...m8


Predictions for the car:

When do you think there will be as many electric cars as there are internal combustion?

When oil consumption/production goes right down and all cars are electric/non I/C, do you think you will you still be able to drive your kit/classic, if so what restrictions do you think will apply and how expensive will the fuel be? or will there be an all out ban and you won't be able to drive them on the road?

Do you think years from now classic/general i/c cars value will do through the roof, stay the same or go down?

Not a survey or anything, just bored atm

quote:

---

Originally posted by Benzine
The gr8 deb8 m8

---

The question is, WHO, will be the first on here to build an EEC?????

I personally dont think electric cars will take off. I think the future is in hydrogen

Provided they're not just taking it out of gas and actually producing it in a green manner

I've been pestering Honda to bring out the FCX for nearly a year now... Tesla appear to be making viable alternatives apart from the price tag (£90k for an electric Elise?)

No matter how much anyone else will disagree and say "oh but you've got to get used to it" any alternative will need:

400 mile (minimum) "fuel range"
Fuel up time under 15 mins
Able to do 80mph all day
And for me if it can't carry 5 people I can't have it (you know, family car as opposed to little pod thing)
Price tag about the same (I could go 10% higher...)
Cost per mile similar or lower

quote:

---

Originally posted by speedyxjs
I personally dont think electric cars will take off. I think the future is in hydrogen

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ninehigh
No matter how much anyone else will disagree and say "oh but you've got to get used to it" any alternative will need:

400 mile (minimum) "fuel range"
Fuel up time under 15 mins
Able to do 80mph all day

---

in the uk, they say the national electric grid is barely adequate for current demands (excuse the pun...) and needs major investment.

Hydrogen fuel cell should be fairly efficient shouldnt it?

On the range issue, you could just hire a small trailer with a few batteries/tank of gas if you wanted longer journeys, ie for holidays.

I used to do a 55 mile round trip for work, so a 40 mile range would have scuppered me. Plus what about that occasional long journey? It would take me about 10 "fill ups" to get to London from here, and how far apart are the service stations? Factor in charging time and how long will that take?

I used to do taxi-ing and on a busy saturday night I could do 400 miles just working!

I'm serious it would need to be as convenent as cars are now.

Without a quantum leap in battery technology I can't see electric cars ever being adequate. Also don't like the idea of driving a completely silent car. If all else fails we'll just have to run em all on old chip pan oil. (smells better than diesel anyway).

quote:

---

Originally posted by speedyxjs
I personally dont think electric cars will take off. I think the future is in hydrogen

---

Ah now this is where solar power comes in, there are towers that use mirrors to concentrate solar power into one point and produce electricity from that. Not sure how well it works but I'm sure we'll get there soon enough and hey there's these great big deserts

Honda have also got a home filling kit, again using solar power, here go pester them

quote:

---

Originally posted by dinosaurjuice

quote:

---

Originally posted by speedyxjs
I personally dont think electric cars will take off. I think the future is in hydrogen

---

hydrogen which is used to make electricity to power electric motors attached to wheels.

---

i think it would be a terrible thing if biofuels became popular - imagine fuel and food competing for land to be grown on. We'd starve! Well, someone would anyway, probably brazil...

I was at a conference 6 months ago and a chap from the organisation that is responsible for vehicle research said that in 40 years half of all vehicles would still have an I/C engine, possible as part of a hybrid and that they didnt see EV taking over totally.

biofuels are interesting; the initial push meant that huge swathes of fuel prodcuing land was lost to palm oil production and the like. The next generation bio fuels which are currently under developement will hopefully take a more more sophisticated approach. Utilising commerical waste streams and/or adding enzymes to existing organix stock to produce significantly higher returns than simply re using chip fat. think of all the oil used to make the processed foods we love, one manufacturer i know is using tens of millions of gallons every year. and then think that if by adding the correct enzyme you could double the bang you get for your buck when burning that oil?

in the end there is no one big solution, the answer may well come incrementally, in millions of tiny steps.

