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

[DelW]

A country's economy is based on making things to sell, whether it is agriculture produce, manufactured goods or service industries. If you decimate part of the west's manufacturing output, what do you replace it with to avoid significant unemployment (in both car factories and in the supply chains)?

The fact that China can make electric cars cheaply is due to either:

• low costs including low wage rates and energy costs
• government subsidisation
• monopoly on raw materials for batteries

If government subsidy is a key element, then it is fair to introduce tarifs to level up the playing field. The other factors could have resulted from government policies (high employment taxes, high corporation tax, high energy costs) or from the industry being asleep at the wheel for not spotting the trends towards electric vehicles. Whether these factors should lead to tariffs is debateable.

I'd suggest a possible fourth factor - total disregard for the environmental consequences of its manufacturing industry, including the mining of its raw materials.

 

[greyman42]

I'd suggest a possible fourth factor - total disregard for the environmental consequences of its manufacturing industry, including the mining of its raw materials.

Spot on, but a lot of people don't seem able to or want to take that in. Yet they would soon get hysterical if we did the same in the UK.

 

[MotCO]

I'd suggest a possible fourth factor - total disregard for the environmental consequences of its manufacturing industry, including the mining of its raw materials.

Including mining raw materials (coal) in China to power their electric cars? According to Yale University, China still generates about 70 percent of its electricity from fossil fuels.

How China Became the World’s Leader on Renewable Energy

China has achieved stunning growth in its installed renewable capacity over the last two decades, far outpacing the rest of the world. But to end its continued dependence on fossil fuels, it must now move ahead with planned reforms to its national electricity system.

e360.yale.edu

Renewables now account for half of China’s installed capacity, but there has also been a surge in permits for new coal-fired power plants, and China still generates about 70 percent of its electricity from fossil fuels. This means actual renewable energy use is lagging behind installed capacity.

And what about the mining of lithium to produce EV batteries? Removing any raw materials can result in soil degradation, water shortages, biodiversity loss, damage to ecosystem functions and an increase in global warming, and this includes lithium.

South America's 'lithium fields' reveal the dark side of electric cars

Demand for lithium-ion batteries is unprecedented - but is mining the chemical harmful to the environment?

www.euronews.com

Any type of resource extraction is harmful to the planet. This is because removing these raw materials can result in soil degradation, water shortages, biodiversity loss, damage to ecosystem functions and an increase in global warming.

But when we think of extraction, we think of fossil fuels like coal and gas. Unfortunately, lithium also falls under the same umbrella, despite paving the way for an electric future.. Lithium can be described as the non-renewable mineral that makes renewable energy possible - often touted as the next oil.

The truth is that no car production is without issues. Neither is perfect, but if large corporations are wedded to minimising the environmental impact, then surely the markets will decide. Making cars at the right price will meet the corporations' crudentials.

 

[Noddy]

Including mining raw materials (coal) in China to power their electric cars? According to Yale University, China still generates about 70 percent of its electricity from fossil fuels.

How China Became the World’s Leader on Renewable Energy

China has achieved stunning growth in its installed renewable capacity over the last two decades, far outpacing the rest of the world. But to end its continued dependence on fossil fuels, it must now move ahead with planned reforms to its national electricity system.

e360.yale.edu

And what about the mining of lithium to produce EV batteries? Removing any raw materials can result in soil degradation, water shortages, biodiversity loss, damage to ecosystem functions and an increase in global warming, and this includes lithium.

South America's 'lithium fields' reveal the dark side of electric cars

Demand for lithium-ion batteries is unprecedented - but is mining the chemical harmful to the environment?

www.euronews.com

The truth is that no car production is without issues. Neither is perfect, but if large corporations are wedded to minimising the environmental impact, then surely the markets will decide. Making cars at the right price will meet the corporations' crudentials.

Lithium can be described as the non-renewable mineral that makes renewable energy possible - often touted as the next oil.

The problem with this description of Lithium as a non-renewable mineral is that it isn’t correct. Yes Lithium the metal isn’t ‘renewable’ but Lithium batteries are both reusable, as say static storage once the cars life has ended, and recyclable if the battery itself is dead.

Companies like Zenobe use former car batteries to power their static storage solutions. https://www.zenobe.com/second-life-batteries/

Companies like Redwood Materials can recover 95% of the precious metal out of the battery. https://www.redwoodmaterials.com/solutions/

So unlike oil, which only ever has a single use, Lithium batteries can have multiple uses, and then most of it can be recycled to make another Lithium battery. So to describe Lithium as ‘the next oil’ and ‘non-renewable’ either misunderstands how Lithium batteries work, or it is intentionally misleading. I suspect in most cases it’s the latter.

