ancient_mariner
Moderator
- Messages
- 28,198
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
I wouldn't be so sure. Unless the range or charge speed increases a lot, there will still be a strong case for IC vehicles. It's why I bought diesel this time round.
and the site receives a small commission
I wouldn't be so sure. Unless the range or charge speed increases a lot, there will still be a strong case for IC vehicles. It's why I bought diesel this time round.
- Messages
- 12,263
- Edit My Images
- No
But that still doesn't address the key point: why should 94% of drivers pay the government far more to use the roads than the 6% who can avoid that payment?
ancient_mariner
Moderator
- Messages
- 28,198
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
Your premise is incorrect. Fuel duty isn't a charge to use the roads. Arguably road fund licence IS such a charge, and EVs now pay normally, but not fuel duty.
For the same reason people cycling would pay zero VAT. Thats what the fuel cost is. You make your choices. Not everything in life is done on an equal basis
- Messages
- 9,514
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think you need to get past this, yes ranges are increasing as is fast charging, but you appear to have a certain set of criteria where you want to drive long distances without stopping. Most of us take a break when doing this type of journey. My EV has an effective motorway driving range of about 220 miles, I haven’t found this to be an issue with breaks and on-route charging, in many cases the car has charged faster than my on-route meal!!!
Mr Bump
From under the bridge
- Messages
- 11,028
- Name
- Sophia aka Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
you bought an old/used car if i read correctly.
i stated "new" in my post, when people go to view models EV will be simply much cheaper to buy and run.
Mr Bump
From under the bridge
- Messages
- 11,028
- Name
- Sophia aka Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
because as people have said to you a 1000 times its all about tail pipe emmissions , petrol and diesel are heavy polluters in our towns and cities
EVs do not have tail pipe emmissions, and in most cases they are charged with 100% green energy from renewables.
the room is talking
you are just not listening
even just this week the current gen mix has been this.
less than 40% of our electricity is from Fossill/Gas
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,567
- Name
- Clive
- Edit My Images
- No
New evs don't tick everyone's boxes. The only reason that some people will buy a new ev is because they can't find a new petrol or diesel vehicle. That doesn't qualify as a choice.
and the target is another 30GW of offshore wind connected by 2030
ancient_mariner
Moderator
- Messages
- 28,198
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
I bought a 3 year old used car because I didn't like anything new within the price range (I'd have gone to £30k).
No. I take breaks, but when I have a 500 mile journey I don't want to spend an extra couple of hours charging. And I want to stop for my sake, not the car. Charging rates are improving for sure, but the cost per mile for the fastest charging is more than petrol or diesel right now. And many cars advertised with fast charging rates simply do not deliver on that. So it would be more expensive for a worse experience. I hope this will change in the future, but there's still a way to go.
Mr Bump
From under the bridge
- Messages
- 11,028
- Name
- Sophia aka Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
no you are wrong there are plenty of clever petrol Hybrid vehicles for sale ever manufacture os doing them and you keep mentioning "diesel" no one wants that filthy stuff any more, EVs are simply better for most people, ask EV owners if they would go back to funny fuel?
Pound Coin
Horatio Nelson
- Messages
- 4,935
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No one pays to use the roads. Or rather, everyone does. Roads are paid for out of general taxation.
Mr Bump
From under the bridge
- Messages
- 11,028
- Name
- Sophia aka Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
yeah for sure i feel that the UK has a ways to go but add all that offshore wind and it will be a game changer.
- Messages
- 1,567
- Name
- Clive
- Edit My Images
- No
In your opinion.
No one wants diesel? Well, I'll be buying another diesel next year, our friends have just bought a 3 year old one and we bought a nearly new petrol car last year. The profile of evs does not fit our requirements and probably many more people too. Forcing buyers into getting evs is not choice. That is what you continually fail to understand.
No one is being forced into getting EVs, just the choice of diesels is diminishing because manufacturers aren't designing them any more. Thats just the market at work.
- Messages
- 1,567
- Name
- Clive
- Edit My Images
- No
No. It is also because manufacturers are given quotas as to how many ice vehicles they can make which is linked to ev production numbers. The number of ice vehicles is insufficient to meet the customer's requirements so the price of nice, nearly new ice vehicles is inflated as a result of frustrated buyers not being able to find new ice vehicles.
- Messages
- 12,263
- Edit My Images
- No
That's a somewhat specious claim.
