Electric Cars
Comments
-
Instead of telling us to buy EV cars as there will eventually be technology to charge it, why not get the technology installed and say buy EV cars, because it is so easy to charge1
-
Manufacturers are being forced down this path, not by market forces, but by government tariffs.ShootersHillGuru said:
I think the die is cast on that already. Manufacturers are already scaling down ICE production and while there will be ICE vehicles on the road for many years after production has stopped I think they’ll be taxed into oblivion. Interested to know why you use the word never.TellyTubby said:
EVs will never become the norm acros the uk for several reasons.ShootersHillGuru said:
Well absolutely. Leaves the question of how millions of car owners in average suburban homes are going to charge their EV’s when they eventually become the norm. We’re not set up for it and the progress being made still looks to me like pissing in the wind. We can’t as a society afford to get someone to see a doctor or have a vital surgical procedure so quite where the money comes from to turn every street into an EV charging heaven is to me pie in the sky.Carter said:
It would absolutely 100% the fault of the idiot who dragged a cable across a footpath and left it overnight. Imagine if a worksite was left with cables and pipes everywhere unprotected deliberately.ShootersHillGuru said:
Serious question. What’s the legal position if someone trips over one of those cables accross the pavement even if covered ? Surely still a trip hazard?JamesSeed said:
I live in a terraced street where there are quite a few EVs. Every lampost has been adapted with a charger, but a lot of owners run a cable out overnight. They put a cover over the cable, and don't drape the cable as shown in the photo above.MrOneLung said:
Can't the terraced house/non driveway plebs make do with public transport?ShootersHillGuru said:The biggest issue I can see with a en mass switch to EV’s still come down to charging for literally millions of people. I just Google Earthed a typical (?) suburban street and for those who want to check it’s Melling Street in Plumstead which is incidentally where my father in law lives. I counted the lampposts on either side of the street and the total is six. Given that lampposts are seen as a way of providing on street charging points in addition to dedicated charging points, I don’t see how it helps much. How would someone living in one of the terraced houses in that typical street hope to charge their EV ? Lampost charging would be chaos with cars competing for the space to charge and how exactly would people charge vehicles from a charging point from their property even if it was practical to have one fitted. These are not small issues that need resolving but massive issues that are duplicated up and down the country for millions and millions of car owners.
If you can't afford a proper abode, you have no right to use the new EV technology.
keep it for the elite.
Also I'd love to not have to dig up footpaths, just leave cables covered in a rubber guard whenever I couldn't be arsed to do it properly or safely
Also given that my stereotypical view of cyclists and EV owners is they are exactly rhe type of people to stand where I am working just filming me on their phone as if that is socially normal and not in any way totally unacceptable they would be the first to grass up a worlk party they left an open worksite like that
The demand isn't there from consumers.
There is no plan from our government to upgrade the electricity supply needed.
There is no strategy to implement the charging points infrastructure.
My understanding is that there isn't enough raw materials to replace all the world's vehicles with EVs.
All of the above issues need to be addressed before EVs take the place of ICE vehicles. I don't believe that it will happen in my lifetime, and probably ever.
There are areas of the world that struggle to get any electricity, let alone enough to power vehicles as well.
Just perhaps there maybe a technological revolution in batteries and a huge investment in charging infrastructure, power supply and cable free charging? I don't see it. EVs will go the way of Beta videos or minidiscs, something better will come along, something practical that consumers buy into, such as hydrogen or synthetic fuel to run all those billions of ICE powered vehicles already on the road.
Now wouldn't that be green, to step back from chucking away all that embedded carbon?2 -
I have zero interest in owning an EV myself. I'm happy for others to drive them and they can make sense for people who rarely travel beyond their immediate area, particularly cities.Hex said:
So providing you get suitable rewards you’ll be happy to play your part in saving our planet ?Carter said:k
The price of used EVs is evidence enough, too much risk too little reward.JamesSeed said:
That’s nonsense. Unless you have stats you can point to, it’s purely anecdotal.Carter said:
Which brings me back full circle. They are unobtainableswordfish said:
Many purchased as totally unnecessary status symbols by those who feel the need to flaunt their assets to impress others.Hex said:
But according to the experts, slightly heavier EVs are NOT the problem. It is probably down to poorly maintained car parks and heavier cars in general, particularly larger SUVs.Carter said:
I'm talking about car parks and the way vehicles are turned on their axis without moving and you've found a hatchet piece about roadsJamesSeed said:
'analysis found that any extra wear is “overwhelmingly caused by large vehicles – buses, heavy goods vehicles”. Road wear from cars and motorcycles is “so low that this immaterial”, they said.Carter said:The weight of them is becoming an issue in car parks. The scrunching and chewing up of the surface from EVs turning without moving at any pace.
Its presented an opportunity for one of my mates who sells an elastic-tarmac product but thats only being bought by people that give a shit about potholes in their car park
'However, in the longer term, the assumption that electric cars will always be heavier is also open to question. Auke Hoekstra, an energy transition researcher at the Eindhoven University of Technology, estimates that batteries are cramming twice as much energy into the same weight every decade. If that continues, the weight problem will disappear before it has started.T&E’s Mathieu said governments should incentivise smaller cars through policies such as taxes and parking charges. That would have benefits far beyond road wear: it would use fewer resources, limit carbon emissions, and make car park scrapes less likely.
“It is not inevitable that EVs are much heavier” than internal combustion engine cars, Mathieu said. “We can and should shift from [internal combustion engines] to EVs, while at the same time reversing the SUV trend.”
The verdict
Extra weight from electric cars could cause some problems at the margins, and in the short-term. However, most EV drivers are unlikely to ever experience problems directly.
Some car park owners may be affected, and if electric trucks are heavier when they become widespread that could add to road maintenance costs.
But almost all of the direct costs will be borne by infrastructure maintenance budgets. The ECIU’s Walker said concerns about extra weight for EVs were simply “massively overstated”. However, he added that carmakers do have a responsibility to produce smaller electric cars, after years of focusing on the most profitable SUVs.
The extra weight of electric cars is not likely to accelerate the destruction of roads, bridges and car parks. Weight concerns threaten to be a distraction from the ultimate prize: cutting carbon emissions to net zero.
Potholes
'Motoring organisations The AA, RAC and FairCharge have hit back at claims that the weight of electric vehicles is responsible for a decline in the quality of roads.
According to the latest Annual Local Authority Road Maintenance (ALARM) survey report by the Asphalt Industry Alliance more than half of the local road network in England and Wales is reported to have less than 15 years’ structural life left, with the amount needed to fix the backlog of carriageway repairs increasing to a record high of £16.3 billion.
Following the publication of the report some national media outlets have put the blame for the deteriorating road network on heavier electric vehicles and larger cars which they say are helping push Britain’s crumbling roads to ‘breaking point’. This is despite the ALARM survey not even mentioning electric vehicles at all.
According to one report “EVs cause twice as much stress on tarmac because they greatly outweigh their petrol or diesel equivalents”.
The RAC’s Head of Policy Simon Williams labelled the assertion that EVs are partly to blame for the poor quality of the UK’s roads as “misguided”.
He said: “A long-term lack of investment in local roads from central government is unquestionably the cause as this has led to a 45% reduction in maintenance carried out by councils in England in the last five years alone.
“Shockingly, government data shows 60% of English councils didn’t carry out any life-extending surface dressing work on their roads in the 2022/23 financial year which means existing defects have simply been left to deteriorate. If water gets into any cracks in the road and freezing conditions follow, surfaces crumble and potholes appear as vehicles of any weight pass over them.
