EV-based road transportation is not viable

[james_s]

All it would do for me is discourage me from ever going into that area.

Dont work if you need to access that area with a van full of kit

I'm not sure why I'd ever be in that situation but if I am it will be because my employer is sending me there, and in that case they can pay the fee.

[tggzzz]

My prejudice is the, ahem, "hopeful" statements that lead the unwary optimist to believe that the cars are capable of driving safely (beta).

More prosaically, my prejudice is that the salesman who know how to demonstrate the car can't even turn on the windscreen demister while the car is stationary. As for being able to turn it on safely while driving, don't make me laugh.

That needn't apply to other EVs in general, of course.

I have zero interest in any kind of self driving tech. I also do hate the touchscreen interface in the Tesla, however beyond that the driving experience is SO good (I spent a few weeks driving one so I have direct experience) that I could forgive the terrible interface. I mean modern cars in general are crap, they're all hideous, they all have those horrible touchscreens in the dash, at least the Tesla doesn't have a gigantic fake grill on the front like most cars do now. Look closely and you'll see the actual air intake for the radiator is a small slot somewhere in the expanse of an enormous black plastic grill. It looks idiotic to me.

For clarity, you snipped the context. I was responding to your statements:

As for buying a Tesla. Don't make me vomit.

It's unfortunate that your prejudice overrides your ability to consider even trying one. you should try driving one before you knock them, it's quite obvious that you haven't.

I think my response is justified, and that you know you have chosen to flip to a different subject.

I have no reason to doubt your position on that different subject.

[Monkeh]

ULEZ is anywhere within the North and South Circular roads, not including those roads itself.  It's a pretty big area to have to pay over a tenner a day to drive in, and not everyone who lives in that area is rich.  (You may have more of a point if you talk about the congestion charge as that's almost all zone 1). 

I know a few people not very happy with it, but ultimately it's one of those taxes that's necessary but never going to be pleasing for those who have to pay it. The whole point of it is to strongly discourage the usage of non ULEZ-compliant vehicles.

All it would do for me is discourage me from ever going into that area. I'll take my money elsewhere and spend it in areas that don't heavily tax me for going there. This kind of thing is one of the reason I loathe urban environments so much, taxes, tolls and paying for parking are completely foreign concepts to me. They put a toll on the 520 bridge when they rebuilt it ~15 years ago and I have not driven on it since.

God forbid your luxury privilege cost you money.

[tom66]

All it would do for me is discourage me from ever going into that area. I'll take my money elsewhere and spend it in areas that don't heavily tax me for going there. This kind of thing is one of the reason I loathe urban environments so much, taxes, tolls and paying for parking are completely foreign concepts to me. They put a toll on the 520 bridge when they rebuilt it ~15 years ago and I have not driven on it since.

Then it has had the intended effect.  Great!

There are two likely outcomes from someone who has a non ULEZ vehicle:
) They stop driving into ULEZ zone and find some other way to get there or avoid it altogether
) They buy a ULEZ compliant vehicle (which includes petrol cars up to 19 years old!) and use that instead of their current vehicle

Taxes are sticks, used correctly they can do good. The air quality in central London is horrid, every time I go there my respiration flares up (I do have a particularly sensitive respiratory tract, mind).  You can almost taste the pollution.  It is better than it used to be (EV's, hybrids and cleaner petrol vehicles, as well as congestion charge have all helped), but it is already known that most of these pollutants have no safe level, just like lead has no safe level, so we should eliminate as much of it as quickly as we can from the environment.

The outcome of ULEZ will be similar to the influence of CARB in California.  CARB being remarkably successful in changing overall fuel economy and making manufacturers fit better emissions controls even for the 80's.

[nctnico]

What you are missing is that hydrogen is THE KEY ingredient for energy storage. Again: the entire world is moving towards hydrogen production (from wind + solar) and storage. In the next decade hydrogen made from renewable sources will be available in abundance. And cheap. Forecasts say that by 2050 hydrogen can be sold to consumers for US $5 per kilo. Even today it is cheaper to run a car from hydrogen compared to running a BEV from public charging. In every serious article about renewable energy, you'll find hydrogen being part of the solution. Now try to convince me again hydrogen is dead... Hydrogen cars are going to be what the LED lamps are today: a truly better solution compared to what we had. BEVs are the CCFL lamps we used to have as a temporary solution to have more efficient light bulbs.