In my opinion it is not
Mr Bump
From under the bridge
- Messages
- 11,028
- Name
- Sophia aka Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Nope what you fail to understand is replace the word force with want. People want better cars not old horrible Ice cars they want modern plug in quiet low maintenance. Smooth to drive. Not start stop in traffic. It's the old guard that want to keep us in the pollution cloud the young people want clean change.
- Messages
- 12,263
- Edit My Images
- No
I agree, the whole thing has the smell of an unholy mix of obsession, cupidity and political insanity.
To be clear, there's nothing wrong with electric vehicles, provided they are safe in use and their owners pay a fair share towards the cost of the road system.
On the other hand, if their owners are being bribed with low taxation, whether it's in order to keep the factories moving or fulfill a political obsession, then there's everything wrong with them.
- Messages
- 12,263
- Edit My Images
- No
We are both equally entitled to our opinions.
- Messages
- 1,567
- Name
- Clive
- Edit My Images
- No
The only reason that ev sales are outstripping ice sales is that production of ice vehicles is being artificially restricted. If they were not then far fewer evs would be sold.
Penalty relief for 2025 for cars and vans: why it matters and what’s at stake
The EU auto industry needs an urgent solution to address the disproportionate costs of the risk of non-compliance with the CO2 2025 targets for cars and vans due to sluggish demand in zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) in the EU. Without such solution, the compliance strategies following the current...
www.acea.auto
- Messages
- 12,263
- Edit My Images
- No
If you had written "It's some of the old guard that want to keep us in the pollution cloud but some of the young people want clean change", then you might have been correct.
- Messages
- 21,053
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
There are loads of examples of tax breaks for various people or groups. There are also many examples of the "rich" (and in many cases this applies to people earning 50k) where they pay extra taxes and lose out in other benefits.
- Messages
- 21,053
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No different to me using a cycle to work scheme to save 40% tax on getting a new bike, compared to people who cant access that
- Messages
- 21,053
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But it isnt a couple of hours charging. I only use public chargers a few times a year - in every case i have got 200 miles within 20 mins or so. Half the time the car was done before food/wee had finished and for the rest it was checking emails, messages etc.
- Messages
- 21,053
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So do you agree with someone driving a brand new piccanto or puma paying £200 a year VED, compared with a 8 yo Fiesta paying £35, while a 20 year old Aston Martin DB9 pays £600+ ??? Were you this vocal when previous governments makde diesel or low emission cars cheaper? All of this is still a tax dodge!
Not to mention someone driving 10k a year in a 1l Fiesta will be paying far less tax through fuel than someone driving a 3l v6 also doing 10k a year
But a 500 mile journey is in the top 2% percentile of EV or any vehicle use. So only 2% of the time the higher rate charging systems are needed. these are then "blips" in cost with usual home charging being 4-7p per kWh and this occasional 50p/kWh. Compared to EVERY fill up with liquid fuel being £1.30-1.60 per litre. But people do like to quote the extremes as normals to try to validate their narrative
- Messages
- 11,232
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Does that 2% apply to everyone with an EV, or just those who can charge at home?
Steep
Nutcrack Rapids
- Messages
- 17,266
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I get people's obsession with range and charge speeds etc, I was the same myself before I came over to the light side as I've said here before.
It's not until you take the step over to EV that you begin to understand how unimportant huge range or ultra fast charging really is. As James said ^ very few people in the real world have to make massive journeys on a regular basis.
DfT figures say that 99% of all road journeys are less than 100 miles which makes trips of 500 miles a tiny fraction of 1%. Ancient Mariner had his own mostly good reasons for not going electric this time and that's fine as long as you don't try to interpolate this into good reasons why nobody should.
Even the smallest EV today will crack 100 miles easily which by those DfT figures makes even the smallest EV a good choice for most drivers in terms of range. People just don't like the idea that they are getting less of a thing. Or are stuck in the belief that they are somehow being deprived of their freedom to go where they like because they might have to change their habits a bit.
I drove 220 miles yesterday and got to a public charger with 10% power left, charged for 10 minutes at 131kwh and got an extra 100 miles, drove home and plugged in for the night.
It's not until you take the step over to EV that you begin to understand how unimportant huge range or ultra fast charging really is. As James said ^ very few people in the real world have to make massive journeys on a regular basis.
DfT figures say that 99% of all road journeys are less than 100 miles which makes trips of 500 miles a tiny fraction of 1%. Ancient Mariner had his own mostly good reasons for not going electric this time and that's fine as long as you don't try to interpolate this into good reasons why nobody should.
