ULEZ - Plans (and would you have to pay?)

[JamesT]

If EVs become a significant fraction of the vehicles out there, I suspect the focus will switch towards LTNs and modal filters to ban all private cars through areas rather than just the ICE ones.

 

[The Ham]

Not likely because although usually heavier that the same sized IC vehicle, they have tyres of different compounds to handle the much higher available torque, and give a similar life. EV haters seem to make a lot of noise about the extra weight, and its impact of performance, the roads (i.e. negligible), but strangely forget that much of the energy used to accelerate can be recovered on braking.

When designing the thickness of roads to cater for expected traffic even vans (like transits) are excluded from the calculations as the impact is so limited.

If EVs become a significant fraction of the vehicles out there, I suspect the focus will switch towards LTNs and modal filters to ban all private cars through areas rather than just the ICE ones.

Indeed, that is unless there road use charging, which there's been other threads on, but it's likely to be based on how congested a road it. Of course, it could be possible to add other factors, such as particle emissions, to determine the cost charged.

Whilst your need more ANPR cameras, the LTN's ones would create a good network to start developing from further.

 

[al78]

The quiet majority want these sorts of things to stop *others* doing things, whilst continuing themselves. We saw that attitude in spades during Covid with the “we went for a day out at the beach and were shocked to find it was packed” brigade.

Same with stuff like speed humps. People like having measures in their own roads to stop others driving fast, but how do such people drive when they’re out and about?

Gasp shock horror, people tend to oppose activities that dump externalised costs on them, which mass car usage does.

One issue with ULEZ zones is there needs to be a viable public transport alternative, and that does not just mean a service that is barely adequate if you make major changes to your lifestyle, it means being able to use a bus or a train in comfort without having to deal with scrotes who stick their dirty feet on seats and will threaten you if you look at them the wrong way, or having to put up with the don't-give-a-toss/no spatial awareness brigade shrieking away, or the seemingly infinitely long strike action that periodically cuts the services in half meaning you end up far too close contact with someone else's armpit.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Aug 2023 ==

If EVs become a significant fraction of the vehicles out there, I suspect the focus will switch towards LTNs and modal filters to ban all private cars through areas rather than just the ICE ones.

The problem there is the possibility that the National Grid does not have the capacity to supply electricity to millions of EVs on top of the existing demand unless the majority agree to charge their cars overnight.

 

[Bald Rick]

The problem there is the possibility that the National Grid does not have the capacity to supply electricity to millions of EVs on top of the existing demand unless the majority agree to charge their cars overnight.

Not right now, but we don’t have millions of EVs (we have over 1 million, including plug in hybrids). By the time we have, say, 10 million, the grid will have the capacity, and more flexible pricing mechanisms that encourage EV users to charge at times of Spare capacity in the grid, such as at night (which is when most people charge now, in my experience).

 

[jon0844]

A car charging at 7kW overnight really can't be much of an impact compared to all the power consumption in the daytime.

 

[Dai Corner]

A car charging at 7kW overnight really can't be much of an impact compared to all the power consumption in the daytime.

Typical household consumption of 2,900 kWh a year is the equivalent of about 300W if it was used at a constant rate. 7kW is like having a large electric fire, the oven, microwave, TV and lights on at the same time.

 

[Bald Rick]

Typical household consumption of 2,900 kWh a year is the equivalent of about 300W if it was used at a constant rate. 7kW is like having a large electric fire, the oven, microwave, TV and lights on at the same time.

Or, more likely, the oven, the hob and the washing machine or dishwasher.

In any event, typical household consumption for a typical car, based on average mileage, will be 5.5kWh per day (or night).

 

[The Ham]

Or, more likely, the oven, the hob and the washing machine or dishwasher.

In any event, typical household consumption for a typical car, based on average mileage, will be 5.5kWh per day (or night).

If my maths is right that would be 47 minutes and 9 second of charge at 7kW or 1 hour 50 minutes on a 3kW (13 amp) plug.

If there was the ability to time that correctly you could charge 12 cars over a 9 and a half hour window (say 9pm to 6:30am) over night without going over that one house's (high but not overly exceptional) usage.

Whilst that may become more of an issue with air source heat pumps (ASHP) as well if it's very cold outside and you need to heat your house as well (but people tend not to run their heating that much over night - for example the times listed above), for most people for the time being it's hardly going to be an issue.