 

[Enthusiast]

I'd suggest a possible fourth factor - total disregard for the environmental consequences of its manufacturing industry, including the mining of its raw materials.

Including mining raw materials (coal) in China to power their electric cars? According to Yale University, China still generates about 70 percent of its electricity from fossil fuels.

China currently operates 1,155 coal fired power plants providing 1,136 Gw. They have a further 332 plants either in pre-construction or construction which will provide an additional 645Gw. For comparison, the UK's total peak electricity demand is around 35Gw (which in the main involves little or no production from coal).

China consumed more than 3.5 billion tons of coal last year - more than the rest of the world put together. Their planned increase of more than 50% in their installed coal-fired electricity capacity means this consumption will only increase considerably. All the UK is doing by pursuing its ridiculous "net zero" strategy is to offshore its emissions elsewhere - principally to China where our stupidity is fuelling an industrial revolution there which will sound the death knell for industry both here and in much of Europe. I suspect the CCP must be rubbing their hands with glee because before too long there will be no need for the West to impose tariffs on Chinese cars to protect its mass produced automotive industry. There won't be much of an industry left to protect.

 

[Noddy]

China currently operates 1,155 coal fired power plants providing 1,136 Gw. They have a further 332 plants either in pre-construction or construction which will provide an additional 645Gw. For comparison, the UK's total peak electricity demand is around 35Gw (which in the main involves little or no production from coal).

China consumed more than 3.5 billion tons of coal last year - more than the rest of the world put together. Their planned increase of more than 50% in their installed coal-fired electricity capacity means this consumption will only increase considerably. All the UK is doing by pursuing its ridiculous "net zero" strategy is to offshore its emissions elsewhere - principally to China where our stupidity is fuelling an industrial revolution there which will sound the death knell for industry both here and in much of Europe. I suspect the CCP must be rubbing their hands with glee because before too long there will be no need for the West to impose tariffs on Chinese cars to protect its mass produced automotive industry. There won't be much of an industry left to protect.

Yes, Electric Cars Are Cleaner, Even When The Power Comes From Coal

One argument that has been made against electric vehicles is that we must decarbonise the power system first otherwise cars are no cleaner than if they use gasoline. But a new study suggests that EVs help to tackle climate change in all but the most coal-reliant countries - 95% of markets globally.

www.forbes.com

One argument against electric vehicles (EVs) made by those that wish to cling to the certainties of the internal combustion engine is that we need to decarbonise the power system first otherwise cars are no cleaner than if they use gasoline.


Many observers question whether electric cars really are ‘greener’ once emissions from production and generating their electricity are taken into account.


Leaving aside the instant improvements in local air quality from not having harmful tailpipe emissions pumping into the atmosphere, a new study suggests that EVs help to tackle climate change in all but the most coal-reliant countries…

 

[The Ham]

Yes, Electric Cars Are Cleaner, Even When The Power Comes From Coal

One argument that has been made against electric vehicles is that we must decarbonise the power system first otherwise cars are no cleaner than if they use gasoline. But a new study suggests that EVs help to tackle climate change in all but the most coal-reliant countries - 95% of markets globally.

www.forbes.com

Only China isn't 100% Coal, as whilst it's got 1,136 Gw of coal capacity there's also 609 Gw of solar capacity and 441 Gw of wind capacity with solar and wind also setting sufficient growth (up 55% for solar and up 21% for wind in 2023).

 

[Noddy]

Only China isn't 100% Coal, as whilst it's got 1,136 Gw of coal capacity there's also 609 Gw of solar capacity and 441 Gw of wind capacity with solar and wind also setting sufficient growth (up 55% for solar and up 21% for wind in 2023).

Exactly! Hence why China is specifically mentioned in the article as a country where an EV is more environmentally friendly (from a lifetime CO2 perspective) than an ICE car. Only where countries grid are all or almost all coal is it worse to drive an EV than an ICE car and with the cost of renewables being so cheap there are fewer and fewer of those left.

The study divided the world into 59 regions to account for differences in power generation and technology. In 53 of these regions – including the US, China and most of Europe – the findings show electric cars and heat pumps are already less emission-intensive than fossil fuel alternatives.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Exactly! Hence why China is specifically mentioned in the article as a country where an EV is more environmentally friendly (from a lifetime CO2 perspective) than an ICE car. Only where countries grid are all or almost all coal is it worse to drive an EV than an ICE car and with the cost of renewables being so cheap there are fewer and fewer of those left.

