Do you think that the UK switching to electric vehicles is realistic?

[renegademaster]

The Leaf is a very cheap second hand car now, which still offers people 50+ miles a day. Despite its flaws, many people could easily get by with that range and at that price, you're now getting close to what some new e-bikes cost (£2-3k).

While cycling is a good way to get around and far to many people make excuses not to cycle, a 'proper' car might be worth the extra spend and suit a commuter just fine, or be ideal as a second car.

They'll probably be very reliable compared an ICE car of the same age.

Ive seen videos of built in viaducts under pavements which you can run charging cables through, i havent actually seen any example in real life though

I'm surprised anyone is still buying them

Because they have motorcycle tier MPGs. Just like how every EV isnt a 1st generation leaf, not every hybrid is a Japanese throwaway minicab tax evasion scheme, tech has evolved a lot since then.

 

[Class 317]

Ive seen videos of built in viaducts under pavements which you can run charging cables through, i havent actually seen any example in real life though


Because they have motorcycle tier MPGs. Just like how every EV isnt a 1st generation leaf, not every hybrid is a Japanese throwaway minicab tax evasion scheme, tech has evolved a lot since then.

The company behind below pavement charging cables is called Kerbo charge. Seen a test installation being used by 2 adjoining houses.
Very flush fit and quite impressive piece of kit.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The company behind below pavement charging cables is called Kerbo charge. Seen a test installation being used by 2 adjoining houses.
Very flush fit and quite impressive piece of kit.

They are a VERY bad idea because they imply entitlement to on street parking outside one's home.

 

[AM9]

They are a VERY bad idea because they imply entitlement to on street parking outside one's home.

Agreed, unless the local authority makes it clear that they are there as an amenity to every driver whose vehicle is registered to use the public highway. The exception would be for those who have marked disabled parking spaces at the kerbside. In those cases, it would be an offence for any unauthorised drive to occupy the space.

 

[jon0844]

Anyone with a blue badge can use one of those spaces, so even that can't be reserved by one particular resident - even if it was put there for a specific need.

The concept is sound though and it allows more affordable running of cabling on private property such as communal parking areas or business premises.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed, unless the local authority makes it clear that they are there as an amenity to every driver whose vehicle is registered to use the public highway.

They can't be considered that because they are only useful to the person who owns both the house and the car.

The only way this should be done is if they move to numbered spaces where you do rent a specific allocated one at a much higher fee than a general parking permit (or free as applicable).

The exception would be for those who have marked disabled parking spaces at the kerbside. In those cases, it would be an offence for any unauthorised drive to occupy the space.

But any Blue Badge holder can legally park, not only an individual.

 

[renegademaster]

Some kind of allocated parking is going to be inevitable if everyone in terraced streets are expected to have only electric cars. I know you don't need the car charging every moment of the day, but most people just want to plug in at night and forget about it , not circle around for an hour looking for a public charging spot that they'll spend another hour in. A charger in front of every house means you can use the household electric bill and not enrich middlemen payment processors and charging networks

 

[bspahh]

They can't be considered that because they are only useful to the person who owns both the house and the car.

https://www.kerbocharge.com/ says that other people can use the charger. The owner of the house gets 4p/kWh (presumably on top of the price of the electricity).

 

[Bletchleyite]

https://www.kerbocharge.com/ says that other people can use the charger. The owner of the house gets 4p/kWh (presumably on top of the price of the electricity).

Doesn't really work unless everyone has one, though. Indeed I can see it making things worse.

 

[talldave]

Who is forcing you to scrap them?

Emperor Khan, by financial punishment for driving them.

For someone apparently so concerned with the environmental cost of cars it’s very odd that you stated this previously:

That replacement car's already built, so no need to build anything new for me.

 

[stuu]

Emperor Khan, by financial punishment for driving them.

That replacement car's already built, so no need to build anything new for me.

Do you think using childish nicknames for elected politicians makes your point more or less valid?

 

[Noddy]

That replacement car's already built, so no need to build anything new for me.

Or, if you were actually genuinely concerned about the environment, you could buy an already built EV.

 

[greyman42]

Do you think using childish nicknames for elected politicians makes your point more or less valid?

Either way, the point stands.

 

[talldave]

Do you think using childish nicknames for elected politicians makes your point more or less valid?

Neither. I'm entitled to loathe the guy as much as anyone else is entitled to laud him. I dislike liars and will be putting my money where my mouth is and actively doing what little I can to ensure he's not re-elected.

Maybe some EV owners will join me once they are paying per mile to drive in London?

Or, if you were actually genuinely concerned about the environment, you could buy an already built EV.

Depends if I'm confident it'll be reliable when it's 15-20 years old?

 

[Bald Rick]

Emperor Khan, by financial punishment for driving them.

