OK so maybe dinosaur was a bit harsh, but I think it's short sighted dismissing electric technology because it doesn't have the infrastructure to support it yet. Back when cars were first introduced I doubt there were petrol stations everywhere, whereas your horse could carry on for ages as long as you had something to feed it with.

I think tbh that it'll be the hybrids of this world that go by the wayside eventually, as they're still dependent on fossil fuels. They're a stop gap.

I don't think pagers are dead either. They've just been absorbed into mobile phones and we call pages text messages now. Why would you have a pager when you've got a mobile phone that does the same thing?

It costs £2 to fully charge a Nissan Leaf and yes the battery does lose capacity over time. After five years you're looking at about 80% capacity compared to factory. That's still 80 miles, and by that point the car's lost enough of its value that it'll be headed into affordable runaround territory.

Once it gets down to that charge the capacity drops steadily for the rest of its life, that's also true. However, the estimated capacity after ten years is still over 70% if it's had a normal charging cycle. So after ten years you'll have a car that'll still do around 70 miles to a £2 charge, but by that point it's worth a couple of grand and still won't cost anything to tax, drive around London, park etc. It still makes sense.

As I've said, it's all about supporting the technology properly. Some offices (such as my old one, where Max was based) have charging points in the car park. If you had an electric car you could charge it while you're in work, not paying for the electricity, and even if you lived in a block of flats 30 miles away you'd be able to do the commute without running out of charge.

Again, when mobile phones first came out they did naff all. The signal was dire, the battery life was dire and the running costs were insane. Once people got behind the technology, it took off and the technology improved. It was worth investing in developing better signal and better batteries, and for companies to plough money into making them do more.

What I'm saying is an electric car won't suit everyone at the moment, but they're only going to become a more viable alternative to fossil fuels with time. It's short-sighted to assume that they won't. They might not be THE alternative to petrol and diesel power, but they're our best option at the moment.

Milton Keynes has just launched some charging points at the shopping centre http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-...-herts-12925417

But do these 'quick charges' constitute as a normal charging cycle? I had a few rc cars as a kid and using the quick charger on them used to screw the battery quicker, this may not be the case with these and a guess that batteries have come a long way since then but its still worth asking.

But I honestly can't see how it could ever be practical to have a car that needs to be plugged in to the main over night or even for periods of time. If you have a drive way or a garage then its not going to be much of an issue but what about every one else? Nuneaton is filled with streets that were built before car parking was an issue, I could take you to street, upon street, upon street, upon street where your lucky to even find a parking space never mind one near your house. Imagine the mess if even half of the car owners had EV cars? There would be wires sprawled all over the road and paths, how is that ever going to be practical? blame and claim solicitors would be in a dream land at the prospect of all those claims for people tripping over wires.

Mobile phones became as popular as they are because there was no alternative, if there had been some thing out at the time that most of the planets population already owned in one shape or form, that did every thing a mobile could do but better, do you honestly thing the mobile phone would be around today?

they keep telling us that oil will run out, well when I was at school it was going to be dry by the year 2000. We all know that we can't rely on it for ever, but I think its safe to say we have enough time left to find a better alternative to it than this.

Maybe if the technology does advance enough it may become viable but its going to be a fucking long time before its at a stage for it to be a proper replacement for a real car, and even when it is you're still gonna have to give it at least a decade (probably a lot more) for those cars to filter down into the part of the used car market where any one could afford one.

Tbh I'm amazed that with all the advances in science they haven't been able to make a viable non oil based substitute for petrol, it only has to burn, be a liquid, not give off poisonous gases when burnt, have some lubricating qualities and not explode when shaken

Edited 5 April, 201115 yr by McLOVIN

There are several problems with quick charging. Yes it shortens battery life but just as importantly charging efficiency is inversely proportional to charging speed. If you manage an 80% efficiency when charging over 10hrs you are looking at less than 5% to do it in an hour (add in the other losses in power generation and transmission and BEVs are already quite appalling efficiency wise). You also need masses of power on tap for a rapid charging station, the report I co-authored last year concluded we would need 1.5 to 2.5 extra national grids to support an 80% BEV market depending on battery type and just how fast a fast charging station would be. Battery swaps were also examined but the problem with those is that it would require a standardised battery pack across multiple vehicles from multiple manufactures before it became economically viable for a “battery station” to exist. Imagine trying to run a petrol station where you needed not just unleaded, premium unleaded and DERV but a different fuel for a Jaguar X, a Merc SL, a Polo and a Clio.

they keep telling us that oil will run out, well when I was at school it was going to be dry by the year 2000. We all know that we can't rely on it for ever, but I think its safe to say we have enough time left to find a better alternative to it than this.

