Home Page
   Articles
       links
About Us    
Traders        
Recipes            
Latest Articles
So 2040?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Energy Efficiency and Construction/Major Projects
Author 
 Message
jema
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 28233
Location: escaped from Swindon
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 17 5:00 pm    Post subject: So 2040? Reply with quote
    

Anyone else figuring that extrapolating a current range on the new electric cars promised this year of at least 200 miles at a 10% increase a year, would mean in 2027 range would be about 520 miles!
Plus if anyone had the political balls you could enforce a standard on batteries that could be hotswapped automatically quicker than you fill up with petrol.
As such I can't see why in the world anyone would be producing or buying petrol/diesel at the car level by 2030 at the latest, especially if the political will was there to make it so.
So 2040 is an absurd joke

Shan



Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Posts: 9075
Location: South Wales
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 17 5:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Add consecutive changes of Government with different priorities and it's even more of a joke.

Slim



Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Posts: 6612
Location: New England (In the US of A)
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 17 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

With so much of the world moving towards a subscription model, and self-driving technology advancing, will anyone own their own car farther out into the future anyway?

Personally, I'm shooting for a radwagon electric cargo bike for into commuting, and hoping that my local car share program will buy an electric pickup truck when they've gone mainstream

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 46207
Location: yes
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 17 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

the car makers have a shorter timescale than the gov one

wellington womble



Joined: 08 Nov 2004
Posts: 15051
Location: East Midlands
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 17 9:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

I was recently in the market for an electric car, but couldn't get anything that met my needs in my price range. I couldn't afford a new one, but older ones were either too big, or I wasn't sure of the battery longevity. I couldn't buy an electric car, even though I wanted too.

As cars have such a long lifespan, and such a thriving second hand market, I think it will take that long to phase wet fuel cars out. There are still so few of them around, even brand new your choice is very limited. It's fine if you want a family vehicle, but for a smaller car or a van, the choice is limited to non existent. Or it was, a year ago. The two seater smart I would have liked has actually gone out of production.

Of course, news that everyone must have electric cars will certainly push production up. But it will definitely take a long time to filter through the whole market. What about vans and lorries and so on? Does it include them, or are they excluded?

onemanband



Joined: 26 Dec 2010
Posts: 1473
Location: NCA90
PostPosted: Wed Jul 26, 17 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

dpack wrote:
the car makers have a shorter timescale than the gov one


The gov't may as well claim credit for phasing out compact discs by 2040.

Mistress Rose



Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 15966

PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 17 5:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

I can't see wet fuels disappearing entirely until someone comes up with heavy enough batteries to get all vehicles everywhere carrying all loads. I am not too happy about the diesel pickups we have to use, but it is the only way to get to most parts of our wood, and in bad weather we can't even get them up some of the steeper slopes. Add to that tractors and you will still have a requirement for some larger vehicles to stay diesel. Lorries going long distances will also be a challenge.

Making bus services more convenient and cheaper will help of course, but this doesn't seem very likely at present.

For shorter distances and around town electric vehicles have definite advantages as long as the electricity is produced using renewable energy. Otherwise it is far more energy efficient to burn the fuel directly in the engine. See Dpacks post on the off grid thread.

jema
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 28233
Location: escaped from Swindon
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 17 7:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Tesla models already have a range of 335 miles. Extend that a bit and make batteries hot swappable and the range issue evaporates.
I am of the view that the only reason this has not already happened is that this does not involve maximum profit.
electric cars are a threat to a lot of profit in all sorts of areas.

Woo



Joined: 19 Sep 2011
Posts: 787
Location: Mayenne, Pays de Loire
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 17 7:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

jema wrote:
Tesla models already have a range of 335 miles. Extend that a bit and make batteries hot swappable and the range issue evaporates.
I am of the view that the only reason this has not already happened is that this does not involve maximum profit.
electric cars are a threat to a lot of profit in all sorts of areas.


i know its not 'on ' topic but my son and his friends were out car watching in Laval last month and watched a police man pull over a Tesla they had been drooling over, the policeman refused to believe it was a real car, despite all the documentation...in the end the frustrated driver just drove off, quietly!
here people keep their cars for years and years. mileage isn't the issue it is in the UK and as they don't put salt on the roads there isn't the corrosion issues cars driven in GB have. example immaculate MK 1 fiesta owned by a local farmer!

Slim



Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Posts: 6612
Location: New England (In the US of A)
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 17 9:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Mistress Rose wrote:

For shorter distances and around town electric vehicles have definite advantages as long as the electricity is produced using renewable energy. Otherwise it is far more energy efficient to burn the fuel directly in the engine.


That's not my understanding of it, though I think it's hard to talk about this stuff as petroleum refiners don't really release statistics on how much energy they utilize, AFAIK.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQpX-9OyEr4

sgt.colon



Joined: 27 Jul 2009
Posts: 7380
Location: Just south of north.
PostPosted: Thu Jul 27, 17 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

It will take a government that long to work out where they can recover the lost revenue from on fuel duty.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Energy Efficiency and Construction/Major Projects All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1
View Latest Posts View Latest Posts

 

Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
Copyright � 2004 marsjupiter.com