Does that factor in the emissions and other environmental harm caused by mining the metals required for the EV battery? Or just the emissions of generating the electricity to charge it?

 

[Krokodil]

Does that factor in the emissions and other environmental harm caused by mining the metals required for the EV battery? Or just the emissions of generating the electricity to charge it?

Do the ICE environmental impact figures include the pollution involved in extracting the oil and the raw materials for the engine? Or just the tailpipe emissions?

 

[DiscoSteve]

Only the most stubborn ICE fan would argue that EV's are less environmentally friendly than gas guzzling ICE vehicles - it amazes me how the great unwashed continue to believe the anti-ev rhetoric spouted by those with a clear interest in Oil & Gas production.

And guess what, there's nothing actually to be scared off, I've been driving my EV for nearly a year and its a hoot (goes like stink) and has a decent range (WLTP of 406) and I just plug it in at home if I need some juice - easy peasy.

 

[AM9]

Do the ICE environmental impact figures include the pollution involved in extracting the oil and the raw materials for the engine? Or just the tailpipe emissions?

... and transporting the fuel to the pump for the duration of each vehicle's life (ironically using oil burning vehicles).

 

[RailWonderer]

Only the most stubborn ICE fan would argue that EV's are less environmentally friendly than gas guzzling ICE vehicles - it amazes me how the great unwashed continue to believe the anti-ev rhetoric spouted by those with a clear interest in Oil & Gas production.

And guess what, there's nothing actually to be scared off, I've been driving my EV for nearly a year and its a hoot (goes like stink) and has a decent range (WLTP of 406) and I just plug it in at home if I need some juice - easy peasy.

It's not always about believing rhetoric but about a lack of information whether or not EVs are good or better value. A lot of people don't look beyond the purchase price, and the expensive out of warranty battery replacements. The other reason is people purchase a car because they like that particular car - say a Mini convertible. If they like the colour and price they will buy it, not what powers it.

 

[Noddy]

Does that factor in the emissions and other environmental harm caused by mining the metals required for the EV battery? Or just the emissions of generating the electricity to charge it?

Yes it includes life time CO2/green house gas emission cost. Below is an extract of one of the tables from the original report which was published in the journal Nature Sustainability with the following link:

Net emission reductions from electric cars and heat pumps in 59 world regions over time - Nature Sustainability

Little is known about the actual effects of electrification policies on carbon emissions. This study shows that, under current carbon intensities of electricity generation, electric cars and heat pumps are less emission intensive than fossil-fuel-based alternatives in 53 of 59 world regions.

www.nature.com

Abstract​

The electrification of passenger road transport and household heating features prominently in current and planned policy frameworks to achieve greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets. However, since electricity generation involves using fossil fuels, it is not established where and when the replacement of fossil-fuel-based technologies by electric cars and heat pumps can effectively reduce overall emissions. Could electrification policies backfire by promoting their diffusion before electricity is decarbonized? Here we analyse current and future emissions trade-offs in 59 world regions with heterogeneous households, by combining forward-looking integrated assessment model simulations with bottom-up life-cycle assessments. We show that already under current carbon intensities of electricity generation, electric cars and heat pumps are less emission intensive than fossil-fuel-based alternatives in 53 world regions, representing 95% of the global transport and heating demand. Even if future end-use electrification is not matched by rapid power-sector decarbonization, it will probably reduce emissions in almost all world regions.

As to other environmental damage, which is what I suspect you are hinting at, all mineral extraction, whether metal, oil, stone, etc has a cost. The question is how do we mitigate it. The number one producer of lithium is Australia at 86000 metric tons, almost double China at 44000 metric tons. Although I don’t think Australia have as rigorous environmental protections as the UK/Europe I suspect they are stricter than many would imagine Lithium mines to be.

Also note there are Lithium reserves in the UK, which are very likely to be mined in future, with all the usual environmental protections. Imerys have identified reserves in Cornwall that could produce 20000 tons per year (just under 1/4 of Australias current output) for at least 30 years which will be enough to produce 15 million car batteries. From one mine, which they hope to open by 2030.

 

[Harpers Tate]

Unlike in oil production where the rare elements needed and used are actually consumed, EV batteries can be stripped and these elements recycled. They are not consumed. The fact is that car batteries last way, way longer than FUD sources would have us believe, such that there are presently insufficient of them that are life expired to sustain a recycling industry. But I firmly believe, as the EV population grows and ages, such an industry will become sustainable - at which point we will have a further "source" of, say, Lithium.