No I'm not missing it, and no it isn't, hydrogen is dead, period. How many hydrogen filling stations do you have in your country? There is only one state in mine that has any at all and I am not aware of more being planned. The only reason there are any hydrogen cars on the road at all is that California offers enormous government subsidies for building alternative fuel cars. Have you not noticed that absolutely no car companies besides Toyota are even talking about hydrogen? They are literally all shifting to BEV or PHEV, all of them. You have your head in the sand to a greater degree than anyone else on this forum, you are obsessed with hydrogen to the point that you are in denial of the reality around you. It's dead.

Open your eyes for once and look outside your box towards the future. Again, hydrogen is going to be abundant in the near future. How much sense does it make to convert hydrogen into electricity only to lug the energy along in heavy batteries? Not much... Hydrogen filling stations are only a matter of time. The question is not IF they get installed but WHEN they get installed. If you'd read up about the subject you'd know many car manufacturers have hydrogen vehicles ready to go into production: BMW, Mercedes, Hyundai, Nikola, Renault (part of Stellantis which a produces brands like Peugeot, Chrysler, Fiat, Citroen, DS, Opel), Nissan, Volkswagen, Ford, etc, etc. The list goes on and on... Actually it is surprising how many car manufacturers are preparing themselves for selling hydrogen vehicles.

You may have had a point 5 years ago when only Toyota seemed to be serious about hydrogen but it is moot today. Hydrogen for cars is happening. All those car manufacturers are not going to invest money into creating production ready models that they will never sell. Mark my words: BEVs are like CCFL bulbs: a nice stop-gap solution but obsolete in 25 years.

[Bud]

Gee, 25 years is at least 3 car changes away....

[nctnico]

Gee, 25 years is at least 3 car changes away....

Indeed. I'll probably skip the BEV alltogether because by the time I'm through my next two hybrid cars, there will be plenty of cars on hydrogen.

[mikeselectricstuff]

What you are missing is that hydrogen is THE KEY ingredient for energy storage. Again: the entire world is moving towards hydrogen production (from wind + solar) and storage. In the next decade hydrogen made from renewable sources will be available in abundance. And cheap. Forecasts say that by 2050 hydrogen can be sold to consumers for US $5 per kilo. Even today it is cheaper to run a car from hydrogen compared to running a BEV from public charging. In every serious article about renewable energy, you'll find hydrogen being part of the solution. Now try to convince me again hydrogen is dead... Hydrogen cars are going to be what the LED lamps are today: a truly better solution compared to what we had. BEVs are the CCFL lamps we used to have as a temporary solution to have more efficient light bulbs.

No I'm not missing it, and no it isn't, hydrogen is dead, period. How many hydrogen filling stations do you have in your country? There is only one state in mine that has any at all and I am not aware of more being planned. The only reason there are any hydrogen cars on the road at all is that California offers enormous government subsidies for building alternative fuel cars. Have you not noticed that absolutely no car companies besides Toyota are even talking about hydrogen? They are literally all shifting to BEV or PHEV, all of them. You have your head in the sand to a greater degree than anyone else on this forum, you are obsessed with hydrogen to the point that you are in denial of the reality around you. It's dead.

Open your eyes for once and look outside your box towards the future. Again, hydrogen is going to be abundant in the near future.

How much sense does it make to convert hydrogen into electricity only to lug the energy along in heavy batteries? Not much...

Way more sense than converting electricity to hydrogen, compressing it in heavy tanks, transporting it by road to a filling station, putting it in a car, where a fuel cell containing expensive metals like platinum converts it back to electricity with maybe 30% end-to-end efficiency. 

Compare that to sending energy down existing wires, right to the home of the users, where they can not only fill up while they sleep, but potentially also use their cars as a backup supply and help stabilise the grid.

