Electric, Hybrid and Alternative fuelled vehicles - News and Discussion

[black and decker boy]

I think hydrogen for trains has been put to bed now, certainly in U.K. loading gauge.

 

energy density and thus storage volume for a regular diagram simply doesn’t work. Rapid charging battery and discontinuous electrification appears to now be the favoured route (no money available so no current procurement for this).

 

for construction heavy plant (my industry), there are 3 approaches. Smaller kit is going electric. Bigger kit R&D is hydrogen but 2 ideologies. Some like JCB are pursuing burning it in conventional style engines. Some think this will have safety and relatability implications (inlet pressures are very high) so are going the fuel cell route.

 

we are a few years away from conveyance and mass availability. One aspect holding it back is the very high cost of green hydrogen - it’s simply unaffordable compared to diesel and HVO.

[GrumpyPenguin]

1 hour ago, black and decker boy said:

I think hydrogen for trains has been put to bed now, certainly in U.K. loading gauge.

 

energy density and thus storage volume for a regular diagram simply doesn’t work. Rapid charging battery and discontinuous electrification appears to now be the favoured route (no money available so no current procurement for this).

 

for construction heavy plant (my industry), there are 3 approaches. Smaller kit is going electric. Bigger kit R&D is hydrogen but 2 ideologies. Some like JCB are pursuing burning it in conventional style engines. Some think this will have safety and relatability implications (inlet pressures are very high) so are going the fuel cell route.

 

we are a few years away from conveyance and mass availability. One aspect holding it back is the very high cost of green hydrogen - it’s simply unaffordable compared to diesel and HVO.

Interesting about how the construction industry is looking at "mix-n-match".

 

Personally, I feel that this is probably the way to go, we do not have to go 100% electric, neither should we be forced to do so either.

 

I don't see any real issue in keeping some plant/machinery/vehicles running on fossil fuel either - with less use of fossil fuels all round the issues of using fossil fuels will diminish ?

 

I did chuckle a little when a European manufacturer of Airport Fire Engines recently made a big thing about their new electric range of Airport Fire Engines - the environmental effect of using these must pale into insignificance in & around an airport !

[idd15]

18 hours ago, GrumpyPenguin said:

 

I did chuckle a little when a European manufacturer of Airport Fire Engines recently made a big thing about their new electric range of Airport Fire Engines - the environmental effect of using these must pale into insignificance in & around an airport !

A few years ago I took part in a tour of a fire station where it was explained to us why the engines could not use diesel engines to power them and instead relied on mahoosive petrol gas guzzlers. It was all about timing, the delay required by a diesel engine to start and warm up was considered too long when responding to an emergency.

 

With electric that small delay is further reduced as it is now simply a question of how long it takes for the driver to get to the vehicle and throw the switch! 

 

I agree in terms of environmental impact the electric engines will have little impact in the immediate vicinity of an airport. However, the energy/pollution savings upstream in the supply chain for the engines will not be insignificant. The following video I found helpful in understanding and getting a wholly different perspective on the effects of savings from efficiency.

 

DW What we get WRONG about energy

 

I have seen figures bandied about that estimate that the global demand for petrol/diesel is already starting to fall due to the 40 million EVs on the road worldwide. 

 

The good news is that every little helps, even our own individual efforts with solar panels, EVs and LED light bulbs... 

 

cheers

idd

 

[Butler Henderson]

Occurred to me there is clear alternative to road pricing and the costs involved in setting that up and that is to tax vehicles on their weight. With the increasing weight of vehicles due to batteries the need to repair road surface damage most be increasing regardless of any backlog in such. It could be on the basis of vehicle classfication  starting in each classification with lowest chargeable rate re emissions and increasing a sepcific amount for every kg of weight above a set starting weight for the classification.

[black and decker boy]

19 minutes ago, Butler Henderson said:

Occurred to me there is clear alternative to road pricing and the costs involved in setting that up and that is to tax vehicles on their weight. With the increasing weight of vehicles due to batteries the need to repair road surface damage most be increasing regardless of any backlog in such. It could be on the basis of vehicle classfication  starting in each classification with lowest chargeable rate re emissions and increasing a sepcific amount for every kg of weight above a set starting weight for the classification.

