I love electric vehicles – and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped Rowan Atkinson

[BenStark]

On 6/4/2023 at 8:28 AM, gargamon said:

On 6/4/2023 at 6:39 AM, SunnyinBangrak said:

When you work out how the electricity is generated in many places EV's are essentially coal powered cars

Yes, need more nuclear power plants. 

Oh wait, did you read the news about how governments (read the greenies) think about nuclear power plants

[KhunLA]

8 hours ago, billd766 said:

If I had an electric vehicle, I would HAVE to be able to charge it at home as the nearest commercial charging stations are around 60 km away on the route 1 near Kamphaeng Phet.

So you're saying you don't have electric at the house ?  That's where most people, inclusive, charge their EVs.

[placeholder]

On 6/5/2023 at 3:12 PM, nauseus said:

What you don't include is the fact that in China the amount of power provided by coal is still increasing. 

 

 

What you don't note is that the percentage of power provided by coal in China is declining:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303368/coal-electricity-production-share-in-china/#:~:text=Coal accounted for nearly 61 percent of China's electricity generation in 2022.

 

Analysis: What do China’s gigantic wind and solar bases mean for its climate goals?

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-what-do-chinas-gigantic-wind-and-solar-bases-mean-for-its-climate-goals/

 

 

[placeholder]

On 6/5/2023 at 7:47 AM, James105 said:

So people that were lied to before are now supposed to just trust these same people now with this?  Why would they?  Once bitten twice shy etc..

 

People do not need a pump at home as petrol cars can travel significantly further between refuelling and when refuelling is needed it takes about 5 minutes rather than hours to fill the car up.   I was responding to a post about the choices people currently are making in the UK, not what is occurring in the communist state of China.

 

If that is the case it would be especially stupid to buy an electric car today as it would be effectively worthless in resale value if there is emerging tech coming out "any day now" that will replace the existing heavy, slow to charge (in comparison to refuelling), poor range batteries.   Anyone with sense would hold off until solid state batteries are available if they do indeed solve the range and slow charging (in comparison to refuelling) problem.  

What would this lie be about? And who exactly are these "same people"?

 

As for you referring to the UK only... Because the UK plays such a prominent role in the EV business? Are EV vehicles being manufactured there? Are EV batteries being manufactured in the UK. As for your dismissal of China...it's by far the biggest manufacturer of EV's and EV batteries and its citizens are the biggest consumers of them. Maybe the fact that even though EVs despite the act  there are no longer being subsidized but still are rapidly increasing in sales strikes you as insignificant or irrelevant but not to someone engaged in a rational analysis of the situation.

 

As for it being stupid to buy an EV, whether it is or not, the fact is that they are increasing being bought. Lots of people buy them because they say they're more fun to drive.

[James105]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

What would this lie be about? And who exactly are these "same people"?

 

As for you referring to the UK only... Because the UK plays such a prominent role in the EV business? Are EV vehicles being manufactured there? Are EV batteries being manufactured in the UK. As for your dismissal of China...it's by far the biggest manufacturer of EV's and EV batteries and its citizens are the biggest consumers of them. Maybe the fact that even though EVs despite the act  there are no longer being subsidized but still are rapidly increasing in sales strikes you as insignificant or irrelevant but not to someone engaged in a rational analysis of the situation.

 

As for it being stupid to buy an EV, whether it is or not, the fact is that they are increasing being bought. Lots of people buy them because they say they're more fun to drive.

Well yes, if you had bothered to read the article the thread was about you would realise it is about the UK.   I've no idea why you keep prattling on about China. 

[placeholder]

52 minutes ago, James105 said:

Well yes, if you had bothered to read the article the thread was about you would realise it is about the UK.   I've no idea why you keep prattling on about China. 

No. It wasn't about the UK. Rowan Atkinson happens to live in the UK. But his comments were general. But if not, tell me what he said that was uniquely about the situation in the UK.