[tom66]

Indeed. I'll probably skip the BEV alltogether because by the time I'm through my next two hybrid cars, there will be plenty of cars on hydrogen.

I think you'll be waiting a while - perhaps as long as farriers have waited for horses to come back into fashion.  But good luck with that. 

[james_s]

The outcome of ULEZ will be similar to the influence of CARB in California.  CARB being remarkably successful in changing overall fuel economy and making manufacturers fit better emissions controls even for the 80's.

CARB is a shining example of California style nuttery created by useful idiots,, second maybe to Prop 65 which has resulted in annoying warning labels on absolutely everything. Take gas cans for example, that regulation came from CARB and spread nationwide. Now our portable gas cans are terrible, they don't vent properly so while being designed to reduce spillage and vented vapors in practice the result is nozzles that glug and splash fuel all over the place. I finally modified or threw away any cans I had with CARB compliant nozzles, I was spilling more fuel on the ground than was going into the tanks.

Some of the emissions controls are nice, but some of it is worthless. The EGR systems on diesel engines dramatically reduce fuel economy and are notorious for clogging up and requiring expensive repairs, most mechanically inclined people delete them. I would love to abolish CARB or at least scale it back.

[nctnico]

What you are missing is that hydrogen is THE KEY ingredient for energy storage. Again: the entire world is moving towards hydrogen production (from wind + solar) and storage. In the next decade hydrogen made from renewable sources will be available in abundance. And cheap. Forecasts say that by 2050 hydrogen can be sold to consumers for US $5 per kilo. Even today it is cheaper to run a car from hydrogen compared to running a BEV from public charging. In every serious article about renewable energy, you'll find hydrogen being part of the solution. Now try to convince me again hydrogen is dead... Hydrogen cars are going to be what the LED lamps are today: a truly better solution compared to what we had. BEVs are the CCFL lamps we used to have as a temporary solution to have more efficient light bulbs.

No I'm not missing it, and no it isn't, hydrogen is dead, period. How many hydrogen filling stations do you have in your country? There is only one state in mine that has any at all and I am not aware of more being planned. The only reason there are any hydrogen cars on the road at all is that California offers enormous government subsidies for building alternative fuel cars. Have you not noticed that absolutely no car companies besides Toyota are even talking about hydrogen? They are literally all shifting to BEV or PHEV, all of them. You have your head in the sand to a greater degree than anyone else on this forum, you are obsessed with hydrogen to the point that you are in denial of the reality around you. It's dead.

Open your eyes for once and look outside your box towards the future. Again, hydrogen is going to be abundant in the near future.

How much sense does it make to convert hydrogen into electricity only to lug the energy along in heavy batteries? Not much...

Way more sense than converting electricity to hydrogen, compressing it in heavy tanks, transporting it by road to a filling station, putting it in a car, where a fuel cell containing expensive metals like platinum converts it back to electricity with maybe 30% end-to-end efficiency. 

Compare that to sending energy down existing wires, right to the home of the users, where they can not only fill up while they sleep, but potentially also use their cars as a backup supply and help stabilise the grid.

Now start to make a cost comparison and you'll see hydrogen is the cheaper option. Efficiency doesn't matter. Cost does.

Platinum is also a non-issue. The amount of platinum in mass produced fuel cells is on par with the amount used in catalythic converters which are already installed on cars. Some brokers that deal in platinum thought they could get rich quick due to large amounts of platinum they imagined would be needed in fuels cells but they where mistaken and lost. It looks like the less platinum is used, the better the fuel cells performs.

[james_s]

Open your eyes for once and look outside your box towards the future. Again, hydrogen is going to be abundant in the near future. How much sense does it make to convert hydrogen into electricity only to lug the energy along in heavy batteries? Not much... Hydrogen filling stations are only a matter of time. The question is not IF they get installed but WHEN they get installed. If you'd read up about the subject you'd know many car manufacturers have hydrogen vehicles ready to go into production: BMW, Mercedes, Hyundai, Nikola, Renault (part of Stellantis which a produces brands like Peugeot, Chrysler, Fiat, Citroen, DS, Opel), Nissan, Volkswagen, Ford, etc, etc. The list goes on and on... Actually it is surprising how many car manufacturers are preparing themselves for selling hydrogen vehicles.