Tbh I'm amazed that with all the advances in science they have't been able to make a viable non oil based substitute for petrol, it only has to burn, be a liquid, not give off poisonous gases when burnt, have some lubricating qualities and not explode when shaken

You can find quotes like that saying we would have passed peak oil by 1900 if you go back far enough. As oil gets harder to extract the cost goes up and the technology to extract it becomes cheaper making continued extraction financially viable. Sooner or later this will stop, probably later.

Probably the best alternative would be the use of DMFC vehicles, methanol is a lot easier to make, store transport than hydrogen, it has a better calorific density when used in fuel cells than hydrogen and we could have them on the mass market by 2013 without a problem, if there was a call for them. Methanol is unfortunately poisonous (the emissions aren’t) but hydrogen is the big PR grabbing tech that lets both sides (the car manufactures and oil companies) off the hook for the next 20 years.

But do these 'quick charges' constitute as a normal charging cycle? I had a few rc cars as a kid and using the quick charger on them used to screw the battery quicker, this may not be the case with these and a guess that batteries have come a long way since then but its still worth asking.

But I honestly can't see how it could ever be practical to have a car that needs to be plugged in to the main over night or even for periods of time. If you have a drive way or a garage then its not going to be much of an issue but what about every one else? Nuneaton is filled with streets that were built before car parking was an issue, I could to you to street, upon street, upon street, upon street where your lucky to even find a parking space never mind one near you house. Imagine the mess if even half of the car owners had EV cars? There would be wires sprawled all over the road and paths, how is that ever going to be practical? Claim and claim solicitors would be in a dream land at the prospect of all those claims.

Your RC cars would've probably had NiCad batteries. EVs tend to use a variant of Lithium Ion, which has a very different chemistry so behaves differently. Also the chargers used on EVs (and the ECU controlling the battery) are a hell of a lot more complex than domestic style chargers.

I agree with your comments about practicality. Our battery specialist couldn't lease one of our EVs because he lives in a 1st floor flat! Having said that, there are loads of charge points at work, so he still takes cars home regularly. There are public charge points in Cov, Brum and Leam now - the idea (or should that be ideal...) is that built-up areas would have a plethora of public charge stations. For some people though, only being able to charge at work, in town or at the shops still wouldn't be enough. EVs aren't going to work for everyone.

There are a few companies touting inductive wireless charging technology (think of how electric toothbrushes charge - or some cordless kettles!), which could work down streets like yours if they can develop the technology. However, the efficiency is poor, not to mention potential issues with digging roads up, pikeys digging holes to nick the copper etc.

There are several problems with quick charging. Yes it shortens battery life but just as importantly charging efficiency is inversely proportional to charging speed. If you manage an 80% efficiency when charging over 10hrs you are looking at less than 5% to do it in an hour (add in the other losses in power generation and transmission and BEVs are already quite appalling efficiency wise). You also need masses of power on tap for a rapid charging station, the report I co-authored last year concluded we would need 1.5 to 2.5 extra national grids to support an 80% BEV market depending on battery type and just how fast a fast charging station would be. Battery swaps were also examined but the problem with those is that it would require a standardised battery pack across multiple vehicles from multiple manufactures before it became economically viable for a “battery station” to exist. Imagine trying to run a petrol station where you needed not just unleaded, premium unleaded and DERV but a different fuel for a Jaguar X, a Merc SL, a Polo and a Clio.

Charging a 30kWh battery in 5s flat every day won't help its life, but a 30-minute charge won't have a massive detrimental effect at all. We're not talking about some 2p Made in China mobile 'phone charger here! As long as the charge profile is properly managed, and the chemistry is allowed to stabilise, rapid charging is not an issue.

Typical 3kW chargers tend to manage ~90% efficiency. Granted ohmic losses will reduce that slightly with rapid charging, but I'd need some serious convincing that it drops to 5% given that I've seen the efficiency differences between a 3kW and a 10kW charge on the same vehicle...

Rapid charging - yes you do need a decent power supply, and the lack of 3-phase domestic installations is a handicap in the UK, whereas it's not such an issue in mainland Europe. (e.g. Germans have 3-phase for their cookers, and often in their garages too). However, circa 10kW rapid charging is possible within the realms of a UK domestic installation (just like an electric cooker!), which'd mean 2 hour recharge times instead of 8. Still not good enough to compete with petrol or diesel, but for some city/town dwellers or those with an EV as a second or third car, it'd be enough.