I think you’ll find that road damage isnt caused by EVs (or SUVs particularly) as they are designed for a certain number of passes of ‘standard’ axles plus oversized / abnormal loads. These are expressed as MSA (million standard axles). A standard axle is one that imposes 80kn on the road pavement (8T)

 

The prevalence of 44T HGVs and internet delivery LGVs contributes far more heavy loading.

 

plus years of underinvestment in actual preventative maintenance, especially on local roads.

 

the tide of SUVs and Cross-Over cars (plus builders in massive great 4*4 pick ups) has swept the country as ICEs so EVs are actually little different (given most are not giant SUVs).

 

my EV has the same weight as my diesel that preceded it, approx 1.9T (0.95T axle weight). My wife’s 7yr old SUV is similar at 1.7T.

 

as for establishing a road charging system, most of our trunk roads, majority of our motorways and many of our urban areas already have the necessary ANPR camera systems in place (and in use). All that is needed is the back office software (so as it’s government, that will be 10 years late and 10* over budget and riddled with bugs).

Edited Sunday at 10:19 by black and decker boy
Clarity

[Chris M]

Hydrogen powered trains are possible in the UK if someone with investment power wants them. BMW had a small fleet of 7 series cars with modified conventional engines running in Germany back in 1990s. This trial was successful but did not lead to much at the time. Hydrogen might or might not be the answer for all sorts of stored power requirements in the future. I fully expect that one day batteries will be hugely better than they are today with greater power storage density quicker charging and all at a cost that is much lower than today's batteries. But when will this happen?  A solid state battery was promised to be in production by 2021, now it is promised to be in expensive cars in a few years time. Many companies have tried making batteries with alternatives to lithium. Apparently some worked very well regarding the charging but had quite a serious propensity to catch fire.  Synthetic alternatives to petrol that don't produce pollution already exists but they are very expensive to make.

 

As an ordinary person I think watching what happens over the next ten to fifteen years will be fascinating; I'm really looking forward to seeing how things turn out. As I buyer of motor cars I am very wary that some big step forward somewhere could lead to the car that I have invested my hard earned savings into becoming almost worthless overnight. 

Edited Sunday at 10:23 by Chris M

[GrumpyPenguin]

3 hours ago, Butler Henderson said:

Occurred to me there is clear alternative to road pricing and the costs involved in setting that up and that is to tax vehicles on their weight. With the increasing weight of vehicles due to batteries the need to repair road surface damage most be increasing regardless of any backlog in such. It could be on the basis of vehicle classfication  starting in each classification with lowest chargeable rate re emissions and increasing a sepcific amount for every kg of weight above a set starting weight for the classification.

I fail to see where various suggestions for road pricing/pay per mile come from. Taking EV's out of the equastion for a moment we already pay per mile !

The more we drive, the more we pay in fuel duty/VAT. The heavier the vehicle, the more fuel (generally) we use and the more we pay in fuel duty/VAT.

 

Large Commercial Vehicles are already taxed on weight & the rates favour those with air suspension.

 

44T HGV's generally have a lower axle weight than HGV's running lighter with less axles.

[Hobby]

27 minutes ago, GrumpyPenguin said:

I fail to see where various suggestions for road pricing/pay per mile come from. Taking EV's out of the equastion for a moment we already pay per mile !

The more we drive, the more we pay in fuel duty/VAT. The heavier the vehicle, the more fuel (generally) we use and the more we pay in fuel duty/VAT

 

You've answered your own question though you cant take EVs out of the equation as they are the cause! The increasing use of EVs means there is less money coming in from fuel duty, especially with home charged EVs which pay practically nothing in taxes. So they have to find another source of income to compensate. Even EVs can't avoid pay per mile and, in theory, it's a fairer system as everyone is charged for their wear and tear on the roads. 

[Hroth]

It'll have nothing to do with "wear and tear" on the roads, it'll just be another convenient income stream for the Treasury.

 

What might be a good idea when it does come about is to keep a written log of where you went, the time you travelled at and the distances recorded on your odometer.

 

If the government uses the network of ANPR cameras to log vehicle movements, you'll be at the mercy of cloned numberplate users and it would be good to have a record of your daily travels to argue against potential overcharges...