[youreavinalaff]

38 minutes ago, placeholder said:

No. It wasn't about the UK. Rowan Atkinson happens to live in the UK. But his comments were general. But if not, tell me what he said that was uniquely about the situation in the UK.

To quote the link in the OP:

 

"notwithstanding our poor electric charging infrastructure". To whom does "our" refer too?

 

"the government has proposed a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030". To which government is he referring?

 

 

[matchar]

Do as I say, not as I do...

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

To quote the link in the OP:

 

"notwithstanding our poor electric charging infrastructure". To whom does "our" refer too?

 

"the government has proposed a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030". To which government is he referring?

 

 

He referred to the fact that he bought an electric car 9 years ago "notwithstanding our poor electric charging infrastructure". He did not refer to the situation today. 

And his objections to the ban are based on alleged facts about electric that are dubious at best. In fact, so dubious that this has been added to the article:

"This article was amended on 5 June 2023 to describe lithium-ion batteries as lasting “upwards of 10 years”, rather than “about 10 years”; and to clarify that the figures released by Volvo claimed that greenhouse gas emissions during production of an electric car are “nearly 70% higher”, not “70% higher”. It was further amended on 7 June 2023 to remove an incorrect reference to the production of lithium-ion batteries needing “many rare earth metals”; to clarify that a reference to “trucks” should instead have been to “heavy trucks for long distance haulage”; and to more accurately refer to the use of such batteries in these trucks as being a “concern”, due to weight issues, rather than a “non-starter”."

There are lots of other problems with that article, too.

[KhunLA]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/08/fact-check-why-rowan-atkinson-is-wrong-about-electric-vehicles

 

This article debunks most of Atkinson's misinformation in OP.

[vinny41]

35 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/08/fact-check-why-rowan-atkinson-is-wrong-about-electric-vehicles

 

This article debunks most of Atkinson's misinformation in OP.

It would appear there is a difference of opinion on points raised in that article

Electric cars were hailed as the greener and cheaper way forward... but they actually cost MORE to run than petrol vehicles

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-12158677/Electric-cars-hailed-greener-cheaper-way-forward-actually-cost-MORE.html

[JonnyF]

Yes they're a con, a fad. There is nothing green about mining precious metals for batteries, nothing green about the methods of generating the electricity. The range is poor and they take time to recharge if you're lucky enough to find a station.

 

If you're serious about "saving the planet", you're better off buying a Honda Super Cub and using Grab or renting a car when you really need one. Of course, if you wish to virtue signal while simultaneously flaunting your wealth - buy the top of the range Tesla.

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, vinny41 said:

It would appear there is a difference of opinion on points raised in that article

Electric cars were hailed as the greener and cheaper way forward... but they actually cost MORE to run than petrol vehicles

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-12158677/Electric-cars-hailed-greener-cheaper-way-forward-actually-cost-MORE.html

For starters did this escape your notice:

"RAC spokesman Simon Williams said: 'When charging at home, the running costs are far cheaper. But that is only possible for those who have a driveway and can install a home charger on their house.' "

 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Yes they're a con, a fad. There is nothing green about mining precious metals for batteries, nothing green about the methods of generating the electricity. The range is poor and they take time to recharge if you're lucky enough to find a station.

 

If you're serious about "saving the planet", you're better off buying a Honda Super Cub and using Grab or renting a car when you really need one. Of course, if you wish to virtue signal while simultaneously flaunting your wealth - buy the top of the range Tesla.

You don't seem to have a clue about relative harm over the lifetimes comparatively of EVs vs ICE vehicles

 

Don’t get fooled: Electric vehicles really are better for the climate
Over its lifetime, the average electric vehicle produces less than half the carbon pollution of a gas-powered vehicle.

https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/11/dont-get-fooled-electric-vehicles-really-are-better-for-the-climate/

 

Nor do you seem to understand why Solar and Wind are far greener than extracting fossil fuels. I expect it's because you're comparing apples to oranges.