Re: electric car range. Why don't they make a standard battery size and a standard way in which it fixes to the car, then when you "fill up" at a station you get the batteries swapped over by a machine. Could even have standard, premium etc

Loads of talk about electric cars, but has anyone got thoughts on whether they'll be able to drive a loud, thirsty kit car in the future or if you'll only be able to if, say, it's on a track or you have limited mileage per year with a tracker or similar?

I guess part of the reluctancy to switch to non-i/c is that we love it and don't want to see it dissapear. If it's still available for the indefinate future then it wouldn't bother me, switch to electric as soon as, as long as I can have an i/c classic/kit for occassional use!

i also saw the hybrid lotus. it has a synthesizer so you can play engine noise internally and externally (!) so you still get the sound of an engine. you can have whatever you want. even horses hooves!

I was watching a programme about Cells (organic types) and their origins. ie all things living are made from cells that come from the same source. Ie the Darwin theory stuff.

However the interesting thing was in the last programme about genetic engineering. They have engineered a cell that feeds on sugar type substances, and produces Bio-Diesel as a waste product.
This diesel only needed washing to clean it up and was fit for imediate use.

I can see this being used as a clean way to provide fuel. OK we ned to grow tons of sugar beet etc. But it's a clean way of producing bio fuel without the process of estrifying it from palm oil and the likes.
No nasty chemical processes, just this liquid sludge being fed endless amounts of sugar and creaming the diesle off the top.

I cannot see Hydrogen being used en masse. You have to make the hydrogen first. This will take a lot of energy, assuming the laws of physics will still apply in the future.

EV's a re nice and good for their purpose. However for long / heavy haul, I cannot see the Infernal Combustion engine being scrapped just yet.

Maybe in the future when they have perfected Cold Fusion, and we can all have Mr Fusion units on our cars etc (You need to see Back to the Future to understand "Mr Fusion" )

All good stuff... but not for the masses just yet. Still if they keep working at it they will get there eventually.

My view is there are just TOO MANY PEOPLE on this planet. (a 50% increase from 4 to 6 Billion ppl in the last 40 years ie in less than my lifetime)

Not that I am advocating mass genocide etc etc.
Eventually the resources will run dry or get very scarce. Then a War will ensue and reduce the population ie reduction by natural selection etc etc. Then it wont matter anymore and the insects (real ones, not small minded people!) will take over the planet

Electric would be fine for my wife - she's a community nurse and only needs to tootle around the local area. My car on the other hand may be used for the 40 mile round trip to work (it has been as much as a 180 mile trip in the past), the 200 mile trip to visit friends, the 900 mile (each way) holiday trip abroad (while towing a trailer) and frequent longish distance days out with the kids.

I also want the ability to carry five people, while towing a trailer and with the boot full!

To be able to maintain that if we move to electricity for transport, hydrogen or some other artifically produced fuel would be the most likely, simply due to the energy density and recharge time problems of batteries.

The distribution network would likely cope okay, as most recharging would be done during the off-peak period when it is only lightly loaded. What we produce the electricity with is the question. If carbon capture can be made to work and at reasonable cost, then we have plenty of coal, tidal power can contribute, as can wind, but otherwise I don't see much alternative to nuclear. France manages to produce 85+ % of its power from nuclear stations, without us hearing of major problems or protests.

I'd love one of these short-range vehicles (whatever sort) as long as it was cheap to run, and didn't involve a vast expenditure in a few years time (as batteries do at the moment - just wait until Prius owners realise that their batteries have a finite life!).

99.9% of my driving is on short journeys - Monday to Friday I do 6 miles to and from the station... on Saturdays I may go 7 miles to and from town. (on Sundays I hoon around in my toy car... )

The main trouble is that the true cost of the energy isn't being counted for all of these cars - hydrogen production consumes power, electricity for batteries consumes coal, gas or nuclear energy (and there are losses from the power station to the house), and even the compressed air cars require energy to compress the air - a very inefficient process.

