[B0ycey]

That's the first sensible thing you've said.

Trust someone who actually charges an EV at home and can provide a link to the tarif that supports their claim

I already told you, these types of tariffs won't exist when everyone is charging their cars. Not to mention not everyone works from home to benefit from off peak charge times. I also doubt your once every ten day charging claim. That is, if you do 15000 miles a year. There is so many red flags in everything you write.

[BeesKnee5]

I already told you, these types of tariffs won't exist when everyone is charging their cars. Not to mention not everyone works from home to benefit from off peak charge times. I also doubt your once every ten day charging claim. That is, if you do 15000 miles a year. There is so many red flags in everything you write.

These tarifs will not only exist, they are guaranteed to become more common.

Your incredulity is based on ignorance I'm afraid.

Off peak is primarily between 11pm and 5am so work from home or not is largely irrelevant.

I did not say I charge once every 10 days, I said a full charge would last the average driver 10 days. I've attached a typical day of electricity use from my most recent bill. I just plug in when I get home and leave the tarif to schedule when is cheapest before I next use the car.

[BeesKnee5]

What is that non-visible image supposed to prove?

Follow the earlier link and you will find out.

[BeesKnee5]

Right again, just information served out of an oven with no data on the recipe, just to undermine Volvo's benchmarks.

That oven is data supported peer reviewed research

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 5119302715

[noemon]

Can.not.be.taken.seriously.

To calculate this accurately for a specific BEV, assumptions must be made about lifetime (here 17 years), yearly mileage (26k km in the first year and 1k less per year thereafter), and energy use per km (0.161 kWh/km based on EPA measurements). This should be combined with assumptions about the current GHG intensity of the electricity mix and its change over time.

To calculate this accurately we should assume 17 years life-cycle of a car, and that a driver drives 1k less km every year after buying the car, because a consumer waits 17 years before adding a new one and when batteries fail in less than 10.

As if anyone needs any more evidence of this total charade. Sure if you push the base assumptions into the fantasy realm instead of the real world, what does that say exactly?

The only thing that shows is that if you post about the right causes, you can get away with saying anything in these "journals".

[BeesKnee5]

To calculate this accurately we should assume 17 years life-cycle of a car, and that a driver drives 1k less km every year after buying the car, because a consumer waits 17 years before adding a new one and when batteries fail in less than 10.

The average new car is driven 35 miles per day, and as cars age they tend to be driven less often, with an average over all cars being 20 miles per day. This is verifiable fact, and is mostly a result of company fleet vehicles doing many more miles than private vehicles.

It's not about how long a person owns the car, as cars are sold down through the second hand market as they age. Your argument against the research is a strawman.

As for batteries failing in less than 10. I do hope so as it means I would get a new battery under warranty, sadly though that's unlikely.

[noemon]

It's not about how long a person owns the car, as cars are sold down through the second hand market as they age. Your argument against the research is a strawman.

Of course it is, because the life-cycle resets every time a new car is added as a replacement to an older one. The environment does not care about metrics based on feelings. Every 3 years when you give your old Tesla back and get a new one, you are adding the equivalent emissions that an ICE car will produce only after being driven for 100k+ km's.

New emissions are produced for this replacement, every 3 years or every 50k km.

In addition, ICE cars are capable of running for 40-50-70 years, Electric cars do not even survive post 10 years and never reach 17 years of age which is the time required for your author's calculations to make sense. If you replace the battery, you are again adding emissions into the environment while resetting that timer.

[BeesKnee5]

.
In addition, ICE cars are capable of running for 40-50 years, .

How many of these are there with their original engines, petrol tank, clutch, gearbox, exhaust, radiator, alternator etc.?

It's like triggers old broom.

[noemon]

How many of these are their with their original engines, petrol tank, clutch, gearbox, exhaust, radiator, alternator etc.?

It's like triggers old broom.

All of these parts are about 100 times less polluting than batteries.

But you are evading the obvious. 17 years is not the life-cycle of an electric car. That is 3-4 years in the real world.

Which means that your author is consciously underreporting EV emissions by a factor of 4 or even 5.

[BeesKnee5]

All of these parts are about 100 times less polluting than batteries.