 

And of course, what would a comment from you be without attributing discreditable motives to others. In this case your comment alleging that those who buy electric vehicles want to "virtue signal".

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, KhunLA said:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/08/fact-check-why-rowan-atkinson-is-wrong-about-electric-vehicles

 

This article debunks most of Atkinson's misinformation in OP.

Utterly devastating to Atkinson's claims. Clearly, he got his information from denialist sources.

[vinny41]

12 minutes ago, placeholder said:

For starters did this escape your notice:

"RAC spokesman Simon Williams said: 'When charging at home, the running costs are far cheaper. But that is only possible for those who have a driveway and can install a home charger on their house.' "

 

And as you well know not every single current car owner has a driveway and can install a home charger

How much does it cost to charge an electric car?

https://www.which.co.uk/reviews/new-and-used-cars/article/electric-car-charging-guide/how-much-does-it-cost-to-charge-an-electric-car-a8f4g1o7JzXj

 

This article details the breakpoint where it cheaper per mile to use a petrol or diesel car interesting that some home charging at peak periods come very close to that breakpoint

[JonnyF]

14 minutes ago, placeholder said:

You don't seem to have a clue about relative harm over the lifetimes comparatively of EVs vs ICE vehicles

 

Don’t get fooled: Electric vehicles really are better for the climate
Over its lifetime, the average electric vehicle produces less than half the carbon pollution of a gas-powered vehicle.

https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/11/dont-get-fooled-electric-vehicles-really-are-better-for-the-climate/

 

Nor do you seem to understand why Solar and Wind are far greener than extracting fossil fuels. I expect it's because you're comparing apples to oranges.

 

And of course, what would a comment from you be without attributing discreditable motives to others. In this case your comment alleging that those who buy electric vehicles want to "virtue signal".

Why are you focusing only on carbon? Why do you focus on the negatives of ICE and ignore the negatives of EV such as the mining of precious metals such as lithium and the damage that such mining causes?

 

If everyone switched to EV there is no way that wind and solar could recharge them all. We'd use gas powered stations to generate the electricity. It's flawed logic.

 

That's before you start worrying about disposing of the batteries and the wind turbine blades.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-02-05/wind-turbine-blades-can-t-be-recycled-so-they-re-piling-up-in-landfills#xj4y7vzkg

 

As I said, if people really want to save the environment, use a Honda Super Cub. Few resources to build, efficient, clean.

 

Out of interest, do you drive an EV or are you just pontificating? 

[KhunLA]

19 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

And as you well know not every single current car owner has a driveway and can install a home charger

How much does it cost to charge an electric car?

https://www.which.co.uk/reviews/new-and-used-cars/article/electric-car-charging-guide/how-much-does-it-cost-to-charge-an-electric-car-a8f4g1o7JzXj

 

This article details the breakpoint where it cheaper per mile to use a petrol or diesel car interesting that some home charging at peak periods come very close to that breakpoint

Let's be realistic ... most have a charging station near them or where they go during the week.  In TH, even @ ฿8/kWh, it only cost us ฿230 / 360kms when O&A / on the road vs ฿900 in the same car, but ICE.

 

Last night, on Phuket, went for munch, nice massaman/roti, next door was 7-11. and next to that BangChak w/PEA Volta charging station.  Had a munch, popped in to get some snacks & water, and car was done, topped up 50% to 100%

 

If CS isn't right next to where you want to be, then put the fold up bike in the trunk, and get a little exercise, go have a coffee & slice of something.

 

It's not rocket science ...

Edited June 9, 2023 by KhunLA

[vinny41]

12 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Let's be realistic ... most have a charging station near them or where they go during the week.  In TH, even @ ฿8/kWh, it only cost us ฿230 / 360kms when O&A / on the road vs ฿900 in the same car, but ICE.

 

Last night, on Phuket, went for munch, nice massaman/roti, next door was 7-11. and next to that BangChak w/PEA Volta charging station.  Had a munch, popped in to get some snacks & water, and car was done, topped up 50% to 100%

 

If CS isn't right next to where you want to be, then put the fold up bike in the trunk, and get a little exercise, go have a coffee & slice of something.