 

[321over360]

They've already made E5 dearer when E10 was introduced. Given the (narrow) claims of E10 being greener, there would be grounds for further differentiating (by price) the lesser credentials of E5. That would suit vendors as they would only need to stock one petrol product.

The "petrol crisis" 2 years ago was purely an engineered crisis like most are in order to sell off all the standard E5 Petrol by instigating a claim in the media that there was a "shortage" and get people panic buying which happened and paved the way for E10 to be implemented in all Petrol Stations even though it is a far inferior version that generates a lower range than the former E5 version.

Not likely because although usually heavier that the same sized IC vehicle, they have tyres of different compounds to handle the much higher available torque, and give a similar life. EV haters seem to make a lot of noise about the extra weight, and its impact of performance, the roads (i.e. negligible), but strangely forget that much of the energy used to accelerate can be recovered on braking.

EV's are an environmental disaster before they have even been made, the impact for the production of 1 EV is the equivalent of over 100 ICE vehicles being manufactured, Child slave labour is used in the Lithium mines just to make the batteries for the EV vehicles. Lets not forget all the multi storey car parks that will not be able to take the extra weight if everyone switches over to EV, factor in greater tyre wear leading to more harmful particulates along with faster road wear.

The London ULEZ scheme expansion at the end of the day is a cash grab by Sadiq Khan, it is opposed by the majority of people in outer London along with those in the Home Counties who will be affected by it and I myself although I own a presently compliant car, if Khan gets another term as London Mayor (Hopefully not given the damage he is doing) then it will roll onto Pay Per Mile, as come 2025 he is going to charge people just to use the Blackwall Tunnel. All the studies have proven is ULEZ has had neglible effect on air quality in London which most days is rated Low (ie good) on all forecasts, yet people are breathing in more toxic air on the tube network which has been known about for 2 decades now but instead signs are put up saying "Train air is refreshed every 3 minutes"

 

[Dai Corner]

The "petrol crisis" 2 years ago was purely an engineered crisis like most are in order to sell off all the standard E5 Petrol by instigating a claim in the media that there was a "shortage" and get people panic buying which happened and paved the way for E10 to be implemented in all Petrol Stations even though it is a far inferior version that generates a lower range than the former E5 version.

Citation needed.

 

[Trainbike46]

EV's are an environmental disaster before they have even been made, the impact for the production of 1 EV is the equivalent of over 100 ICE vehicles being manufactured, Child slave labour is used in the Lithium mines just to make the batteries for the EV vehicles. Lets not forget all the multi storey car parks that will not be able to take the extra weight if everyone switches over to EV, factor in greater tyre wear leading to more harmful particulates along with faster road wear.

This is entirely nonsense, debunked in detail here: https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-how-electric-vehicles-help-to-tackle-climate-change/

The London ULEZ scheme expansion at the end of the day is a cash grab by Sadiq Khan, it is opposed by the majority of people in outer London along with those in the Home Counties who will be affected by it and I myself although I own a presently compliant car, if Khan gets another term as London Mayor (Hopefully not given the damage he is doing) then it will roll onto Pay Per Mile, as come 2025 he is going to charge people just to use the Blackwall Tunnel. All the studies have proven is ULEZ has had neglible effect on air quality in London which most days is rated Low (ie good) on all forecasts, yet people are breathing in more toxic air on the tube network which has been known about for 2 decades now but instead signs are put up saying "Train air is refreshed every 3 minutes"

Could you cite your studies showing that the ULEZ has so far improved air quality?

 

[Bald Rick]

The "petrol crisis" 2 years ago was purely an engineered crisis like most are in order to sell off all the standard E5 Petrol by instigating a claim in the media that there was a "shortage" and get people panic buying which happened and paved the way for E10 to be implemented in all Petrol Stations even though it is a far inferior version that generates a lower range than the former E5 version.

Citation required

EV's are an environmental disaster before they have even been made, the impact for the production of 1 EV is the equivalent of over 100 ICE vehicles being manufactured, Child slave labour is used in the Lithium mines just to make the batteries for the EV vehicles

Citation required

All the studies have proven is ULEZ has had neglible effect on air quality in London which most days is rated Low (ie good) on all forecasts

Citation Required!