Until we have electric cars that can be charged overnight from a wind turbine then there isn't a truly environmentally-safe option.

I think the best next step would be the diesel series hybrid. ie a small highly efficient diesel generator powering electric motors with maybe a small amount of batteries for starting off.

The problem with batteries is they are so dirty to produce, hydrogen also takes large amounts of energy to produce. Until these processes can be made cleaner and more efficient I don't think they are really viable for the scale we are talking about.

Now if they can make nuclear fusion work properly...

well guys i do know what will happen in the near future - i work at nissan and as such the group (with renault as well) has come up with a plan for how it feels there will be cars in the future.

the government has told car manufacurers they HAVE to make green cars - full stop - and now not 10 years down the line but within a couple of years

at the frankfurt show this year renault showed what they are coming up with - starting with a car the size of a megane

and 3 others as well - one still concept

nissan has currently a car being launched soon called the leaf - yea crap name - but technically it should be a way ahead of the current cars out there

these cars are capable of 100 mile range
0-60 times comparible to a V6
80% charge in 20 mins
batteries you dont own - so dont get bills for to replace - you lease them in with the car costs
the recharge system at home looks like it will be installed as part of the car purchase
the batteries are not big huge wacking things taking the whole boot up but small cells within the floor space
when the batteries are dead or need to be replaced you will be driving the car to an 'exchange' facility - probably at gas stations and an automated sytyem removes the dead ones - swaps it with recharged ones - away you go - in 3 minutes!

the leaf is rolling out it seems in the US first then over here as soon as the infrastructure is upto speed - which is the hardest bit i suppose - working in conjunction with fuel suppliers and local councils etc to work out where to site them is on going now.

hydrogen cars are in my eyes the way forward - but there are big problems with firstly cost - its not financially viable for a mass market - yet - along with the other downsides - but if they can power my house whilst stationary on the drive - i'll sign up now!

problem is that everyone knows electric cars are not the best solution but something has to be done RIGHT NOW - the other technologies will need to be developed further - battery development is evolving at such a huge pace that they predict ranges of 300 miles+ by 2013 or so
in fact we are going to be manufacturing lithium ion batteries in the near future - hopefully as well the leaf if we get the contract for that - that is to be decided yet

the best way is to look at them

renault ZE program

nissan leaf

quote:

---

Originally posted by Benzine
Re: electric car range. Why don't they make a standard battery size and a standard way in which it fixes to the car, then when you "fill up" at a station you get the batteries swapped over by a machine. Could even have standard, premium etc

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tweek

---

You know I just thought of something else.

An electric motor contains very few moving parts and apparently have almost zero servicing.. What's gonna happen to all the mechanics?

The problem is that we are raping certain parts of the world to produce these "green" cars. The manufacturing process and raw materials for these batteries will come back to haunt us.

Electric cars require electricity generation from something ....it is already predicted that we will have electricity shortages in the next few years as we haven't built enough renewable sources (most of which are a joke) or Nuclear stations. A wholesale switch to EVs would see the country grind to a (silent) halt. I do not think people will except the range and recharge rate either (drive 100miles, wait 3 hours, drive another 100 miles...makes a trip to Scotland from Kent take a very long time).

I have images of Motorway hardshoulders full of EV waiting for the AA/RAC to arrive and take the for a charge....

I would have thought fuel cell technology would be much more suitable for vehicles.

Expect to still be using your smell, noisey IC cars for sometime to come.

nuclear is not the answer - the uranium or whatever stuff that is dug out of the ground is of finite suppply and will run out.

remember when there is no fuel, then air travel will cease to exist - a journey of 50 miles will seem like a huge distance, like it was in the middle ages so I doubt there'll be many complaints about a 400 mile range.

surely the answer is dig a really deep hole and make use of the heat in the earth core?

sugget we start buying shares in Spear and Jackson and other spade manufacturers now.

quote:

---

Originally posted by wilkingj
Not that I am advocating mass genocide etc etc.

