One of the issue with Nuclear in Britain as I understand it, is that all the plants are a different design, where as in France they picked one design and stuck to it, making it simpler and cheap to build plants they have.

46 minutes ago, Mark-UK said:

One of the issue with Nuclear in Britain as I understand it, is that all the plants are a different design,

Kinda like all electric cars having different sockets and power requirements LOL

55 minutes ago, StephenFord said:

Kinda like all electric cars having different sockets and power requirements LOL

Yes , that is something that really does need sorting out

Just thought I would drop this here. 

21 minutes ago, DeezNutz said:

Just thought I would drop this here. 

 

Always follow the money! 😀 The web site that produced this funny and complicated bar chart confess the following... (cut and paste directly) Not really an independent opinion.

About us

Europe's leading clean transport campaign group

Transport & Environment's (T&E) vision is a zero-emission mobility system that is affordable and has minimal impacts on our health, climate and environment.

55 minutes ago, StephenFord said:

Always follow the money! 😀 The web site that produced this funny and complicated bar chart confess the following... (cut and paste directly) Not really an independent opinion.

About us

Europe's leading clean transport campaign group

Transport & Environment's (T&E) vision is a zero-emission mobility system that is affordable and has minimal impacts on our health, climate and environment.

I don't see how this affects the analysis that hydrogen fuelled vehicles are less efficient than electrical. As long as 100% renewable energy is going in the production/use then both will have "minimal impacts on our health, climate and environment". Only difference is the 49% difference in efficiency between the two, showing why the industry is going down the battery vehicle route rather than fuel cells.

Considering that a majority of renewable energy comes from wind farms, this would mean you would need double the amount of installations for the same energy output on the road. Meaning more ships to install the farms, using more heavy fuels, and overall being more harmful the the environment.

Yes, the organisation may have a bias against combustion vehicles but it is hard to dispute that the health, climate and environmental affect of a BEV/fuel cell cars are much less in comparison, especially over the whole-life of the vehicle.

 

 

Efficiency is a virtual red herring. Hydrogen is potentially an infinite bottomless pit. So if it is 100% 'efficient' in vehicles, or 20% 'efficient' in vehicles, bottom line is, it doesn't matter. 

The purpose of this thread was to agitate the government into having a proper debated into the issue of them introducing a policy of banning petrol/diesel cars in just 15 years without the proper consultation they advocated in their manifesto. (They just introduced a unilateral policy with no consultation)

I am not against 'battery' cars, but I am against governments thinking they know it all, when patently, they don't...

4 minutes ago, StephenFord said:

Efficiency is a virtual red herring. Hydrogen is potentially an infinite bottomless pit. So if it is 100% 'efficient' in vehicles, or 20% 'efficient' in vehicles, bottom line is, it doesn't matter. 

The purpose of this thread was to agitate the government into having a proper debated into the issue of them introducing a policy of banning petrol/diesel cars in just 15 years without the proper consultation they advocated in their manifesto. (They just introduced a unilateral policy with no consultation)

I am not against 'battery' cars, but I am against governments thinking they know it all, when patently, they don't...

What the efficiency of hydrogen fuel cell vehicle is now is 25-35% (whole system), according to Volkswagen. Now I know they can't always be trusted but let's take this as a rough estimate. Efficiency still does matter though as it is the difference between having a 200 mile and 300 mile range vehicle.

Also, other than faster refuelling, what is the benefit of using electricity to create hydrogen to then create electricity again, rather than taking the smaller losses of inversion and rectification to store it in a battery.

I do agree that it was rushed, but what benefit would a public consultation have done other than delay the implementation by a couple of years and most likely been influenced by those companies interested in keeping fossil fuels around for a bit longer (BP, Shell, Chevron).