“Any attempt to say the weight of EVs is responsible for a decline in the quality of our roads is a distraction from the reality that our roads have been neglected for too long. We badly need to start treating our roads like the national assets they are, instead of poring good money after bad by just filling potholes which are, of course, purely the symptom of a far deeper problem.”
Edmund King, AA President, said the recent headlines “beggared belief”.
He said: “The current state of the roads is due to years of underspending, sub-standard repairs, roads only being resurfaced every 80 years, and all of this exacerbated by record rainfall over the last nine months. To suggest that the one million EVs on the roads, out of 41.3 million licensed vehicles, are to blame for the potholes is barking. Obviously 44 tonne trucks can add to wear and tear, but it is estimated that on average an EV is about 300lbs heavier than a comparable petrol car, that is the weight of one heavy passenger.
“Perhaps the next headline should be ‘heavy passengers cause potholes. It beggars belief.”
Quentin Willson, motoring broadcaster and Founder of FairCharge, said:
“The notion that heavier electric cars are causing a pothole crisis on our roads makes no sense at all. What about all the vans, trucks, fuel tankers, car transporters and 44 tonne HGVs – not to mention all the two tonne SUVs? EVs are definitely not the heaviest vehicles on our roads by a massive margin. This is just another nonsensical EV myth.”
Craig Andrews, Technical Director for leading highway and runway maintenance specialist Foster Contracting, said:
“The failing UK road network is nothing to do with electric vehicles. It’s decades of under funding before EVs ever hit the roads. Cars of any kind have very little impact on a pavement. It’s the HGVs that cause the stress and do the damage.”
Colin Walker, Head of Transport at the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, said:
“Attempts to pin the blame for the UK’s pothole problems on electric vehicles shows that media misinformation about EVs isn’t going away. Rather than making alarmist and unevidenced claims, wouldn’t it be better if our media used its influence to help its readers access the benefits and savings that come from EV ownership? After all, EVs can save their owners as much as £1,300 a year to run – handy savings in the midst of a cost of living crisis. And, increasingly powered by electricity from British windfarms rather than oil imported from abroad, EVs can help secure our energy independence and protect us from future global price shocks.”
Asphalt Industry Alliance (AIA) Chair Rick Green commented:
“Our Annual Local Authority Road Maintenace (ALARM) survey reports are based on both qualitative and quantitative feedback received from those responsible for maintaining them and have for many years highlighted the link between highway maintenance funding and the condition of the local road network.
“ALARM 2024, once again, reports that local authorities don’t have the funds to keep the carriageway to their own target conditions and that lack of investment is the reason for continued deterioration and a network in decline.
“Reasons identified by local authority engineers needing to deal with unforeseen costs included rising traffic volumes and increased average vehicle weights on a deteriorating network. Feedback received from local highway authorities (LHAs) indicates a perception that there may be an impact due to heavier vehicles (with whatever drivetrain) especially on evolved, unclassified roads that would not have been designed to deal with today’s larger and heavier vehicles, let alone HGVs’ total and axle weights.'
I have never gotten strapped up with PCP and have intention of doing so, used EVs are not trusted as proven by the arse falling out of them as soon as they leave the forecourt.
I'm not sold on your premise that EVs will 'save the planet'. I don't buy it in the slightest.
All too often, this type of rhetoric comes from people who take to a plane several times a year and probably eat meat.
All the time we have virtue signalling political masters using huge quantity of carbon to have self congratulatory jollies around the world in the name of forcing me to reduce my carbon footprint (COP), all the time we have major conflict around the world, all the time we all buy our shiny new carbon saving equipment from the other side of the world rather than produce it locally, all the time that too many of us chuck things away because they are so last week, and all the time that our world population is already far too big for the earth's resources, with nobody trying to address that, then I'm not going to self flagellate because I want to ride a 45yr old motorbike or drive a diesel Transit for work.4 -
I have only spoken about my personal experience and leading professional research into Lithium Ion batteries by academics, I am far from a Climate Change denier. I have been to a Tesla in Thermal Runaway and it honestly terrifies me in retrospect, as for the future hopefully the volatile aspect will be curtailed.Hex said:I think we agree that the current iteration of EVs is not the final solution. Far from it. But it is a necessary part of a process to save the planet. My difficulty ignoring the nay-sayers is their arguments are fueled by misinformation which they seem happy to believe. They are, apparantly, willing to help build a narrative that will damage or destroy the planet.1 -
The problem with hydrogen fuel is it is difficult to produce. We have electricity so you can make electric cars now. Toyota seem to be putting a lot of their eggs in the hydrogen basket and this is the technology I think will win out. Things have to be sorted out/invented before hydrogen is viable but when that happens batteries go out the window immediately. Let us not forget that hydrogen powers electric engines but these cars won't need batteries which have questionable green credentials. In the meantime I think people should be encouraged to keep their petrol cars longer but the car industry doesn't like this and it has nothing to do with saving the planet. They have been actively designing cars for the last 10/15 years which don't last as long when they were actually getting more and more reliable before that.1
-
‘Twas just a whimsical aside but all the stuff about heavier electric cars crushing the country beneath their tyres is just alarmism.Carter said:Nobody is chucking out alarmism or hyperbole. It’s a discussion and people are putting points across until the defensiveness starts.
Whereas the concerns about batteries are totally legitimate. There isn’t enough lithium in the world to make the batteries we need so something else needs to come along.0 -
Seems to me that an awful lot of money and energy (no pun intended) is being put into the EV revolution for something that many of us think has no future.1
-
Spreading misinformation has long been used by the fossil fuel lobbyists to stop or slow change. No surprise therefore that, with EV's, doubts have been sown and exaggerated based on anecdotal examples.Hex said:I think we agree that the current iteration of EVs is not the final solution. Far from it. But it is a necessary part of a process to save the planet. My difficulty ignoring the nay-sayers is their arguments are fueled by misinformation which they seem happy to believe. They are, apparantly, willing to help build a narrative that will damage or destroy the planet.
Not all EV drivers are a shining example in the fight to combat climate change though. A near neighbour of mine drives a Tesla, his wife a Grandland x, which I presume she needs for doing the occasional local school run with her grandkids 🤔 They fly abroad for holidays at frequent intervals, have their house lit up like a Christmas tree most of the time, have delivery vehicles dropping off god knows what several times a week, and are voracious meat eaters hosting barbeques frequently throughout the summer. Of course, they may take carbon offsetting measures, but if I was to take a wild guess, I suspect they don't.
They are of course a godsend for stimulating economic growth, being demanding consumers, so all good then?
My point is those who have a conscience about trying to reduce their carbon footprint but are reluctant to switch to an EV, their concerns born of doubt, shouldn't be guilt tripped into changing when so many others couldn't give a shit about it. I do respect you for banging the EV drum and championing the cause on here though.
The world's changing, but not much and not fast enough to save us from ourselves, not save the planet, which in its long history has bounced back for life to thrive after previous mass extinction events, so it's something you'd think we'd want to sustain in its present state. So frustrating. Apologies for drifting off topic a bit.