Thats not forcing you to scrap your car. It might incentivise you to sell to, but that’s quite different.

Besides, selling your car does not mean that someone else does not get use out of it. There is still a market for non ULEZ compliant vehicles. Autotrader has more than 50,000 of them for sale.

That replacement car's already built, so no need to build anything new for me.

So if you sell your already built car, it’s completely wasteful, but if you buy an already built car, that’s ok?

 

[AM9]

They can't be considered that because they are only useful to the person who owns both the house and the car.

No, they are road space, A groove through the footpath doesn't reduce the value of that space to any driver, which in many areas is in itself at a premium. Unless of course you advocate a change in the concept of the public highway. Dedicating public roadspace to residents private use would in some cases make those roads impassable and delivery of goods and services to those residences virtually impossible.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, they are road space, A groove through the footpath doesn't reduce the value of that space to any driver, which in many areas is in itself at a premium. Unless of course you advocate a change in the concept of the public highway.

Yes, I think there's a good case to change how parking works in such areas, with designated spaces being rented to specific households for a much higher fee than at present so they can charge their EV.

Dedicating public roadspace to residents private use would in some cases make those roads impassable and delivery of goods and services to those residences virtually impossible.

Have you never been to a terraced street? If not, I'd suggest going and playing with Google Streetview before revising that comment.

 

[AM9]

Have you never been to a terraced street? If not, I'd suggest going and playing with Google Streetview before revising that comment.

That depends wha6y you mean by a "terraced street".
If you mean a street which is running horizontally along a very steep face of a hill, maybe with the next parallel road much higher or lower, i.e. like a paddy field in a hilly area, then I think they are pretty rare outside a few post industrial areas such as south Wales valleys or parts of towns in the north.
If you mean a street where the houses are in terraces with no driveways interrupting the kerbline. Yes I've visited, travelled along and even lived in homes on streets like that, and I know exactly how 'possessive' behaviour towards parking spaces can make visiting and deliveries extremely difficult if not impossible. The highway is there to enable moving from one place to another. The law makes it clear that having a vehicle registered only entitles it's registered keeper to use the public road system. It does not confer any right to occupying a partiular space on it. Excessive long-term occupation of space on that through path just causes too many obstructions.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That depends wha6y you mean by a "terraced street".

I think it's very clear what I mean.

If you mean a street where the houses are in terraces with no driveways interrupting the kerbline. Yes I've visited, travelled along and even lived in homes on streets like that, and I know exactly how 'possessive' behaviour towards parking spaces can make visiting and deliveries extremely difficult if not impossible. The highway is there to enable moving from one place to another. The law makes it clear that having a vehicle registered only entitles it's registered keeper to use the public road system. It does not confer any right to occupying a partiular space on it. Excessive long-term occupation of space on that through path just causes too many obstructions.

I think that ship is somewhere most of the way across the Pacific. Making it work (both for charging and for stopping pavement parking) would be the priority over whether White Van Man has to walk a short way to deliver his Amazon tat.

 

[AM9]

I think it's very clear what I mean.

If you had used a more meaningful term it would be helpful to others. I've assumed that it would be the more commonly encountered case that I described.

I think that ship is somewhere most of the way across the Pacific. Making it work (both for charging and for stopping pavement parking) would be the priority over whether White Van Man has to walk a short way to deliver his Amazon tat.

Not sure what ships in the pacific has got to do with anything regarding obstruction of the highway or pavement parking, you do talk in riddles sometimes.
Every user of the highway should a) not cause undue obstruction irrespective of their reason for using it and b) definitely not obstruct the footpath which is exclusively for pedestrians. Those that do should be dealth with whether they are amongst the list of pet hate delivery firms that you may have, or the resident who lives in the property nearest where they park. There is no right (implied or actual) to park anywhere particularly kerbside.

 

[talldave]

Thats not forcing you to scrap your car. It might incentivise you to sell to, but that’s quite different.

I feel that a "tax" rate of 112% (and increasing) on an asset is as good as "forcing". And as the cancer of Pay Per Mile (faux ULEZ) schemes spreads across the UK, the asset becomes un-sellable.

So if you sell your already built car, it’s completely wasteful, but if you buy an already built car, that’s ok?

Doing something unnecessary is wasteful. After all, as cars shuffle down the supply chain, i suppose my sale/purchase will inevitably result in another new car slotting in at the top of the chain, whether I like it or not.

I tend to keep my cars until the cost of repairs starts increasing to silly levels (ie: I have to pay someone to do something major).. My current cars are the cheapest I’ve maintained in over a quarter of a century (of keeping records!) even using genuine OEM parts.I spend more with Thames Water than I do maintaining a car.

