Would you buy a BYD EV?

[Gweiloman]

22 minutes ago, BKKBike09 said:

 

My attitude is based on substantive professional experience of how the Chinese State operates.  

Please share some experiences. Would genuinely like to hear from all sides.

[JBChiangRai]

1 hour ago, retarius said:

 

 

Also, I note that in the US and UK, EVs lost market share marginally last year, despite a rising car market and despite actually selling more cars that the year before, which is sending a shiver up the analysts who have been forecasting everlasting EV growth well into eternity. Losing market share this early in the products life cycle in key markets must be a worry, and whether it reflects dissatisfaction with EVs by previous purchasers or not, was not covered in the reports.

 

 

I don't know where you read that, but it's not correct.

 

 

The USA 

Electric vehicle sales accounted for 7.9% of total industry sales in Q3, a record and up from 6.1% a year ago and 7.2% in Q2. As Cox Automotive has been reporting, higher inventory levels, more product availability, and downward pricing pressure have helped spur continued linear growth of EV sales in the U.S. market. EV sales have now increased for 13 straight quarters. https://www.coxautoinc.com/market-insights/q3-2023-ev-sales/

 

 

 

 

The UK

 

 

[Gweiloman]

56 minutes ago, retarius said:

I'm not a fan of EV at the moment preferring to wait and see and too wait until the prices tumble as they do with all new technologies where there is intense competition. For the moment I think it is a hoax on mankind, a cop out on the hard decisions that need to be made about climate change (assuming climate change is not a hoax as well, and I thin the jury is out on that as well), and of course it affords a great opportunity for governments to reward their friends and donors by subsidising billionaires with tax payer's money.

 

Also, I note that in the US and UK, EVs lost market share marginally last year, despite a rising car market and despite actually selling more cars that the year before, which is sending a shiver up the analysts who have been forecasting everlasting EV growth well into eternity. Losing market share this early in the products life cycle in key markets must be a worry, and whether it reflects dissatisfaction with EVs by previous purchasers or not, was not covered in the reports.

 

Having said that, if I were to buy an EV, BYD would be my choice of EV. The reason is that, unlike most people I read on ASEAN NOW forums, I am not anti-China. Indeed I am pro-China. 

 

I think that the BYD small SUV (the one that looks like a Porshe Cayenne from the back) is to my mind, by far and away the most stylish of all EV vehicles. Teslas look out of proportion to my eye (too tall and not wide enough, at least the one's I've seen on the roads here), and they have an incredibly poor record of owner complaints (at least the data I have seen for the US, I have seen none for Thailand) and I'm sure the servicing of manufacturing defects in Thailand is poor quality.

 

The other climate saving vehicle I would consider is a Hybrid from Toyota. I rented a Hybrid in the UK for a a few months when I was there.....it got 80 mpg, which astonished me. I doubt running costs of EVs would be lower that that of a hybrid, given the extricate price of electricity here,  but doubtless there are some cheerleaders on here would tell me I am wrong.

Maybe in the early days, when the rest benefits of owning an EV were not fully known, the early adopters cited saving the planet as one of the reasons for buying an EV. Today however, no one cites this as the reason. Fact remains however that EVs are less polluting than ICEs when driven in cities and urban areas, not to mention a more pleasant environment with less engine roars.

 

As regards to EV sales, reports I have read about sales in the UK is that whilst personal sales have fallen, fleet sales have increased. People there are preferring to lease their vehicles as opposed to owning them outright. Schemes such as salary sacrifice and notated leases means that it’s financially better to lease than to own. 
 

Electricity prices in the UK has shot up significantly in the past few years. Don’t know the reason except possibly due to the Ukraine war? Expensive electricity takes away one of the major benefits of owning an EV. In Thailand, the situation is (currently) very different. Electricity is a fraction of petrol prices. Amount of sunlight hours makes solar a good investment even just for the house. Being able to charge an EV with any extra production is a bonus. It’s important to consider only relevant factors when making a decision.

