The Big 'Let's sell our cars and take buses/ebikes instead' thread (warning: probably very dull)

kingstongraham

rick_chasey said:

Rowan Atkinson makes a good case for the problems with electric cars:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson

Here's a response to it: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jun/08/fact-check-why-rowan-atkinson-is-wrong-about-electric-vehicles

rjsterry

Ford CEO talking about EVs.

https://thedriven.io/2023/06/09/legacy-auto-is-failing-ford-ceo-says-ev-transition-more-than-switching-drive-trains/#disqus_thread

rick_chasey

Yes he makes a good point that all the car companies outsourced each individual bit of software requirements to different suppliers who own the software IP (so they could play them off each other to drive down the prices), so for car companies to suddenly get up to speed with the software side of electric cars, which is the big challenge beyond the engine, is literally something they’ve never done before.

Pross

I saw this article and thought of this thread and the 'what about the countryside?' responses. I'm not totally convinced that demand responsive transport works that well to be honest, we had something similar in my area but it has been scrapped due to lack of use so I think it has to be accepted it will be loss making, certainly in the early years. The technology may help reduce empty / low use services but if you are using it you don't want to be hanging around for ages.

https://cities-today.com/industry/adapting-mobility-hubs-to-rural-communities-with-transport-tech/?li_fat_id=69ae2d30-9e08-414d-94ba-6e3dd0531991

Pross

Good news that the TATA battery plant is going to be built in Somerset.

focuszing723

Good to have a local saurce, great when it's in plaice.

Pross

Interesting idea and one that might be more widely supported given the general dislike of SUVs by those that on't drive them https://www.thelocal.fr/20230519/french-city-to-bring-in-parking-charges-based-on-car-weight

shirley_basso

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

Stevo_666

A welcome boost to Porsche 911 and Ferrari drivers?

focuszing723

You'd be wangered if you had an EV Hummer they're four Tonne!

First.Aspect

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

Pross

First.Aspect said:

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.

Stevo_666

focuszing723 said:

You'd be wangered if you had an EV Hummer they're four Tonne!

Time for a Caterham 620R I think

First.Aspect

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.

Do I have to agree, now that you've explained it?

First.Aspect

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10098-022-02433-8

I have of course, read every word of this. Therefore, I am entitled to say something like, 'interesting' or 'any thoughts?'

TheBigBean

First.Aspect said:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10098-022-02433-8

I have of course, read every word of this. Therefore, I am entitled to say something like, 'interesting' or 'any thoughts?'

This is overwhelmingly caused by large vehicles – buses, heavy goods vehicles. Smaller vehicles make a negligible contribution

As Pross was saying.

Pross

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.

Do I have to agree, now that you've explained it?

Well you could become John80 and assume you know more about how to do a job than the people actually doing it I suppose. The design standards literally ignore cars and light commercial vehicles in designing road pavements (that’s the structure of the road and not the bit alongside that people walk on) despite there being vastly more of them as the axle loading and subsequent wear factor is statistically negligible.

First.Aspect

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.

Do I have to agree, now that you've explained it?

Well you could become John80 and assume you know more about how to do a job than the people actually doing it I suppose. The design standards literally ignore cars and light commercial vehicles in designing road pavements (that’s the structure of the road and not the bit alongside that people walk on) despite there being vastly more of them as the axle loading and subsequent wear factor is statistically negligible.

I literally have no recollection of discussing this topic previously.

First.Aspect

TheBigBean said:

First.Aspect said:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10098-022-02433-8

I have of course, read every word of this. Therefore, I am entitled to say something like, 'interesting' or 'any thoughts?'

This is overwhelmingly caused by large vehicles – buses, heavy goods vehicles. Smaller vehicles make a negligible contribution

As Pross was saying.

I literally didn't read it. I thought those were the forum rules.

Pross

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.

Do I have to agree, now that you've explained it?

Well you could become John80 and assume you know more about how to do a job than the people actually doing it I suppose. The design standards literally ignore cars and light commercial vehicles in designing road pavements (that’s the structure of the road and not the bit alongside that people walk on) despite there being vastly more of them as the axle loading and subsequent wear factor is statistically negligible.

I literally have no recollection of discussing this topic previously.

Not directly with you but if you go back a couple of pages I tried to explain it then to others. It’s one of those things that people find counterintuitive so won’t accept.

At the ridiculous end of the spectrum are people who argue cyclists should pay road tax because they contribute to wearing out the road (hopefully not on here!). After 30 odd years in highway engineering I’ve been told I’m wrong about virtually everything road design related as people think using the roads gives them knowledge of how they work at a technical level.

First.Aspect

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.

Do I have to agree, now that you've explained it?

Well you could become John80 and assume you know more about how to do a job than the people actually doing it I suppose. The design standards literally ignore cars and light commercial vehicles in designing road pavements (that’s the structure of the road and not the bit alongside that people walk on) despite there being vastly more of them as the axle loading and subsequent wear factor is statistically negligible.

I literally have no recollection of discussing this topic previously.

Not directly with you but if you go back a couple of pages I tried to explain it then to others. It’s one of those things that people find counterintuitive so won’t accept.

At the ridiculous end of the spectrum are people who argue cyclists should pay road tax because they contribute to wearing out the road (hopefully not on here!). After 30 odd years in highway engineering I’ve been told I’m wrong about virtually everything road design related as people think using the roads gives them knowledge of how they work at a technical level.

But what about car parks. Surely they will all collapse?

First.Aspect

Roads near here have no HGV traffic and are like the surface of the moon.

Cows don't pay road tax.

Pross

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.

Do I have to agree, now that you've explained it?

Well you could become John80 and assume you know more about how to do a job than the people actually doing it I suppose. The design standards literally ignore cars and light commercial vehicles in designing road pavements (that’s the structure of the road and not the bit alongside that people walk on) despite there being vastly more of them as the axle loading and subsequent wear factor is statistically negligible.