 

[AM9]

If EVs become a significant fraction of the vehicles out there, I suspect the focus will switch towards LTNs and modal filters to ban all private cars through areas rather than just the ICE ones.

Still clinging onto the notion that EVs won't catch on in any significant way? To all intents and purposes, there will be little else in the population of private cars. LTNs will also be further developed to train drivers to take the less human-damaging routes for their 'essential' journeys. That will create a 21st century culture of active and public transport travel for the benefit of all.*

* Of course there will always be few who for reasons of accessibility, require something like a private car.

Not likely because although usually heavier that the same sized IC vehicle, they have tyres of different compounds to handle the much higher available torque, and give a similar life. EV haters seem to make a lot of noise about the extra weight, and its impact on performance, the roads (i.e. negligible), but strangely forget that much of the energy used to accelerate can be recovered on braking.

 

[jon0844]

The "petrol crisis" 2 years ago was purely an engineered crisis like most are in order to sell off all the standard E5 Petrol by instigating a claim in the media that there was a "shortage" and get people panic buying which happened and paved the way for E10 to be implemented in all Petrol Stations even though it is a far inferior version that generates a lower range than the former E5 version.


EV's are an environmental disaster before they have even been made, the impact for the production of 1 EV is the equivalent of over 100 ICE vehicles being manufactured, Child slave labour is used in the Lithium mines just to make the batteries for the EV vehicles. Lets not forget all the multi storey car parks that will not be able to take the extra weight if everyone switches over to EV, factor in greater tyre wear leading to more harmful particulates along with faster road wear.

The London ULEZ scheme expansion at the end of the day is a cash grab by Sadiq Khan, it is opposed by the majority of people in outer London along with those in the Home Counties who will be affected by it and I myself although I own a presently compliant car, if Khan gets another term as London Mayor (Hopefully not given the damage he is doing) then it will roll onto Pay Per Mile, as come 2025 he is going to charge people just to use the Blackwall Tunnel. All the studies have proven is ULEZ has had neglible effect on air quality in London which most days is rated Low (ie good) on all forecasts, yet people are breathing in more toxic air on the tube network which has been known about for 2 decades now but instead signs are put up saying "Train air is refreshed every 3 minutes"

Most entertaining.

Especially the bit about cobalt. Not only do many new batteries contain 0% now, what is used to refine oil?

If you've suddenly taken an interest in child labour, best not buy petrol or diesel.

 

[DustyBin]

Citation needed.

Well it was “engineered” in so far as there wasn’t actually a shortage, but there was no grand conspiracy. A few people started panic buying and the media fed the hysteria, just like they did with the toilet roll shortage in 2020.

There’s certainly some truth in the claim that using E10 can negatively effect MPG, it’s well documented. Again though, that’s more unintended consequences than conspiracy.

I shan’t comment on the other points raised……

 

[The Ham]

faster road wear.

Whilst it will impact the lifespan of the surface course, in the great scheme of things hardly a significant difference for the majority of roads.

It'll have a very limited impact on motorways where there's a very high percentage of the traffic are HGV's.

It'll likewise have a small impact on lightly used roads (like a lot of residential roads) which see flows of less than 1,000 vehicles a day in each direction. Especially given that traffic trends to drive along different alignments (i.e. they don't drive as if a lane) due to parked cars, where they are narrower driving much closer to the kerb to pass another vehicle, pulling across to turn into a driveway, etc.

Whilst there would be some extra costs, overall they would be small and dwarfed by the amounts spent on gritting the roads each year.

 

[AM9]

Whilst it will impact the lifespan of the surface course, in the great scheme of things hardly a significant difference for the majority of roads.

It'll have a very limited impact on motorways where there's a very high percentage of the traffic are HGV's.

It'll likewise have a small impact on lightly used roads (like a lot of residential roads) which see flows of less than 1,000 vehicles a day in each direction. Especially given that traffic trends to drive along different alignments (i.e. they don't drive as if a lane) due to parked cars, where they are narrower driving much closer to the kerb to pass another vehicle, pulling across to turn into a driveway, etc.

Whilst there would be some extra costs, overall they would be small and dwarfed by the amounts spent on gritting the roads each year.