[mikebike]

59 minutes ago, BKKBike09 said:

 

My attitude is based on substantive professional experience of how the Chinese State operates.  

If I used that criteria, I would never buy anything produced in the U.S.A... 

[retarius]

4 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

Maybe in the early days, when the rest benefits of owning an EV were not fully known, the early adopters cited saving the planet as one of the reasons for buying an EV. Today however, no one cites this as the reason. Fact remains however that EVs are less polluting than ICEs when driven in cities and urban areas, not to mention a more pleasant environment with less engine roars.

 

As regards to EV sales, reports I have read about sales in the UK is that whilst personal sales have fallen, fleet sales have increased. People there are preferring to lease their vehicles as opposed to owning them outright. Schemes such as salary sacrifice and notated leases means that it’s financially better to lease than to own. 
 

Electricity prices in the UK has shot up significantly in the past few years. Don’t know the reason except possibly due to the Ukraine war? Expensive electricity takes away one of the major benefits of owning an EV. In Thailand, the situation is (currently) very different. Electricity is a fraction of petrol prices. Amount of sunlight hours makes solar a good investment even just for the house. Being able to charge an EV with any extra production is a bonus. It’s important to consider only relevant factors when making a decision.

I agree, if the manufacturers' and governments' claims had been more realistic, there would have been less dispute, but when these folks stretch the truth to sell you an experimental product and whose net positive environmental benefits are unproven and have been exaggerated to sell more vehicles, it erodes trust. I certainly don't trust people who make unverifiable and unqualified claims, even outright lies. This is what is behind modern (global) mistrust of institutions, such as government, the media, corporations, politicians and authority in general....we now assume they are all lying and we are right 90% of the time. 

Yes, the economics of EVs will vary from country to country, depending also on the climate (warm or cold), cost of petrol, cost of electricity, how the electricity is generated and so forth. The one thing EVs have going for them is they don't chuck out filth and particles from an exhaust, however this is offset by how the electricity is generated and in countries like China (whose folk have bought EVs like madmen) most of their electricity is generated with coal...if a true analysis is done, maybe the atmospheric muck is increased by having electricity fuelling their cars, and the atmosphere might not improve. Ultimately the economics of EVs will depend on the particular features of your personal situation.

 

 

What I read was that sales in the UK for EVs increased, but the rate of increased declined, which is of concern so early in the product life cycle, and that market share declined meaning that sales of ICEs grew at a faster rate in the growth segment. I didn't see the fleet vs personal sales data, but manufacturers with too much inventory typically discount heavily to fleets, which is another bad sign, if they are having to do that. 

 

[JBChiangRai]

2 minutes ago, retarius said:

What I read was that sales in the UK for EVs increased, but the rate of increased declined, which is of concern so early in the product life cycle, and that market share declined meaning that sales of ICEs grew at a faster rate in the growth segment. I didn't see the fleet vs personal sales data, but manufacturers with too much inventory typically discount heavily to fleets, which is another bad sign, if they are having to do that. 

 

 

The rate of increase has to ultimately decrease as the number of potential buyers gets lower because people have already bought one.

 

What's important is that the market share of EV new sales continues to increase.  That's the true measure of whether the "changeover" from ICE is really happening.

[mikebike]

Here's something EVs can do that ICE vehicles cannot... 

 

An Australian woman used her BYD electric car to power her son's dialysis machine during a blackout

[paddypower]

On 1/5/2024 at 10:11 AM, Woof999 said:

Blimey. Better buy 2 in case the first one blows up. Parked away from each other of course.

used to be the Fiat joke. My investment guru has come up with this: Buy your own disaster

 

On 1/5/2024 at 10:11 AM, Woof999 said:

Blimey. Better buy 2 in case the first one blows up. Parked away from each other of course.

 

[retarius]

26 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

 

I don't know where you read that, but it's not correct.