I literally have no recollection of discussing this topic previously.

Not directly with you but if you go back a couple of pages I tried to explain it then to others. It’s one of those things that people find counterintuitive so won’t accept.

At the ridiculous end of the spectrum are people who argue cyclists should pay road tax because they contribute to wearing out the road (hopefully not on here!). After 30 odd years in highway engineering I’ve been told I’m wrong about virtually everything road design related as people think using the roads gives them knowledge of how they work at a technical level.

But what about car parks. Surely they will all collapse?

I’d be worried about any built in the 1960s as there’ll be voids forming where the bodies of East End gangsters victims decompose. I certainly wouldn’t drive over, or stand under, Hammersmith flyover.

First.Aspect

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.

Do I have to agree, now that you've explained it?

Well you could become John80 and assume you know more about how to do a job than the people actually doing it I suppose. The design standards literally ignore cars and light commercial vehicles in designing road pavements (that’s the structure of the road and not the bit alongside that people walk on) despite there being vastly more of them as the axle loading and subsequent wear factor is statistically negligible.

I literally have no recollection of discussing this topic previously.

Not directly with you but if you go back a couple of pages I tried to explain it then to others. It’s one of those things that people find counterintuitive so won’t accept.

At the ridiculous end of the spectrum are people who argue cyclists should pay road tax because they contribute to wearing out the road (hopefully not on here!). After 30 odd years in highway engineering I’ve been told I’m wrong about virtually everything road design related as people think using the roads gives them knowledge of how they work at a technical level.

But what about car parks. Surely they will all collapse?

I’d be worried about any built in the 1960s as there’ll be voids forming where the bodies of East End gangsters victims decompose. I certainly wouldn’t drive over, or stand under, Hammersmith flyover.

Shit I was only joking

briantrumpet

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.

Do I have to agree, now that you've explained it?

Well you could become John80 and assume you know more about how to do a job than the people actually doing it I suppose. The design standards literally ignore cars and light commercial vehicles in designing road pavements (that’s the structure of the road and not the bit alongside that people walk on) despite there being vastly more of them as the axle loading and subsequent wear factor is statistically negligible.

I literally have no recollection of discussing this topic previously.

Not directly with you but if you go back a couple of pages I tried to explain it then to others. It’s one of those things that people find counterintuitive so won’t accept.

At the ridiculous end of the spectrum are people who argue cyclists should pay road tax because they contribute to wearing out the road (hopefully not on here!). After 30 odd years in highway engineering I’ve been told I’m wrong about virtually everything road design related as people think using the roads gives them knowledge of how they work at a technical level.

But what about car parks. Surely they will all collapse?

I’d be worried about any built in the 1960s as there’ll be voids forming where the bodies of East End gangsters victims decompose. I certainly wouldn’t drive over, or stand under, Hammersmith flyover.

censored I was only joking

Those were probably the victims' last words.

TheBigBean

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.

Do I have to agree, now that you've explained it?

Well you could become John80 and assume you know more about how to do a job than the people actually doing it I suppose. The design standards literally ignore cars and light commercial vehicles in designing road pavements (that’s the structure of the road and not the bit alongside that people walk on) despite there being vastly more of them as the axle loading and subsequent wear factor is statistically negligible.

I literally have no recollection of discussing this topic previously.

Not directly with you but if you go back a couple of pages I tried to explain it then to others. It’s one of those things that people find counterintuitive so won’t accept.

At the ridiculous end of the spectrum are people who argue cyclists should pay road tax because they contribute to wearing out the road (hopefully not on here!). After 30 odd years in highway engineering I’ve been told I’m wrong about virtually everything road design related as people think using the roads gives them knowledge of how they work at a technical level.

I found your posts on this interesting and I learnt something, so don't be put off from sharing your expertise.

kingstongraham

I couldn't see what they described as road wear, but as the study was in Scotland I assume it includes majing potholes wese on terrible roads.

First.Aspect

kingstongraham said:

I couldn't see what they described as road wear, but as the study was in Scotland I assume it includes majing potholes wese on terrible roads.

Yes in Scotland a road defect needs to be visible in space to count as a pothole. It is Boris Johnsons fault somehow, and means we should be in the EU.

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

Pross said:

First.Aspect said:

shirley_basso said:

Won't help EVs as they weight 2 tons due to batteries.

There's a pretty good argument that any road charging model should account for this, given the additional surface wear that it creates.

It really doesn't as I tried to explain before.

Do I have to agree, now that you've explained it?

Well you could become John80 and assume you know more about how to do a job than the people actually doing it I suppose. The design standards literally ignore cars and light commercial vehicles in designing road pavements (that’s the structure of the road and not the bit alongside that people walk on) despite there being vastly more of them as the axle loading and subsequent wear factor is statistically negligible.

I literally have no recollection of discussing this topic previously.

Not directly with you but if you go back a couple of pages I tried to explain it then to others. It’s one of those things that people find counterintuitive so won’t accept.

At the ridiculous end of the spectrum are people who argue cyclists should pay road tax because they contribute to wearing out the road (hopefully not on here!). After 30 odd years in highway engineering I’ve been told I’m wrong about virtually everything road design related as people think using the roads gives them knowledge of how they work at a technical level.

But what about car parks. Surely they will all collapse?

We did that one an' all. Are you sure dementia is not setting in.

Stevo_666

First.Aspect said:

kingstongraham said:

I couldn't see what they described as road wear, but as the study was in Scotland I assume it includes majing potholes wese on terrible roads.

Yes in Scotland a road defect needs to be visible in space to count as a pothole. It is Boris Johnsons fault somehow, and means we should be in the EU.