 

[johnd]

22 minutes ago, Hroth said:

It'll have nothing to do with "wear and tear" on the roads, it'll just be another convenient income stream for the Treasury.

 

What might be a good idea when it does come about is to keep a written log of where you went, the time you travelled at and the distances recorded on your odometer.

 

If the government uses the network of ANPR cameras to log vehicle movements, you'll be at the mercy of cloned numberplate users and it would be good to have a record of your daily travels to argue against potential overcharges...

 

 

 If you  have an EV then already logged as the cars performance etc are reported over air to the manufacture. Big brother is here.

Edited Sunday at 16:40 by johnd

[Chris M]

Yes most modern cars know where they are and can report back to base. The technology to fit a device that would do this on all cars is cheap and could be made easily available. Pay per mile could probably be introduced within 2 or 3 of years if the government decided. I think they will have to go this route sooner or later. There would have to be very heavy fines for those who switched there pay per mile technology off.

[Hobby]

1 hour ago, Hroth said:

It'll have nothing to do with "wear and tear" on the roads, it'll just be another convenient income stream for the Treasury.

 

Agree to differ time, the tax income from fuel tax helps towards the upkeep of the road network as well as other things, so I do not feel it can be dismissed so easily!

[Neil]

7 hours ago, Butler Henderson said:

..... With the increasing weight of vehicles due to batteries the need to repair road surface damage most be increasing regardless of any backlog in such. .....

 

My Nissan Leaf weighs about 300kg more than my last car, a Ford Focus. I weigh about 95kg so that's about three big blokes heavier, not a huge difference.

[Neil]

2 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

Agree to differ time, the tax income from fuel tax helps towards the upkeep of the road network as well as other things, so I do not feel it can be dismissed so easily!

 

However some of the other things will come under the umbrella of environmental damage. Air quality/pollution has measurable detrimental effects on health and health is one of the biggest areas of governmental spend. The cost of cars on the road isn't just road infrastructure there are societal costs as well. Next year EVs will be paying road fund license for the first time so will be contributing to costs. 

[TheQ]

7 hours ago, black and decker boy said:

 

 

my EV has the same weight as my diesel that preceded it, approx 1.9T (0.95T axle weight). My wife’s 7yr old SUV is similar at 1.7T.

 

 

A 1984 landrover 110 ( that's the long wheel base) was considered to be a very large vehicle at the time, but weighs about 1700 kg, family cars are now it's weight before adding electrickery.

[Hroth]

The info transmitted to the manufacturers mightbe difficult for the government to get access to without acquiring extra powers.  It may well require new laws to be put through Parliament.  Equally, a legally required spy module would require new legal powers to be put through parliament.  Even with the current majority, just doing so would take more than two to three years, and then would have to be implemented.  I can see an attempt using the ANPR network might be tried first while they sort out the other methods.

 

Tax income from fuel is a mixture of excise duty and VAT, which goes straight to the Treasury and into the general taxation pot.   Some might go to transport related expenditure (all, not just roads) but none is earmarked for road use.

 

[GrumpyPenguin]

3 hours ago, Hobby said:

 

You've answered your own question though you cant take EVs out of the equation as they are the cause! The increasing use of EVs means there is less money coming in from fuel duty, especially with home charged EVs which pay practically nothing in taxes. So they have to find another source of income to compensate. Even EVs can't avoid pay per mile and, in theory, it's a fairer system as everyone is charged for their wear and tear on the roads. 

I did say to take EV's out of the equation for a moment !

 

I already pay per mile & have no intenstion of getting a EV ever.

 

Unless you use an EV with a "granny charger" HMG, with a bit of software could easily work out how much kwh you use to charge your EV at home through your so called smart meter & charger. No problem at all to collect fuel duty and VAT through public chargers.

 

However, anyone who thinks that all the taxation collected through motoring goes to the upkeep of the roads will be in for a shock - it just goes into the coffers to pay for whatever they like to squander it on.

[black and decker boy]

So exploring this for a moment.

 

i currently do around 20,000 miles a year, 90% is business, 10% private.

 

ive seen a figure of 6p/mile suggested for pay-per-Mile charging 

 

That would be £1200/year for me.

it currently costs me around £300 to ‘fuel’ my EV, of which around £15 is VAT.