 

 

The USA 

Electric vehicle sales accounted for 7.9% of total industry sales in Q3, a record and up from 6.1% a year ago and 7.2% in Q2. As Cox Automotive has been reporting, higher inventory levels, more product availability, and downward pricing pressure have helped spur continued linear growth of EV sales in the U.S. market. EV sales have now increased for 13 straight quarters. https://www.coxautoinc.com/market-insights/q3-2023-ev-sales/

 

 

 

 

The UK

 

 

 \

The data I saw gave a 15.8% market share applies to the BEV segment. AS I understand it Toyota are the only large manufacturer making hybrids and basically own the PHEV segment. I didn't see any data for that segment. The plug in hybrids, are basically Toyota are they not?

But the PHEV sector seems to have had a 50% growth in ,market share (5% in 2022, up to 7.5 in 2023 from the graph). We have been discussing EVs from BYD rather than hybrids.

 

Now according to the EV plus hybrid data, it seems market share for pure EVs, like BYD, declined slightly, from a higher base that hybrids. Then it follows that much the growth in total market comes from hybrids. Toyota must be well satisfied at this result but EV manufacturers would be anxious. I must say I'm not surprised at this, I myself would buy a hybrid, but not an EV. 

 

 

[retarius]

11 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

 

The rate of increase has to ultimately decrease as the number of potential buyers gets lower because people have already bought one.

 

What's important is that the market share of EV new sales continues to increase.  That's the true measure of whether the "changeover" from ICE is really happening.

No that isn't true. The market share of EVs fell marginally, so new personal buyers are not buying them at the same rate as ICE vehicles, it has nothing to do with prior purchasers....every product life cycle has existing purchasers, but it is highly unusual for market share to decline so early....when a new technology is introduced, you as a maker want the market share for your class to increase and for you to take an increasing share within an growing market. This is simply not happening. 

[JBChiangRai]

8 minutes ago, retarius said:

 \

The data I saw gave a 15.8% market share applies to the BEV segment. AS I understand it Toyota are the only large manufacturer making hybrids and basically own the PHEV segment. I didn't see any data for that segment. The plug in hybrids, are basically Toyota are they not?

But the PHEV sector seems to have had a 50% growth in ,market share (5% in 2022, up to 7.5 in 2023 from the graph). We have been discussing EVs from BYD rather than hybrids.

 

Now according to the EV plus hybrid data, it seems market share for pure EVs, like BYD, declined slightly, from a higher base that hybrids. Then it follows that much the growth in total market comes from hybrids. Toyota must be well satisfied at this result but EV manufacturers would be anxious. I must say I'm not surprised at this, I myself would buy a hybrid, but not an EV. 

 

 

 

It's not true to say that Toyota own the PHEV segment, only a few of Toyota ranges are hybrid and even fewer PHEV (only the Prius?).  Mercedes on the other hand, offer a model in their major every ranges (C, E, S class) as a PHEV.

 

The PHEV market share is actually tanking, not going up. Plug-in hybrids once dominated EV sales. Now their market share is tanking - ABC News

 

2 minutes ago, retarius said:

No that isn't true. The market share of EVs fell marginally, so new personal buyers are not buying them at the same rate as ICE vehicles, it has nothing to do with prior purchasers....every product life cycle has existing purchasers, but it is highly unusual for market share to decline so early....when a new technology is introduced, you as a maker want the market share for your class to increase and for you to take an increasing share within an growing market. This is simply not happening. 

 

The data I posted shows the market share of EV's is increasing, not decreasing.  In the UK it has to increase to 22% of all models sold by a manufacturer this year or they will be fined 15,000 GBP for every model that missed the target.

[Flyguy330]

When EV's were just starting to appear on the market two decades ago I was very enthusiastic about them. I would have seriously considered buying one, but the charging infrastructure wasn't there yet. A few years later I remember reading a story posted on another forum by a guy who was taking his Tesla on a trip from the UK to southern France. After he crossed the channel and hit the French motorway he got a warning of some kind from the Tesla onboard computer. Then he got a phone call from the Tesla HQ (really!?) telling him to pull into the next rest area and go for a coffee while they uploaded a fix for the reported error to the car. He did that, the error went away, and he drove on happily for the rest of his trip. I though - what amazing technology! To have the ability for 'fix' your car remotely!