5 -
My son in law is involved in the Extreme E motor sport business. He says they are replacing EV sports vehicles with hydrogen powered vehicles from next year.MuttleyCAFC said:The problem with hydrogen fuel is it is difficult to produce. We have electricity so you can make electric cars now. Toyota seem to be putting a lot of their eggs in the hydrogen basket and this is the technology I think will win out. Things have to be sorted out/invented before hydrogen is viable but when that happens batteries go out the window immediately. Let us not forget that hydrogen powers electric engines but these cars won't need batteries which have questionable green credentials. In the meantime I think people should be encouraged to keep their petrol cars longer but the car industry doesn't like this and it has nothing to do with saving the planet. They have been actively designing cars for the last 10/15 years which don't last as long when they were actually getting more and more reliable before that.Current Hydogen powered vehicles are in fact battery powered, the cells charge the battery instead of electricity. The new Hydrogen sports cars will have cells that inject the gas straight into the engine so returning to the combustion engine model. Current Hydrogen cars are 0 - 60 eventually, so can’t cut it for racing.
its still expensive to make hydrogen though, which needs lots of power, so isn’t without challenges.0 -
Going slightly off-topic, the introduction of energy-saving light bulbs was an important step in producing much more energy efficient and therefore environmentally preferable lighting. At the time we could not say they were better looking. We were not told that they were environmentally suspect. But they changed our mentality regarding energy efficiency and reducing electricity demands. Many didn’t transition willingly, the government having to require the electricity companies to supply some to households free of charge. BUT they filled a gap while white LEDs were invented.EVs are much the same except their introduction has the time-limiting problems of global warming in the background. The main difference is the role that misinformation is playing in creating an anti-EV narrative. That’s dangerous. Look what the 25 year campaign of anti-EU nonsense achieved.
I’m not suggesting we force people to buy EVs. I’m not saying batteries do not have environmental issues to be overcome. Range needs to increase as does the infrastructure. But if you were pondering going EV and using this thread as guidance then you may not realise that many of the reasons put forward to not do so are either misleading or just not true. The EU debate showed us that if you repeat lies often enough then they become the ‘truth’. The planet cannot allow this ‘truth’ to win out.3 -
Sponsored links:
-
I am ready and willing to be convinced but my starting point is misstrust. I think that is the right starting point.1
-
I would say that I’m a pretty average retired person. We have one vehicle which needs to be large enough for us both and three grandchildren. (We do several school runs a week). I’m in the market for a new car early next year. Our house has a drive. Home charging won’t be an issue. Range on my trips to both London and Devon for family visits will be. Family in both places don’t have charging as both are terraced houses. When I visit I’ll have to find a charging point and enough time to charge up the battery. No idea how long that will take. Small inconvenience? Not for me. I think it’s enough to put me off an EV for now. I’m perfectly happy to accept that some of the concerns are being overplayed but range and ease and availability of charging is major for me.Hex said:Going slightly off-topic, the introduction of energy-saving light bulbs was an important step in producing much more energy efficient and therefore environmentally preferable lighting. At the time we could not say they were better looking. We were not told that they were environmentally suspect. But they changed our mentality regarding energy efficiency and reducing electricity demands. Many didn’t transition willingly, the government having to require the electricity companies to supply some to households free of charge. BUT they filled a gap while white LEDs were invented.EVs are much the same except their introduction has the time-limiting problems of global warming in the background. The main difference is the role that misinformation is playing in creating an anti-EV narrative. That’s dangerous. Look what the 25 year campaign of anti-EU nonsense achieved.
I’m not suggesting we force people to buy EVs. I’m not saying batteries do not have environmental issues to be overcome. Range needs to increase as does the infrastructure. But if you were pondering going EV and using this thread as guidance then you may not realise that many of the reasons put forward to not do so are either misleading or just not true. The EU debate showed us that if you repeat lies often enough then they become the ‘truth’. The planet cannot allow this ‘truth’ to win out.0 -
Anyone seriously considering buying an EV would be well advised to conduct broader research than looking for advice in this place. However, there's no substitute for practical experience, so posts from those who were open minded enough to take the plunge and buy one are the ones to take most notice of.Hex said:Going slightly off-topic, the introduction of energy-saving light bulbs was an important step in producing much more energy efficient and therefore environmentally preferable lighting. At the time we could not say they were better looking. We were not told that they were environmentally suspect. But they changed our mentality regarding energy efficiency and reducing electricity demands. Many didn’t transition willingly, the government having to require the electricity companies to supply some to households free of charge. BUT they filled a gap while white LEDs were invented.EVs are much the same except their introduction has the time-limiting problems of global warming in the background. The main difference is the role that misinformation is playing in creating an anti-EV narrative. That’s dangerous. Look what the 25 year campaign of anti-EU nonsense achieved.
I’m not suggesting we force people to buy EVs. I’m not saying batteries do not have environmental issues to be overcome. Range needs to increase as does the infrastructure. But if you were pondering going EV and using this thread as guidance then you may not realise that many of the reasons put forward to not do so are either misleading or just not true. The EU debate showed us that if you repeat lies often enough then they become the ‘truth’. The planet cannot allow this ‘truth’ to win out.
I'm not going to post anything else here that might help dissuade anyone from buying an EV though.0 -
I was/am in a similar position to you so I don't disagree with your decision. In May 23 we ordered our Volvo (est 5-8mths). We had one longish trip to Wiltshire 2 or 3 times a year which would have required recharging. The MiL had a drive but 3Kw charging is very slow so we would have to use public chargers in town, some 10-15mins walk. I've just checked and 14 of 15 are available. Unfortunately MiL died before the Volvo was delivered so we haven't put the theory into practice. I think the 'lack of infrastructure' is being overplayed for the average driver but I am basing that on what I personally have witnessed and read.ShootersHillGuru said:
I would say that I’m a pretty average retired person. We have one vehicle which needs to be large enough for us both and three grandchildren. (We do several school runs a week). I’m in the market for a new car early next year. Our house has a drive. Home charging won’t be an issue. Range on my trips to both London and Devon for family visits will be. Family in both places don’t have charging as both are terraced houses. When I visit I’ll have to find a charging point and enough time to charge up the battery. No idea how long that will take. Small inconvenience? Not for me. I think it’s enough to put me off an EV for now. I’m perfectly happy to accept that some of the concerns are being overplayed but range and ease and availability of charging is major for me.Hex said:Going slightly off-topic, the introduction of energy-saving light bulbs was an important step in producing much more energy efficient and therefore environmentally preferable lighting. At the time we could not say they were better looking. We were not told that they were environmentally suspect. But they changed our mentality regarding energy efficiency and reducing electricity demands. Many didn’t transition willingly, the government having to require the electricity companies to supply some to households free of charge. BUT they filled a gap while white LEDs were invented.EVs are much the same except their introduction has the time-limiting problems of global warming in the background. The main difference is the role that misinformation is playing in creating an anti-EV narrative. That’s dangerous. Look what the 25 year campaign of anti-EU nonsense achieved.