Most minor roads suffer more damage from excavation for buried, services and extreme weather (abnormally high or low temperatures, and seepage from cracks and local flooding. So any costs from increased wear from slightly heavier small vehicles (real or contrived) is immeasurable. So, yet another desperate claim to defend health-threatening pollution through the unnecessary continued use of IC engined private cars.

 

[The Ham]

Most minor roads suffer more damage from excavation for buried, services and extreme weather (abnormally high or low temperatures, and seepage from cracks and local flooding. So any costs from increased wear from slightly heavier small vehicles (real or contrived) is immeasurable. So, yet another desperate claim to defend health-threatening pollution through the unnecessary continued use of IC engined private cars.

Indeed, for simplicity I was excluding other factors, even though they are much much more likely to be an issue.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The quiet majority want these sorts of things to stop *others* doing things, whilst continuing themselves. We saw that attitude in spades during Covid with the “we went for a day out at the beach and were shocked to find it was packed” brigade.

Same with stuff like speed humps. People like having measures in their own roads to stop others driving fast, but how do such people drive when they’re out and about?

My bold. Well for me I would like to see the speed hump outside my house removed. The result would be less noise and particulate pollution from the majority that don't drive sensibly. If someone does not care about the effect of their speed on others then the are not going to slow down for the speed bump let alone drive slowly. Taking the speed bumps away in my area would mean less wear and tear on my own car. I currently drive at about 5mph so maybe removing the speed bumps would be counterproductive as I could then do the 20mph as shown on the signs !.

I suspect you're right.



I think we'll see the widespread adoption of EVs (for the majority of people they're an eminently sensible choice after all), which will certainly bring an end to new "ordinary" new ICE cars. Meanwhile, "interesting" ICE cars will continue to be available for those willing to pay for them, but it will be a relatively small number.

As I've said previously, I see the current deadline as a not-very-subtle nudge, and I think that once it's "job done" and enough people have changed their habits, it will probably be abolished. I may be wrong!

I would like a reliable, cheap to maintain car. One day when the range is there I will go EV but NEVER while the technology is immature and the prices so high.

I'm not going to vote for a party that decides our future is more oil and gas mining, more road building and a reduction of investment in green energy solutions, rail, cycling infrastructure, subsidies for solar etc.

But it will be an election issue for sure.

You better not buy things made of plastic. Not much choice there - and I wish there was because plastic is not easy to recycle and breaks too easily.

Why not? Even if the manufacturers don't, I can see independent distributors doing so based on their price, range, ease of refuelling v charging and whatever else they can think of. Is there an electric equivalent to the hot hatch at a price boy racers can afford yet?

I suppose EVs are not going to be so easy to "modify" ?. I can see small manufacturers making sports cars like MG and others did before "Hot Hatches" took over the market back in the 80s or 90s or thereabouts.

There are lots of rules on importing vehicles, and associated costs. By the time you bring a handful of cars in, they'll cost more than an EV.

And as for hot hatches, have there been many affordable ones recently even in ICE guise? Look at any car meet and you'll likely see far older cars because as car makers have been scaling back their portfolios in recent years, a lot of the GTIs, STs, RSs and the like have been axed.

The best you're going to get is an old Fiesta ST or similar, or a basic car you'll have to throw vinyls on and a spoiler from Halfords.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2023 ==


I fully accept we need to use oil and gas for the foreseeable, but I don't support anyone who gives up on a move to reduce (and one day axe) consumption and instead consume more, because money.

I accept we'll likely need fossil fuels for things like planes, so to counter that we want to go green on the railway and roads. And so on.

NIMBY here !- So I have to fork out for a car to reduce emissions but the long procession of planes flying over my head can continue dropping rubbish on me !. I am not exaggerating we are on the approach path to Heathrow when they are landing from the East. Croydon is where they do their U turn if coming from the West to land from the East.

As I said, you'd be having to buy a much older hot hatch these days, and soon you'd have no choice because they're not being made at all.

Old classics like the Renault 5 are coming back, sort of, in EV guise (I had an Escort Cosworth, which shows my age!) and you'll start to see more performance models - not least because it's really easy to give an EV 400+ BHP with dual motors, which is exactly what MG has done with the MG4 Xpower. Crazy performance for the money, and no doubt a second or third hand vehicle you'll see used by younger drivers in 5-10 years from now.

