Turbines need replacing on average every 5 years , useless to try and recycle them , become extremely inefficient when the wind blows over 70km per hour and require back up when they freeze over or stall.Not on the nights when the wind doesn't blow, no. What do you propose, days off for everyone who cannot go to work in the morning when it wasn't windy overnight?
I’ve got an Audi etron. Leased. Chose that because the quoted range (200miles) was enough to do a regular there and back jaunt i doLooking to buy an electric. But torn between that and a hybrid. Kind of new when it comes to electric cars. Looking for more economic value. Should one go for a used or new? And hybrid or electric. Purpose is more long distance journeys. Tend to use cycle for local use. Any tips would be great.
Rented a golf vw electric. Brilliant and quick.
I’d be interested to know if those range quotes are evenly vaguely accurateBeen researching over the last month or so and at the moment for our own mileage the sums just don't stack up. We kind of like the Kia Rio electric at £30,000 after government discount, but the mileage range still isn't there at 180 or 280 for the mid-range £34,000 version.
Our current vehicle takes a 53 litre tank @£63 with a possible range of 650 plus miles plus, whereas a home charge x 2 would be around the £20 for the same mileage. However factor in annual mileage excluding hollibobs and it would take around 7 years to claw back the extra auntie.
Very interested in this tech if I live long enough, but at the moment unless you are a business driver the fiscals don't make sense. As someone mentioned the battery range is getting greater with the reliability ratio improving by the month.
Kia say their batteries only lose 1 % over three years which makes for very good reading and with a 7 year warranty what is there not to like. Also the overall lack of maintenance is particularly appealing.
Electric cars are coming along nicely for the joe soap but we feel they are not just quite there yet. Not read the full thread as I have just stumbled across it, but will do when more sober.
Also they tell us that electric cars are more environmentally friendly, producing less CO2.Turbines need replacing on average every 5 years , useless to try and recycle them , become extremely inefficient when the wind blows over 70km per hour and require back up when they freeze over or stall.
they also need a lot of dispatchable replacement.
Not better for bird life and the environment and yes when the thermals are fine operate per Kwh generation of electricity producing less Co2 than fossil fuels but without nuclear or hydro use up much more energy and to generate that electricity.
As for solar farms and panels don't get me started.
We will have to build a hell of a lot of massive ugly batteries if we want 30 per cent of the worlds electricity generated from renewable energy and counting bio mass as renewable well ............
Inefficient , intermittent , yes less Co2 into the atmosphere than fossil fuels notwithstanding how much coal and gas you have to burn to make most of their componentry but in our climate hear in OZ for example they become so inefficient in hot weather ( 5 months of the year in most parts ) you usually have to shut them down if they don't shut down due to current and voltage differential on their own (LOL).
Probably along the lines of the manufacturer quoted mpg's for derv and petrol and non achievable on the road.I’d be interested to know if those range quotes are evenly vaguely accurate
Excellent summary but for a range of reasons EV are here to stay and over time as technology improves the cost of production will come down.Also they tell us that electric cars are more environmentally friendly, producing less CO2.
I have to say I find that extremely difficult to believe. Extremely difficult.
First of all you have all the mining of the Lithium, the manufacturing of the batteries and shipping it all over the globe. Not to mention the environmental cost of disposing of all the batteries
But putting all of that to one side, the basic physics of it makes it hard to add up. Every schoolboy knows that conversion of any form of energy to another form is lossy - it's never 100% efficient. It's often only 50% in fact, unless special energy recovery techniques are used.
And since half of our power generation comes from burning fossil fuels, you just have to look at how does digging coal out of the ground, make its way to turning the wheels of an electric car?
It goes something like
Heat energy(burning the coal)
Potential energy (pressuring steam)
Kinetic energy (moving steam)
Kinetic energy (moving turbine)
Electrical energy (generated from the alternators at the power station)
High voltage electricity ( for long distance transmission)
Lower voltage electricity (at substation)
Chemical energy (in your EV battery)
Potential energy (in the car's motors)
Kinetic energy at the wheels.
Burn the fuel in the car to drive the wheels.
The latter is massively more inherently efficient. The former wastes lots energy (as heat) at every conversion.
I think EVs are the biggest con going but the whole industry has emperor's New clothes about it and no-one has the bottle to call it out for being a sham.
(Not to mention the fact that the poor sod motorist contributes diddly squat to overall CO2 output anyway. The VAST majority of which comes from heating and industrial use.)
The only solid justification for EVs is inner city air quality.
Don't have an account?Register now!