In which reality? Can I have some of whatever you're smoking? Hydrogen car sales have already peaked and started to decrease.

https://insideevs.com/news/629973/us-hydrogen-fuel-cell-car-sales-2022q4/

A grand total of 15,000 hydrogen powered cars have been sold worldwide. 15 thousand, that's it, in 15 years. 

Volkswagen alone sold over 325,000 BEVs in 2022 alone.

Tesla sold 46,025 Model Y BEVs in October of last year. That is 3 times as many cars in *one month* of a single model from a single manufacture than have been sold in total over the entirety of the last *15 years* of hydrogen cars from all manufactures combined. EV sales are increasing by leaps and bounds and there are *millions* of them on the road today. The vast majority of hydrogen cars in the world are in the state of California where the government has been dumping billions of dollars into subsidies to make it happen, market penetration elsewhere is zero. I just can't even comprehend how a rational person could look at this data and say "Yep, hydrogen is clearly the future!" That is some stunning cognitive dissonance. You're clearly intelligent, so this is really confusing to me. This puts the "Linux is going to take over the entire consumer desktop/laptop market any day now!" crowd to shame. I'd bet on nuclear fusion powered cars being the future before I'd bet on HFC.

[fourfathom]

Take gas cans for example, that regulation came from CARB and spread nationwide. Now our portable gas cans are terrible, they don't vent properly so while being designed to reduce spillage and vented vapors in practice the result is nozzles that glug and splash fuel all over the place.

The most recent CARB (California Air Resources Board) gas cans aren't too bad.  But yes, I spilled many gallons trying to pour from the first/second/third/fourth-generation CARB-compliant cans.  Wasn't CARB also responsible for that MTBE gasoline additive?  Horrible.

[nctnico]

Maybe I'm on to something. I'm an engineer and I simply look at what car manufacturers are working on from an engineering perspective. The information is all there on internet. 2022 is buzzing with announcements / press releases showing hydrogen powered cars AND governments are choosing to use hydrogen for energy transport & storage 'en masse'. It doesn't take a genius to connect the obvious dots. I don't care about what is being sold or popular right now; what is sold right now is already old technology. It is about where new technology is heading.

Most of it all, I'm not going to say or claim that several big car companies are investing in dead-end technology. These people aren't stupid; making cars is their bread and butter.

[james_s]

The most recent CARB (California Air Resources Board) gas cans aren't too bad.  But yes, I spilled many gallons trying to pour from the first/second/third/fourth-generation CARB-compliant cans.  Wasn't CARB also responsible for that MTBE gasoline additive?  Horrible.

They may have finally got it right but I've never used one that worked worth a crap. I finally bought a NATO jerry can "potable water" storage can and never looked back. It seals tightly and doesn't leak or smell, even if I leave it on its side in the back of my car, I can store it inside the house and it doesn't smell at all. The nozzle that attaches is sturdy and flows nicely, it's not compliant, hence being sold as a water jug but it works better than any fuel container I've used.

CARB also is responsible for the big bulky fuel cap with a silly afterthought lanyard that came with my Honda generator, the original purchaser was in CA. I removed the lanyard because it got in the way of filling and replaced the cap with the much more compact and less cumbersome 49 state model. CARB is one of those organizations that was created by well meaning people but it has far too broad of a reach and resulted in a lot of really bone headed stuff that makes sense to the emotionally driven "do something, anything!" crowd.

[vad]

Tesla sold 46,025 Model Y BEVs in October of last year.

Amazing.

Now let’s compare to a third world country.

In 2021, before sanctions, Volkswagen Group sold 199,200 cars in Russia. Among those there were 6,262 Porsches, 330 Bentleys and 200 Lamborghinis.

Tesla sold 650 vehicles in Russia in the same year. That’s all Tesla models.

That’s despite the fact that electricity in Russia is dirt cheap: 3.7-5.05 RUB per kWh or 5.5-7.5 US cents delivered.