 

It's not rocket science ...

Public charging in the Uk is B34.37 per kWh so charging MG ZS EV for example would cost in the region of £39.73 or B1728 people may have a charging station near them but not every charging station is in working order

[James105]

14 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Let's be realistic ... most have a charging station near them or where they go during the week.  In TH, even @ ฿8/kWh, it only cost us ฿230 / 360kms when O&A / on the road vs ฿900 in the same car, but ICE.

 

Last night, on Phuket, went for munch, nice massaman/roti, next door was 7-11. and next to that BangChak w/PEA Volta charging station.  Had a munch, popped in to get some snacks & water, and car was done, topped up 50% to 100%

 

If CS isn't right next to where you want to be, then put the fold up bike in the trunk, and get a little exercise, go have a coffee & slice of something.

 

It's not rocket science ...

 

I'm pretty sure that people who drive petrol cars can do the same thing, but if they are in a hurry they can skip the "munch" and all the other stuff you occupied yourself with whilst you waited to fill your car 50% and get to where they want to go significantly faster.

[placeholder]

20 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Why are you focusing only on carbon? Why do you focus on the negatives of ICE and ignore the negatives of EV such as the mining of precious metals such as lithium and the damage that such mining causes?

 

If everyone switched to EV there is no way that wind and solar could recharge them all. We'd use gas powered stations to generate the electricity. It's flawed logic.

 

That's before you start worrying about disposing of the batteries and the wind turbine blades.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-02-05/wind-turbine-blades-can-t-be-recycled-so-they-re-piling-up-in-landfills#xj4y7vzkg

 

As I said, if people really want to save the environment, use a Honda Super Cub. Few resources to build, efficient, clean.

 

Out of interest, do you drive an EV or are you just pontificating? 

As I suspected you continue to compare apples to oranges. What you don't seem to get is that mining for minerals to make EVs is not the same as mining for hydrocarbons. Batteries are not fuel and are not continuously being consumed. In fact, EV batteries can mostly be recycled. Over the lifetime of an EV vs an ICE vehicle, EVs will do much less harm as far as emissions go. And that's not taking into account the huge harm to human health that is caused by automotive emissions.

Also, you take no account of the environmentally damaging effects of hydrocarbon extraction. Or are you seriously claiming that mining for hydrocarbons isn't environmentally damaging?

Also, you take no account of the fact that the share of electricity generated by wind and solar is continually increasing. In the UK in 2022 41% of electric power consumed came from renewables. Most new power plant investment worldwide is now in renewables.

As for disposing of turbine blades, time marches on. Your article comes from the dark ages of 2020. Here's one from February 2023

Vestas hails breakthrough for recyclable wind turbines
A new chemical recycling process can break down the epoxy resin in wind turbine blades into virgin-grade materials.

https://www.energymonitor.ai/tech/renewables/vestas-hails-breakthrough-for-recycling-wind-turbine-blades/

[KhunLA]

18 minutes ago, James105 said:

I'm pretty sure that people who drive petrol cars can do the same thing, but if they are in a hurry they can skip the "munch" and all the other stuff you occupied yourself with whilst you waited to fill your car 50% and get to where they want to go significantly faster.

Didn't occupy myself with, they were necessities, got to eat, and shop.

 

All those folks that walk, run or bike for exercise ... hmm, how easy to charge car while doing.  Nothing but excuses for most people not to own an EV, but not many valid reasons.

 

If it's not for you, then so be it.  But don't complain about the air pollution, or noise.   Walking from car to munch last night, and I really noticed the noise and exhaust pollution, since rush hour, and thought to myself, "just think if they were all EVs".

 

What a wonderful world ... you go SatchMo.

 

On that ... noise & pollution ... Imagine this intersection being all EVs, it's not rocket science, to tell which is a better alternative.

