GroveHillWanderer

Except that credit and debit cards never show a day of the month for expiry, only the month and year. As @richard_smith237says, it is a little bit funny.

Not so - when I mentioned MG a few years ago to my nearly 30 year-old daughter, she said she'd never heard of the brand before.

It's still not entirely clear to me what precisely it is you really want to do. Are you definitely set on using the 65k monthly deposit method or would you prefer (or are you OK with) just doing the "total needed in one year" - i.e. 800k in the bank. method? Until it's clear what your preferred method is, it's difficult to give a precise answer.

That's what I thought, but he seems to think different. I also asked him if he would charge his vehicle using the granny charger at his home if he installs the wall charger up in Surin and he said no, it takes too long and he would just charge at commercial charging stations. Again, if he's using the car as a Grab taxi and trying to minimize his running costs, that doesn't seem like the best way to go.

A question for those more in the know than me (I know little to nothing about electrical power systems, or the requirements and considerations for EV wall chargers). My Thai nephew has just bought an MG4 on finance. He is apparently planning to make the repayments mainly by operating as a Grab taxi driver - he also has/had a pool cleaning business but I'm not sure if he's going to continue doing both (it would seem a little tricky to do so). Anyway, he's talking about installing the free wall charger that he says was included in the deal at his parents home in Surin province, on the basis that there aren't many charging stations nearby. Although there's one just 17 km away and another two roughly 40 km distant. Now, he does go up there surprisingly frequently (maybe 10 times or so a year) and often spends four to five days there. However, wouldn't it still make more sense, economically speaking to have the wall charger installed at his home in Hua Hin where it would get a lot more use? Also, would the power supply at his parents' house, which is a small rural dwelling with only one major appliance (a refrigerator) be likely to be suitable for a wall charger?

Can you provide a valid evidentiary source for that outlandish claim? If not, then it's baseless (and therefore worthless). All I can find is where Biden, although he initially promised to halt drilling on federal lands and stop issuing offshore oil-drilling leases has ultimately not carried through on these promises (albeit partly because of legal action). ­Biden’s Oil Letdown: Despite pledge to stop public lands drilling, Trump-era drilling boom continues

It should only be 'Cat Water' if you believe you have to follow the word order of the source language when translating. For instance, if you translate 'le ballon rouge' from French, would you say that should really be 'the balloon red' and not 'the red balloon' in English?

You need either 800,000 in the bank or proof of monthly deposits. It's one or the other - not both. If you have 800,000 in the bank you don't need to do monthly transfers. But as others have said, you need to clarify what method you (or more pertinently) your agent, has been using. Because if what you're doing amounts to changing the method used to show financial means, there may be some different considerations involved.

Nothing that I've noticed. So if you're not bothered about having Android Auto functionality, as you say it's maybe not worth doing the update. For me though, I'd always been a fan of Android Auto and was a little peeved that it wasn't there in MG ZS's sold in Thailand when all the reviews I read from other countries said it was supported. So I updated as soon as I could. As I say, I couldn't point to anything else that changed. Perhaps an MG dealer could tell you what else (if anything) was changed - though I wouldn't necessarily count on it.

That answer is way out of date though, the MG ZS got an OTA update that implemented full Android Auto functionality probably close to a year ago. I use it all the time

I think much of this was already addressed in earlier posts, but here goes. The older technology that powered earlier Teslas (and other brands) was Lithium-ion - also called Lithium-ion NMC. The newer technology that both Tesla and others are already using on more and more models are LFP (lithium iron phosphate, aka LiFePO 4) batteries. And this is not in the future, this is now. They are a different technology, but whether you would call them merely a tweak of Li-ion batteries would somewhat depend on your definition of the word. Not only can LFP batteries be charged to 100% as often as you want without detriment, they are indeed, much less likely to catch fire. If an LFP battery were to catch fire, the issues surrounding extinguishing them would be slightly different, as they require a class D fire extinguisher as opposed to class A, B or C for Lithium-ion batteries. However, current EV's are already 11-80 times less likely to catch fire than ICE vehicles and those with LFP batteries will be even less of a risk, since they are much, much harder to ignite in any normal circumstances, such as in a collision or as a result of thermal runaway. I believe someone already posted, not too long ago on the thread, the video of an LFP battery having a nail driven into it with no hint of a fire breaking out. The Risks of Lithium-ion vs LFP I couldn't tell you what is "mostly" used in Chinese EV's but again, more and more of them use LFP batteries - the MG4 does for instance, as mentioned by @Bandersnatchabove. As do various new Tesla models. You're right that there are other technologies still being developed but LFP batteries are already here.

This is only true of older battery technologies which are already on the way out. It doesn't apply for instance, to LFP batteries which many manufacturers are switching to now and as far as I'm aware. won't apply to most upcoming battery technologies (in which there is generally much less battery degradation over time anyway). Electric vehicles with LFP battery compositions can be charged to 100% daily Even with Lithium ion batteries, that figure of 75% sounds suspiciously low. According to the same article linked to above: Also, it is generally accepted that charging your Li-ion EV battery to 100% from time to time is OK - you just don't want to be doing it every single day (and most drivers don't need to, as they don't require 100% charge for their regular, daily vehicle use). Which is just like an ICE vehicle if you ask me - I have a petrol vehicle and I rarely fill the tank to 100% full. And again, although people often quote it as a drawback of EV's that you're usually advised not to Iet them get below 10% (not 25% as in that Telegraph article) that's pretty much the same as with ICE vehicles. I usually refill my petrol tank once it's down to somewhere between 10 - 25%. I would never let my vehicle's petrol tank get down to 0% before refilling but somehow with EV's, that's seen as something bad.