40kW rapid chargers could be a possibility in commercial premises. Think motorway service stations, car dealers, maybe some places of work. They're the ideas that people are banding around at the moment, but that'd only happen if the public decide that they want to buy EVs - and they might not!

I see your point about grid capacity, but I don't think it's as black and white as you make out. Most EV users would only be looking for a short 'top-up' charge during the day - which may well be at a rapid charging station. Domestic rapid charging is unlikely to exceed 10kW due to the infrastructure, and a daily 2 hour 10kW charge is no different to your mum cooking your Sunday dinner on her electric cooker.

Overnight most of the charging will be 3kW, and the effect won't be so significant as you imply given that we've got immersion heaters drawing similar powers, or cookers and electric showers drawing even more power. It'll be rare that EV drivers would need a full 8-hour slow charge every night too.

Swapping out batteries is a massive headache, even if you could standardise a series of designs you'd need to assign a battery state of health/quality rating to each battery and track its use. Otherwise someone with a brand new EV could end up with a piece of shit battery that's near the end of its useful life the fist time they do a battery swap. A theoretical possibility, but it only really has any practical potential when you're looking at fleet vehicle operators etc.

I don't believe that EVs are the solution to the world's energy problems, but I do think that they have their place in ensuring that there's enough petrol and oil left in the world for me to continue ragging the shit out of my Polo 'til I'm too senile to operate the ignition key. At the moment there's enough technology there to make an EV work for some people, but not all. But that doesn't mean we should just dismiss them!

The internal combustion engine's had over a century of development, with some heavy investment in R&D - whereas EV technology hasn't had the same focus. Back in the 1980s people used to take the piss out of unrefined shitty diesel cars, yet 30 years later the technology has moved on and there are shedloads of oil burners - including refined powerful luxury cars.

Hydrogen has massive storage/logistical issues, so I'm not convinced we'll see much beyond the odd technology demonstrator or concept car in the next few years. Various alcohol fuels are a much more realistic proposition than hydrogen, but the issues lie with creating the fuel itself. 6 years ago when I had my first job in the automotive industry the analysts were predicting that ethanol would be the next big thing. We're still waiting... It does however, play its part where sufficient biomass can be generated to make production practical and worthwhile.

I think that the next 10 years will be interesting, but that we won't have seen the end of diesel or petrol. Alcohol fuels (or at least the likes of bioethanol) may become slightly more prevalent, and that in built-up areas EVs will become more common - and possibly the second car of choice for some people. But who knows!?

what I've always said and thought.

A fair point, but it's not a full picture.

It's true that electric vehicles aren't emissions free, unless you can guarantee the power is coming from a nuclear station. However, they're still considerably better than any car that uses fossil fuels. Including hybrids.

I was going to add what Andy says, though, about not using up fossil fuels needlessly. When I'm sat in traffic I'd love to not be using up valuable petrol/diesel that could be used for fun drives. If urban populations swap en masse to electric technology then that means I can keep my G40 going for longer.

I'm driving yet another solution tomorrow. I'm flying out to Frankfurt to test Vauxhall's new electric cars, including the Ampera which uses a 1.4 litre petrol engine to charge the batteries and provide added power, and a 148bhp electric engine for the bulk of its time on the road. I guess that's like a hybrid but where most of the power comes from the electric motor, not the petrol one.

Similar setup to the Chevvy Volt.

Good read this thread, it's good see see some people who don't just spout out what ever dribble pops into their head.

Highly boosted, small capacity engine, capable of running various fuels (E85, Unleaded, Diesel, Kerosene, heavy Oil etc) powering a set of electric motors with capacitors to back it up for short periods of generator down time, that's how I see the next 10 years.

No change to infastructure, no batteries to dispose of etc etc.

e100 conversions are where its at for petrol engines.

e100 conversions are where its at for petrol engines.

Not really, as it's a idiot to start on when cold, and consumption is also 30% more.

its a solution for race vehicles or anyone who can afford the extra consumption in the search for power. I'm thinking koenigsegg CCX-R which iirc runs 1181hp on e100

A fair point, but it's not a full picture.

It's true that electric vehicles aren't emissions free, unless you can guarantee the power is coming from a nuclear station. However, they're still considerably better than any car that uses fossil fuels. Including hybrids.

That's just not true, the Tesla would based on there own figures and the UKs power generation network cause more Co2 pollution than the equivalent Lotus Exige S per mile. The figures are all out there and you can do the calculations yourself easily enough.

The other problem with E100 is production, we would need to use ~82% of our arable farm land to make a 100% switch to Bio-renewables at current levels of use.

I can't see all-electric cars ever catching on properly. I think we'll go from hybrids to hydrogen via a few wrong turns.