 

[JonnyF]

45 minutes ago, placeholder said:

As I suspected you continue to compare apples to oranges. What you don't seem to get is that mining for minerals to make EVs is not the same as mining for hydrocarbons. Batteries are not fuel and are not continuously being consumed. In fact, EV batteries can mostly be recycled. Over the lifetime of an EV vs an ICE vehicle, EVs will do much less harm as far as emissions go. And that's not taking into account the huge harm to human health that is caused by automotive emissions.

Also, you take no account of the environmentally damaging effects of hydrocarbon extraction. Or are you seriously claiming that mining for hydrocarbons isn't environmentally damaging?

Also, you take no account of the fact that the share of electricity generated by wind and solar is continually increasing. In the UK in 2022 41% of electric power consumed came from renewables. Most new power plant investment worldwide is now in renewables.

As for disposing of turbine blades, time marches on. Your article comes from the dark ages of 2020. Here's one from February 2023

Vestas hails breakthrough for recyclable wind turbines
A new chemical recycling process can break down the epoxy resin in wind turbine blades into virgin-grade materials.

https://www.energymonitor.ai/tech/renewables/vestas-hails-breakthrough-for-recycling-wind-turbine-blades/

You seem to be ignoring many factors in mining these precious metals. No concern for the methods by which it is mined such as child labour?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jan/03/child-labour-toxic-leaks-the-price-we-could-pay-for-a-greener-future

 

 

You also seem to be ignoring the fact that many of these batteries are manufactured in China where they have little regard for environmental regulations.

 

Still at least you can feel good about driving an EV to save the planet. Oh wait you a minute, you aren't even driving an EV, just pontificating on a forum ????.

[James105]

43 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Didn't occupy myself with, they were necessities, got to eat, and shop.

 

All those folks that walk, run or bike for exercise ... hmm, how easy to charge car while doing.  Nothing but excuses for most people not to own an EV, but not many valid reasons.

 

If it's not for you, then so be it.  But don't complain about the air pollution, or noise.   Walking from car to munch last night, and I really noticed the noise and exhaust pollution, since rush hour, and thought to myself, "just think if they were all EVs".

 

What a wonderful world ... you go SatchMo.

 

On that ... noise & pollution ... Imagine this intersection being all EVs, it's not rocket science, to tell which is a better alternative.

 

 

You seemed to be making a point that having an EV gives you time to get food, shopping etc whilst you are waiting for your car to charge as though it is some kind of advantage.   It didn't make a lot of sense to me hence my comment as petrol car owners can also stop to do the same thing.   The only difference is if they wanted to get to their destination quicker (the purpose they got into the car in the first place) then they don't have to do this.

 

An EV might be convenient for those little journeys around town, but then so is a bicycle which doesn't need charging at all.  An EV seems to serve a very specific use case for very specific people.   Attempting to encourage wide spread adoption is a fools errand whilst the technology is in its infancy and cannot compete with petrol cars just now.  

 

Even the quietness of EVs has drawbacks as without any noise in a country that barely has any pavements (sidewalks) makes it a bit more dangerous for those (non polluting) pedestrians if they cannot hear you coming.  

[youreavinalaff]

14 hours ago, placeholder said:

He referred to the fact that he bought an electric car 9 years ago "notwithstanding our poor electric charging infrastructure". He did not refer to the situation today. 

Actually, in that part of the article he used Present Perfect Tense. That spans from when he bought his EV up to present day, or at least the time of writing.

 

Besides, you asked for specifics to UK. I provided 2 abd asked questions. You, surprise surprise, fid not answer.

[placeholder]

25 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

You seem to be ignoring many factors in mining these precious metals. No concern for the methods by which it is mined such as child labour?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jan/03/child-labour-toxic-leaks-the-price-we-could-pay-for-a-greener-future

 

 

You also seem to be ignoring the fact that many of these batteries are manufactured in China where they have little regard for environmental regulations.

