A bit of eco-back pedalling.........?

[Towpack]

Does this mean the ill-informed decision makers are finally realising that the "phase out" targets of ICE's, gas boilers etc are totally unrealistic and unobtainable?


Eco rethink.

 

[Rob Cowell]

It means they are saying anything at all that their focus groups think might leave them with more than 100 MPs in the next parliament even if this directly contravenes their own promises from the last 4 years. See also ULEZ and 20mph speed limits.

 

[karl2000]

Best summary Ive heard

 

[Tractionman]

The ill informed decision makers are finally realising that the people/taxpayers of this country, are finally (slowly) realising what they are up to across the board.

What they don't realise is, they were put in their positions to serve - not dictate.

 

[Towpack]

Well, whatever their reasoning, they've done it with most measures being put back a few years so I'm not complaining.

 

[karl webster]

They realise the people are starting to stand up for themselves. Well some are. The more they get pushed back the slower whatever bs they are doing will happen.

 

[chadr]

The 2030 end date was for "100%" petrol or diesel cars - Hybrid cars always had an end date of 2035 from the start.

Considering that nearly half of new cars available sold in the UK are hybrid (i.e. have some form of petrol/diesel ICE with additional battery power - whether that's self charging or plug-in) and that proportion is constantly growing, to the point that I doubt you would be able to buy a purely 100% petrol or diesel car in a couple of years anyway, let alone in 7 years time. So we are talking about an almost negligible number of new pure petrol or diesel vehicles.

So what does this new announcement mean in real terms? Very, very little IMHO.

Just another soundbite to rally the troops and make some people feel like they were being listened to.

The major car manufacturers aren't going to make their global strategies based on a transient policy decision in the UK, which might sway one way or the other, within the same government, let alone a different government. They will be looking at global markets and demand and they are only going one way. So I expect the current trends to continue, regardless of Westminster policies.

 

[BobMurphy]

The move to 2035 puts the UK in line with the EU and many other countries. That can only make planning easier for the manufacturers - yet most are complaining about watering down the 'green' commitments. I suspect their objections are intended to publicly boost their 'green' credentials !

The one company who is not complaining is Ineos - who see advantage in having more time to develop alternative technologies and to give more time for the country's infrastructure to become fit for purpose. I hope the Government will spend the time upgrading the National Grid. It seems we can generate more power from the off-shore windfarms than the grid can handle - which is madness and shows a lack of joined-up thinking. I suspect nothing will change prior to the next election however.

Toyota have announced a new type of battery that would give an EV a range of 650 miles with a re-charge time of 20 minutes. If true that would be a clincher if:

1. It doesn't cost a fortune.
2. It doesn't require an 80Kw charge point.
3. It doesn't suffer from thermal runaway on your driveway (or in a packed carpark).

Unfortunately, I suspect there is so much vested interest in Lithium-Ion battery technology that the big guys won't want to adopt it. We shall see.

I just scrapped my lovely 20-year-old Ford Focus estate (terminal rust) and bought a 2020 Honda Jazz 1.3 petrol manual that is Euro-6 compliant and therefore ULEZ friendly. Mrs M is getting the hang of it at present and stressing over the 600-page owner's manual (!). I didn't go electric as I feel the technology is still evolving and there are too many issues surrounding the current offerings (range and charging availability being two of them). I'm intending to install a 22Kw (3-phase) EV charger next year in anticipation of going electric sometime. I believe in getting the infrastructure in place first !

Bob.

 

[Towpack]

Cutting to the chase, irrespective of who's in power and what targets and measures are announced the one thing I want to know is......How long can I keep driving my old Land Cruiser and riding my ICE bikes? I suspect most on here will feel the same.

 

[Towpack]

Toyota have announced a new type of battery that would give an EV a range of 650 miles with a re-charge time of 20 minutes. If true that would be a clincher if:

1. It doesn't cost a fortune.
2. It doesn't require an 80Kw charge point.
3. It doesn't suffer from thermal runaway on your driveway (or in a packed carpark).

I'm sure you've know the maths Bob. With the average size of an EV battery around 40Kwh with some much larger, to fully charge that in 20mins will need a 120Kw charger. OK, that's from flat which ideally will never happen but it'll still need a charger much larger than currently available for domestic use. With a 100Kwh battery, that's a 300Kw charger. Battery tech may improve power density but you can't get out more than you put in.
We keep hearing, and most will know, that Hydrogen tech is the only long term answer but very little about any planning or investment to implement it.

 

[BobMurphy]

I'm sure you've know the maths Bob. With the average size of an EV battery around 40Kwh with some much larger, to fully charge that in 20mins will need a 120Kw charger. OK, that's from flat which ideally will never happen but it'll still need a charger much larger than currently available for domestic use. With a 100Kwh battery, that's a 300Kw charger. Battery tech may improve power density but you can't get out more than you put in.
We keep hearing, and most will know, that Hydrogen tech is the only long term answer but very little about any planning or investment to implement it.

Yes, you're right of course. I was sceptical about the Toyota claim but hopefully they will release details soon so we can see how viable the technology is (if it exists in the real world and not just in a Lab somewhere).

Ineos are pursuing Hydrogen technology, but is it for gas-powered ICE motors or for electric Hydrogen fuel cells ??? The cost of 'cracking' water to provide Hydrogen & Oxygen is huge which brings us back to the lack of a suitable national power infrastructure.

I've just watched a couple of videos about technological developments during WWII, we seemed to get the planning right back then, probably driven by a different breed of people.

Bob.

 

[Rob Cowell]

I'm sure you've know the maths Bob. With the average size of an EV battery around 40Kwh with some much larger, to fully charge that in 20mins will need a 120Kw charger. OK, that's from flat which ideally will never happen but it'll still need a charger much larger than currently available for domestic use. With a 100Kwh battery, that's a 300Kw charger. Battery tech may improve power density but you can't get out more than you put in.
We keep hearing, and most will know, that Hydrogen tech is the only long term answer but very little about any planning or investment to implement it.

The only long term answer is to drive less.

 

[GeekOKent]

The only long term answer is to drive less.

That's crazy talk

 

[Rob Cowell]

That's crazy talk

I read it in Das Kapital.

 

[frank rabbets]

TP I don't think any vehicle type has ever been banned. You can still drive a Traction engine belching out 1000 cars worth of pollution and holding back traffic to 12 mph. Even legal on Mways.