No new car is going to be cheap. I was shocked how much an ICE car costs now. In many ways, this is allowing EV makers to keep prices high.

I have always bought old reliable cars (OK the Vectra I have got so as to be ULEZ compliant is turning out to be a serious money pit).

That will likely make it extremely expensive and therefore something for the wealthy, who will of course be also able to afford the fuel bill. I mean, sure, rebuild an old Cosworth engine or a Volvo T5 engine, but they were never remotely fuel efficient.

For everyone else, EVs will be a cheaper choice.

Not in the near future for me. No I will be looking at second hand EVs that need a new battery.

That’s the point; most people will be happy with an (affordable) EV once they’re widely available. Any ongoing ICE car sales in the UK will almost certainly be of niche models to people who specifically want one. Hopefully they don’t become prohibitively expensive to all but the very wealthy, but even now if you buy a performance car you know it’s going to cost you in fuel, tax, insurance etc.



Again, they won’t be aimed at commuters or the school run brigade for whom an EV makes perfect sense.



If it’s an issue (which it certainly can be) they’ll simply stock less fuel. A lot of the petrol storage issues seem to be with E10, which no self-respecting petrolhead buys anyway.

And me. My ULEZ compliant Vectra does not like E10 - it eats the seals in the fuel pump (£500+ no thank you thats 40 ULEZ charges).

I doubt that there will be any moves to increase the proportion of vehicles using E5 for general road use. If they want to keep filling up at one of the remaining fuel stations, they will have to make their vehicle work on whatever is acceptable to most IC users.

Impossible for my Vectra - E10 is a no no.

E5 is "universal" though, some people just prefer not to pay the higher price (although you can benefit from increased fuel economy). The cars that can't/shouldn't run on E10 are the ones most likely to stick around or continue in production, therefore E5 will (eventually) become the default option.

I fear no - most cars are happy on E10 I thought ?.

I would have thought some sort of E100 (i.e. zero dead dinosaurs) is likely to be the long-term outcome for the tiny number of petrol non-EVs and for things like lawnmowers. Presumably additives will be developed to resolve the issues that presently causes, just like they did with leaded fuel.

Its the ethanol that destroys the seals so the ethanol needs to be removed - then its E0 !.

I think diesel could be become "endangered" as there are less enthusiast-focused diesel cars to sustain long-term demand (plus of course sales of new diesels have nosedived). You'll still be able to get it I'm sure, but I could see some fuel stations dropping it altogether eventually.

I expect Heavy Goods Vehicles will take a long time to become non-diesel.

Long term there won't be "fuel stations", you'll probably need to order it for home delivery. But I think diesel itself will take longer to go than petrol, as the HGV and heavy plant/farming machinery industry is going to take a long time to switch. (Yes, that'll be red diesel mostly, but that's the same as normal diesel, just with the dye added, and it could well be that fuel tax is abolished anyway, replaced with road pricing, so it may cease to need to be distinguished).

Most cars will probably be EVs within 20-30 years, by contrast, and all bar classics within 50 or so, and ULEZs will be long gone because they won't be needed - nobody will care if one person drives a classic 2023 Vauxhall Astra (!) through central London, as they'll be the only one doing it that day, probably.

When/if ULEZ goes the cameras will be used for other revenue generating purposes. There are not many examples of taxes or other charges (road or otherwise) being removed.

Most standalone fuel station sites would be suitable for a small supermarket with a Costa and a Subway and maybe 20 parking spaces with chargers, I'd expect to see some of those over the coming years.

Good point. It is going to have to be a place to go and charge your car where you want to spend 30 minutes or more. Obviously supermarkets (if it is time to go shopping) but for those who buy ready made expensive coffee then most petrol stations might make it as a Costa/Starbuks etc.

Car and fuel retailers seem to have followed the same course as others, moving from town centres to retail parks on the edges of urban areas.

The onward march of car culture. When will planners learn.

Gasp shock horror, people tend to oppose activities that dump externalised costs on them, which mass car usage does.