Ultimately we're at a stagnation point with ICE vehicles. With high-end performance engines only reaching 50% thermal efficiency in the last few years, with the majority of cars around 20-35%, there needed to be a change. Now there is an argument for bio-fuels and they probably will be the answer is the developing world where electrical infrastructure is poor, but their development is a long way of (25% of the worlds demand for petroleum by 2050), where as we can use battery technology that is here now and is relatively affordable.

On 11/24/2020 at 8:50 AM, StephenFord said:

My initial post was done just after the petition was started. It is now just under 5000, and runs for 6 months until beginning of May 2021. Glad not everyone has the "don't think I'll bother" attitude...😁

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/556842

Well, I thought I'd check again on this petition now its been running for 10 weeks. Seems to have stalled at just over 7,000 signatures. 

Touch and go that it will reach the 10,000 signature threshold and frankly there's not a hope in hell it will get to 100,000 signatures. 

Nothing I've read persuades me to sign.

Only hope for those in support seems to be another Boris U-turn. Clearly most of us have the  "don't think I'll bother" attitude...😁

26 minutes ago, Linds said:

Well, I thought I'd check again on this petition now its been running for 10 weeks. Seems to have stalled at just over 7,000 signatures. 

By contrast, a petition to stop HS2 which still has until 17 June to run has picked up over 147,000 signatures:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/563380

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I thought the petrol ban petition was not very well worded, which I think may have put off people who are broadly in favour in principle but would like to see more debate on timescales or alternatives to batteries, which seem to be regarded as a "done deal" at present.

2 hours ago, DeezNutz said:

those companies interested in keeping fossil fuels around for a bit longer (BP, Shell, Chevron).

They seem to have seen which way the wind is blowing - Shell have bought what I understand is the largest electric car charger network in the UK, while BP have culled their oil exploration division.

6 minutes ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

They seem to have seen which way the wind is blowing - Shell have bought what I understand is the largest electric car charger network in the UK, while BP have culled their oil exploration division.

Long term it makes sense. I work in the maritime industry and the jobs with BP and Shell for British sailors has slowly decreased over the years. Partly due to lower costs from other nationalities but also the reduction in crude imports. BP bought Chargemaster and Polar to form BP Pulse, which is the largest network in the UK, and have just done a deal to be included with Ford Charge Pass for the Mach-E. Shell have built out their fast charging network at their forecourts slowly as well. You also have companies like GRIDSERVE who are creating a network or purely EV-charging forecourts. 

Whichever way you look at it, the industry know that BEV's are the future. I can actually see a lot of the car manufacturers going purely EV before 2035 as it will save them money in carbon credits and tax.

1 hour ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

By contrast, a petition to stop HS2 which still has until 17 June to run has picked up over 147,000 signatures:

 

Easy to see why - HS2 effects many people with Compulsory Purchase Orders, and it was (before Covid) in the daily news so awareness was exceptionally high even for folk not directly effected.

However, the ban of all petrol/diesel cars in just 15 years has got in comparison, no media coverage, and folk are sleep walking into a logistical nightmare. In 2035, they'll all be screaming, "but there's no where to charge my new car! How can I drive anywhere? When I run out on the hard shoulder, how is the AA/RAC guy going to give me a can of electric to get me going? How did we let this happen?"

1 hour ago, StephenFord said:

When I run out on the hard shoulder

Lol, the way we're going here with "smart" motorways, there won't be any hard shoulders!😃

But yes, the issues have received pretty different media coverage, plenty this week about Swampy and his friends trying to stop HS2 for instance, and of course the HS2 petition has a "name" behind it in Chris Packham. 

1 hour ago, DeezNutz said:

Whichever way you look at it, the industry know that BEV's are the future. I can actually see a lot of the car manufacturers going purely EV before 2035 as it will save them money in carbon credits and tax.

Yes, I think the crunch for many models will come as vehicle  platforms fall due to be renewed. Can't see any new investment in ICE platforms, it'll all be "skateboards" I guess. 