I’m not suggesting we force people to buy EVs. I’m not saying batteries do not have environmental issues to be overcome. Range needs to increase as does the infrastructure. But if you were pondering going EV and using this thread as guidance then you may not realise that many of the reasons put forward to not do so are either misleading or just not true. The EU debate showed us that if you repeat lies often enough then they become the ‘truth’. The planet cannot allow this ‘truth’ to win out.1 -
Overplayed?Hex said:
I was/am in a similar position to you so I don't disagree with your decision. In May 23 we ordered our Volvo (est 5-8mths). We had one longish trip to Wiltshire 2 or 3 times a year which would have required recharging. The MiL had a drive but 3Kw charging is very slow so we would have to use public chargers in town, some 10-15mins walk. I've just checked and 14 of 15 are available. Unfortunately MiL died before the Volvo was delivered so we haven't put the theory into practice. I think the 'lack of infrastructure' is being overplayed for the average driver but I am basing that on what I personally have witnessed and read.ShootersHillGuru said:
I would say that I’m a pretty average retired person. We have one vehicle which needs to be large enough for us both and three grandchildren. (We do several school runs a week). I’m in the market for a new car early next year. Our house has a drive. Home charging won’t be an issue. Range on my trips to both London and Devon for family visits will be. Family in both places don’t have charging as both are terraced houses. When I visit I’ll have to find a charging point and enough time to charge up the battery. No idea how long that will take. Small inconvenience? Not for me. I think it’s enough to put me off an EV for now. I’m perfectly happy to accept that some of the concerns are being overplayed but range and ease and availability of charging is major for me.Hex said:Going slightly off-topic, the introduction of energy-saving light bulbs was an important step in producing much more energy efficient and therefore environmentally preferable lighting. At the time we could not say they were better looking. We were not told that they were environmentally suspect. But they changed our mentality regarding energy efficiency and reducing electricity demands. Many didn’t transition willingly, the government having to require the electricity companies to supply some to households free of charge. BUT they filled a gap while white LEDs were invented.EVs are much the same except their introduction has the time-limiting problems of global warming in the background. The main difference is the role that misinformation is playing in creating an anti-EV narrative. That’s dangerous. Look what the 25 year campaign of anti-EU nonsense achieved.
I’m not suggesting we force people to buy EVs. I’m not saying batteries do not have environmental issues to be overcome. Range needs to increase as does the infrastructure. But if you were pondering going EV and using this thread as guidance then you may not realise that many of the reasons put forward to not do so are either misleading or just not true. The EU debate showed us that if you repeat lies often enough then they become the ‘truth’. The planet cannot allow this ‘truth’ to win out.
My friend in Lincolnshire has an EV. He decided not to drive it to us in Devon because the nearest public charger is 8 miles away.0 -
One can charge from a 3 pin socket. Takes longer but good for top ups if no other option is available.
0 -
Good idea. The government could put up taxes to pay for it whilst blaming the previous government for not doing it. Obviously taxpayers will probably no longer have the disposable income to buy an EV, or an ICE for that matter, so the number of chargers to cars ratio will be even better.MrOneLung said:Instead of telling us to buy EV cars as there will eventually be technology to charge it, why not get the technology installed and say buy EV cars, because it is so easy to charge0 -
Not quite how I look at it!
The government are telling us to do anything. They are, however, introducing a ban on the manufacture of machines that cause environmental harm and long term damage to the environment. Just like you cannot use CFC's in fridges.
Fuel tax is effectively dropping because it does not rise with inflation.1 -
I have to ask, why were you even thinking about visiting your MiL?Hex said:
I was/am in a similar position to you so I don't disagree with your decision. In May 23 we ordered our Volvo (est 5-8mths). We had one longish trip to Wiltshire 2 or 3 times a year which would have required recharging. The MiL had a drive but 3Kw charging is very slow so we would have to use public chargers in town, some 10-15mins walk. I've just checked and 14 of 15 are available. Unfortunately MiL died before the Volvo was delivered so we haven't put the theory into practice. I think the 'lack of infrastructure' is being overplayed for the average driver but I am basing that on what I personally have witnessed and read.ShootersHillGuru said:
I would say that I’m a pretty average retired person. We have one vehicle which needs to be large enough for us both and three grandchildren. (We do several school runs a week). I’m in the market for a new car early next year. Our house has a drive. Home charging won’t be an issue. Range on my trips to both London and Devon for family visits will be. Family in both places don’t have charging as both are terraced houses. When I visit I’ll have to find a charging point and enough time to charge up the battery. No idea how long that will take. Small inconvenience? Not for me. I think it’s enough to put me off an EV for now. I’m perfectly happy to accept that some of the concerns are being overplayed but range and ease and availability of charging is major for me.Hex said:Going slightly off-topic, the introduction of energy-saving light bulbs was an important step in producing much more energy efficient and therefore environmentally preferable lighting. At the time we could not say they were better looking. We were not told that they were environmentally suspect. But they changed our mentality regarding energy efficiency and reducing electricity demands. Many didn’t transition willingly, the government having to require the electricity companies to supply some to households free of charge. BUT they filled a gap while white LEDs were invented.EVs are much the same except their introduction has the time-limiting problems of global warming in the background. The main difference is the role that misinformation is playing in creating an anti-EV narrative. That’s dangerous. Look what the 25 year campaign of anti-EU nonsense achieved.
I’m not suggesting we force people to buy EVs. I’m not saying batteries do not have environmental issues to be overcome. Range needs to increase as does the infrastructure. But if you were pondering going EV and using this thread as guidance then you may not realise that many of the reasons put forward to not do so are either misleading or just not true. The EU debate showed us that if you repeat lies often enough then they become the ‘truth’. The planet cannot allow this ‘truth’ to win out.0 -
Happy wife, happy life.AddicksAddict said:
I have to ask, why were you even thinking about visiting your MiL?Hex said:
I was/am in a similar position to you so I don't disagree with your decision. In May 23 we ordered our Volvo (est 5-8mths). We had one longish trip to Wiltshire 2 or 3 times a year which would have required recharging. The MiL had a drive but 3Kw charging is very slow so we would have to use public chargers in town, some 10-15mins walk. I've just checked and 14 of 15 are available. Unfortunately MiL died before the Volvo was delivered so we haven't put the theory into practice. I think the 'lack of infrastructure' is being overplayed for the average driver but I am basing that on what I personally have witnessed and read.ShootersHillGuru said:
I would say that I’m a pretty average retired person. We have one vehicle which needs to be large enough for us both and three grandchildren. (We do several school runs a week). I’m in the market for a new car early next year. Our house has a drive. Home charging won’t be an issue. Range on my trips to both London and Devon for family visits will be. Family in both places don’t have charging as both are terraced houses. When I visit I’ll have to find a charging point and enough time to charge up the battery. No idea how long that will take. Small inconvenience? Not for me. I think it’s enough to put me off an EV for now. I’m perfectly happy to accept that some of the concerns are being overplayed but range and ease and availability of charging is major for me.Hex said:Going slightly off-topic, the introduction of energy-saving light bulbs was an important step in producing much more energy efficient and therefore environmentally preferable lighting. At the time we could not say they were better looking. We were not told that they were environmentally suspect. But they changed our mentality regarding energy efficiency and reducing electricity demands. Many didn’t transition willingly, the government having to require the electricity companies to supply some to households free of charge. BUT they filled a gap while white LEDs were invented.EVs are much the same except their introduction has the time-limiting problems of global warming in the background. The main difference is the role that misinformation is playing in creating an anti-EV narrative. That’s dangerous. Look what the 25 year campaign of anti-EU nonsense achieved.