 

if I was in a diesel, it would cost me around £2550 to fuel, of which around £1225 would be tax and VAT.

 

so a 6p per mile on my case would replace the lost tax & VAT on petrol/diesel that I’ve not needed since 2019. Whether my employer would be pleased to now pay the extra £1200 is unlikely and would clearly be getting squeezed.

 

I’ll regard VED as equal for all as of this April and so not part of the road charging assessment.

 

[johnofwessex]

I was talking to an EV owner, he has one of these tariffs with a low rate for off peak power, battery & solar panels.

 

He said that running it is so cheap that whereas in the past he might have decided not to go somewhere because of the cost of diesel his running costs are so low he doesnt bother about it any more.

 

Clearly multiply this by what at some stage will be a significant number of vehicles in the country and it doesnt bode well for public transport or congestion.

[Hobby]

13 hours ago, GrumpyPenguin said:

However, anyone who thinks that all the taxation collected through motoring goes to the upkeep of the roads will be in for a shock - it just goes into the coffers to pay for whatever they like to squander it on.

 

I agree, and so I had said some of the taxes are also used "towards" the upkeep!

 

I think B&D's last post summarises the situation best, the increasing number of EV's is leading to a massive "black hole" in tax revenue in the near future. There are currently 1.25m full EVs on the roads in the UK, if we halve B&Ds figures for mileage down the national average of 10k p.a., so say £600 in tax, that's £750m just for this year and will increase every year. If you think the government can afford to lose that amount of money each year I feel you're living in dreamland!

[Nick C]

15 hours ago, Hroth said:

The info transmitted to the manufacturers mightbe difficult for the government to get access to without acquiring extra powers.  It may well require new laws to be put through Parliament.  Equally, a legally required spy module would require new legal powers to be put through parliament.  Even with the current majority, just doing so would take more than two to three years, and then would have to be implemented.  I can see an attempt using the ANPR network might be tried first while they sort out the other methods.

 

Tax income from fuel is a mixture of excise duty and VAT, which goes straight to the Treasury and into the general taxation pot.   Some might go to transport related expenditure (all, not just roads) but none is earmarked for road use.

 

There's a much easier and simpler method - the mileage covered by every single car over three years old is recorded every year when the MOT test is done - just subtract last year's value and multiply by 6 pence... There's a box already on the change-of-owner form to record milage too, so that's easy to account for. No fancy software needed, just a means of recording those cars under three (though having MOT test at 12 and 24 months would be a good idea given how many cars fail their first one with things like bald tyres).

 

An ANPR system would be very bad as not only is there the issue of false plates, but also the huge number of roads not covered by them - which would lead to narrow country lanes being used as rat-runs by people trying to avoid expensive roads.

 

 

Edited 23 hours ago by Nick C

[Hobby]

That wouldn't cover the first three years though. 

 

I think we'll just have to wait and see, suffice to say they'll have to do something as I pointed out in my last post.

[GrumpyPenguin]

18 minutes ago, Nick C said:

There's a much easier and simpler method - the mileage covered by every single car over three years old is recorded every year when the MOT test is done - just subtract last year's value and multiply by 6 pence... 

The problem with that is the fact that relatively cheap apps/software can change the displayed mileage on the dashboard/tablet/touchscreen so unless the MOT station has the equipment to download the actual mileage from the main ECU which cannot be changed unless you have access to main dealer equipment.

If a system is used like that it will only be a matter of time before the hackers find a way round that one too.

[Reorte]

4 hours ago, johnofwessex said:

I was talking to an EV owner, he has one of these tariffs with a low rate for off peak power, battery & solar panels.

 

He said that running it is so cheap that whereas in the past he might have decided not to go somewhere because of the cost of diesel his running costs are so low he doesnt bother about it any more.

 

Clearly multiply this by what at some stage will be a significant number of vehicles in the country and it doesnt bode well for public transport or congestion.

I've heard plenty of people grumble about the cost of fuel but not that many actually seem to avoid travelling because of it.

[Nick C]

39 minutes ago, GrumpyPenguin said:

If a system is used like that it will only be a matter of time before the hackers find a way round that one too.

That applies whatever approach you take!