Is there increasing resistance against EV’s?

[Amarillo]

it would be great to keep the trucks on the inside lane only though

That is how I envisage it working. Some sort of guided lane for pantograph trucks, with trains of them connected by Bluetooth or similar, trundling along at a steady 90 kph, only breaking up and reforming when one or more want to leave the train.

If the overhead power cables are not to run under bridges or through tunnels, trucks temporarily relying on battery power, it does away with any issues of vandals wanting to lob stuff onto the cables.

I really can’t see that automatic lowering or raising of the pantograph to be an issue.

I was riding the Docklands Light Railway today. It must be 30 years old. Everything is fully automated, and while there are occasional issues, it is generally very reliable. I still love sitting at the front and pretending I’m the driver.

If self driving trains were possible when the London Docklands were being developed 30 or 40 years ago, I cannot understand why autonomous pantograph can’t be possible today.

 

[Wildcamper]

I don’t understand this fixation on China as a guide to how we decarbonise in this country.

Britain was the first country to industrialise, there’s nothing wrong is being one of the first to decarbonise.

I think it comes down to economics. Decarbonisation costs money which has to come from somewhere. Adding that cost onto all the other business costs make UK products and services more expensive. In the likes of China/India where they are do not have to add these cost, and where labour and welfare costs are already lower, makes UK goods less competitive. What good will it be for the UK to be the greenest country with the most expensive products that others do not purchase?

 

[Amarillo]

It's only 4,6m€ a mile. 38.5B € and you're done

Cheaper and greener and lower running costs and probably greater revenue potential than HS2.

I wonder if the electricity companies would fund it.

 

[haydnw2]

I really can’t see that automatic lowering or raising of the pantograph to be an issue.

German example said that it lowers automatically if they indicate or pull out to overtake.

 

[westfalia]

The costs of an almost worldwide lockdown would have been unthinkable
5 years ago but it happened. The costs of Zelenskys shopping list are being
realised without a care.
Hotel California aka Jeff Bezos needs to cough up a few quid for the carbon stuff.
The money would be there if they wanted it all to go full green, but they don't, they just want
us to be constantly worrying about sh1t.

I drive through those tram lines on the A5 to Frankfurt often and I have yet to see a truck
using them.
White Elephant, if ever I saw one.

 

[Borris]

That is how I envisage it working. Some sort of guided lane for pantograph trucks, with trains of them connected by Bluetooth or similar, trundling along at a steady 90 kph, only breaking up and reforming when one or more want to leave the train.

So it's basically a railway but without the rails. I can't help thinking that it would be far better if freight were to be carried over long distance by an improved rail network instead of via the roads. EVs could be targeted for local distribution and delivery. Wouldn't the investment be better spent improving the railway network and infrastructure we already have?

 

[Calimili]

The costs of an almost worldwide lockdown would have been unthinkable
5 years ago but it happened. The costs of Zelenskys shopping list are being
realised without a care.
Hotel California aka Jeff Bezos needs to cough up a few quid for the carbon stuff.
The money would be there if they wanted it all to go full green, but they don't, they just want
us to be constantly worrying about sh1t.

I drive through those tram lines on the A5 to Frankfurt often and I have yet to see a truck
using them.
White Elephant, if ever I saw one.

I commuted from Munich to Frankfurt for 8 years weekly, never saw an electric truck on that stretch. The Germans did the test/experiment, by judging from the outcomes , it must not have been that successful, the tram-truck thing. That stretch of Autobahn still remains a good straight stretch to test top speeds of 911s though.

 

[Amarillo]

So it's basically a railway but without the rails. I can't help thinking that it would be far better if freight were to be carried over long distance by an improved rail network instead of via the roads. EVs could be targeted for local distribution and delivery. Wouldn't the investment be better spent improving the railway network and infrastructure we already have?

You’ve just invented HS2. Move passenger traffic to high speed rail and freight goes by snail rail.

The problem is that railways are expensive to build and maintain. Electrifying roads should be relatively cheap.

 

[Borris]

The problem is that railways are expensive to build and maintain. Electrifying roads should be relatively cheap.

"Should" ? WelI I wouldn't know!

However, I suspect that such a nation wide project would prove vastly more complicated than you suggest. The UK trunk road network simply wasn't designed with such a system in mind. Accordingly, if such project were to go ahead, there would be an endless list of unforesene problems, each with significant cost implications. Costs would quickly escalate out of control. And thats just the civil engineering bit.