I’m not suggesting we force people to buy EVs. I’m not saying batteries do not have environmental issues to be overcome. Range needs to increase as does the infrastructure. But if you were pondering going EV and using this thread as guidance then you may not realise that many of the reasons put forward to not do so are either misleading or just not true. The EU debate showed us that if you repeat lies often enough then they become the ‘truth’. The planet cannot allow this ‘truth’ to win out.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Sainthood requires more than just pleasing your Mrs.guinnessaddick said:
Happy wife, happy life.AddicksAddict said:
I have to ask, why were you even thinking about visiting your MiL?Hex said:
I was/am in a similar position to you so I don't disagree with your decision. In May 23 we ordered our Volvo (est 5-8mths). We had one longish trip to Wiltshire 2 or 3 times a year which would have required recharging. The MiL had a drive but 3Kw charging is very slow so we would have to use public chargers in town, some 10-15mins walk. I've just checked and 14 of 15 are available. Unfortunately MiL died before the Volvo was delivered so we haven't put the theory into practice. I think the 'lack of infrastructure' is being overplayed for the average driver but I am basing that on what I personally have witnessed and read.ShootersHillGuru said:
I would say that I’m a pretty average retired person. We have one vehicle which needs to be large enough for us both and three grandchildren. (We do several school runs a week). I’m in the market for a new car early next year. Our house has a drive. Home charging won’t be an issue. Range on my trips to both London and Devon for family visits will be. Family in both places don’t have charging as both are terraced houses. When I visit I’ll have to find a charging point and enough time to charge up the battery. No idea how long that will take. Small inconvenience? Not for me. I think it’s enough to put me off an EV for now. I’m perfectly happy to accept that some of the concerns are being overplayed but range and ease and availability of charging is major for me.Hex said:Going slightly off-topic, the introduction of energy-saving light bulbs was an important step in producing much more energy efficient and therefore environmentally preferable lighting. At the time we could not say they were better looking. We were not told that they were environmentally suspect. But they changed our mentality regarding energy efficiency and reducing electricity demands. Many didn’t transition willingly, the government having to require the electricity companies to supply some to households free of charge. BUT they filled a gap while white LEDs were invented.EVs are much the same except their introduction has the time-limiting problems of global warming in the background. The main difference is the role that misinformation is playing in creating an anti-EV narrative. That’s dangerous. Look what the 25 year campaign of anti-EU nonsense achieved.
I’m not suggesting we force people to buy EVs. I’m not saying batteries do not have environmental issues to be overcome. Range needs to increase as does the infrastructure. But if you were pondering going EV and using this thread as guidance then you may not realise that many of the reasons put forward to not do so are either misleading or just not true. The EU debate showed us that if you repeat lies often enough then they become the ‘truth’. The planet cannot allow this ‘truth’ to win out.0 -
It's a chance to give the thermals and sundry other warmth retaining clothes a run out, but if it's not the summer ....AddicksAddict said:
I have to ask, why were you even thinking about visiting your MiL?Hex said:
I was/am in a similar position to you so I don't disagree with your decision. In May 23 we ordered our Volvo (est 5-8mths). We had one longish trip to Wiltshire 2 or 3 times a year which would have required recharging. The MiL had a drive but 3Kw charging is very slow so we would have to use public chargers in town, some 10-15mins walk. I've just checked and 14 of 15 are available. Unfortunately MiL died before the Volvo was delivered so we haven't put the theory into practice. I think the 'lack of infrastructure' is being overplayed for the average driver but I am basing that on what I personally have witnessed and read.ShootersHillGuru said:
I would say that I’m a pretty average retired person. We have one vehicle which needs to be large enough for us both and three grandchildren. (We do several school runs a week). I’m in the market for a new car early next year. Our house has a drive. Home charging won’t be an issue. Range on my trips to both London and Devon for family visits will be. Family in both places don’t have charging as both are terraced houses. When I visit I’ll have to find a charging point and enough time to charge up the battery. No idea how long that will take. Small inconvenience? Not for me. I think it’s enough to put me off an EV for now. I’m perfectly happy to accept that some of the concerns are being overplayed but range and ease and availability of charging is major for me.Hex said:Going slightly off-topic, the introduction of energy-saving light bulbs was an important step in producing much more energy efficient and therefore environmentally preferable lighting. At the time we could not say they were better looking. We were not told that they were environmentally suspect. But they changed our mentality regarding energy efficiency and reducing electricity demands. Many didn’t transition willingly, the government having to require the electricity companies to supply some to households free of charge. BUT they filled a gap while white LEDs were invented.EVs are much the same except their introduction has the time-limiting problems of global warming in the background. The main difference is the role that misinformation is playing in creating an anti-EV narrative. That’s dangerous. Look what the 25 year campaign of anti-EU nonsense achieved.
I’m not suggesting we force people to buy EVs. I’m not saying batteries do not have environmental issues to be overcome. Range needs to increase as does the infrastructure. But if you were pondering going EV and using this thread as guidance then you may not realise that many of the reasons put forward to not do so are either misleading or just not true. The EU debate showed us that if you repeat lies often enough then they become the ‘truth’. The planet cannot allow this ‘truth’ to win out.0 -
Shooters, you seem to be seeking out negatives, when the reality is that these changes are happening now, slowly at first, but more rapidly as time passes.ShootersHillGuru said:
And perhaps expensively pointless if you can’t secure the parking space in front of your house which in many streets and roads is very much the case.JamesSeed said:
Think you’d need permission from the council. And what would cover the trench? A grille? Perhaps that could catch on if councils allowed it. But as Carter says, it’s not straightforward.stevexreeve said:
Surely people can pay an electrician and / or build to run a cable from the house to the road in a small trench. Might cost the same as a couple of full tanks of petrol!JamesSeed said:
I live in a terraced street where there are quite a few EVs. Every lampost has been adapted with a charger, but a lot of owners run a cable out overnight. They put a cover over the cable, and don't drape the cable as shown in the photo above.MrOneLung said:
Can't the terraced house/non driveway plebs make do with public transport?ShootersHillGuru said:The biggest issue I can see with a en mass switch to EV’s still come down to charging for literally millions of people. I just Google Earthed a typical (?) suburban street and for those who want to check it’s Melling Street in Plumstead which is incidentally where my father in law lives. I counted the lampposts on either side of the street and the total is six. Given that lampposts are seen as a way of providing on street charging points in addition to dedicated charging points, I don’t see how it helps much. How would someone living in one of the terraced houses in that typical street hope to charge their EV ? Lampost charging would be chaos with cars competing for the space to charge and how exactly would people charge vehicles from a charging point from their property even if it was practical to have one fitted. These are not small issues that need resolving but massive issues that are duplicated up and down the country for millions and millions of car owners.
If you can't afford a proper abode, you have no right to use the new EV technology.
keep it for the elite.I live in a terraced street in the Battersea/Clapham area, and every lamppost in our street is equipped with an EV charge point. In addition all the people with EVs have a charge socket at home, so they can take advantage of the cheaper overnight rates.There’s not really an issue with parking outside your own house, especially bearing in mind that you don’t need to charge your car every night. And if you do need to charge urgently you can use any one of the lamppost chargers - and it’s still cheaper than petrol, per mile.
These residents use the same cable ducts that television links truck use when running their cables to live cameras. Perfectly safe, but I imagine a minor irritation for wheelchair users. Having said that, I’ve never seen a wheelchair in our street in the 22 years I’ve lived here.
And the car I’m looking at (Hyundai Inster) charges from 0-80% in 20 mins. Future generations of batteries will do the same as six or seven minutes. No more having to drive to a petrol station to fill up. Sounds good to me.