Had a 2020 ZS ICE for 3 years now. Had no problems with it regarding reliability. In contrast to some other posters, I find it very comfortable - especially on long trips, where I suffer no driver fatigue or 'butt pain'(unlike the Isuzu I owned before). I don't find the engine noisy when accelerating (although I find putting it into Sport mode reduces the noise level when you really want to put your foot down). Once cruising, I switch back to regular D mode to reduce fuel consumption. As you can switch to S mode and back 'on the fly' just by pushing the gear selector sideways, this is really quick and easy to do. The 2020 model isn't particularly good on fuel economy but I can still get 14km/l on longer trips (less around town, obviously). The only fault it's had was that when I first got it, the battery kept going dead every couple of days, which they fixed at no cost (a wiring issue apparently) in under an hour at the local dealer. In the three years since then, no faults at all. Overall I'm extremely pleased with my MG ZS purchase.

Your complaint about the OP not providing evidence is unfounded - all the sources were in the linked article. On the other hand, you make a bunch of claims in your post without any linked sources whatsoever. Pot calling kettle black, or what?

That day is a lot closer than you might think. There are already EV's with a 1000 km range and batteries that can add 400 km of range in ten minutes. They're not the norm yet, but may well be, before too long. And I don't know about you, but I don't ever let my ICE vehicle's tank get down to absolutely and completely empty before filling up (and I can't imagine anyone else does). For me, I usually go to top up once it gets to around 25% and I don't usually fill it up to 100% either.

What are you basing that on? The average driver around the world, according to all the figures I've seen, makes mostly short trips, ranging less than 10km from home. With that kind of urban driving, many if not most drivers can probably exceed the manufacturer's stated range, which is based on a combination of urban and motorway driving. Unlike ICE's, EV's actually get better mileage on short, stop-start driving around town, than on highway driving. In 2017 Nearly 60% of All Vehicle Trips Were Less than Six Miles

As has been pointed out on other EV-related threads, according to numerous sets of figures from various safety organizations around the world, ICE vehicles are up to 11 times more likely to catch fire than EV's. Here's just one example. EV fires

Actually, according to the article, the losses are only expected to rise in the short term, and they say they expect to be making 8% profit on their EV's within 3 years. Furthermore:

For a while, very possibly - but for five years?

You seem to have completely misread the OP. It is a list of "21 misleading myths" about EV's. What he is clearly stating is that all these 21 statements are, in fact, false.

If he means he can come back in immediately then he is wrong. The penalties for overstaying by as long as he has involve at least a 3 year ban, possibly 5. Which of those it is, depends on whether it's less than three years, or more. Overstaying in Thailand

The Texas Public Policy Foundation isn't exactly an unbiased source though, is it? Its funding and its board members basically come from a cabal of oil industry executives and GOP activists. Some of its top sources of funds are Chevron, Exxon Mobil and various other fossil fuel industry interests. As one of its critics told the Texas Observer, "Most think tanks work for their funders and TPPF's donors are a Who's Who of Texas polluters, giant utilities and big insurance companies. TPPF is thinking the way its donors want it to think." The Texas Public Policy Foundation You can pretty much see where they stand on the ICE vs EV debate from the fact that one of their stated goals is to "explain the forgotten moral case for fossil fuels" by rejecting the scientific consensus on climate change. One of their best known representatives, Kathleen Hartnett-White, who was appointed by Trump to his administration's Council on Environmental Quality, doesn't even believe carbon dioxide poses any environmental risk. According to her, carbon dioxide is “an odorless, invisible, beneficial, and natural gas.” Trump taps climate skeptic for top White House environmental post

I don't know where some people on this thread are getting their ideas of how justice systems work. There is no justice system in the world that allows for a verdict of "guilty, but with really, really good evidence so that we can be happy about executing the felon," and another type of verdict of "guilty, but with not such a good level of evidence, so we won't apply the death penalty to this one." In no justice system (as far as I'm aware) are there different levels of certainty to the guilty verdict that can be applied as some seem to be suggesting, to decide who should be executed and who shouldn't. There is the possibility of saying that only certain, particularly heinous types of murder should be subject to the death penalty but the trouble there is that even innocent people can be wrongly convicted of the most heinous crimes. Somebody mentioned about mass murderers being deserving of the death penalty. As a person of Irish extraction I always go back to the cases of the Birmingham six, the Guildford four and the Maguire seven. These were people convicted on the basis of supposedly overwhelming evidence - including forensic evidence and in some cases, confessions (later judged to have been forced) of taking part in the planting of the IRA bombs that murdered dozens and injured hundreds of people in pubs in the UK. Had the death penalty been in place in the UK at the time, there's little doubt many, if not most of them would have been executed (there were even people campaigning to bring the death penalty back specially for them). Over a decade later however, they were all found to have been the victims of a massive miscarriage of justice, and released. With justice systems the way that are in reality (and not the way some people would like them to be) there's no way of saying that only "especially" guilty people should be executed.

Covid is not "another type of flu" - it's from a completely different family of viruses. Covid is a coronavirus, influenza is not. Also, viruses do not always become less virulent as they mutate, that's just a common, but mistaken assumption. Viruses can evolve to be more deadly As that article points out, one classic example is bird flu - it was initially mild in humans, but evolved to become more deadly.

Yes, a boxer (albeit of the kickboxing variety). See dictionary definition below, wherein the proponents of the art are described as boxers. Kickboxing definition