 

Still at least you can feel good about driving an EV to save the planet. Oh wait you a minute, you aren't even driving an EV, just pontificating on a forum ????.

It's a good thing fossil fuels have so little impact on human health:

Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels Costs $8 Billion Per Day, New Research Finds

The study, the first of its kind to quantify the global impacts of air pollution caused by burning fossil fuels, focused on the health impacts of three specific types of pollutants: Nitrogen dioxide, ozone, and fine particulate matter, which has the greater impact, causing about 1.8 billion days of missed work due to disease and $2.2 trillion in air pollution costs every year. Nitrogen dioxide and ozone pollution cost $351 billion and $380 billion, respectively. Together, air pollution from these three pollutants is responsible for 4.5 million premature deaths around the world each year, the study said.

https://e360.yale.edu/digest/air-pollution-from-fossil-fuels-costs-8-billion-per-day-new-research-finds

 

And there are already batteries that don't contain cobalt being used in mass production 

The lithium iron phosphate battery (LiFePO
4 battery) or LFP battery (lithium ferrophosphate) is a type of lithium-ion battery using lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO
4) as the cathode material, and a graphitic carbon electrode with a metallic backing as the anode. Because of their lower cost, high safety, low toxicity, long cycle life and other factors, LFP batteries are finding a number of roles in vehicle use, utility-scale stationary applications, and backup power.[6] LFP batteries are cobalt-free.[7

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_iron_phosphate_battery

 

 

[placeholder]

6 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Actually, in that part of the article he used Present Perfect Tense. That spans from when he bought his EV up to present day, or at least the time of writing.

 

Besides, you asked for specifics to UK. I provided 2 abd asked questions. You, surprise surprise, fid not answer.

Well, you got me on the charging station quesiton. As for the other, his objection to the government ban is based on general and mostly baseless assertions about EVs. I highly recommend the article that .Khun LA linked to before that very efficiently and facutally dealt with the nonsense propagated by Atkinson

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/08/fact-check-why-rowan-atkinson-is-wrong-about-electric-vehicles

[youreavinalaff]

11 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Well, you got me on the charging station quesiton. As for the other, his objection to the government ban is based on general and mostly baseless assertions about EVs. I highly recommend the article that .Khun LA linked to before that very efficiently and facutally dealt with the nonsense propagated by Atkinson

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/08/fact-check-why-rowan-atkinson-is-wrong-about-electric-vehicles

So, you agree there are comments specific to UK?

 

Something you denied earlier.

[Yellowtail]

19 hours ago, placeholder said:

 

What you don't note is that the percentage of power provided by coal in China is declining:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303368/coal-electricity-production-share-in-china/#:~:text=Coal accounted for nearly 61 percent of China's electricity generation in 2022.

 

Analysis: What do China’s gigantic wind and solar bases mean for its climate goals?

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-what-do-chinas-gigantic-wind-and-solar-bases-mean-for-its-climate-goals/

 

 

Yeah, looks like they'll be at 50% renewable in less than 10,000 years,

 

[placeholder]

45 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Yeah, looks like they'll be at 50% renewable in less than 10,000 years,

 

Let me help you with the math. It looks like china's electricity growth has been about 5% per year for at least 10 years. From 2017 to 2020 China's total rate of increase was about 5%.

Yet as the chart below shows, the growth in wind power alone for those years was 16%. Actually that growth rate continued through 2022).

 

 

https://www.globaldata.com/data-insights/power-and-utilities/power-generation-and-cumulative-capacity-of-wind-power-plants-in-china-2017-2021/

So how long would it take for wind power alone to account for 50% of power generates.. It looks like in 2020 a total of 400 TW hours were generated by wind. At the rate of 16%, in  23 years the total electricity generated by wind would come to about 12500 TW hours.  In the meantime, at the 5% rate of increase, total power production starting at 7500 TW hours would rise to just slightly more than 23,000 TW hours

Now maybe to your way of thinking 23 years is approximately 10,000 years. Not to mine.

And I'm not even including solar in my calculations.