5 -
TT, don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. People who give up meat might be helping the planet, people who don’t fly on planes might be helping the planet, people ditching polluting cars might be helping the planet, people who by locally produced goods might be helping save the planet, but not many people will do all of these things. But every little helps.TellyTubby said:
I have zero interest in owning an EV myself. I'm happy for others to drive them and they can make sense for people who rarely travel beyond their immediate area, particularly cities.Hex said:
So providing you get suitable rewards you’ll be happy to play your part in saving our planet ?Carter said:k
The price of used EVs is evidence enough, too much risk too little reward.JamesSeed said:
That’s nonsense. Unless you have stats you can point to, it’s purely anecdotal.Carter said:
Which brings me back full circle. They are unobtainableswordfish said:
Many purchased as totally unnecessary status symbols by those who feel the need to flaunt their assets to impress others.Hex said:
But according to the experts, slightly heavier EVs are NOT the problem. It is probably down to poorly maintained car parks and heavier cars in general, particularly larger SUVs.Carter said:
I'm talking about car parks and the way vehicles are turned on their axis without moving and you've found a hatchet piece about roadsJamesSeed said:
'analysis found that any extra wear is “overwhelmingly caused by large vehicles – buses, heavy goods vehicles”. Road wear from cars and motorcycles is “so low that this immaterial”, they said.Carter said:The weight of them is becoming an issue in car parks. The scrunching and chewing up of the surface from EVs turning without moving at any pace.
Its presented an opportunity for one of my mates who sells an elastic-tarmac product but thats only being bought by people that give a shit about potholes in their car park
'However, in the longer term, the assumption that electric cars will always be heavier is also open to question. Auke Hoekstra, an energy transition researcher at the Eindhoven University of Technology, estimates that batteries are cramming twice as much energy into the same weight every decade. If that continues, the weight problem will disappear before it has started.T&E’s Mathieu said governments should incentivise smaller cars through policies such as taxes and parking charges. That would have benefits far beyond road wear: it would use fewer resources, limit carbon emissions, and make car park scrapes less likely.
“It is not inevitable that EVs are much heavier” than internal combustion engine cars, Mathieu said. “We can and should shift from [internal combustion engines] to EVs, while at the same time reversing the SUV trend.”
The verdict
Extra weight from electric cars could cause some problems at the margins, and in the short-term. However, most EV drivers are unlikely to ever experience problems directly.
Some car park owners may be affected, and if electric trucks are heavier when they become widespread that could add to road maintenance costs.
But almost all of the direct costs will be borne by infrastructure maintenance budgets. The ECIU’s Walker said concerns about extra weight for EVs were simply “massively overstated”. However, he added that carmakers do have a responsibility to produce smaller electric cars, after years of focusing on the most profitable SUVs.
The extra weight of electric cars is not likely to accelerate the destruction of roads, bridges and car parks. Weight concerns threaten to be a distraction from the ultimate prize: cutting carbon emissions to net zero.
Potholes
'Motoring organisations The AA, RAC and FairCharge have hit back at claims that the weight of electric vehicles is responsible for a decline in the quality of roads.
According to the latest Annual Local Authority Road Maintenance (ALARM) survey report by the Asphalt Industry Alliance more than half of the local road network in England and Wales is reported to have less than 15 years’ structural life left, with the amount needed to fix the backlog of carriageway repairs increasing to a record high of £16.3 billion.
Following the publication of the report some national media outlets have put the blame for the deteriorating road network on heavier electric vehicles and larger cars which they say are helping push Britain’s crumbling roads to ‘breaking point’. This is despite the ALARM survey not even mentioning electric vehicles at all.
According to one report “EVs cause twice as much stress on tarmac because they greatly outweigh their petrol or diesel equivalents”.
The RAC’s Head of Policy Simon Williams labelled the assertion that EVs are partly to blame for the poor quality of the UK’s roads as “misguided”.
He said: “A long-term lack of investment in local roads from central government is unquestionably the cause as this has led to a 45% reduction in maintenance carried out by councils in England in the last five years alone.
“Shockingly, government data shows 60% of English councils didn’t carry out any life-extending surface dressing work on their roads in the 2022/23 financial year which means existing defects have simply been left to deteriorate. If water gets into any cracks in the road and freezing conditions follow, surfaces crumble and potholes appear as vehicles of any weight pass over them.
“Any attempt to say the weight of EVs is responsible for a decline in the quality of our roads is a distraction from the reality that our roads have been neglected for too long. We badly need to start treating our roads like the national assets they are, instead of poring good money after bad by just filling potholes which are, of course, purely the symptom of a far deeper problem.”
Edmund King, AA President, said the recent headlines “beggared belief”.
He said: “The current state of the roads is due to years of underspending, sub-standard repairs, roads only being resurfaced every 80 years, and all of this exacerbated by record rainfall over the last nine months. To suggest that the one million EVs on the roads, out of 41.3 million licensed vehicles, are to blame for the potholes is barking. Obviously 44 tonne trucks can add to wear and tear, but it is estimated that on average an EV is about 300lbs heavier than a comparable petrol car, that is the weight of one heavy passenger.
“Perhaps the next headline should be ‘heavy passengers cause potholes. It beggars belief.”
Quentin Willson, motoring broadcaster and Founder of FairCharge, said:
“The notion that heavier electric cars are causing a pothole crisis on our roads makes no sense at all. What about all the vans, trucks, fuel tankers, car transporters and 44 tonne HGVs – not to mention all the two tonne SUVs? EVs are definitely not the heaviest vehicles on our roads by a massive margin. This is just another nonsensical EV myth.”
Craig Andrews, Technical Director for leading highway and runway maintenance specialist Foster Contracting, said:
“The failing UK road network is nothing to do with electric vehicles. It’s decades of under funding before EVs ever hit the roads. Cars of any kind have very little impact on a pavement. It’s the HGVs that cause the stress and do the damage.”
Colin Walker, Head of Transport at the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, said:
“Attempts to pin the blame for the UK’s pothole problems on electric vehicles shows that media misinformation about EVs isn’t going away. Rather than making alarmist and unevidenced claims, wouldn’t it be better if our media used its influence to help its readers access the benefits and savings that come from EV ownership? After all, EVs can save their owners as much as £1,300 a year to run – handy savings in the midst of a cost of living crisis. And, increasingly powered by electricity from British windfarms rather than oil imported from abroad, EVs can help secure our energy independence and protect us from future global price shocks.”
Asphalt Industry Alliance (AIA) Chair Rick Green commented:
“Our Annual Local Authority Road Maintenace (ALARM) survey reports are based on both qualitative and quantitative feedback received from those responsible for maintaining them and have for many years highlighted the link between highway maintenance funding and the condition of the local road network.
“ALARM 2024, once again, reports that local authorities don’t have the funds to keep the carriageway to their own target conditions and that lack of investment is the reason for continued deterioration and a network in decline.
“Reasons identified by local authority engineers needing to deal with unforeseen costs included rising traffic volumes and increased average vehicle weights on a deteriorating network. Feedback received from local highway authorities (LHAs) indicates a perception that there may be an impact due to heavier vehicles (with whatever drivetrain) especially on evolved, unclassified roads that would not have been designed to deal with today’s larger and heavier vehicles, let alone HGVs’ total and axle weights.'
I have never gotten strapped up with PCP and have intention of doing so, used EVs are not trusted as proven by the arse falling out of them as soon as they leave the forecourt.
I'm not sold on your premise that EVs will 'save the planet'. I don't buy it in the slightest.
All too often, this type of rhetoric comes from people who take to a plane several times a year and probably eat meat.