But you are evading the obvious. 17 years is not the life-cycle of an electric car. That is 3-4 years in the real world.

Which means that your author is consciously underreporting EV emissions by a factor of 4 or even 5.

Just go on autotrader .

100s of EVs over 3-4 years old despite the numbers sold new being very few at the time.

Today's EVs come with an 8 year warranty on the battery so you are talking nonsense. For most of the EVs sold today the battery will outlast the car.

[noemon]

Just go on autotrader .

100s of EVs over 3-4 years old despite the numbers sold new being very few at the time.

Today's EVs come with an 8 year warranty on the battery so you are talking nonsense. For most of the EVs sold today the battery will outlast the car.

Look how many of these cars on autotrader already had their batteries replaced under warranty thus resetting their life-cycle values.

8 years warranty you say but if it fails at 4 the life-cycle is reset again and you need another 17 years to break even.

I know it comes as a shock to you after investing so much emotion on your new purchase, but you have been conned.

You are not helping the environment, just making it a lot worse while driving electricity prices up at the same time.

My side hobby is to flip cars in the UK. I am a car enthusiast and was very impressed by the driving dynamics of the new Teslas. I am subscribed on autotrader and ebay for all tesla's, bmw's, polestars and what not. I will happily flip a Tesla and even own one, but I do not convince myself that what I am doing is saving the environment. On the contrary.

[BeesKnee5]

Look how many of these cars on autotrader already had their batteries replaced under warranty thus resetting their life-cycle values..

Find me one. Just one.

8 years warranty you say but if it fails at 4 the life-cycle is reset again and you need another 17 years to break even.

I know it comes as a shock to you after investing so much emotion on your new purchase, but you have been conned.

You are not helping the environment, just making it a lot worse while driving electricity prices up at the same time.

So to get this clear,

You think manufacturers are giving every EV driver a new battery after 4 years.

That means Tesla drivers are doing over 50k a year

[noemon]

Find me one. Just one.

I have much better things to do right now than browsing autotrader and opening every single tesla ad one by one. It's not an important point anyway. I may look it up later but you can have this argument for now.

So to get this clear,

You think manufacturers are giving every EV driver a new battery after 4 years.

That means Tesla drivers are doing over 50k a year

No, that is not what I said, that is a straw-man.

No matter what you say on this subject, this debate is lost for you when you posted that study showing that the assumption for the life-cycle of an EV should be 17 years for the pro-EV calculations to make sense.

You should have the sense to see the con based on this information alone. No EV lasts 17 years, and even Tesla's 8 year warranty or 150k km,which ever comes first comes with the caveat of 70% battery withing those 8 years. That means that tesla itself is telling you that your battery will be 70% by 8 years time and could be anything below 70% after the 8 years by the 17th year that your author is assuming, this car will have been replaced at least 3,4 times with a new EV.

[BeesKnee5]

I have much better things to do right now than browsing autotrader and opening every single tesla ad one by one. It's not an important point anyway. I may look it up later but you can have this argument for now.
[.

You never had an argument.

By your reckoning you can open any ad for an EV over 5 years old and it will have had a replacement battery.

It should be as easy as shooting fish in a barrel.

Ieven Tesla's 8 year warranty or 150k km,which ever comes first comes with the caveat of 70% battery withing those 8 years

By your reckoning they will have been replaced by 4 years, but look at the evidence. EVs with 200,000 miles are still at 88%. With the UK average annual mileage being 8,000 miles that's 25 years worth.

[noemon]

You never had an argument.

By your reckoning you can open any ad for an EV over 5 years old and it will have had a replacement battery.

It should be as easy as shooting fish in a barrel.

I know you are having EV Derangement Syndrome right now so I am sympathetic to your plight.

I said "if batteries fail before the 8 years say in 4 years the life-cycle timer resets" 4,8 years is potatoe, potato anyway as according to your study you 'll need to run the EV for 17 years for the calculations to make sense and no EV can run for 17 years without battery replacement anyway, even according to the manufacturers. So that is that really. EV's are in reality far more polluting than the equivalent ICE cars in real world scenarios.

None of what you are strawing about, but EVDS is clearly an issue because you still are ignoring your own author's assumptions.