 

A few years later I moved to Hong Kong for work. The job took me into China a lot. It was then I began to become aware of the control exercised on the Chinese population. Live TV News was being censored real time (picture & sound blacked out), the Great Firewall of China meant many common websites are blocked - no Google, Gmail, Facebook etc. Chinese citizens live under the 'good behaviour'  system - called Social Credit - where, if you misbehave in any way (like making this post I'm writing) the government can remove chosen freedoms and services from you in punishment. Then in 2019 the Hong Kong protests started up - where the Hong Kong people had the balls to object to the creeping Sinofication of their previously free nation, and the gradual loss of the rights and freedoms they valued. This escalated into an almost civil war scenario. The CCP reaction was to impose a draconian new 'security law' which is being used to this day to punish Hong Kong'ers in the most basic and often petty ways. Failure to stand for the Chinese National Anthem at a football match will get you arrested.

 

Now I realise that the same wonderful technology that helped that guy with the Tesla to 'fix' his car at a petrol station in France can be used to punish you if your 'Social Credit' score drops. They can remotely switch off your car and deprive you of free mobility at the click of a mouse.

So no, I won't buy a BYD, or any other EV for that matter - until they force me by cutting off petrol supplies.

[mikebike]

10 minutes ago, Flyguy330 said:

They can remotely switch off your car and deprive you of free mobility at the click of a mouse.

So no, I won't buy a BYD, or any other EV for that matter

You DO realize that "they" can also do this on every modern ICE vehicle also, right? 

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, retarius said:

I'm not a fan of EV at the moment preferring to wait and see and too wait until the prices tumble as they do with all new technologies where there is intense competition. For the moment I think it is a hoax on mankind, a cop out on the hard decisions that need to be made about climate change (assuming climate change is not a hoax as well, and I thin the jury is out on that as well), and of course it affords a great opportunity for governments to reward their friends and donors by subsidising billionaires with tax payer's money.

 

Also, I note that in the US and UK, EVs lost market share marginally last year, despite a rising car market and despite actually selling more cars that the year before, which is sending a shiver up the analysts who have been forecasting everlasting EV growth well into eternity. Losing market share this early in the products life cycle in key markets must be a worry, and whether it reflects dissatisfaction with EVs by previous purchasers or not, was not covered in the reports.

 

Having said that, if I were to buy an EV, BYD would be my choice of EV. The reason is that, unlike most people I read on ASEAN NOW forums, I am not anti-China. Indeed I am pro-China. 

 

I think that the BYD small SUV (the one that looks like a Porshe Cayenne from the back) is to my mind, by far and away the most stylish of all EV vehicles. Teslas look out of proportion to my eye (too tall and not wide enough, at least the one's I've seen on the roads here), and they have an incredibly poor record of owner complaints (at least the data I have seen for the US, I have seen none for Thailand) and I'm sure the servicing of manufacturing defects in Thailand is poor quality.

 

The other climate saving vehicle I would consider is a Hybrid from Toyota. I rented a Hybrid in the UK for a a few months when I was there.....it got 80 mpg, which astonished me. I doubt running costs of EVs would be lower that that of a hybrid, given the extricate price of electricity here,  but doubtless there are some cheerleaders on here would tell me I am wrong.

Climate change is not a hoax. Anyone with an education in thermodynamics knows that. The problem is, only 0.5% of the world's population have said education.

 

EV's are not the solution to climate change. Number 1, if the entire ICE vehicle fleet on the planet were replaced by EV's overnight, it would only reduce CO2 emissions by 9%. Number 2, there is simply not enough lithium being mined to manufacture that number of EV's. It's about 20% at best.

 

The real problem is electricity generation, where fossil fuels are still in use by 70% of total power plants in operation.

 

The hoax is not climate change, more some of the proposed solutions. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) leads that charge, like cold fusion and Piltdown Man. Despite the billions poured into CCS, there is not a single plant on the planet that is operating to design specifications.