All the time we have virtue signalling political masters using huge quantity of carbon to have self congratulatory jollies around the world in the name of forcing me to reduce my carbon footprint (COP), all the time we have major conflict around the world, all the time we all buy our shiny new carbon saving equipment from the other side of the world rather than produce it locally, all the time that too many of us chuck things away because they are so last week, and all the time that our world population is already far too big for the earth's resources, with nobody trying to address that, then I'm not going to self flagellate because I want to ride a 45yr old motorbike or drive a diesel Transit for work.
And of course, no one has ever claimed that EVs alone will save the planet.3 -
Hex has literally claimed that EVs will save the planet on this thread(at least twice), hence my wording.JamesSeed said:
TT, don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. People who give up meat might be helping the planet, people who don’t fly on planes might be helping the planet, people ditching polluting cars might be helping the planet, people who by locally produced goods might be helping save the planet, but not many people will do all of these things. But every little helps.TellyTubby said:
I have zero interest in owning an EV myself. I'm happy for others to drive them and they can make sense for people who rarely travel beyond their immediate area, particularly cities.Hex said:
So providing you get suitable rewards you’ll be happy to play your part in saving our planet ?Carter said:k
The price of used EVs is evidence enough, too much risk too little reward.JamesSeed said:
That’s nonsense. Unless you have stats you can point to, it’s purely anecdotal.Carter said:
Which brings me back full circle. They are unobtainableswordfish said:
Many purchased as totally unnecessary status symbols by those who feel the need to flaunt their assets to impress others.Hex said:
But according to the experts, slightly heavier EVs are NOT the problem. It is probably down to poorly maintained car parks and heavier cars in general, particularly larger SUVs.Carter said:
I'm talking about car parks and the way vehicles are turned on their axis without moving and you've found a hatchet piece about roadsJamesSeed said:
'analysis found that any extra wear is “overwhelmingly caused by large vehicles – buses, heavy goods vehicles”. Road wear from cars and motorcycles is “so low that this immaterial”, they said.Carter said:The weight of them is becoming an issue in car parks. The scrunching and chewing up of the surface from EVs turning without moving at any pace.
Its presented an opportunity for one of my mates who sells an elastic-tarmac product but thats only being bought by people that give a shit about potholes in their car park
'However, in the longer term, the assumption that electric cars will always be heavier is also open to question. Auke Hoekstra, an energy transition researcher at the Eindhoven University of Technology, estimates that batteries are cramming twice as much energy into the same weight every decade. If that continues, the weight problem will disappear before it has started.T&E’s Mathieu said governments should incentivise smaller cars through policies such as taxes and parking charges. That would have benefits far beyond road wear: it would use fewer resources, limit carbon emissions, and make car park scrapes less likely.
“It is not inevitable that EVs are much heavier” than internal combustion engine cars, Mathieu said. “We can and should shift from [internal combustion engines] to EVs, while at the same time reversing the SUV trend.”
The verdict
Extra weight from electric cars could cause some problems at the margins, and in the short-term. However, most EV drivers are unlikely to ever experience problems directly.
Some car park owners may be affected, and if electric trucks are heavier when they become widespread that could add to road maintenance costs.
But almost all of the direct costs will be borne by infrastructure maintenance budgets. The ECIU’s Walker said concerns about extra weight for EVs were simply “massively overstated”. However, he added that carmakers do have a responsibility to produce smaller electric cars, after years of focusing on the most profitable SUVs.
The extra weight of electric cars is not likely to accelerate the destruction of roads, bridges and car parks. Weight concerns threaten to be a distraction from the ultimate prize: cutting carbon emissions to net zero.
Potholes
'Motoring organisations The AA, RAC and FairCharge have hit back at claims that the weight of electric vehicles is responsible for a decline in the quality of roads.
According to the latest Annual Local Authority Road Maintenance (ALARM) survey report by the Asphalt Industry Alliance more than half of the local road network in England and Wales is reported to have less than 15 years’ structural life left, with the amount needed to fix the backlog of carriageway repairs increasing to a record high of £16.3 billion.
Following the publication of the report some national media outlets have put the blame for the deteriorating road network on heavier electric vehicles and larger cars which they say are helping push Britain’s crumbling roads to ‘breaking point’. This is despite the ALARM survey not even mentioning electric vehicles at all.
According to one report “EVs cause twice as much stress on tarmac because they greatly outweigh their petrol or diesel equivalents”.
The RAC’s Head of Policy Simon Williams labelled the assertion that EVs are partly to blame for the poor quality of the UK’s roads as “misguided”.
He said: “A long-term lack of investment in local roads from central government is unquestionably the cause as this has led to a 45% reduction in maintenance carried out by councils in England in the last five years alone.
“Shockingly, government data shows 60% of English councils didn’t carry out any life-extending surface dressing work on their roads in the 2022/23 financial year which means existing defects have simply been left to deteriorate. If water gets into any cracks in the road and freezing conditions follow, surfaces crumble and potholes appear as vehicles of any weight pass over them.
“Any attempt to say the weight of EVs is responsible for a decline in the quality of our roads is a distraction from the reality that our roads have been neglected for too long. We badly need to start treating our roads like the national assets they are, instead of poring good money after bad by just filling potholes which are, of course, purely the symptom of a far deeper problem.”
Edmund King, AA President, said the recent headlines “beggared belief”.
He said: “The current state of the roads is due to years of underspending, sub-standard repairs, roads only being resurfaced every 80 years, and all of this exacerbated by record rainfall over the last nine months. To suggest that the one million EVs on the roads, out of 41.3 million licensed vehicles, are to blame for the potholes is barking. Obviously 44 tonne trucks can add to wear and tear, but it is estimated that on average an EV is about 300lbs heavier than a comparable petrol car, that is the weight of one heavy passenger.
“Perhaps the next headline should be ‘heavy passengers cause potholes. It beggars belief.”
Quentin Willson, motoring broadcaster and Founder of FairCharge, said:
“The notion that heavier electric cars are causing a pothole crisis on our roads makes no sense at all. What about all the vans, trucks, fuel tankers, car transporters and 44 tonne HGVs – not to mention all the two tonne SUVs? EVs are definitely not the heaviest vehicles on our roads by a massive margin. This is just another nonsensical EV myth.”
Craig Andrews, Technical Director for leading highway and runway maintenance specialist Foster Contracting, said:
“The failing UK road network is nothing to do with electric vehicles. It’s decades of under funding before EVs ever hit the roads. Cars of any kind have very little impact on a pavement. It’s the HGVs that cause the stress and do the damage.”
Colin Walker, Head of Transport at the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, said:
“Attempts to pin the blame for the UK’s pothole problems on electric vehicles shows that media misinformation about EVs isn’t going away. Rather than making alarmist and unevidenced claims, wouldn’t it be better if our media used its influence to help its readers access the benefits and savings that come from EV ownership? After all, EVs can save their owners as much as £1,300 a year to run – handy savings in the midst of a cost of living crisis. And, increasingly powered by electricity from British windfarms rather than oil imported from abroad, EVs can help secure our energy independence and protect us from future global price shocks.”
Asphalt Industry Alliance (AIA) Chair Rick Green commented:
“Our Annual Local Authority Road Maintenace (ALARM) survey reports are based on both qualitative and quantitative feedback received from those responsible for maintaining them and have for many years highlighted the link between highway maintenance funding and the condition of the local road network.
“ALARM 2024, once again, reports that local authorities don’t have the funds to keep the carriageway to their own target conditions and that lack of investment is the reason for continued deterioration and a network in decline.