 

[trebor79]

I feel that a "tax" rate of 112% (and increasing) on an asset is as good as "forcing". And as the cancer of Pay Per Mile (faux ULEZ) schemes spreads across the UK, the asset becomes un-sellable.

Good. Encourages people to get rid sooner. We can't keep spewing poisonous fumes into the air we breathe, it's absolutely ludicrous.
I've always found diesel exhaust fumes to be particularly offensive and physically irritating. I never understood why small diesel engined vehicles were promoted in the first place, they should have been banned decades ago. The sooner we can walk around towns and cities without breathing all that rubbish, the better.

Doing something unnecessary is wasteful. After all, as cars shuffle down the supply chain, i suppose my sale/purchase will inevitably result in another new car slotting in at the top of the chain, whether I like it or not.

But it's not just about the economic or carbon cost of the vehicle, it's also about not breathing carcinogens and other nasty stuff.

I tend to keep my cars until the cost of repairs starts increasing to silly levels (ie: I have to pay someone to do something major).. My current cars are the cheapest I’ve maintained in over a quarter of a century (of keeping records!) even using genuine OEM parts.I spend more with Thames Water than I do maintaining a car.

So ULEZ makes the cost of running the car to silly levels, which prompts you to get shot of it and run something compliant. The policy works.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you had used a more meaningful term it would be helpful to others. I've assumed that it would be the more commonly encountered case that I described.

The only usage of the term "terraced" in the context of housing I have ever heard is of the Victorian style of long rows of houses either side of a road (or my more modern one, for that matter, they still build them). You're not American are you, or some other odd regional variation? They call them row houses. The alternative you posit is hardly ever used, principally because they hardly ever occur in the UK. I don't even know what you'd call it, but because it's so rare you would probably use a sentence to describe it, e.g. "houses on terraces on the side of a hill".

Not sure what ships in the pacific has got to do with anything regarding obstruction of the highway or pavement parking, you do talk in riddles sometimes.

You've also never heard the figure of speech "that ship has sailed" to refer to a situation where something has already happened and going on about it potentially becoming a future problem is just pointless? It's one of the most common figures of speech in the UK.

Every user of the highway should a) not cause undue obstruction irrespective of their reason for using it and b) definitely not obstruct the footpath which is exclusively for pedestrians. Those that do should be dealth with whether they are amongst the list of pet hate delivery firms that you may have, or the resident who lives in the property nearest where they park. There is no right (implied or actual) to park anywhere particularly kerbside.

There's no right, no, but it's not illegal either. But you clearly aren't that familiar with this arrangement because "parking wars" are very much a thing, and if something is introduced where you need to be in a particular place in relation to your home to charge your car that will only get worse, thus that cannot be allowed and other alternatives need to be investigated, e.g. actually renting bits of the street to specific people.

I feel that a "tax" rate of 112% (and increasing) on an asset is as good as "forcing".

Forcing you to dispose of it, yes. But you can sell it, then someone else uses it.

And as the cancer of Pay Per Mile (faux ULEZ) schemes spreads across the UK, the asset becomes un-sellable.

These cars, particularly petrols (almost any petrol younger than 15 years complies), are increasingly old. By the time they get unsellable for that reason they'll be unsellable because they're falling to bits. It might even be that ULEZs stop being a thing, because almost all cars on the road by then comply anyway. Though I'd expect ZEZs to then spread, requiring EVs (or hydrogen for those who absolutely must) only.

 

[trebor79]

These cars, particularly petrols (almost any petrol younger than 15 years complies), are increasingly old. By the time they get unsellable for that reason they'll be unsellable because they're falling to bits. It might even be that ULEZs stop being a thing, because almost all cars on the road by then comply anyway. Though I'd expect ZEZs to then spread, requiring EVs (or hydrogen for those who absolutely must) only.

Another potential solution (though it would require a bit of a change to how the electricity market is set up) would be to have charge posts along the street activated by RFID card that uses your own domestic tariff to bill you. I think that's a more elegant solution than renting bit of the street to particular people as it allows charger use to maximised - ie if I'm away for a week or don't need to charge my car tonight someone else can use it, rather than it being sat there useless.

 

[AM9]

There's no right, no, but it's not illegal either. But you clearly aren't that familiar with this arrangement because "parking wars" are very much a thing, and if something is introduced where you need to be in a particular place in relation to your home to charge your car that will only get worse, thus that cannot be allowed and other alternatives need to be investigated, e.g. actually renting bits of the street to specific people.