 

[Bantamzen]

Only the most stubborn ICE fan would argue that EV's are less environmentally friendly than gas guzzling ICE vehicles - it amazes me how the great unwashed continue to believe the anti-ev rhetoric spouted by those with a clear interest in Oil & Gas production.

And guess what, there's nothing actually to be scared off, I've been driving my EV for nearly a year and its a hoot (goes like stink) and has a decent range (WLTP of 406) and I just plug it in at home if I need some juice - easy peasy.

You know EVs are going to be the future, there's no doubt about this. But this kind of snobbery can be done without, it really doesn't help the argument at all. Just say "yeah my EV is great, you should consider one" rather than trying to imply that anyone who hasn't got one is some sort of undesirable. There are still plenty of reasons why people may be hesitant about switching, not everywhere is awash with charging stations or on-street charging, and not all homes able yet to have charging points installed without wires running over pavements etc.

 

[Mawkie]

Unlike in oil production where the rare elements needed and used are actually consumed, EV batteries can be stripped and these elements recycled. They are not consumed. The fact is that car batteries last way, way longer than FUD sources would have us believe,...

Rory Reid, of Top Gear fame and now Autotrader, has produced a small series on the Autotrader YouTube channel investigating a Tesla (used as a taxi) with over 400,000 miles on the clock, on its original batteries and original motors.

What is incredible is that those batteries, when they become less useful for life in a motor vehicle, will be reused in battery home storage, or other static uses, providing useful service for many decades, before being completely stripped down and recycled.

 

[skyhigh]

and the expensive out of warranty battery replacements.

Not this rubbish again...

 

[trebor79]

Does that factor in the emissions and other environmental harm caused by mining the metals required for the EV battery?

Yes. Next

It's not always about believing rhetoric but about a lack of information whether or not EVs are good or better value. A lot of people don't look beyond the purchase price, and the expensive out of warranty battery replacements. The other reason is people purchase a car because they like that particular car - say a Mini convertible. If they like the colour and price they will buy it, not what powers it.

Ah the mythical battery replacement costs.
What powers the car is now my primary focus. I will not consider anything that burns fuel, even for a rental (mine needs repair after a crash and I've told the insurer I won't accept a fuelled hire car).

 

[Harpers Tate]

A battery would be an expensive replacement. The question is - are you going to need one - to which the statistical answer is almost certainly not in the lifetime of the car. If you did, you'd be as unfortunate as someone who needed, say, an entirely new engine in their ICE.

 

[trebor79]

A battery would be an expensive replacement. The question is - are you going to need one - to which the statistical answer is almost certainly not in the lifetime of the car. If you did, you'd be as unfortunate as someone who needed, say, an entirely new engine in their ICE.

I view the risk of battery failure as very low, otherwise manufacturers wouldn't be offering such long warranties. Generally with electrical stuff that fails it's either dead on arrival or fails soon after entering service. Very unusual for electrical components (including batteries) to just fail randomly several years into service. I'd wager the risk is less than the risk of a timing belt letting go on an engine.

 

[jon0844]

Most batteries are modular but some car makers (Tesla) seemingly don't allow repairs or servicing and want to sell a new battery. There are major issues concerning right to repair in the US going on, and also within the EU, and it should be possible for someone qualified (and there are many companies starting that work on batteries) to repair or recondition batteries, as well as safely swap out a battery. This sort of thing needs to be sorted in courts around the world, or else people will be ripped off for fixing any battery issues (however rare) as EVs age.

The cost of batteries means that (from the last report I saw but can't cite here) it's around $3500 for a battery from one of the major manufacturers - an absolutely staggering fall and I think they're likely cheaper still by now. I'm not sure what size capacity they averaged that for, but likely bigger than the batteries coming in the small B-segment cars (thus, they're going to be even cheaper). Once you've added on the relevant costs, that's still not cheap but neither is it the £20-30k or £50k figure that some people seem to make up quote.

Nissan in Japan will sell a new battery for an old Leaf for around £3000, but how many people with an old car buy brand new parts? Once my cars were old enough, they were repaired by independent mechanics using salvaged parts. The same will apply for batteries for most people unlucky enough to need a replacement (or not even necessarily unlucky as maybe they used the car so heavily that they have probably been saving a fortune for years by that point).

As I've said before, I'd always feel safer buying an old EV over an old ICE car given the hidden surprises it might have. An EV is a pretty simple design and should not only be more reliable in the first place, but cheaper to fix. Bar the battery itself (and maybe the BMS), it should be easier for people to fix too. Again, there will be issues with part pairing and other methods put in place to stop anyone being able to work on a vehicle they supposedly own, but that's for Governments to regulate. Those same issues apply to ICE cars too, and will for everything if we allow it.