[SiliconWizard]

How is that surprising that EV sales are blooming, at least in Europe and the US, when they are heavily promoted, subsidized, and people are threatened to see ICE banned within only years from now (at least in Europe.) Duh.

How does that show that it's viable as a replacement? "Viable" and "the only option available" is not exactly the same thing. My take on this is about the numbers. Just crunch numbers, it won't add up on a large scale, based on current, and foreseeable numbers. Sure one can always forecast a great future full of cheap hydrogen, amazing new batteries and nuclear fusion, but *this* is pure speculation.

With that said, yes Tesla cars are great - they have a few issues to iron out, but I'm sure that will improve, Tesla is still young as a carmaker. As purely a user, if you can afford one and can do with the constraints of charging and whatnot, they are a great option. That's certainly and obviously not for everyone.

It's interesting to be debating EVs in times when electricity prices have gone through the roof and blackouts are threatening all over the place.

[james_s]

Amazing.

Now let’s compare to a third world country.

In 2021, before sanctions, Volkswagen Group sold 199,200 cars in Russia. Among those there were 6,262 Porsches, 330 Bentleys and 200 Lamborghinis.

Tesla sold 650 vehicles in Russia in the same year. That’s all Tesla models.

That’s despite the fact that electricity in Russia is dirt cheap: 3.7-5.05 RUB per kWh or 5.5-7.5 US cents delivered.

How many hydrogen powered cars were sold in Russia during that time? That was my point, no EV vs ICE. How much does gasoline cost in Russia? How much do cars themselves cost? I know very little about that part of the world. If gasoline and cars that use it are relatively cheap then it seems obvious it will remain popular there.

[MadScientist]

How is that surprising that EV sales are blooming, at least in Europe and the US, when they are heavily promoted, subsidized, and people are threatened to see ICE banned within only years from now (at least in Europe.) Duh.

How does that show that it's viable as a replacement? "Viable" and "the only option available" is not exactly the same thing. My take on this is about the numbers. Just crunch numbers, it won't add up on a large scale, based on current, and foreseeable numbers. Sure one can always forecast a great future full of cheap hydrogen, amazing new batteries and nuclear fusion, but *this* is pure speculation.

With that said, yes Tesla cars are great - they have a few issues to iron out, but I'm sure that will improve, Tesla is still young as a carmaker. As purely a user, if you can afford one and can do with the constraints of charging and whatnot, they are a great option. That's certainly and obviously not for everyone.

It's interesting to be debating EVs in times when electricity prices have gone through the roof and blackouts are threatening all over the place.

Bev sales are booming because people see them as a viable alternative , that’s the primary reason in markets sales subsidies are small or merely partially overcone the price increase over ice in no sense can current BEVs be regarded as cost effective to buy. That’s yet to come

There is no serious evidence that grid blackouts will come to pass most are merely warnings or chicken little style shouting. Let’s wait and see shall we !!!

The future is undoubtably non hydrocarbon and Bev offers the best current alternative that’s evident from car companies largely deciding to switch to Bev production you can’t drive a version of a car if it’s not made

Most people in my experience who predict Bev doom have never driven or owned a bev and their criticism is often theoretical or semi “ ideological “ it’s not grounded in experience

In my country data centres are way more a treat to the grid then BEVs that been made clear by thd grid operator

BEVs offers  cost effective alternative to ice in fact it’s a Superior driving experience hence we have a good alternative and it’s only going to improve with time

By the way fuel prices have climbed more than electricity in many markets further encouraging people to look at BEVs  people can generate electricity themselves also they can’t make petrol  !!!

[MadScientist]

Amazing.

Now let’s compare to a third world country.

In 2021, before sanctions, Volkswagen Group sold 199,200 cars in Russia. Among those there were 6,262 Porsches, 330 Bentleys and 200 Lamborghinis.

Tesla sold 650 vehicles in Russia in the same year. That’s all Tesla models.

That’s despite the fact that electricity in Russia is dirt cheap: 3.7-5.05 RUB per kWh or 5.5-7.5 US cents delivered.