Obstruction of the highway is illegal, and it is irrelevant that people doit for their own convenience. The choice to charge at the kerbside via an unauthorised power cable is part of a driver's lifestyle choices, as is living in any particular location, and owning a road vehicle at all, (disabled drivers excepted). Kerbside charging 'posts' have been discussed many times here and some even have experience of streets with them fitted and in operation. They would have appropriate provision that authorised exclusive use of that space whilst they actively in use. Just having a licensed and taxed road vehicle does not override the rights of road access to others.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Obstruction of the highway is illegal, and it is irrelevant that people doit for their own convenience. The choice to charge at the kerbside via an unauthorised power cable is part of a driver's lifestyle choices, as is living in any particular location, and owning a road vehicle at all, (disabled drivers excepted). Kerbside charging 'posts' have been discussed many times here and some even have experience of streets with them fitted and in operation. They would have appropriate provision that authorised exclusive use of that space whilst they actively in use. Just having a licensed and taxed road vehicle does not override the rights of road access to others.

Cars parked along these streets are not recognised as causing an obstruction. They are so parked in basically every such street. Where they would cause an obstruction (i.e. prevent a fire truck getting in) double yellow lines tend to be painted.

My mind utterly boggles as to why you're considering something that's been happening for as long as cars have existed suddenly a massive problem.

 

[RailWonderer]

Good. Encourages people to get rid sooner. We can't keep spewing poisonous fumes into the air we breathe, it's absolutely ludicrous.
I've always found diesel exhaust fumes to be particularly offensive and physically irritating. I never understood why small diesel engined vehicles were promoted in the first place, they should have been banned decades ago. The sooner we can walk around towns and cities without breathing all that rubbish, the better.

But it's not just about the economic or carbon cost of the vehicle, it's also about not breathing carcinogens and other nasty stuff.

So ULEZ makes the cost of running the car to silly levels, which prompts you to get shot of it and run something compliant. The policy works.

Tony Blair promoted diesels as the panacea to motoring and that these 'clean efficient fuels' would be the future. Had the company car incentives not been so strong there wouldn't be so many on the road and on autotrader still. So much so that plenty of makes and models were only available as diesels (certain Volvos, Mercedes CLS for example), where for the petrol equivalent you would need to import from a market where they made them.

Unless you are doing high miles annually, diesel is more expensive to fill up anyway so it never made sense to me. More efficient petrol hybrids and EVs have made diesel a bit defunct.

 

[bspahh]

Unless you are doing high miles annually, diesel is more expensive to fill up anyway so it never made sense to me. More efficient petrol hybrids and EVs have made diesel a bit defunct.

The relative price of petrol and diesel varies a bit. At the moment, diesel is a bit more expensive when it is priced by volume. However, it a bit more dense (~ 10% ?) than petrol, so you get a bit more energy per litre, and the price ends up closer. That also means that the fuel consumption in MPG is a bit better than the equivalent petrol engine. CO2 emissions are measured by the weight of the CO2, which isn't affected by the density of diesel.

I've got an 11 year old diesel. I think its better for the environment to keep using it until it has worn out, and try to avoid driving too much in busy city centres.

 

[trebor79]

The relative price of petrol and diesel varies a bit. At the moment, diesel is a bit more expensive when it is priced by volume. However, it a bit more dense (~ 10% ?) than petrol, so you get a bit more energy per litre, and the price ends up closer. That also means that the fuel consumption in MPG is a bit better than the equivalent petrol engine. CO2 emissions are measured by the weight of the CO2, which isn't affected by the density of diesel.

I've got an 11 year old diesel. I think its better for the environment to keep using it until it has worn out, and try to avoid driving too much in busy city centres.

Don't the fumes and particulates it's spewing out count for anything? How using something that pumps filth into the atmosphere every second it's switched on can be better for the environment than an EV is beyond me.

Depending upon the mileage you do, and what you replace it with, you might find you save money by getting rid of it and buying an EV. My Tesla (so relatively expensive) nearly covers it's monthly financing costs as I spend about £45 a month on electricity instead of circa £400 on petrol and about £40 on engine oil for the knackered old 208 it replaced. No servicing required other than tyres and brakes as necessary and replace the cabin air filter every couple of years (about £20 for parts and Tesla have a video showing you how to DIY).

 

[AM9]

Cars parked along these streets are not recognised as causing an obstruction. They are so parked in basically every such street. Where they would cause an obstruction (i.e. prevent a fire truck getting in) double yellow lines tend to be painted.

Despite you professing superior knowledge of on street parking practices, (especially by the less considerate members of society), you seem unaware of the impact of over parking where free passage on the road is sufficently impaired to cause frequent complaints to the authorities.

My mind utterly boggles as to why you're considering something that's been happening for as long as cars have existed suddenly a massive problem.

Well maybe you should cast your mind back less than 48 hours to your post in this very thread, #2793, in which you said: "They are a VERY bad idea because they imply entitlement to on street parking outside one's home."
This statement is even more surprising, considering that I concurred with your view in this thread's very next post, #2794.