One issue with ULEZ zones is there needs to be a viable public transport alternative, and that does not just mean a service that is barely adequate if you make major changes to your lifestyle, it means being able to use a bus or a train in comfort without having to deal with scrotes who stick their dirty feet on seats and will threaten you if you look at them the wrong way, or having to put up with the don't-give-a-toss/no spatial awareness brigade shrieking away, or the seemingly infinitely long strike action that periodically cuts the services in half meaning you end up far too close contact with someone else's armpit.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Aug 2023 ==


The problem there is the possibility that the National Grid does not have the capacity to supply electricity to millions of EVs on top of the existing demand unless the majority agree to charge their cars overnight.

This is it. We seem to still be undermining the benefits of public transport by allowing out of town shopping etc. Our town centres need to be the place to go as that is where the public transport goes. I must admit around Croydon the clientele frequenting busses is making them less attractive. Easily solved by a more rigorous approach to policing behaviour - won't happen though as there is not money in it unless you look at the big picture.

 

[Sonic1234]

Most standalone fuel station sites would be suitable for a small supermarket with a Costa and a Subway and maybe 20 parking spaces with chargers, I'd expect to see some of those over the coming years.

Shell opened one just like this in Fulham - a small Waitrose, Costa and EV charging. No petrol or diesel.

 

[jon0844]

Not in the near future for me. No I will be looking at second hand EVs that need a new battery.

Do you buy a new engine for a 10 year old car that has failed? You'd either swap the battery out for one from another car, or take it to a specialist that would diagnose the faulty/failing cells and replace them.

And in any case, a battery degrades it doesn't just fail!

 

[Peter Sarf]

Do you buy a new engine for a 10 year old car that has failed? You'd either swap the battery out for one from another car, or take it to a specialist that would diagnose the faulty/failing cells and replace them.

And in any case, a battery degrades it doesn't just fail!

Well I would not (knowingly) be buying a 10-20 year old ICE car with a suspect engine. But it looks like I am more likely to be confronted with needing to replace batteries in an EV of that age range.

 

[AM9]

Well I would not (knowingly) be buying a 10-20 year old ICE car with a suspect engine. But it looks like I am more likely to be confronted with needing to replace batteries in an EV of that age range.

Just where does it 'look like' you will be "needing to replace batteries in an EV of that age range"?
The myth that all EV batteries need replacing after 10 years has been debunked enough times in RUK (and many other places) that you must have a pretty creditable source to believe it.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Just where does it 'look like' you will be "needing to replace batteries in an EV of that age range"?
The myth that all EV batteries need replacing after 10 years has been debunked enough times in RUK (and many other places) that you must have a pretty creditable source to believe it.

Battery life keeps coming up in conversations outside of RUK. It seems to be what a lot of people say puts them off. Whether it is true or not I don't know but there must be something triggering the comments. Certainly the alleged problem is putting a number of people off so there needs to be something done about that mis-information.

I know for me the range would be OK most of the time but the cases where I really need a car then the range would be tricky without quick and convenient charging and that issue will hopefully subside as more and more charging points become available. If range reduces with age enough to make a battery unusable then that the end of that battery's life. I wonder if people are comparing EV batteries to Lead-Acid batteries (for ICE) and that the similarities on life are not there.

 

[The Ham]

Battery life keeps coming up in conversations outside of RUK. It seems to be what a lot of people say puts them off. Whether it is true or not I don't know but there must be something triggering the comments. Certainly the alleged problem is putting a number of people off so there needs to be something done about that mis-information.

I know for me the range would be OK most of the time but the cases where I really need a car then the range would be tricky without quick and convenient charging and that issue will hopefully subside as more and more charging points become available. If range reduces with age enough to make a battery unusable then that the end of that battery's life. I wonder if people are comparing EV batteries to Lead-Acid batteries (for ICE) and that the similarities on life are not there.

I suspect that most people think about their phone battery and how they have to replace that every 4 years.

However even if cars didn't have the cooling systems, car batteries are likely to be charged less often (depending on range and miles traveled twice a week shouldn't be uncommon), as well being fast charged less often (or over charged less often).

 

[DustyBin]

I suspect that most people think about their phone battery and how they have to replace that every 4 years.

However even if cars didn't have the cooling systems, car batteries are likely to be charged less often (depending on range and miles traveled twice a week shouldn't be uncommon), as well being fast charged less often (or over charged less often).

Mileage (which obviously dictates number of charge cycles) appears to be as significant as age when it comes to battery degradation.