These "17 years" will haunt your nights now. Sorry for pointing it out to you.

[BeesKnee5]

These "17 years" will haunt your nights now. Sorry for pointing it out to you.

There is nothing to haunt as you are yet to support your assertion and have been provided with evidence of EVs with their battery at 88% after 200,000 miles, well beyond the average mileage of a car. The active BMS of Tesla and other new EVs is a different animal to the passive cooling of a Nissan leaf.

But you keep buying the FUD and paying more to drive if you wish.

[noemon]

There is nothing to haunt as you are yet to support your assertion and have been provided with evidence of EVs with their battery at 88% after 200,000 miles, well beyond the average mileage of a car. The active BMS of Tesla and other new EVs is a different animal to the passive cooling of a Nissan leaf.

But you keep buying the FUD and paying more to drive if you wish.

Paying more to drive he said. Oh dear.

Petrol drivers pay around 80% fuel tax and all electricity consumers pay the Green Levy in their bills so that EV drivers can get a subsidy.

Aside from the fact that the 80% fuel duty adds about 25 billion a year and the VAT on it another 10 billion for sure in the UK's coffers, a hole you will need to plug by pushing that cost into electricity bills, EV drivers get preferential night rates only because petrol drivers fund those rates. But the biggest con is that new ICE cars on a 3-year lease are far less polluting than the equivalent EV's on a 3-year lease. That is just a fact and the most important fact of them all. 30-35 billion per year you will need to find for your transition just for that. That is 300 billion every 10 years, just to replace the subsidy and for what exactly? So you can destroy the earth with mining and batteries? While polluting more on aggregate?

This is worse than beta-max. And it will go the way of the dodo.

I am already using zero-emission synthetic fuel when going around the track and by 2035, ICE cars will be in an even stronger and much more environmentally friendly position.

If you think the Germans will just hand over car manufacturing to the Chinese, you got another thing coming.

The EU is already talking about scrapping 2035 altogether and when(not if) the EU does that, the UK will follow suit.

[BeesKnee5]

Paying more to drive he said. Oh dear.

Petrol drivers pay around 80% fuel tax and all electricity consumers pay the Green Levy in their bills so that EV drivers can get a subsidy.

Aside from the fact that the 80% fuel duty adds about 25 billion a year and the VAT on it another 10 billion for sure in the UK's coffers, a hole you will need to plug by pushing that cost into electricity bills, EV drivers get preferential night rates only because petrol drivers fund those rates.

Good that you admit to paying huge sums unnecessarily.

That cost is far more likely to go into road tax or a charge on mileage than electricity, which is fine by me and won't make your cost of driving any cheaper.

EV drivers don't get preferential night rates, anyone can switch to a TOU tariff and pay less for their electricity if they want. It's funny as these tarifs have existed for a long time and used to be called Economy 7 to charge storage heaters.

[noemon]

Good that you admit to paying huge sums unnecessarily.

That cost is far more likely to go into road tax or a charge on mileage than electricity, which is fine by me and won't make your cost of driving any cheaper.

EV drivers don't get preferential night rates, anyone can switch to a TOU tariff and pay less for their electricity if they want.

The 8% Green Levy on all electricity bills funds the subsidies the energy companies get to offer these lower night tariffs.

The fact is that you are not paying less to drive, but a lot more on aggregate for the same units of energy. We are socialising these costs as long as we can(it will no longer be possible when the transition happens) but that does not reduce these overall costs. Just because petrol drivers fund your driving temporarily, it does not make your evry mile driven cheaper, in fact it makes it even more expensive.

You think you are paying £17 to charge your car overnight, but another guy is paying another £10 extra during the same time to fund your charge and another £20 extra via fuel duty. All of which will be lost and passed on to you once the transition happens. These extra costs conveniently escape the EV metrics and still the EV metrics do not make sense.

Not to mention that once electricity becomes a monopoly, companies will become even worse than the cartel they are currently operating.

[BeesKnee5]

The 8% Green Levy on all electricity bills funds the subsidies the energy companies get to offer these lower night tariffs.

This is another lie by you.

The environmental and social obligation costs do not affect wholesale price or determine what tarifs suppliers provide.