 

People can winge and moan all they like, but ICE is a goner and nothing is going to change that.
General Motors have committed to ALL vehicle production to be non ICE by 2035, President Biden has how said the entire government fleet has to go electric, even talk of electric powered tanks.

I read the other day that within 2 years electric models of each car will be cheaper than ICE version, due to the dramatic drop in battery  production costs.

Edited February 2, 20215 yr by Mark-UK
Spelling correction

It's also not a ban on driving pure ICE cars, well not yet anyway, it's a ban on making new ones.

I've said it a lot though, modern ICE engines are boring anyway.  Capable yes, but the days of Fords, Alfas, Vauxhalls etc. with sweet V6s in is long gone so now just give me something with decent poke and I don't really care how it does it.

1 hour ago, Mark-UK said:

...even talk of electric powered tanks.

Makes me laugh how much emissions regulation there is on military vehicles...  Definitely some irony surrounding the rear end emissions, considering what's happening at the front end. 🤦‍♂️

1 hour ago, Mark-UK said:

People can winge and moan all they like, but ICE is a goner and nothing is going to change that.
General Motors have committed to ALL vehicle production to be non ICE by 2035, President Biden has how said the entire government fleet has to go electric, even talk of electric powered tanks.

I read the other day that within 2 years electric models of each car will be cheaper than ICE version, due to the dramatic drop in barrier production costs.

Lol but some of us do enjoy a good winge and moan, Mark - just ask my Mrs who has to listen to me all day.😃

But yes, I agree, barring some miracle fuel, ICE has had its day. I saw 2025 mentioned as break even day, but that may well move earlier. If the industry has accepted electric is the way to go, then a lot of developments will start appearing. Smaller, lighter, cheaper batteries that charge quickly suddenly seem to be coming on the near horizon, and I suspect there's a lot of development to be done on electric motors. I was intrigued to read the other day of alternative types of electric motors giving greater efficiency over a relatively narrow range of rpm, so maybe multi-speed transmissions may make a reappearance.  

Electric tanks though? I can see my Dad (who was in tanks in WW2)  turning in his grave at the thought of a flat battery in the face of a Tiger tank!

57 minutes ago, Guy Heaton said:

It's also not a ban on driving pure ICE cars, well not yet anyway, it's a ban on making new ones.

I've said it a lot though, modern ICE engines are boring anyway.  Capable yes, but the days of Fords, Alfas, Vauxhalls etc. with sweet V6s in is long gone so now just give me something with decent poke and I don't really care how it does it.

Yes, tend to agree, Guy. Downsized petrol turbos weighed down with emissions gear are just not a lot of fun to drive anymore.

6 hours ago, Mark-UK said:

I read the other day that within 2 years electric models of each car will be cheaper than ICE version, due to the dramatic drop in barrier production costs.

I've noticed drop in barrier costs already , this was only £21

😂😂😂

 

On 1/31/2021 at 5:35 PM, StephenFord said:

When I run out on the hard shoulder, how is the AA/RAC guy going to give me a can of electric to get me going?

Can of electrics called a battery. No reason why one car can’t charge another. The 15 year rule is obviously to speed up the process, make it 2045 things wouldn’t change quickly enough. Stephen, your focus will be a museum piece by then! 

Just now, Alex.S said:

 Stephen, your focus will be a museum piece by then! 

It almost is already LOL Anyway, you're talking to a guy who shaves with a 60 year old vintage razor, and wears English made leather brogues, I'm not one for fast change 🤣

Still got better paintwork than a Mk4! 

3 minutes ago, Alex.S said:

Still got better paintwork than a Mk4! 

My 1963 triumph vitese had better also.

 

Every day is a school day! Triumph I thought made motorcycles only. And Vitesse makes me think Rover 827 V8 24v . Late 80s . the car all my cars have never lived up to. 
 

Definition of 'vitesse'

1. the act or quality of acting or moving fast; rapidity. 2. the rate at which something moves, is done, or acts.