 

It's a fact politicians ignore science in favor of economics. It's also a fact insurance companies are ramping up premiums across the board to cover their climate change risks.

[UWEB]

3 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Musk is an "Idiot"?   Based on what?

Based on his personality. In old days I was a Fan of him, but he turned into a complete Idiot.

[Gweiloman]

1 hour ago, retarius said:

 

Yes, the economics of EVs will vary from country to country, depending also on the climate (warm or cold), cost of petrol, cost of electricity, how the electricity is generated and so forth. The one thing EVs have going for them is they don't chuck out filth and particles from an exhaust, however this is offset by how the electricity is generated and in countries like China (whose folk have bought EVs like madmen) most of their electricity is generated with coal...if a true analysis is done, maybe the atmospheric muck is increased by having electricity fuelling their cars, and the atmosphere might not improve. Ultimately the economics of EVs will depend on the particular features of your personal situation.

 

 

What I read was that sales in the UK for EVs increased, but the rate of increased declined, which is of concern so early in the product life cycle, and that market share declined meaning that sales of ICEs grew at a faster rate in the growth segment. I didn't see the fleet vs personal sales data, but manufacturers with too much inventory typically discount heavily to fleets, which is another bad sign, if they are having to do that. 

 

While it seems true that the majority of electricity in China is generated by fossil fuels, I read a report stating that renewables capacity already accounts for more than 50%. Of course this refers to ideal conditions but I’m in no doubt that sooner rather than later, the majority of electricity generated in China will be by renewables. The question is whether other countries are as committed. 
 

I’m not surprised that the rate of sales have declined in some countries for reasons mentioned earlier. I believe that in Thailand, this is not the case.

[JBChiangRai]

10 minutes ago, UWEB said:

Based on his personality. In old days I was a Fan of him, but he turned into a complete Idiot.

I wouldn’t call Musk an idiot, he obviously is highly intelligent.

 

In common with many genius’s, he lacks common sense.

 

He doesn’t know when to keep his opinion to himself, he makes decisions on emotion and he doesn’t appreciate dissenting opinion in his workforce.  His boards are filled with lackeys which means his companies lack any form of effective corporate governance.  It’s a very dangerous situation for large companies to be in.

[Gweiloman]

1 hour ago, Flyguy330 said:

When EV's were just starting to appear on the market two decades ago I was very enthusiastic about them. I would have seriously considered buying one, but the charging infrastructure wasn't there yet. A few years later I remember reading a story posted on another forum by a guy who was taking his Tesla on a trip from the UK to southern France. After he crossed the channel and hit the French motorway he got a warning of some kind from the Tesla onboard computer. Then he got a phone call from the Tesla HQ (really!?) telling him to pull into the next rest area and go for a coffee while they uploaded a fix for the reported error to the car. He did that, the error went away, and he drove on happily for the rest of his trip. I though - what amazing technology! To have the ability for 'fix' your car remotely!

 

A few years later I moved to Hong Kong for work. The job took me into China a lot. It was then I began to become aware of the control exercised on the Chinese population. Live TV News was being censored real time (picture & sound blacked out), the Great Firewall of China meant many common websites are blocked - no Google, Gmail, Facebook etc. Chinese citizens live under the 'good behaviour'  system - called Social Credit - where, if you misbehave in any way (like making this post I'm writing) the government can remove chosen freedoms and services from you in punishment. Then in 2019 the Hong Kong protests started up - where the Hong Kong people had the balls to object to the creeping Sinofication of their previously free nation, and the gradual loss of the rights and freedoms they valued. This escalated into an almost civil war scenario. The CCP reaction was to impose a draconian new 'security law' which is being used to this day to punish Hong Kong'ers in the most basic and often petty ways. Failure to stand for the Chinese National Anthem at a football match will get you arrested.

 

Now I realise that the same wonderful technology that helped that guy with the Tesla to 'fix' his car at a petrol station in France can be used to punish you if your 'Social Credit' score drops. They can remotely switch off your car and deprive you of free mobility at the click of a mouse.