“Reasons identified by local authority engineers needing to deal with unforeseen costs included rising traffic volumes and increased average vehicle weights on a deteriorating network. Feedback received from local highway authorities (LHAs) indicates a perception that there may be an impact due to heavier vehicles (with whatever drivetrain) especially on evolved, unclassified roads that would not have been designed to deal with today’s larger and heavier vehicles, let alone HGVs’ total and axle weights.'
I have never gotten strapped up with PCP and have intention of doing so, used EVs are not trusted as proven by the arse falling out of them as soon as they leave the forecourt.
I'm not sold on your premise that EVs will 'save the planet'. I don't buy it in the slightest.
All too often, this type of rhetoric comes from people who take to a plane several times a year and probably eat meat.
All the time we have virtue signalling political masters using huge quantity of carbon to have self congratulatory jollies around the world in the name of forcing me to reduce my carbon footprint (COP), all the time we have major conflict around the world, all the time we all buy our shiny new carbon saving equipment from the other side of the world rather than produce it locally, all the time that too many of us chuck things away because they are so last week, and all the time that our world population is already far too big for the earth's resources, with nobody trying to address that, then I'm not going to self flagellate because I want to ride a 45yr old motorbike or drive a diesel Transit for work.
And of course, no one has ever claimed that EVs alone will save the planet.
BTW, I'm for all doing our bit and agree that it's not like that everyone will buy into all the recommended ways to improve things.
As I've said a number of times though, the biggest problem by far is world population explosion, nothing else matters without that being addressed.4 -
Classic case of I’m alright JackJamesSeed said:
Shooters, you seem to be seeking out negatives, when the reality is that these changes are happening now, slowly at first, but more rapidly as time passes.ShootersHillGuru said:
And perhaps expensively pointless if you can’t secure the parking space in front of your house which in many streets and roads is very much the case.JamesSeed said:
Think you’d need permission from the council. And what would cover the trench? A grille? Perhaps that could catch on if councils allowed it. But as Carter says, it’s not straightforward.stevexreeve said:
Surely people can pay an electrician and / or build to run a cable from the house to the road in a small trench. Might cost the same as a couple of full tanks of petrol!JamesSeed said:
I live in a terraced street where there are quite a few EVs. Every lampost has been adapted with a charger, but a lot of owners run a cable out overnight. They put a cover over the cable, and don't drape the cable as shown in the photo above.MrOneLung said:
Can't the terraced house/non driveway plebs make do with public transport?ShootersHillGuru said:The biggest issue I can see with a en mass switch to EV’s still come down to charging for literally millions of people. I just Google Earthed a typical (?) suburban street and for those who want to check it’s Melling Street in Plumstead which is incidentally where my father in law lives. I counted the lampposts on either side of the street and the total is six. Given that lampposts are seen as a way of providing on street charging points in addition to dedicated charging points, I don’t see how it helps much. How would someone living in one of the terraced houses in that typical street hope to charge their EV ? Lampost charging would be chaos with cars competing for the space to charge and how exactly would people charge vehicles from a charging point from their property even if it was practical to have one fitted. These are not small issues that need resolving but massive issues that are duplicated up and down the country for millions and millions of car owners.
If you can't afford a proper abode, you have no right to use the new EV technology.
keep it for the elite.I live in a terraced street in the Battersea/Clapham area, and every lamppost in our street is equipped with an EV charge point. In addition all the people with EVs have a charge socket at home, so they can take advantage of the cheaper overnight rates.There’s not really an issue with parking outside your own house, especially bearing in mind that you don’t need to charge your car every night. And if you do need to charge urgently you can use any one of the lamppost chargers - and it’s still cheaper than petrol, per mile.
These residents use the same cable ducts that television links truck use when running their cables to live cameras. Perfectly safe, but I imagine a minor irritation for wheelchair users. Having said that, I’ve never seen a wheelchair in our street in the 22 years I’ve lived here.
And the car I’m looking at (Hyundai Inster) charges from 0-80% in 20 mins. Future generations of batteries will do the same as six or seven minutes. No more having to drive to a petrol station to fill up. Sounds good to me.7 -
And when the first person trips and sues you......JamesSeed said:
Shooters, you seem to be seeking out negatives, when the reality is that these changes are happening now, slowly at first, but more rapidly as time passes.ShootersHillGuru said:
And perhaps expensively pointless if you can’t secure the parking space in front of your house which in many streets and roads is very much the case.JamesSeed said:
Think you’d need permission from the council. And what would cover the trench? A grille? Perhaps that could catch on if councils allowed it. But as Carter says, it’s not straightforward.stevexreeve said:
Surely people can pay an electrician and / or build to run a cable from the house to the road in a small trench. Might cost the same as a couple of full tanks of petrol!JamesSeed said:
I live in a terraced street where there are quite a few EVs. Every lampost has been adapted with a charger, but a lot of owners run a cable out overnight. They put a cover over the cable, and don't drape the cable as shown in the photo above.MrOneLung said:
Can't the terraced house/non driveway plebs make do with public transport?ShootersHillGuru said:The biggest issue I can see with a en mass switch to EV’s still come down to charging for literally millions of people. I just Google Earthed a typical (?) suburban street and for those who want to check it’s Melling Street in Plumstead which is incidentally where my father in law lives. I counted the lampposts on either side of the street and the total is six. Given that lampposts are seen as a way of providing on street charging points in addition to dedicated charging points, I don’t see how it helps much. How would someone living in one of the terraced houses in that typical street hope to charge their EV ? Lampost charging would be chaos with cars competing for the space to charge and how exactly would people charge vehicles from a charging point from their property even if it was practical to have one fitted. These are not small issues that need resolving but massive issues that are duplicated up and down the country for millions and millions of car owners.
If you can't afford a proper abode, you have no right to use the new EV technology.
keep it for the elite.I live in a terraced street in the Battersea/Clapham area, and every lamppost in our street is equipped with an EV charge point. In addition all the people with EVs have a charge socket at home, so they can take advantage of the cheaper overnight rates.There’s not really an issue with parking outside your own house, especially bearing in mind that you don’t need to charge your car every night. And if you do need to charge urgently you can use any one of the lamppost chargers - and it’s still cheaper than petrol, per mile.
These residents use the same cable ducts that television links truck use when running their cables to live cameras. Perfectly safe, but I imagine a minor irritation for wheelchair users. Having said that, I’ve never seen a wheelchair in our street in the 22 years I’ve lived here.
And the car I’m looking at (Hyundai Inster) charges from 0-80% in 20 mins. Future generations of batteries will do the same as six or seven minutes. No more having to drive to a petrol station to fill up. Sounds good to me.5 -
I've never seen a wheelchair in our street. Ahh that's alright then. Just a minor inconvenience if one does decide to turn up 👍2
-
I'm chuckling away picturing every traffic management and road works guarding inspector rolling their eyes at the thought of having to fine and bollock utilities for having a sign out of place or a spelling mistake then preparing for the earful they will rightly get when these things are littering pavements.
They are last resorts, temporary measures and used by people who know what they are doing and how to secure them properly. They are still trip hazards and if I use my own gathered first hand witnessed evidence of how fucking badly a lot of people drive in this country and how lane discipline is a lost art I do not believe people will be using these correctly and a lot of well intended EV drivers getting sued3 -
Just use a charge gully or similar https://www.chargegully.com/. Good luck getting a local council to approve though.
0
