There is always fuel available in the tank. They are regularly replenished by diesel tankers. If they replace those with EV tankers, I would be less optimistic about the tanks. If an EV tanker pops, I can imagine it goes off like a mini nuke.
EV are they worth it?
- Thread starter ericmark
- Start date
- Status
Sponsored Links
Don't be even more stupid than usual! EVs are about the same size as ICEs. If we have enough space to park ICEs, we have enough space to park EVs.
A petrol station has space to park unlimited ICE cars for recharging. With the same space you could park maybe 10 EVs.
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 7 Sep 2022
- Messages
- 3,260
- Reaction score
- 863
- Country
I think you have a curious definition of "unlimited"
He's about to go through the bottom of that barrel he's scraping, I think...
- Joined
- 7 Sep 2022
- Messages
- 3,260
- Reaction score
- 863
- Country
Die hard ICE drivers should show a little more appreciation for people wanting to switch to EVs, and thus better preserve the finite resources of the black stuff they so dearly love to burn. Indeed, they should actively encourage it
Not all of us are die hard ICE drivers. Some of us are die hard against fires that can't be put out. Imagine your neighbour's EV ignites, it would burn your house down and you haven't done anything to make that happen. Or, if you were going through black wall tunnel and an EV ignites?
Of course that's the difference. While you're sitting on your arse, crying about how impossible it all is, the Swedes have got off their arses and actually just done it. 10 minutes, under 1000 litres of water, job done.
New report presented - Cold Cut Systems AB
A new report by MSB from a demonstration of an extinguishing method of lithium-ion batteries has been published.
www.coldcutsystems.com
As stated in my post, I wasn't sure of the correct terminology.
Keeping an older car on the road, especially with a low annual mileage, means those owners are not contributing to the energy & emissions produced in the manufacture of a new car, be it EV or ICE. Such tin boxes packed full of electronics that are already in short supply are designed to last little beyond their manuf. warranty period, then the resultant scrappage (sorry, recycling) process will required further energy & emissions.
Whether or not I'm correct in that belief my comments will, I'm sure, cut no ice (not ICE) with the pro. EV brigade & to be honest I'm not bothered.
If the world's current conflicts escalate, squabbling over whose cars 'generate the most emissions' will be the least of our worries
Last edited:
I'm not sure any car (ICE or EV) - indeed any manufactured goods, ever pay off their manufacturing CO2. You're not alone in using that terminology, but I think it's actually technically wrong. So unless someone can show me how any manufactured product "eats" CO2, we just have to accept that once something is made, the CO2 emissions used in making it, are out there... forever...
And I agree completely with that. It's absolutely true. If I was doing very few miles a year, in a rural area, (and particularly if I didn't have that many more motoring years left in me), I'd keep whatever ICE I was in too. Indeed, my parents are currently running a 2001 diesel Freelander, which doesn't even have a DPF. There's little sense in them getting an EV for the miles they do. I don't know whether they'll give up driving before the Freelander gives up the ghost, but it will be a close-run thing.
I'll even go further and say that like-for-like, the manufacturing CO2 emissions of an EV are higher than the equivalent ICE! However, when you consider the total lifetime CO2 emissions of each, the EV is significantly better. Depending on the country they're operated in, they'll overtake the ICE between about 20,00 and 50,000 miles, by which I mean, their total CO2 will be about the same, and thereafter, they just get better and better.
The other factor to consider, is, I feel, that although the current owner of an ICE might do very few miles, the current owner may not be the last owner. On average, cars in the UK currently live about 15 years. If, (as I do), you cover a big annual mileage, it makes more sense to get an EV than if you just do a few thousand miles a year. But of course, nobody is saying you have to scrap your ICE. We just need to stop building new ones, and let the old ones get to the end of their working lives. That will take a long time. I'm not even 60 yet, and I expect to see some ICEs still on the road, by the time I go to my grave.
As you can see, you were wrong there...
If the world's current conflicts escalate, squabbling over whose cars 'generate the most emissions' will be the very least of our worries
There are always reasons to put off doing the right thing. Yes, if the conflicts escalate, that might wipe us out before the effects of climate change get the chance. Likewise, if the earth gets hit by a big enough meteor. In fact, they're also great reasons to put off getting fit, losing weight, finding that cure for cancer or, indeed, achieving anything at all in life. However, just on the off chance that the current conflicts don't escalate and wipe out humanity (and considering we've been squabbling for at least the last 20,000 years, I reckon I'm on a pretty safe wicket here), We'e probably as well carrying on trying to solve the problems...
If you're doing less than 8k miles a year then yes, keeping an ICE is probably better for the environment than buying a new EV. EVs are good when they are removing petrol or diesel miles, not sitting on a drive.As stated in my post, I wasn't sure of the correct terminology.
Keeping an older car on the road, especially with a low annual mileage, means those owners are not contributing to the energy & emissions produced in the manufacture of a new car, be it EV or ICE. Such tin boxes packed full of electronics that are already in short supply are designed to last little beyond their manuf. warranty period, then the resultant scrappage (sorry, recycling) process will required further energy & emissions.
Whether or not I'm correct in that belief my comments will, I'm sure, cut no ice (not ICE) with the pro. EV brigade & to be honest I'm not bothered.
If the world's current conflicts escalate, squabbling over whose cars 'generate the most emissions' will be the least of our worries
The chip crisis is over, there's no major shortages anymore.
I wonder about that? Perhaps if doing under 8k a year in a vehicle that hasn't got many years left in it, that might be more the case? The thing is, people in that situation rarely go out and buy a brand new vehicle anyway. What (I think) we need to do, is encourage new car buyers (who tend to be the ones doing the bigger mileages anyway), to go electric, so that:
(a) the cars doing the most miles will have the lowest emissions and
(b) the second hand market is primed with lower CO2 vehicles, which will then trickle down until they become more affordable.
- which is basically the official strategy anyway, as far as I can tell?
Thought I posted this on Monday but not so sure I did in the end, anyway quite interesting: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3ct4mvd
- Status
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