---

Battery cars don't work in any shape or form. They are heavy, use more energy to make and are less efficient than the old I/C engine. Clean at source? Yes, if you ignore ozone production. Cleaner than Petrol? No. Not in any shape or form.

The buzz word now is local production of energy to eliminate transmission loss. If this works with power stations, why does it not work with cars? You can't get much more local the two foot in front of you.

As for Genocide, I've always had a soft spot for early Judas Priest.

Old thread bump, just wondering what everyone thinks now? I think we're currently at this stage when it comes to electric vehicles:



Massive battery factories being built all over the place which will bring down the price of lithium batteries. New battery technology will increase range (to the magical 200 mile range* which 95% of people don't need anyway)

*in your every day affordable car - yes tesla already can.

I still think hydrogen for transportation is mostly a silly idea. Yes, you could use renewable energy to generate and pressurize the hydrogen, but why not cut out the middle men and store straight to batteries?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Benzine
When do you think there will be as many electric cars as there are internal combustion?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Benzine
When oil consumption/production goes right down and all cars are electric/non I/C, do you think you will you still be able to drive your kit/classic?

---

I agree about hydrogen; it's got a low energy density, requires high pressures, is leaky and is energy consuming to make in the first place. I think batteries will continue to evolve as they are.

Biofuels may increase in importance but will never be the entire solution as it stands, we just couldn't make enough of the stuff. Maybe in the future there may be giant production facilities using GM Algae fed off waste water etc., but it would take a long time to be phased into mass production.

Electrical energy storage will continue to evolve steadily I think, and will probably be the way forwards in the medium to long run.

The key is that hydrogen, biofuel, methanol, batteries or fossil fuels are just different ways of storing energy. Where we get the energy from and how cheap it is are the main deciding factors IMO. Pretty much all our energy originates from the sun, even fossil fuels- it was just collected and stored a loooong time ago

If we had unlimited energy we could synthesise hydrocarbons from atmospheric CO2 and water, refilling the oil wells as a carbon repository... if we had unlimited energy.

Renewables are important but the scope for development is finite, and they'll never be reliable. For me nuclear power needs to play a mix in the medium to long term - but not as it is now.

Even the new fission reactors we are looking at building (light water pressurised) are based around designs which are not far evolved from the earliest types, although they are undoubtedly far safer. This is because there has been very little research has been done on fission reactors in the last thirty years... there are some interesting alternatives to the fuel rodwater cooling set up, such as standing wave or molten salt reactors. Also in the medium to long term Thorium is a promising fuel source, especially combined with a molten salt reactor.

In the longer term Fusion will be cracked sooner or later. With ITER and the conventional research program it will be later, though I still have some small hope hanging on the wildcards which are focus fusion, the polywell and the Lockheed Martin approach. Enough to keep an eye on them but not get excited!

OK, essay completed... I'll get back under me rock

quote:

---

Originally posted by Badger_McLetcherPretty much all our energy originates from the sun, even fossil fuels- it was just collected and stored a loooong time ago

---

I work with hydrogen - would be very worried of having huge energy stores of it anywhere!

Just some figures to play with, from https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/energy-consumption-in-the-uk

In 2016 energy consumption in the uk in millions of tonnes of oil equivalent:
domestic 42
industry 24
transport 55
other 19

total 140 million tonnes of oil equivalent (MTOE).

this energy comes from:
gas 43
solid fuels 2
petroleum 62
electricity 26

The 100% capacity of the national grid is 77GWHr, which over a year equates to 58 MTOE
since we already use 26 of this, if the whole grid were used to charge 'transport' using all the current capacity to best effect we could charge 32 MTOE worth of energy with the current infrastructure, which is about 60% of the transport use. So to do 100% of the transport load would mean the grid would have to find another 23 MTOE capacity which is about 40% increase in capacity. I doubt that we could actually charge cars using 'spare' capacity using 100% of the spare capacity, as most would plug their cars in on arrival at home or on arrival at work/car park or whatever, so the cars cannot all be plugged in all the time. So practically I would say the grid would need at least 1.5 * "transport use" added to current use, which would mean effectively doubling the grid capacity.