So no, I won't buy a BYD, or any other EV for that matter - until they force me by cutting off petrol supplies.

If only the 2019 riots in HKG could have been explained so simplistically as you have posted. It started based in part on the proposed extradition law to close a loophole that till today, allows a self confessed murderer to continue to roam the streets of HKG. One western country, no need to say who, exploited the situation to try and cause further chaos.

 

I have family that’s living and working in HKG for the last 25 years. Yes, things have changed but is nowhere near as draconian as you make out.

[retarius]

44 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

While it seems true that the majority of electricity in China is generated by fossil fuels, I read a report stating that renewables capacity already accounts for more than 50%. Of course this refers to ideal conditions but I’m in no doubt that sooner rather than later, the majority of electricity generated in China will be by renewables. The question is whether other countries are as committed. 
 

I’m not surprised that the rate of sales have declined in some countries for reasons mentioned earlier. I believe that in Thailand, this is not the case.

I think renewables are a fantasy for powering a national grid, the wind turbines don't work well enough due the the variation in the wind, they fail early, needing fixing or replacement and reportedly cause ecological damage and per KWH are very expensive to generate. Solar, again the technology is not as good as it is touted to be, and just yesterday there is an article in the Guardian touting a solar cell panel problem in landfills in the UK. Unless you go for the more expensive option of having rechargeable batteries in your house what do you do at night. And then what ecological damage occurs in involved in the manufacture of batteries (not to mention child labour) and we don't even know what awful ecological damage and costs will be to replace batteries at the end of their life....8 years for cars, so I'm not sure why it would be longer for a house battery. And in my experience manufactures use the up to argument when making claims so batteries will last up to 8 years.....it might be 6 in real life. 

I can't remember the figures for Thailand and can't be bothered to look them up, I can't imagine they will be much different than elsewhere when corrected for the launch date of the technology. 

[ozimoron]

12 minutes ago, retarius said:

I think renewables are a fantasy for powering a national grid, the wind turbines don't work well enough due the the variation in the wind, they fail early, needing fixing or replacement and reportedly cause ecological damage and per KWH are very expensive to generate. Solar, again the technology is not as good as it is touted to be, and just yesterday there is an article in the Guardian touting a solar cell panel problem in landfills in the UK. Unless you go for the more expensive option of having rechargeable batteries in your house what do you do at night. And then what ecological damage occurs in involved in the manufacture of batteries (not to mention child labour) and we don't even know what awful ecological damage and costs will be to replace batteries at the end of their life....8 years for cars, so I'm not sure why it would be longer for a house battery. And in my experience manufactures use the up to argument when making claims so batteries will last up to 8 years.....it might be 6 in real life. 

I can't remember the figures for Thailand and can't be bothered to look them up, I can't imagine they will be much different than elsewhere when corrected for the launch date of the technology. 

 

Where do you get this misinformation from?

 

https://www.arcadia.com/blog/true-cost-fossil-fuels

 

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#/media/File:20201019_Levelized_Cost_of_Energy_(LCOE,_Lazard)_-_renewable_energy.svg

[retarius]

58 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Climate change is not a hoax. Anyone with an education in thermodynamics knows that. The problem is, only 0.5% of the world's population have said education.

 

EV's are not the solution to climate change. Number 1, if the entire ICE vehicle fleet on the planet were replaced by EV's overnight, it would only reduce CO2 emissions by 9%. Number 2, there is simply not enough lithium being mined to manufacture that number of EV's. It's about 20% at best.

 

The real problem is electricity generation, where fossil fuels are still in use by 70% of total power plants in operation.

 

The hoax is not climate change, more some of the proposed solutions. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) leads that charge, like cold fusion and Piltdown Man. Despite the billions poured into CCS, there is not a single plant on the planet that is operating to design specifications.

 

It's a fact politicians ignore science in favor of economics. It's also a fact insurance companies are ramping up premiums across the board to cover their climate change risks.

