Anecdotally I would suggest that many cars do not get scrapped when they are beyond economic repair, they get scrapped because people want something newer/better and the market for old cars is finite.
Exactly but I think that often owners with availably space (big houses, countryside etc.) keep their old cars for a rainy day or because of emotional attachment or to save the money of having to scrap and that can augment the average in quite a bit if they are still being counted as not scrapped. Don't know the rules in the UK but this is quite common in countries you have to pay to scrap (some are financed by the government to reduce the number of old cars).
I still think it would be a much greener approach if we used our things as much as we could out of them. Everybody talks about the efficiency of new machinery but the CO2 and energy tax of producing a new machine (and disposal of old) when your old, albeit less efficient, is still running will probably never offset for most cases. Or maybe I think this way cause I'm still in love with my 19 years old Civic <3
Especially if it includes all vehicles. I know lots of people who have a few motorcycles of all ages. Not classics, just hacks. a 30 year old hack can knock the system a long way out for that day. Same with farms and old vans, landys and quads.
On the reason people change cars, the fuel use has to be considered and in UK taxation. It is more expensive to keep an old car.
...
On the reason people change cars, the fuel use has to be considered and in UK taxation. It is more expensive to keep an old car.
I think that is just a pretext to justify your new car.
I found this UK gov, but there seems to be just a difference of about 100GBP between an old and new car (I used my 1.9TDI VW Bora from 1999 to quickly check). And fuel consumption isn't really that different. At least for me, I use between 4.5l/100km and 5l/100km. Which isn't that much worse than I use with a newer car. So at least for me, a new car would be newer worth it, since I drive maybe 5000km a year.
Re: Will Electric Vehicles Be Viable? When?
Posted: 16 Jul 2018, 13:20
by Tommy Cookers
and of course an EV doing 5000 km/year will only reach 200 of the 2000 cycles of 35% capacity that is provided
so low mileage users could have a far cheaper smaller lighter battery than is made available
giving a cheaper lighter EV would sell to the many such users who are quite willing to be sold their kind of EV
and of course an EV doing 5000 km/year will only reach 200 of the 2000 cycles of 35% capacity that is provided
so low mileage users could have a far cheaper smaller lighter battery than is made available
giving a cheaper lighter EV would sell to the many such users who are quite willing to be sold their kind of EV
Renault sort of acknowledge this in their battery rental schemes. They set an annual mileage limit and guarantee a % charge at end of lease depending on that. I didn’t research it far but I remember that the worst lease residual was 75% and the purchase option residual 66%.
Selling battery life based on annual mileage would I think would be a hard sell. However as leasing becomes ever more popular perhaps it may happen, lease deals always have a mileage clause as far as I know.
Re: Will Electric Vehicles Be Viable? When?
Posted: 17 Jul 2018, 00:17
by Big Tea
Here we go guys, as mentioned earlier, a flying car attempt, and it is on topic cos its 'Letric
I like it... could use more range but it's cool.
Wish the reporter was smart enough to not call a motor an engine, much like people who call their cars engine a motor.
Was a pet peeve of my auto shop teacher and I guess it rubbed off.
much like people who call their cars engine a motor.
Do we need to stop watching "motor sport" and start watching "engine sport"? Unless we watch Formula E - then we're watching "motor sport" so we're ok.
I have the same pet peeve about people using the word "theory" incorrectly. Don't get me started on the poor use of the apostrophe!
Re: Will Electric Vehicles Be Viable? When?
Posted: 17 Jul 2018, 15:53
by Just_a_fan
Whilst sitting in traffic today, I was mulling the issue of EVs. It seems to me that the big driver for EVs is urban air quality, not "climate change". Seems sensible to have vehicles that can run as either EV or ICEV depending on location. So you run as an ICEV for longer runs, and as an EV in urban environments. Current systems would easily allow for a vehicle to do 30-50 miles as pure EV in urban environments and then switch to ICEV once "on the open road".
Air quality covered and range anxiety dealt with in one fell swoop.
We have this sort of vehicle already, of course, in the PHEV but many aren't able to run 50 miles on battery alone. Easy enough to sort that out. Use GPS to determine where the vehicle is and have it swap automatically between power sources within "EV zones". Anyone intending to run in an EV zone will have to plan ahead to ensure they have sufficient charge - if the vehicle knows it's going to be going in to an EV zone then it would ensure sufficient charge is maintained for that part of the journey.
Seems like the simplest way to keep Govt and vehicle users happy. There will be an overall reduction in urban NOx/CO and CO2 too and it won't be a hardship for drivers. Win/win.
Re: Will Electric Vehicles Be Viable? When?
Posted: 17 Jul 2018, 16:22
by AngusF1
^ Most sensible comment on EVs I've come across yet.
Not too keen on *forcing* people to run on electric by GPS, but cars could be programmed to do this by default and most people would run with it anyway.
Whilst sitting in traffic today, I was mulling the issue of EVs. It seems to me that the big driver for EVs is urban air quality, not "climate change". Seems sensible to have vehicles that can run as either EV or ICEV depending on location. So you run as an ICEV for longer runs, and as an EV in urban environments. Current systems would easily allow for a vehicle to do 30-50 miles as pure EV in urban environments and then switch to ICEV once "on the open road".
Air quality covered and range anxiety dealt with in one fell swoop.
We have this sort of vehicle already, of course, in the PHEV but many aren't able to run 50 miles on battery alone. Easy enough to sort that out. Use GPS to determine where the vehicle is and have it swap automatically between power sources within "EV zones". Anyone intending to run in an EV zone will have to plan ahead to ensure they have sufficient charge - if the vehicle knows it's going to be going in to an EV zone then it would ensure sufficient charge is maintained for that part of the journey.
Seems like the simplest way to keep Govt and vehicle users happy. There will be an overall reduction in urban NOx/CO and CO2 too and it won't be a hardship for drivers. Win/win.
Hybrids are the best of both worlds, an EVs with no range limitations, but they´re still using too small electric motors and batteries, so the real range in full electric mode is too short and most of them can´t work in electric mode above 50km/h. I guess there´s not enough space for a fuel tank and a big enough battery
Problem is, as with EVs, price.
EV do really need a new battery technology wich lower prices, or manufacturers lowering their profit percentage so they become affordable/comparable to ICE cars, because IMHO EV prices today are a scam
[
Do we need to stop watching "motor sport" and start watching "engine sport"? Unless we watch Formula E - then we're watching "motor sport" so we're ok.
Don't talk for us. I'm a motorsport fan cause I watch F1 solely to appreciate the MGU-K/H