Also, imagine the cost to the nation of the disruption caused, whilst the necessary infrastructure is being put in place. With many major routes experiencing nose to tail traffic for much of the day, such disruption would clearly have serious cumulative cost implications.

Anyway, such a large scale project would take decades to achieve and require the support of numerous successive governments on the way. How likely is that? The reality is that the best you could expect is a trial stretch of motorway, followed by a small scale roll out which would almost certainly end up getting cancelled.

IMO, it would be far better spending the cash on improving our current under utilised rail network for the benefit of both passengers and freight. I say under utilised, not from an informed position but merely as a layman casually observing the amount of time a section of track actually has a train on it. Yes, I know there are very important historic safety reasons for the spacing between trains but I'm sure the tracks could be used more efficiently with a bit of lateral thinking and some modern science to provide those necessary safety protections. It seems to me that a major truck road sees far greater use.

 

[Amarillo]

"Should" ? WelI I wouldn't know!

However, I suspect that such a nation wide project would prove vastly more complicated than you suggest. The UK trunk road network simply wasn't designed with such a system in mind. Accordingly, if such project were to go ahead, there would be an endless list of unforesene problems, each with significant cost implications. Costs would quickly escalate out of control. And thats just the civil engineering bit.

Also, imagine the cost to the nation of the disruption caused, whilst the necessary infrastructure is being put in place. With many major routes experiencing nose to tail traffic for much of the day, such disruption would clearly have serious cumulative cost implications.

Anyway, such a large scale project would take decades to achieve and require the support of numerous successive governments on the way. How likely is that? The reality is that the best you could expect is a trial stretch of motorway, followed by a small scale roll out which would almost certainly end up getting cancelled.

IMO, it would be far better spending the cash on improving our current under utilised rail network for the benefit of both passengers and freight. I say under utilised, not from an informed position but merely as a layman casually observing the amount of time a section of track actually has a train on it. Yes, I know there are very important historic safety reasons for the spacing between trains but I'm sure the tracks could be used more efficiently with a bit of lateral thinking and some modern science to provide those necessary safety protections. It seems to me that a major truck road sees far greater use.

I think you are right about rail capacity. The Elizabeth Line will soon be running 24 trains per hour (up from 22 tph now) and has a built in upgrade capacity to 34tph, matching the LU Victoria Line.

But, if you’ve ever ridden the Elizabeth Line you will know the trains are still painfully slow. Abbey Wood to Heathrow is 30 miles, and the train takes 70 minutes, an average speed of just 25mph.

The other disadvantage with freight by rail is from producer to station and then station to consumer the goods need to be transferred from road to rail then rail to road adding cost and time.

There are other Electric Road technologies. A rail embedded in the tarmac which only becomes live as the special electric vehicle passes over it. The advantage with this system is it will take EVs of all sizes. And then induction, which I think suffers energy loss (a third rail has 97% power transfer).

There’s a good Wikipedia page on “ground level power supply”.

Ground-level power supply - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I think Electric roads will happen, but overhead cables, third rail or induction is anyone’s guess. But what we can be sure about, whatever continental Europe does, we’ll do it differently.

 

[GrumpyGranddad]

"Should" ? WelI I wouldn't know!

However, I suspect that such a nation wide project would prove vastly more complicated than you suggest. The UK trunk road network simply wasn't designed with such a system in mind. Accordingly, if such project were to go ahead, there would be an endless list of unforesene problems, each with significant cost implications. Costs would quickly escalate out of control. And thats just the civil engineering bit.

Also, imagine the cost to the nation of the disruption caused, whilst the necessary infrastructure is being put in place. With many major routes experiencing nose to tail traffic for much of the day, such disruption would clearly have serious cumulative cost implications.

Anyway, such a large scale project would take decades to achieve and require the support of numerous successive governments on the way. How likely is that? The reality is that the best you could expect is a trial stretch of motorway, followed by a small scale roll out which would almost certainly end up getting cancelled.

IMO, it would be far better spending the cash on improving our current under utilised rail network for the benefit of both passengers and freight. I say under utilised, not from an informed position but merely as a layman casually observing the amount of time a section of track actually has a train on it. Yes, I know there are very important historic safety reasons for the spacing between trains but I'm sure the tracks could be used more efficiently with a bit of lateral thinking and some modern science to provide those necessary safety protections. It seems to me that a major truck road sees far greater use.

Remember when passenger trains had a freight car. Wonder why that was stopped. I’m sure Amazon/UPS/etc would utilise it.