Even the smallest EV today will crack 100 miles easily which by those DfT figures makes even the smallest EV a good choice for most drivers in terms of range. People just don't like the idea that they are getting less of a thing. Or are stuck in the belief that they are somehow being deprived of their freedom to go where they like because they might have to change their habits a bit.
I drove 220 miles yesterday and got to a public charger with 10% power left, charged for 10 minutes at 131kwh and got an extra 100 miles, drove home and plugged in for the night.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 12,263
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 12,263
- Edit My Images
- No
No.
It makes perfect sense because it seeks to put the burden on the person likely to have the greatest wealth.
To do otherwise, would be very unfair. The person who chooses to use the less efficient vehicle has elected to pay the greater tax.
- Messages
- 21,053
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No is doesnt, having a brand new 30k car will probably mean a lower tax than a v6 3l car worth 10k - so the burden is not necessarily on those with the greatest wealth.
And for your 2nd part - those not buying EV has elected to pay the most taxes on fuel etc (which is the lease efficient vehicle) so really contradicts what you say!!
Every. 90% of all passenger vehicles average sub 50 miles per day and are stationary for 14+ hrs per day
People want all pros no cons. Every time the EV vs ICE debate comes up its 1) range 2) charge time. Every year a new reason not to gets quashed. The expense arbitrage is now minimal and zero with any upfront+operational costs now down to 2 years at most. With 7 -10 year warranties on drive train. Being able to change parts yourself, how many people actually do change parts themselves. The tech in EVs with the Chinese manufacturers now means EV surpass ICE but people are worried about tracking but will carry smart phones around with them. Then new excuses get invented once the old ones are debunked. and new Solid state batteries are seeing 500 mile actual ranges.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,232
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
"But a 500 mile journey is in the top 2% percentile of EV or any vehicle use. So only 2% of the time the higher rate charging systems are needed"
If the 2% is based on 500 mile journeys, how are people without a driveway charging, unless using public chargers? It feels like something is missing here.
- Messages
- 12,263
- Edit My Images
- No
I think what's missing is honesty.
So far as I can see, there's nothing especially wrong with electric cars but equally, there's nothing especially wrong with chemical powered cars either. However, vast amounts of money have been put into developing electric cars and vast amounts of, for want of a better term, belief, have been poured into them. The spenders can't afford to have this technology just potter along and the believers can't deal with the reality that their dream may prove flawed because chemical powered cars are preferred by many more people for sensible reasons.
On top of all this, substantial numbers of politicians have climbed on the electric bandwagon, only to find that that it ran out of power while the chemical cars kept going. What does a politician do when they find out they backed the wrong horse? Too many of them just ignore the mistake and keep on pounding the podium. C'est la vie...
- Messages
- 1,567
- Name
- Clive
- Edit My Images
- No
It depends on the individual's opinion on whether a claimed 500 miles actually turns out to be reliable. The reality is that we won't really know how long a battery will maintain an adequate charge and how much depreciation on resale values will be until there are enough examples over enough years to form an average. So why gamble now? I know that my diesel CR-V will do over 500 miles on a tankful no matter whether it is -20C or 40C, night or day whether I blat down the autoroute to Spain averaging over 60mph for 440 miles or tootle about the country lanes all week. I know that I will be able to fill up in under 5 minutes at thousands of filling stations at prices within a narrow band as long as I don't use autoroute stations.
There are too many unanswered questions and I ain't risking over €40k to have to adapt to my car's needs when I can spend half that and get something that I know I can live with. I note that many of the pro-ev users have company cars or are leasing them, including business use. I have to fund my own purchases.
Steep
Nutcrack Rapids
- Messages
- 17,266
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Why would you doubt the 500 miles figure? There are already cars that exceed that and range estimates have been very accurate throughout the 15 years that EV have been evolving and there's no reason why that would change.
EV depreciation is almost the same as ICE cars now exactly because data you say does not exist shows battery technology is far more reliable than first thought.
Nobody is asking you to gamble on anything, if you want to stick with your diesel, then do it. As I've said many times, this thread is about why people are buying EVs not why they are sticking to ICE.
You might be able to buy a 2nd hand CR-V for 20 grand but you won't get change out of £35k for a base model new one and it will be petrol, not diesel.
Any unanswered questions are because you don't want to hear the answers, not because the answers aren't there.
Not sure of the point of your last sentence, people drive ICE company cars and even lease them.