You are entitled to your opinion about climate change and I'm entitled to mine.

There has been nothing wrong with my education, so do not impugn it. I will admit it is 50 years since I was at university doing a PhD in radiation chemistry. My IQ puts me in the top 0.5% of people.  

 

I have zero interest in climate change and I will be dead before it affects me, so I don't care and I wouldn't be an early adopter of EVs to save the planet. I leave the planet saving to Greta and her pals. Democracy is the wrong system, anyway, to save the planet if planet warming is caused by industrial activities, and since the largest per capit are the tiny fraction of the planet in the greedy insane west, then I don't see a happy outcome at all. The scientist by the way are all driven by the same impetus....being a cheerleader is the way to big grants, so nay sayers or scientist that generate data supporting counter narratives are shunned. You are naive to believe whet they put out. 

 

 

The only green technology worth a <deleted> is nuclear, imvho and personally I wouldn't invest my money in anything else. Mini reactors is where my speculative money is invested. Of course nuclear has its own issues with waste, but that is a technology that already exists as opposed to the fantasy technologies you are talking about....fusion, Christ that has been coming since the Dark Ages. And yes I know the Yanks have claimed reproducible results of a lab experiment, personally I don't see it being a usable technology generating grid potential energy before the earth fries. 

[retarius]

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Where do you get this misinformation from?

 

https://www.arcadia.com/blog/true-cost-fossil-fuels

 

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#/media/File:20201019_Levelized_Cost_of_Energy_(LCOE,_Lazard)_-_renewable_energy.svg

There is much misinformation on the web as we have been repeatedly told by people that wish to censor it. Also the CIA, the most evil institution on the planet has editors working inside wikipedia. You can find that if you search. Anyway, en example, I was just informed by a mate of you that China's energy is over 50% generated by renewables....I read data very recently on this specific breakdown showing over 50% of China's energy comes from coal, and less than 20% form renewables, and I was surprised at how high this is, seeing as China is the #1 polluter. So cynically speaking, the data selected in charts and presentations tends to support the narrative you are supposed to buy. So I have little faith in your charts.

The main problems with fantasy technologies still exist irrespective of the data ie lack of reliable power for wind or solar, length of service much less than nuclear or coal reactors, and disposal of the materials at the end of their life.... 

[retarius]

19 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Where do you get this misinformation from?

 

https://www.arcadia.com/blog/true-cost-fossil-fuels

 

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#/media/File:20201019_Levelized_Cost_of_Energy_(LCOE,_Lazard)_-_renewable_energy.svg

I just checked out the article.....these are "levellised costs" here being quoted not the ac dual costs of what it costs they energy company to produce and sell a kWh.. They come from a mathematical model which is entirely dependent on the assumptions used. Levellised costs include the "societal costs" of fossil fuels.

Who is to say what asinine assumptions are included in the model? I have done a huge amount of forecasting in my life for my sins. You have a draft forecast drawn up with a set of assumptions and if the numbers don't meet managements expectations, you change the assumptions...no one challenges assumptions they challenge the numbers. I ask have a lot of experience with cost benefit analyses of medicines. My company were pioneers in this field and I had the group in my bailiwick. What a crock....the outcome is predetermined, the medicine will show an excellent cost benefit despite its enormous cost, so the assumptions are rigged and the model shows a huge benefit in costs by using the medicine. It was so corny, I was convinced it would die in the marketplace but US insurance companies and Pharmacy Benefit Managers loved it. I saw hundreds of presentations of the published data and no one ever challenged the assumptions underpinning it. They were focussed on the numbers. I am suspicious that this group who published this, are dyed in the wool climate change advocates, and that the data are biased.

[Gweiloman]

4 minutes ago, retarius said:

There is much misinformation on the web as we have been repeatedly told by people that wish to censor it. Also the CIA, the most evil institution on the planet has editors working inside wikipedia. You can find that if you search. Anyway, en example, I was just informed by a mate of you that China's energy is over 50% generated by renewables....I read data very recently on this specific breakdown showing over 50% of China's energy comes from coal, and less than 20% form renewables, and I was surprised at how high this is, seeing as China is the #1 polluter. So cynically speaking, the data selected in charts and presentations tends to support the narrative you are supposed to buy. So I have little faith in your charts.

