. While her husband drove, she had her phone in her hand for the whole journey, planning & replanning the route like a military campaign to find available and working chargers. It was not a restful drive...
They make excellent city/commuter cars if you have reliable charging at home or work. I get around 320 to 370 Km (depending on the weather) out of an 80% charge in my midsize BEV. Meanwhile, my daily commute is only 48 Km, round trip. So I only charge it once or twice a week using my home L2 charger.
Since I only charge to 80% and almost never fast charge it, range should only decrease 10%-12% over 200,000 Km. The battery has a 160,000 Km warranty. If it dies after that period, I expect that a fair greater number of refurbishment companies will be in operation by then, so the replacement cost shouldn't be terrible, assuming the rest of the car is still in good enough condition to warrant the work.
If you don't have reliable access to a charger at home or work, then no, I wouldn't recommend one. You could use public fast DC chargers, but they tend to be expensive and hard on the battery. Stick with a hybrid and wait until more curbside charging gets rolled out.
EVs in Europe are £40k+ because that's how much it really costs to make an EV, and make a modest profit.
The ones you get for £25k are not made in Europe, as the manufacturers have access to cheap raw materials, cheap energy, and cheap labour.
So, do you want a cheap EV, or would you rather your fellow Europeans had a job?
So, do you want a cheap EV, or would you rather your fellow Europeans had a job?
Emotional blackmail only works if the choice is a close one. With the difference in price between the European EVs and 'the cheap ones' it has no hope and people will actually be choosing between cheap EV/similar priced hybrid
<....."The ones you get for £25k are not made in Europe, as the manufacturers have access to cheap raw materials, cheap energy, and cheap labour."....>
Bearing in mind the degree of automation on modern assembly lines (even in the far East; perhaps especially in the far East?), I really don't think that the cost of labour makes any significant difference. Even 20 years ago when MG Rover went out of business, their body-in-white assembly operation and paint shops had been almost entirely automated for nearly a decade with very few actual people involved apart from those monitoring/maintaining the robots. 20 years on, automation has certainly expanded to other areas of assembly.
No, cheap Labour in China etc is not a big factor.
> EVs in Europe are £40k+ because that's how much it really costs to make an EV, and make a modest profit.
> The ones you get for £25k are not made in Europe, as the manufacturers have access to cheap raw materials, cheap energy, and cheap labour.
That's far too simplistic. The cheap ones are also smaller and have fewer electronic "services". Much of what GM and Ford are making are premium brand vehicles and most people can't afford them. Even their few more modest vehicles are very expensive and are still packed with bells and whistles that people just don't want.
The cheap Chinese and Romanian cars will probably sell *very* well in the west if tariffs don't kill the market off.
"The cheap ones are also smaller and have fewer electronic "services".
Nice hope there, but you're dreaming.
There is no difference between the latest MG, BYD etc., vehicles and the European alternatives. They have the same toys, the same mandatory safety features, comply with the same crash tests. Yet cost £10k less. It is simply cheaper to make EVs in China, for whatever reason.
Yet cost £10k less. It is simply cheaper to make EVs in China, for whatever reason
Largely because the Chinese government heavily subsidies them in a way that would be illegal in the EU. Hence the EU looking to put a tariff on them to remove the effects of the subsidies on pricing.
"The only attractive EV option at present is a milk float."
I genuinely can't remember when I last saw one. Must be decades ago. Not saying they disappeared that long ago, but must be that long since I saw one around here. I've lived here for 40 years and the only milkmen I can ever remember seeing diesel engined flat-bed "Transit-like" vans. Back when I was a kid, living with my parents in a different town, it seemed like all the milk deliveries were Lead acid battery EVs.
in the 1980's at a place where I worked they had small 3 wheel BEV flatbeds for moving parts around the factory, it is legend that an new starter was given his first BEV to drive and decided to take it home to show his mum. Somehow got it past the gatehouse (OK, this is 1980's UK factory we are talking about!) and started trundling down the road ...only to run out of battery half way home on the towns main ring road.
Having read the comments with interest, I suspect that maintaining and refurbing older, simpler ICE vehicles is going to become quite lucrative. Particularly if wide ranging tariffs on Chinese EVs kill the cheaper end of the market. A lot of the barriers to ownership of EVs are not going to simply vanish (no drive, high cost of electricity, poor winter reliability, high initial cost). Governments will respond with more ULEZs and fees, but there doesn't appear to be a viable transition path for a large chunk of the population in the UK in the foreseeable future. They really need a 'Model T' EV, but they insist on stuffing daft amounts of tech into them to support health and safety tick boxes. They may not be able to have their cake and eat it there.
Cost is going to be the major factor - the only time that I bought a brand new car (in 1989) its price was a little more than a years gross wages for me. A similar size/class of ICE car with a similar position in the model range still represents a little more that a years gross wages for the same job. By comparison, the 'Western' built EVs with all their extras-as-standard would be between two and three years gross wages.
Despite the hefty depreciation on EVs, second hand they are still very expensive for the bulk of the car owning population, and a second hand ICE will still look a vastly better economic proposition.
To put it quite simply, they are unaffordable for anyone towards the lower end of the payscale, and then you have to add in the cost of installing charging facilities; and the people at the lower end of the payscale are of course, more often the ones without driveways or are in rented accomodation where installing such a facility can be more problematical (and they will be reluctant to pay the cost to install such facilituies in a house they only rent for fear of the landlord terminating the tenancy before they have got their moneys worth out of it).
There is also the not insignificant matter that a large proportion of those who don't have a driveway are rarely able to park outside the house they live in (sometimes not even in the same street!), so couldn't even run a cable across the pavement or verge.
Who'd want pure EV - there's barely one sensible use case because electricity is hard to find sometimes and less reliable than a mature fuel infrastructure. The grid is vulnerable and insufficient and it's hard to get power when you run out halfway during a cross country drive because the charging station on your app was broke. "They" want us to have EV because "they" don't want us to travel freely. Stay in your 15 minute city serf.
If you ignore all the usual benefits, two major ones I found (tend to drive below 100miles) were:
- I almost never have to visit a petrol (charging) station again (they're not particularly pleasant or a good use of time), I just plug in at home or work
- The cars are much more relaxing to drive (quieter, smoother, no obvious gear changes etc)
I must admit that, from reading the comments here and elsewhere regarding electric cars, the ICE car industry has done an absolutely magnificent hatchet job on what it sees as it's opposition, but should be its future. It has convinced the general populace to a surprisingly large degree, such that it's really seen as tribal: ICE vs Electric and scorched earth in between.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