To supply the 58MTOE for transport from H2 would need 22 million T of H2. This turns to water (198 million tonnes per year) in the atmosphere. Water is also a greenhouse gas, and you will get more rain where there as most cars, so cities would become very foggy!

LPG/mains Gas is currently well understood and available and easy to adapts cars to ( I have driven almost 300K miles in LPG converted cars). They also provide less carbon per MJ, and in fact the USA has the biggest % reduction in its CO2 emissions of any country in the last few years (10%+) as it is sourcing a lot of energy from shale gas.

Bioethanol/biofermentation type things are probably next best, but don't forget the waste products will need to have something done with them - think of a few hundred million tonnes of the slime that comes out of the bottom of your compost heap if it is too wet! Like a lot of things, its ok if you have 'small' use, but one you start producing in the millions of tonnes per annum range you have to think of the impact of the waste on the environment.

I suspect to achieve anything meaningful we will all have to accept very much less powerful vehicles to reduce total transport energy use, and longer journey times, but with the new proposals on limiting speed on motorways and in towns less power may not be an issue anyway!

Regards
Hugh

quote:

---

Originally posted by UncleFista

quote:

---

Originally posted by wilkingj
Not that I am advocating mass genocide etc etc.

---

I am !

---

Can't admit to having read the complete thread, but IMHO electric (battery) cars just won't work.

1. There's no infrastructure for charging/re-charging and who's supposed to pay for that?
2. People seem oblivious to the fact that most electricity to charge batteries creates pollution
3. What happens (cost) when the batteries need replacing [they will do] - it could de-value a 2nd hand car pretty quickly?
4. What happens (recycling) when the batteries need replacing [they will do]?
5. What happens when people start getting hit by electric cars that they couldn't hear coming?
6. Currently (and yes it may improve) batteries take significant time to re-charge and very little time to discharge

That said I'm not saying oil based fuels are the right thing, but the world currently operates that way. It would take quite some endeavour (sp?) to alter that. Personally I can't see harmony between either manufacturers or governments capable of changing things pretty quickly and for the better.

Maybe a little off topic, but an ex colleague bought a Twizzy in preference to another motorcycle, he asked if he could plug it in whilst at work, to be told 'No that would be a taxable benefit we are not able to provide'

^^^

I can see the thinking behind this and indeed why should work provide the electricity.

So is the answer to make charge points at work PAYG?

I have to assume that street or car park charge points would be PAYG.


Must also say that I can see the attraction of the Twizy as a kind of "enclosed" motorbike.

[Edited on 14/12/16 by nick205]

quote:

---

Originally posted by NigeEss
Mother Nature has ways of dealing with population numbers but humans are hell bent on finding ways to stop her.
So letting nature take its course is a start............................

---

must say that not allowing the Twizzy recharge is a bit mean - the battery capacity is 6kwH, so even at 100% charge a day under £100 per annum for industrial rate electric, wouldn't even bother declaring it for tax on the guy myself - just ask him to drop a tenner in the charity box in the canteen every couple of months.
The reality is there will be no huge take off unless the grid gets sorted and the government makes all commercial places put charging in all car parks - after all 50% of people park roadside and there is no chance of people trailing cables across the pavement, so most could/would only charge at work, or if some form of swappable battery was available, or the government put a couple of charge points on every lamp post I suppose (or you need to be able to charge cars 100% in the time it takes to have lunch - would mean grid peak load would be 12-1pm every day. You would need to link all these up somehow to allow charging (special charge card perhaps that enables the point and checks your car ID?). Personally I think this would be a better use of the HS2 money, you can lay a lot of wire for 55.7 billion!
We looked at a smart charge point for work, it was about £1200 per port for the hardware, then install on top. To get to 50% of the 30million cars in the uk able to charge at once (say), you would need to install 15million points * £1200 worth of these- approx. £18 billion + install costs which would pretty much spend all the HS2 money.