 

[The Ham]

Most batteries are modular but some car makers (Tesla) seemingly don't allow repairs or servicing and want to sell a new battery. There are major issues concerning right to repair in the US going on, and also within the EU, and it should be possible for someone qualified (and there are many companies starting that work on batteries) to repair or recondition batteries, as well as safely swap out a battery. This sort of thing needs to be sorted in courts around the world, or else people will be ripped off for fixing any battery issues (however rare) as EVs age.

The cost of batteries means that (from the last report I saw but can't cite here) it's around $3500 for a battery from one of the major manufacturers - an absolutely staggering fall and I think they're likely cheaper still by now. I'm not sure what size capacity they averaged that for, but likely bigger than the batteries coming in the small B-segment cars (thus, they're going to be even cheaper). Once you've added on the relevant costs, that's still not cheap but neither is it the £20-30k or £50k figure that some people seem to make up quote.

Nissan in Japan will sell a new battery for an old Leaf for around £3000, but how many people with an old car buy brand new parts? Once my cars were old enough, they were repaired by independent mechanics using salvaged parts. The same will apply for batteries for most people unlucky enough to need a replacement (or not even necessarily unlucky as maybe they used the car so heavily that they have probably been saving a fortune for years by that point).

As I've said before, I'd always feel safer buying an old EV over an old ICE car given the hidden surprises it might have. An EV is a pretty simple design and should not only be more reliable in the first place, but cheaper to fix. Bar the battery itself (and maybe the BMS), it should be easier for people to fix too. Again, there will be issues with part pairing and other methods put in place to stop anyone being able to work on a vehicle they supposedly own, but that's for Governments to regulate. Those same issues apply to ICE cars too, and will for everything if we allow it.

The other thing to note, there's going to be a market (even if it's quite small) for a car who's battery is so shot that it can only do (say) 30 miles, there's not really the same thing for a car who has a busted engine.

 

[Krokodil]

If someone does a lot of recharge cycles (like a taxi driver for example) and is therefore likely to need to replace the battery with new at some point, how much will the old battery have depreciated in value between the point at which it was bought new and the point at which it is no longer considered good enough for the car (but still has resale value for non-automotive use)?

 

[AM9]

If someone does a lot of recharge cycles (like a taxi driver for example) and is therefore likely to need to replace the battery with new at some point, how much will the old battery have depreciated in value between the point at which it was bought new and the point at which it is no longer considered good enough for the car (but still has resale value for non-automotive use)?

Such a requirement would become part of the business expenditure of running a taxi, and such running would have generated a lot of income from fares. That's nothing like the claimed £10000 out of the blue for a new battery that those against EVs claim will be visited on the poor private motorist.

 

[trebor79]

Such a requirement would become part of the business expenditure of running a taxi, and such running would have generated a lot of income from fares. That's nothing like the claimed £10000 out of the blue for a new battery that those against EVs claim will be visited on the poor private motorist.

Old batteries will have significant value once the battery recycling industry has scaled. New cost of replacement will be a fraction of what it is today.

 

[paul1609]

A battery would be an expensive replacement. The question is - are you going to need one - to which the statistical answer is almost certainly not in the lifetime of the car. If you did, you'd be as unfortunate as someone who needed, say, an entirely new engine in their ICE.

I think thats true for degradation but unfortunately not true for accident damage. If the hv battery is damaged in an accident the ev is a write off.

 

[Enthusiast]

What powers the car is now my primary focus. I will not consider anything that burns fuel, even for a rental (mine needs repair after a crash and I've told the insurer I won't accept a fuelled hire car).

And what have they said in response to that?

Is there a particular reason for your stubbornness?

 

[jon0844]

I think thats true for degradation but unfortunately not true for accident damage. If the hv battery is damaged in an accident the ev is a write off.

Funny to read that as only a few hours ago I was reading something about GWM and how they have a servicing and repair department for damaged batteries, with the aim of ensuring batteries can be saved even after some types of crash damage. It helps with their insurance rating as a result.

I assume other car makers will be doing this sort of thing either already or soon.

The battery position does mean it might not be written off except in the sort of accident where it's the least of anyone's worries.

 

[trebor79]

And what have they said in response to that?

Is there a particular reason for your stubbornness?

They made a note of it. It's actually a Credit Repair, so I'm sure they'll be only to happy to inflate the bill to the other party.
And yes, I often drive 1,000 miles a week. That costs me less than £20. If I buy fuel it'll be more like £200. And it's filthy and pollutes the air we all breathe.