 

[andyinluton]

I think you are right about rail capacity. The Elizabeth Line will soon be running 24 trains per hour (up from 22 tph now) and has a built in upgrade capacity to 34tph, matching the LU Victoria Line.

Pretty easy to run trains close together on the same track when they are all going to the same place, run at the same speed & all stop at the same stations. Whats making the journey times long on the EL are stops not the speed of the train when moving.

It gets a lot harder on the mainline when you have slow, semi fast and fast passenger trains along with freight all sharing just 2 tracks in each direction.

 

[flying banana]

I'll tell you how crap the rail network. When I want parts from Leeds delivering to Sheffield. Stores send them by van courier. Even small items like a valve or filter that you could easy chuck in a train cab. Our Hull depot uses 7 or 8 of these courier trips per shift along the hugely congested m62,day and night.our diesel used to come in by rail tanker. We use 12000l per shift at Sheffield alone. That now comes by road on Sheffields inner city ring road a61.Go figure.
Edit. The A61 is now part of sheffields clean air zone. Some irony there somewhere

 

[Lambeth Cali]

I meant to ask the battery experts - is it good to let electric car batteries run down close to zero regularly like a phone battery?
I know it’s not with our leisure batteries. I was just wondering is the make up of BEV batteries more similar to phone batteries than starter/leisure batteries?

 

[Hawthorn37]

I think you are right about rail capacity. The Elizabeth Line will soon be running 24 trains per hour (up from 22 tph now) and has a built in upgrade capacity to 34tph, matching the LU Victoria Line.

But, if you’ve ever ridden the Elizabeth Line you will know the trains are still painfully slow. Abbey Wood to Heathrow is 30 miles, and the train takes 70 minutes, an average speed of just 25mph.

The other disadvantage with freight by rail is from producer to station and then station to consumer the goods need to be transferred from road to rail then rail to road adding cost and time.

There are other Electric Road technologies. A rail embedded in the tarmac which only becomes live as the special electric vehicle passes over it. The advantage with this system is it will take EVs of all sizes. And then induction, which I think suffers energy loss (a third rail has 97% power transfer).

There’s a good Wikipedia page on “ground level power supply”.

Ground-level power supply - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I think Electric roads will happen, but overhead cables, third rail or induction is anyone’s guess. But what we can be sure about, whatever continental Europe does, we’ll do it differently.

Does Scalectrix have a patent on the bottom power system for cars?? You could take corners at an amazing speed

 

[Ch1pbutty]

I meant to ask the battery experts - is it good to let electric car batteries run down close to zero regularly like a phone battery?
I know it’s not with our leisure batteries. I was just wondering is the make up of BEV batteries more similar to phone batteries than starter/leisure batteries?

Yes, topping up for the sake of it is not recommended as will shorten battery life in the long run. The Car will display a friendly warning if you do it too often.

Tesla (assume other cars have similar setup) will automatically route the car via a charging point when you put the destination in the satnav. It preconditions the battery enroute to ensure its in the best state upon arrival to take a charge. Upon arrival it will usually set charge limit to reach destination plus a margin - this can be overridden in order to take a full charge but believe its set this way so that you don't hog the charger, will also charge a penalty fee if you remain connected to the charger after charging is completed...system works well as we have never had to queue.

Should only use a fast/supercharger now and again, as a rapid charge is not great for the battery life. Its better to charge say at 32amps (or slower, but obviously take longer), hence overnight charging at home is ideal, plus you can also fix a cheap tariff for home charging in offpeak hours.

 

[Lambeth Cali]

Yes, topping up for the sake of it is not recommended as will shorten battery life in the long run. The Car will display a friendly warning if you do it too often.

Tesla (assume other cars have similar setup) will automatically route the car via a charging point when you put the destination in the satnav. It preconditions the battery enroute to ensure its in the best state upon arrival to take a charge. Upon arrival it will usually set charge limit to reach destination plus a margin - this can be overridden in order to take a full charge but believe its set this way so that you don't hog the charger, will also charge a penalty fee if you remain connected to the charger after charging is completed...system works well as we have never had to queue.

Should only use a fast/supercharger now and again, as a rapid charge is not great for the battery life. Its better to charge say at 32amps (or slower, but obviously take longer), hence overnight charging at home is ideal, plus you can also fix a cheap tariff for home charging in offpeak hours.