The guy in this video makes a lot of sense (regarding the load on the grid):



Basically, he's saying that most people don't need to recharge their cars immediately they get home, so the computers can schedule it to those times when the grid has a surplus (and stop the charging when the grid hits peak demand). Makes sense to me.

Nick205 - I'd love to hear a debate between you and Robert Llewellyn!

To declare my interests: I've just bought a diesel car, but in a few years time I shouldn't be surprised if I buy either a plug-in hybrid or a fully-electric car. 99% of my journeys are just 50 miles a day - often much less. Once every month or so I need to drive further so, at the moment, those types of car don't fit my needs (although a hybrid might). BTW: taxi drivers using Toyota Prius hybrids have recorded up to 1.5 million miles on the one battery pack, so maybe battery life isn't such an issue...

[Edited on 14/12/16 by David Jenkins]

quote:

---

Originally posted by David Jenkins
taxi drivers using Toyota Prius hybrids have recorded up to 1.5 million miles on the one battery pack, so maybe battery life isn't such an issue...

---

A few taxis in Ipswich are Prius - most of the time I've seen/heard them they've been on electric. The current ones have quite a small capacity so you're probably quite right about the engine kicking in, but the type I'd probably get is the plug-in hybrid (not Toyota, currently) - charge it at home, do 30 miles or so on the battery, with a few litres of petrol as a 'get you home' option.



[Edited on 14/12/16 by David Jenkins]

Exchangeable battery packs might work, but can you really see enough harmony between manufacturers and governments for that to happen any time soon - if ever? I doubt it!

The comment above about 1.5 million miles on a battery pack.....from my experience the rest of the car would have needed replacing several time over to get anywhere near that sort of mileage.

As I've said on other posts cycling could really present an option for shorter journeys. Coupled with more sensible working regimes that could (IMHO) make a big difference.

A bizarre example...there's a Tesco Express about 500m from our house. I walk there, but our neighbour drives there - we both come back with a loaf of bread.

For 500m - I'd walk...

But you're correct about people not having a clue: my neighbours had solar panels installed a few years back, and tried to persuade us to do the same (unsuccessfully). They were quite self-righteous about them... and every evening they leave their kitchen light on from dusk until about 11pm, and most of the time the room is unoccupied. Sometimes their house is like Blackpool Illuminations, are they're only a pair of pensioners - just think how much of their expensive investment's output they are wasting every day!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Benzine
Old thread bump, just wondering what everyone thinks now?


My predictions:

50/50 ratio of new cars being internal combustion vs electric - 2025
EVs to link in to the national grid and provide storage and help smooth out demand (along with home packs)
Battery packs to start being commonly installed in homes in the next 10 years.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by beagley

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ninehigh
No matter how much anyone else will disagree and say "oh but you've got to get used to it" any alternative will need:

400 mile (minimum) "fuel range"
Fuel up time under 15 mins
Able to do 80mph all day

---

Why the 400 mile range? I have an 8 mile commute to work where I could plug up all day and my wife has about a 22 mile drive, but she could also plug in while at work for 8 hours. It seems everyone is scared with a 40 - 50 mile range and all, but the truth seems to be that "most" people don't really drive more than 20-30 miles round trip for daily use.

---

This video is something to consider:



It's a bit disingenuous in places - e.g. quoting Norway as a wonderful, clean place, while ignoring that most of the country's wealth comes from oil and gas production, and it's a bit "shock horror" in other places, but on the whole it's not far off the mark.

[Edited on 21/2/21 by David Jenkins]