The main problems with fantasy technologies still exist irrespective of the data ie lack of reliable power for wind or solar, length of service much less than nuclear or coal reactors, and disposal of the materials at the end of their life.... 

I hate to correct you but you misquoted me. I said it’s the capacity that is over 50%, not the actual generation. I said in my post that the majority is still being generated by fossil fuels. Renewables are generating, if I’m not mistaken, about 25-26% currently.

 

I’m not a Green, I don’t believe that saving the planet is up to me. If by my actions, it helps a little, great. I do think that renewables alone will never ever be sufficient. It is but one piece of the solution. Who knows what new technology is around the corner? Some of the advancements today would have been unthinkable a couple of decades ago.

 

 

[ozimoron]

20 minutes ago, retarius said:

There is much misinformation on the web as we have been repeatedly told by people that wish to censor it. Also the CIA, the most evil institution on the planet has editors working inside wikipedia. You can find that if you search. Anyway, en example, I was just informed by a mate of you that China's energy is over 50% generated by renewables....I read data very recently on this specific breakdown showing over 50% of China's energy comes from coal, and less than 20% form renewables, and I was surprised at how high this is, seeing as China is the #1 polluter. So cynically speaking, the data selected in charts and presentations tends to support the narrative you are supposed to buy. So I have little faith in your charts.

The main problems with fantasy technologies still exist irrespective of the data ie lack of reliable power for wind or solar, length of service much less than nuclear or coal reactors, and disposal of the materials at the end of their life.... 

 

I searched. I can't find that the CIA has editors inside wikipedia. Maybe it's down a rabbit hole somewhere?

[josephbloggs]

Going back to the subject of BYD, I think the Atto 3 is a great looking car. But saw this monstrosity today. I mean, why would you put fake quad exhausts on it?? The mind boggles.

 

[sirineou]

1 minute ago, josephbloggs said:

Going back to the subject of BYD, I think the Atto 3 is a great looking car. But saw this monstrosity today. I mean, why would you put fake quad exhausts on it?? The mind boggles.

 

Why put fake dual exhausts in any car? even an ICE vehicle . It looks ridiculous. 

But I have to agree not as ridiculous as on an EV. 

Perhaps the owner has a good sense of humor. 

[BKKBike09]

5 hours ago, retarius said:

And what way is that.....don't tell us all you were in Uighur camp building BYDs. Tell guys what this substantive experience is or shut up. 

 

Since this is the 'Would you buy a BYD' thread, I think not. Why don't you start a suitable thread and then we can have it, champ.

[josephbloggs]

4 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Why put fake dual exhausts in any car? even an ICE vehicle . It looks ridiculous. 

But I have to agree not as ridiculous as on an EV. 

Perhaps the owner has a good sense of humor. 

Agree, any fake exhaust on any car is horrible. I was thinking maybe to give him/her the benefit of the doubt as it might be someone with a sense of humour........but then I saw the front with a God ugly bodykit on. Definitely not trying to be self deprecating or funny, just someone with no taste that has ruined what is a perfectly lovely looking car.

[BKKBike09]

5 hours ago, Gweiloman said:

Please share some experiences. Would genuinely like to hear from all sides.

 

Thanks. As per my response to Retardius, I've suggested he open a suitable thread for debate on this topic.

 

Back on topic: as a BYD owner, I was also intrigued to be told by a dealer today that the 'free' servicing only applies if you service within one month of the specified interval. My Atto is up for the 12-month service now. They suggested doing it today but I said better to fix the crash damage and then do it. Since some body parts have to come from China it's going to take 2-3 weeks to fix once the work starts. I asked how much the service would cost if no longer free and was told a couple of thousand baht, so I said no problem to pay if necessary.