So for example, if you got a small battery like in Mazda MX30 or a hybrid, it could actually be better to charge overnight using 3 pin plug than a wall charger?
I just mention as I would avoid charging away from home like the plague (still keen on REX) and often used hybrids don’t come with a charging cable apart from the 3 pin. And also my 24 mile commute would be near the limit of many used hybrids like Volvo XC40. But you say it’s ok to run low.

 

[Ch1pbutty]

So for example, if you got a small battery like in Mazda MX30 or a hybrid, it could actually be better to charge overnight using 3 pin plug than a wall charger?
I just mention as I would avoid charging away from home like the plague (still keen on REX) and often used hybrids don’t come with a charging cable apart from the 3 pin. And also my 24 mile commute would be near the limit of many used hybrids like Volvo XC40. But you say it’s ok to run low.

Yes, it just takes longer using 3pin / 10amp. We charged ours this way for first 3 months of ownership as took a while to get a home charger installed.

The in-laws have a hybrid Toyota Rav 4 which works out quite economical, then you don’t need a cable as it charges the small battery itself whilst driving.

 

[2into1]

To answer the original question....
The push back isn't against electric cars themselves, it is that they have become symbolic of the chaos that net zero policies are having on the lower income groups. While electric car owners are being handed subsidies to drive around at a fraction of their cost (charging at home, from their solar and Tesla powerbank), profiteering handsomely whenever the grid asks them to cut power for a few hours, zero road tax etc.
Electric car drivers then cruise around enjoying their demonstration of wealth and unearned moral superiority, whilst looking down on those still driving dirty diesels.
That is the underlying sentiment of those who took great pleasure at the massive queues of Teslas at charging stations and their resulting ruined Xmas plans, and they are having schadenfreude overloads at the mighty price drops just announced that cost owners more than £10k overnight.
It doesn't take much self reflection to know how this reply will be felt by some, but it's the painful truth.

 

[Borris]

I think the push back is also about the inconvenience that EVs bring. They may be promoted as the latest thing in convenience, but is that really true? Leaving aside all the other reasons why many people aren't tempted by this much lorded "green" panacea, I suspect that they just don't want the hassle of planning a route around where they can recharge and all the range anxiety that goes with that. Also, I doubt that most can be @r$ed to spend time working out which tarrif is best, from which provider and have they got the right app and cable? EVs might make sense if you can home charge but many won't have the option or any prospect of having it.

Filling up an ICE vehicle at any of the current extensive "working" network of conventional fuel stations can be done usually, without hassle or even much thought. There's one around every corner and you can almost always get enough fuel to take you many hundreds of miles. There's usually no queueing and the choice is simple, ordinary or superfuel. The price per litre is even posted on a massive sign outside most filling stations so no need to even slow down if the price doesn't suit. They even supply the charging cable that works with each and every ICE vehicle.

Without even considering any of the many other reasons for this so called push back, unless EVs become equally as convenient then the vast majority won't be changing any time soon.

 

[Lambeth Cali]

Wow!
Thanks again @chockswahay

 

[willwander]

or maybe it's this...
Apparently she…. "wondered if people were making a judgement about me that I wasn't looking for."

'Elon Musk has made me embarrassed to drive my Tesla now'

Elon Musk was once hailed as the secret to Tesla's success. Now he's one of its problems.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[2into1]

or maybe it's this...
Apparently she "wondered if people were making a judgement about me that I wasn't looking for."

'Elon Musk has made me embarrassed to drive my Tesla now'

Elon Musk was once hailed as the secret to Tesla's success. Now he's one of its problems.

www.bbc.co.uk

Ha ha. The 1st paragraph (clipped below) speaks directly to the 'unearned moral superiority' I referenced. Even the facial expression chimes.
Musk had these views all the time. If the ability to use her car to virtue signal was such an important part of her car choice, perhaps she should have done some research.
That'll be another wimp Leftie calling for diversity in everything, except political views.

 

[chockswahay]

Wow!
Thanks again @chockswahay

Eh? What for?

 

[GrannyJen]

So for example, if you got a small battery like in Mazda MX30 or a hybrid, it could actually be better to charge overnight using 3 pin plug than a wall charger?
I just mention as I would avoid charging away from home like the plague (still keen on REX) and often used hybrids don’t come with a charging cable apart from the 3 pin. And also my 24 mile commute would be near the limit of many used hybrids like Volvo XC40. But you say it’s ok to run low.

I've not installed a home charger. I just come home, plug it in and leave it. I'm just back from Eastbourne today, a 90 mile round trip, used less than half my battery capacity and it will be charged to the optimum 80% when I wake up in the morning, good for 170+ miles.