Money Off Buying an Electric Car Scheme Sucks

Berk Bonebonce

Wouldn't that Government money be better spent getting people to stop driving? I mean, here's a few grand if you give up your driving licence, use public transport instead, and buy a bike. Or spend that Government money on public transport or cycling facilities.

We really must lose this idea that somehow electric cars are a 'green' alternative. They use such a large amount of resources in their manufacture and we do not have the road capacity in this small and overcrowded country to fit them all in. And we've got a national obesity crisis, so the more fat assed people that give up driving and take to walking/cycling the better.

MattC59

Berk Bonebonce wrote:

Wouldn't that Government money be better spent getting people to stop driving?

At last..... a practical solution !!! :roll:

lae

Electric cars do certainly have the potential to be much much greener than conventional internal combustion engined cars. It just takes time for them to develop - the petrol engine did have an 80 year head start (a few electric cars from the 1890s excepted) as the fuel of choice. Even if the electric cars are powered by fossil fuels, a power plant is a hell of a lot more efficient than a petrol engine.

As for embodied energy (i.e. energy in production and deconstruction), yeah it is high, but it's only currently slightly higher than a normal petrol car, and the longer the car stays in use for, the proportionally smaller this effect becomes.

The idea of paying people to stop driving just isn't realistic. The trend for deurbanisation is continuing - more people than ever are living in the suburbs and in commuter villages with poor public transport links and poor infrastructure for cycling. The government would have to spend £££, and that ain't gonna happen.

Also with any subsidies, the government is trying to boost industry in the UK and perhaps keep our remaining car factories open/entice some new ones. Giving money to people to take away their ability to buy the second-most-expensive product available simply ain't gonna happen, especially under the Tories.

I'd happily welcome electric cars as part of a transport system which includes public transport, cycling, increased use of hire cars* and privately owned vehicles.

*incidentally this is what I do - I haven't had a car for nearly two years now, but when moving large stuff or going on a long journey with several friends, I hire a car or van and share the costs. It's cheaper than each of us buying a train ticket and much more fun.

craker

frinkmakesyouthink wrote:

Even if the electric cars are powered by fossil fuels, a power plant is a hell of a lot more efficient than a petrol engine.

Got any figures? Granted a power station has economies of scale over a petrol engine but transmission (to charge points), storage and drivetrain efficiency ought to be factored.

Now the pollution is in a different place & may be different (radioactive waste) but I still can't see electric vehicles being more efficient. I'd expect more commercial services to switch to electric if it was efficient, seeing as efficient = cheap in the world of energy.

re-cycles

mr_si wrote:

I'd expect more commercial services to switch to electric if it was efficient, seeing as efficient = cheap in the world of energy.

Most commercial vehicles cover far more than the 80-100 mile range of current electric vehicles. LDV did have an all electric van ready for production before they went into receivership, not sure if that'll ever get built now.

As for the OP, I can see many benefits of subsidising EVs. The car has been a huge success and it will take many generations to get people to give them up. If we can get people out of petrol cars and into EVs we can all benefit. Leaving aside the environmental concerns, wouldn't it be nice if town centres became quieter, no more rattling diesel engines? The reduced range of an EV would potentially help reduce the average journey, so our roads would ultimately have less traffic on them.

lae

mr_si wrote:

Got any figures? Granted a power station has economies of scale over a petrol engine but transmission (to charge points), storage and drivetrain efficiency ought to be factored.

Yeah I'll look through my lecture notes. It was something in the region of 20% efficiency for ICE cars and 35% projected efficiency for electric cars powered by the current national grid, measured in terms of kJ used per km/kJ needed to propel that vehicle at a normal driving speed per km. Depends on how you measure efficiency though - a dragster is extremely fuel efficient in that it gets a large amount of power from a set amount of fuel, but obviously a dragster isn't what most people would call 'efficient'.

Basically an ICE needs to run smoothly and produce useable power in a massive range of speeds, from 1,000rpm to around 8,000rpm. The advantage of producing energy a power plant is that the whole operation can be set up to get the most amount of energy from the available fuel; they don't have to compromise for driveability, smoothness etc

The drivetrain efficiency of an electric car is vastly superior to that of an ICE car, too. Because electric motors can produce maximum torque at 0rpm, they don't need a clutch or gearbox. Basically you can bolt an electric motor directly to the driven wheels. The number of moving parts in an electric motor is about half a dozen, compared to several hundred inside an ICE, which means they need very little maintenance (which further helps the environment).

mr_si wrote:

Now the pollution is in a different place & may be different (radioactive waste) but I still can't see electric vehicles being more efficient. I'd expect more commercial services to switch to electric if it was efficient, seeing as efficient = cheap in the world of energy.

I think as commercial vehicles are constantly on the move, and that electric vehicles currently have a relatively limited range and a slow recharge time, that commercial vehicles will probably be the last vehicles to become fully electric, unless they have wireless electricity transmission or similar.

I don't quite understand what you mean by 'efficient' in this context. A solar power plant could be regarded as 'efficient' as it produces little waste and needs no fuel (well, you know), but it's certainly not a cheap option both in terms of building it and maintaining it. On the other hand, it's quite inefficient - the amount of energy they produce compared to the amount of energy available from the sun is minute. A coal fired power plant is still extremely cheap both in terms of production and maintenance. It's very good at turning coal into electricity but it takes up a hell of a lot of space (because you need a coal mine to fuel it) and it uses up a limited resource. So is it efficient or not?

The Mechanic

I heard that the cost of recycling/disposing of a Toyota Prius is more that a Range Rover due to the batteries. Don't know where this came from but it might make sense. There are all sorts of nasties in batteries.

KentS

In Sweden we have the interesting situation that if you power your car by electricity you are a hero and environments friend. If you on the other hand warm up your house with exactly the same electricity you are the worst kind of polluter and punished with extra taxes.
:?:

OffTheBackAdam

I wonder what the range of these cars is in the current weather conditions, when the driver would have the (electric) heater on full blast!

mcdonji1

New NASA research clearly demonstrates that it is much greener to get knocked off your bike by an electric car.

Has anyone actually been knocked off by a hybrid?

Jim