Electric motorcycles have got so much potential though. I've been running an electric motorscooter (think a 50 without the noise) on and off for about 5 years. It's got 30 miles range, does 30mph, costs nothing to tax, and I can park it for free (big consideration in cities). It's an ideal commuter, just annoying that I haven't had a job in that time that I commute to.

It's not just scooters, there's a couple of bikes that have reached mass market now that are comparable in performance to a 400cc petrol (ie will piss on most cars), and from memory, an electric bike's competed in the Isle of Man TT at least once.

its a solution for race vehicles or anyone who can afford the extra consumption in the search for power. I'm thinking koenigsegg CCX-R which iirc runs 1181hp on e100

I think it makes that power on E85- impressive indeed, Bentley don't take advantage of Ethanol in their flex-fuel vehicles, but use it as a green advertising point, only problem is it's not readily available in the UK at the moment.

A fair point, but it's not a full picture.

It's true that electric vehicles aren't emissions free, unless you can guarantee the power is coming from a nuclear station. However, they're still considerably better than any car that uses fossil fuels. Including hybrids.

That's just not true, the Tesla would based on there own figures and the UKs power generation network cause more Co2 pollution than the equivalent Lotus Exige S per mile. The figures are all out there and you can do the calculations yourself easily enough.

The other problem with E100 is production, we would need to use ~82% of our arable farm land to make a 100% switch to Bio-renewables at current levels of use.

Ergo don't use arable land- there's miles and miles of baren wasteland and desert to expoilt, a wheatgrass has already been genetically modified to prove ethanol production doesn't have to rely on high yeald crop (sugarcane/sugarbeat), this also wouldn't influence food prices.

That's just not true, the Tesla would based on there own figures and the UKs power generation network cause more Co2 pollution than the equivalent Lotus Exige S per mile. The figures are all out there and you can do the calculations yourself easily enough.

I'd be interested in seeing your figures, most conventional EVs "grid-to-wheel" CO2 emissions are better than conventional cars "tank-to-wheel" CO2, let alone "well-to-wheel" - and that includes the UK's network mix:

Click me

BTW - I'm not some EV fan boy. Just someone that gets frustrated by the amount of bullshit that's out there on the subject.

I can't see all-electric cars ever catching on properly. I think we'll go from hybrids to hydrogen via a few wrong turns.

All electric won't work for a lot of people, at least not at the moment - so I think you're right. Hybrids are a bit of a fudge compromise, but if/when battery cost and weight per kWh comes down, more heavily hybridised cars would make a lot of sense - or range-extended EVs like the Chevy Volt.

Hydrogen I don't see happening any time soon - we're a long way off from even seeing demo fleets of those, yet hybrids and EVs are already in the marketplace. If you could nail the distribution and storage issues, then happy days.

Hydrogen I don't see happening any time soon - we're a long way off from even seeing demo fleets of those, yet hybrids and EVs are already in the marketplace. If you could nail the distribution and storage issues, then happy days.

GM are running a trial with a fleet of HydroGen4 vehicles at the moment, with large companies including ADAC giving them a go. They reckon it'll be viable by 2015 but a few of the journos weren't convinced the infrastructure is in place to support it.

I'm with you on this, we're at least a decade off Hydrogen being a viable option. EVs are a decent way to bridge the gap but they're not a solution and neither are hybrids.

And I've got figures somewhere for the CO2 emissions to recharge an Ampera. It varies around Europe depending on the way they produce the electricity in the first place but it's lower than a hybrid or even the weediest diesel car, and by quite a considerable margin too.

Thing is, with the HydroGen4 it's still a development car and won't ever go into full production. They reckon what they learn from it will go into the production vehicle, which will be the fifth generation car.

Lol I heard about this,

jheez can't Tesla take a joke

GM are running a trial with a fleet of HydroGen4 vehicles at the moment, with large companies including ADAC giving them a go. They reckon it'll be viable by 2015 but a few of the journos weren't convinced the infrastructure is in place to support it.

I'd forgotten about them! Still, they're not really a demo fleet of a pre-production vehicle put into the public's hands, very much a prototype/technology demonstrator vehicle - I guess where EVs were a few years ago (e.g. E-Mini etc.).

Alcohol fuels have the advantage that the infrastructure is there to support it (petrol stations!), as do EVs to a lesser extent (national grid) as it needs refinement/modifications at the user's end. Hydrogen's nowhere really at the moment in comparison.

Just found out that one of my neighbours has a 3-phase electric point in their garage. If I nick one of the rapid chargers from work I'm sorted.