By the time most cars reach the point of having less than 80% of their original range, they’ll probably be in “banger” territory and not going that far anyway. We’ll have to see how the market develops I suppose, but that’s my current take on it.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I suspect that most people think about their phone battery and how they have to replace that every 4 years.

However even if cars didn't have the cooling systems, car batteries are likely to be charged less often (depending on range and miles traveled twice a week shouldn't be uncommon), as well being fast charged less often (or over charged less often).

I think that is key (I hope) - look after the battery. The parallel is not servicing the engine (oil, water etc) often enough but that is easier to judge on an older car by looking at the service history. The problem with the EV battery is replacement seems to be more expensive then replacing an ICE engine, probably forces the end the life of the ICE car.

Mileage (which obviously dictates number of charge cycles) appears to be as significant as age when it comes to battery degradation.

By the time most cars reach the point of having less than 80% of their original range, they’ll probably be in “banger” territory and not going that far anyway. We’ll have to see how the market develops I suppose, but that’s my current take on it.

I am probably one of those who gets long trips out of cars that are in banger territory. I certainly buy them old enough that depreciation is incapable of being a factor !. I think that is the problem for a lot of less well off motorists - they really are at the mercy of the planners and ULEZ is really the planners sticking plaster making people pay for the short sighted planning. We really need to find ways of making car use less necessary not punishing those who rely on a car.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Mileage (which obviously dictates number of charge cycles) appears to be as significant as age when it comes to battery degradation.

By the time most cars reach the point of having less than 80% of their original range, they’ll probably be in “banger” territory and not going that far anyway. We’ll have to see how the market develops I suppose, but that’s my current take on it.

And then they'll be bought as a second car used only as a local runaround, just like beat up old Corsas and the likes. So if they only have say 50-100 miles of range left it won't matter.

 

[AM9]

I think that is key (I hope) - look after the battery. The parallel is not servicing the engine (oil, water etc) often enough but that is easier to judge on an older car by looking at the service history. The problem with the EV battery is replacement seems to be more expensive then replacing an ICE engine, probably forces the end the life of the ICE car.

I think that comparing the cost of replacing a battery with replacing an IC engine, (which in many cars would be as expensive as including the clutch and gearbox), is a bit premature at the moment. Battery development for EVs is developing rapidly, - in performance, longevity, (replacement) cost and repair/refurbishment cost.
Once the supply of new IC engines stops, the price of used examples that are worth fitting will steadily rise and their availability will get more difficult. The number of (wealthy) petrolheads willing to pay for a completely new engine built by a specialist engineering company is pretty small I imagine, especially as the range of IC engines still used will be wide but with only a very few of each type. So before long, for anybody other than an obsessive classic car enthusiast, there will be very few prepared to feed this market at the top, and cascading will be a matter of pot luck.

 

[jon0844]

I don't see anyone going to a car maker and asking to buy a brand new battery, which will be supplied and fitted by a 'senior tech' at £125 per hour or something stupid. There was a case where Tesla locked their batteries and wouldn't allow a battery from another Tesla to be fitted, but I'd hope that would be illegal under right to repair laws in Europe (mind you, I wouldn't put it past our Government to stitch consumers up given half a chance).

Quite aside from the fact that batteries don't just fail, for the rare exceptions (because, yes, some batteries may have faults not related to everyday wear*) where there's some inherent fault within the battery that makes it fail, there are now companies that will run diagnostics and identify faults - and fix them. You'll keep your battery and replace faulty cells as required, or perhaps the battery management will be re-calibrated so the battery continues to work. And remember, batteries are always higher in capacity than advertised, just like HDDs and SSDs have additional space to allow for faults.

* With most things electrical, they're likely to fail quite early on so likely within the warranty period. Electronics either fail quick, or last forever, unless there's some obvious design fault - and if there's a design flaw, chances are it will be subject to a recall or you'll be able to use consumer protections to seek remedy.

As ever, the people who like to say that a battery will die after five years (irrespective of mileage/charge cycles) are doing so simply because they're anti-EV. End of. They'd never say an engine will die at 100k, or say you'd buy a new engine (you simply wouldn't do it, unless it was some hand-built performance car and you had bottomless pockets).

Old ICE cars are likely to have lots of fiddly, expensive, issues to find and repair. Fixing a battery is going to be a whole lot easier.