How many hydrogen powered cars were sold in Russia during that time? That was my point, no EV vs ICE. How much does gasoline cost in Russia? How much do cars themselves cost? I know very little about that part of the world. If gasoline and cars that use it are relatively cheap then it seems obvious it will remain popular there.

Russia is irrelevant anyway the way it’s going it’s a pariah country and a complete outlier it’s irrelevant

[MadScientist]

Tesla sold 46,025 Model Y BEVs in October of last year.

Amazing.

Now let’s compare to a third world country.

In 2021, before sanctions, Volkswagen Group sold 199,200 cars in Russia. Among those there were 6,262 Porsches, 330 Bentleys and 200 Lamborghinis.

Tesla sold 650 vehicles in Russia in the same year. That’s all Tesla models.

That’s despite the fact that electricity in Russia is dirt cheap: 3.7-5.05 RUB per kWh or 5.5-7.5 US cents delivered.

The Leaf was by far the biggest Bev seller in Russia 360,000 in 3022 alone way beyond Tesla

[tom66]

[..]The question is not IF they get installed but WHEN they get installed. If you'd read up about the subject you'd know many car manufacturers have hydrogen vehicles ready to go into production: BMW, Mercedes, Hyundai, Nikola, Renault (part of Stellantis which a produces brands like Peugeot, Chrysler, Fiat, Citroen, DS, Opel), Nissan, Volkswagen, Ford, etc, etc. The list goes on and on... Actually it is surprising how many car manufacturers are preparing themselves for selling hydrogen vehicles.

How many of these manufacturers have built anything more than a prototype?
How many of these manufacturers are working on Hydrogen ICE instead of fuel cells, which is even less likely to go anywhere for a number of reasons?
How many of these manufacturers also have significant EV investments? (besides Nikola, I think they all do; Nikola has gravity-assisted trucks instead.)

[vad]

The Leaf was by far the biggest Bev seller in Russia 360,000 in 3022 alone way beyond Tesla

Nissan sold whopping 131 Leafs in Russia in 2021, before exiting the market last year.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1082346/russia-ev-car-fleet-by-model/

[nctnico]

[..]The question is not IF they get installed but WHEN they get installed. If you'd read up about the subject you'd know many car manufacturers have hydrogen vehicles ready to go into production: BMW, Mercedes, Hyundai, Nikola, Renault (part of Stellantis which a produces brands like Peugeot, Chrysler, Fiat, Citroen, DS, Opel), Nissan, Volkswagen, Ford, etc, etc. The list goes on and on... Actually it is surprising how many car manufacturers are preparing themselves for selling hydrogen vehicles.

How many of these manufacturers have built anything more than a prototype?
How many of these manufacturers are working on Hydrogen ICE instead of fuel cells, which is even less likely to go anywhere for a number of reasons?
How many of these manufacturers also have significant EV investments? (besides Nikola, I think they all do; Nikola has gravity-assisted trucks instead.)

How many LED lamp manufacturers have also manufactured CCFL and incandescent lamps?

[tom66]

How many LED lamp manufacturers have also manufactured CCFL and incandescent lamps?

Well Philips released plenty of LED lamps when cheap CCFLs were about,  they were like $50 each though so the power efficiency benefit didn't really make sense.   IIRC the first was released in around 2007 with  that weird external phosphor which makes the bulb yellow when off. (This didn't prove that popular with consumers but it does look kinda neat to have a yellow bulb light up white.)

At the same time you did have some weird competing technologies, like RF stimulated fluro bulbs and EEFL based lamps.   It took a dramatic fall in the price of LEDs for the CCFL to die out.  A bit like what is happening with batteries...

What we have here is more the opposite to the CCFL situation:  EVs are more expensive than ICE, but more efficient per mile and usually cheaper to run.  Hydrogen is much more expensive than EV and ICE to buy, but costs more to run than a typical diesel and much more than an EV.   Also, more difficult to refuel with only a few filling stations available.  So why would anyone choose the more expensive hydrogen car? 

You say there are loads of hydrogen cars on the drawing board, but why are Toyota pretty much the only ones to vaguely commercialise this tech...  meanwhile all the European marques are pushing EVs like mad.