EU is trying to ban Diesel and petrol cars

[BrocLuno]

I think for us west-coasters, it'll be mostly hybrid for the foreseeable future ... LA and San Diego from SF are just too far apart.

The cold does bad things to batteries in terms of output, so parking your SF Tesla at Heavenly Valley overnight on a ski trip might get you stuck up there, unable to make it over the summit(s)... Similar in CO and other mountain states. Hybrids can get over and down the mountain, so it'll be them for a while.

We are not there yet. But we are plugging away (pun intended). I can see hybrids that have very small eco-turbo motors for heat, charging and A/C while the electric moves you around. This as a response to bad-air days and exclusion zones.

I don't think it'll be an all-in ban. I do think it'll be incremental as they make petrol engine use more iffy in more places ...

 

[SilverFusion2010]

The technology isn't there yet. It's made big gains, but I think plug-in hybrids are going to take over first, battery tech isn't there yet. If you think you're going to get the American public to give up their gassers without a fight... think again

 

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
Originally Posted By: MCompact
I really enjoy driving my wife's i3, but I don't think EVs will really catch on in the US until they have a range of at least 300 miles, a charging time of under 15 minutes, and a sufficient charging infrastructure to support them.


An alternate approach is to have a rapid battery swap as part of the EV design; mfg would be smart to standardize form factor to aid in adoption; pull into a station and swap it out; A lot like propane cylinders


Tesla already tried this, and it was a miserable failure.

Assuring the quality and range of a battery is ridiculously more difficult than doing the same for a bulk load of fuel.

Someone has to own all of those batteries and accept the liability of receiving a bad one in the exchange. Batteries have been around for a long time, and nobody has ever been willing to accept this, including Tesla. Under their program, you eventually had to give their battery back and get your own. What if I'm never returning to where I've "left" my battery?

 

[HoosierJeeper]

I just don't get how it's any better for the earth. Mining the metals for the batteries is atrocious and where does the electricity come from? A hole in the wall? I'm not a fan of EVs at all nor the holier-than-thou people that preach about them.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Pajero
True! Unfortunately the U.S. has 99 nuclear reactors in 30 states. I could be mistaken, but nuclear reactors will recharge the engines. Not sure if that's good or bad. We definitely need more alternative sources of energy. I live in New Mexico. Waste Isolation Power Plant (WIPP) in Carlsbad, NM They store the spent fuel from nuclear material in the salt mines. There has already been one leak. Don't mean to get off topic.

WIPP

Fossil fuels are limited and antiquated. So is the combustion engine...........




Respectfully,

Pajero!


They could be reprocessing that waste and using it as fuel in next-generation reactors. Nothing comes close to the energy density of Nuclear, which will be extremely important with the push to get off fossil-sources and subsequently replacing that with electricity.

 

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: PeterPolyol
Originally Posted By: Trav
As long as the range is good and recharge times are short I for one am all in.

Of course, but unfortunately they're not so we're back full circle.


Not quite, things are changing quickly. The rest of your post IMO is just typical nothing will replace the horse and cart stuff from more than 100 years ago.
As I posted I cant see it happening in my lifetime. Right now EV's have limited use but it wont always be that way. IMO this is technology we need to invest in heavily so the US is a leader not just a end user of the technology where everyone is driving some little Chicom or Japanese EV.



Those who felt the horse and cart would never be replaced had no valid argument. Although the ICE was not in full swing on automobiles, the power or combustion was already clearly in effect and already vastly superior to organism power.

The fact that combustion defeats organisms was clear from the first moment a person pointed an arrow at a man carrying a gun hundreds of years ago.

By the time the ICE first started up, steam power had already put a lot of animals and people out to pasture for good. The idea of a ship being towed by people taking on a steamboat was completely dumb at that point. The idea of using horse teams rather than steam engines in an industrial plant was equally ludicrous. The idea of going up against a gunship using a war boat full of javelin throwers was insane.

There is no such precedent in battery/electric vs. ICE.

Beyond that, combustion/fossil fuel has one area where electric will never touch it: Aviation.

Electricity has no ability at all to produce thrust outside of direct mechanical manipulation of the air. An electric plane is capable of being an outdated propeller plane at its absolute peak of development. This is a major setback that only changing the laws of physics can overcome. Also, a motor made of giant magnets will never be as light as one made of hollow lightweight alloys. Electric motors may do a passable job of taking on the piston engine, but they will never come within a fraction of equaling the gas turbine.

Same with marine. Try pulling up to the less developed parts of the world and attempting to charge a battery the size of a Ford Excursion. You'll probably put out every light in a quarter of the town.

Battery/Electric is the opposite case. It's never had the advantage over combustion, and nobody exists who can draw a logical picture of how it ever will.

But ultimately, the biggest problem with battery/electric is that it only works in the presence of a competent, strong, and reliable electrical grid. That's why battery/electric will never be able to replace this when the power goes out:

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: PeterPolyol
Originally Posted By: Trav
As long as the range is good and recharge times are short I for one am all in.

Of course, but unfortunately they're not so we're back full circle.


Not quite, things are changing quickly. The rest of your post IMO is just typical nothing will replace the horse and cart stuff from more than 100 years ago.
As I posted I cant see it happening in my lifetime. Right now EV's have limited use but it wont always be that way. IMO this is technology we need to invest in heavily so the US is a leader not just a end user of the technology where everyone is driving some little Chicom or Japanese EV.



Those who felt the horse and cart would never be replaced had no valid argument. Although the ICE was not in full swing on automobiles, the power or combustion was already clearly in effect and already vastly superior to organism power.

The fact that combustion defeats organisms was clear from the first moment a person pointed an arrow at a man carrying a gun hundreds of years ago.

By the time the ICE first started up, steam power had already put a lot of animals and people out to pasture for good. The idea of a ship being towed by people taking on a steamboat was completely dumb at that point. The idea of using horse teams rather than steam engines in an industrial plant was equally ludicrous. The idea of going up against a gunship using a war boat full of javelin throwers was insane.

There is no such precedent in battery/electric vs. ICE.

Beyond that, combustion/fossil fuel has one area where electric will never touch it: Aviation.

Electricity has no ability at all to produce thrust outside of direct mechanical manipulation of the air. An electric plane is capable of being an outdated propeller plane at its absolute peak of development. This is a major setback that only changing the laws of physics can overcome. Also, a motor made of giant magnets will never be as light as one made of hollow lightweight alloys. Electric motors may do a passable job of taking on the piston engine, but they will never come within a fraction of equaling the gas turbine.

Same with marine. Try pulling up to the less developed parts of the world and attempting to charge a battery the size of a Ford Excursion. You'll probably put out every light in a quarter of the town.

Battery/Electric is the opposite case. It's never had the advantage over combustion, and nobody exists who can draw a logical picture of how it ever will.

But ultimately, the biggest problem with battery/electric is that it only works in the presence of a competent, strong, and reliable electrical grid. That's why battery/electric will never be able to replace this when the power goes out:





Great post!

I will say that for large-scale marine, like the container ships, I can see them adopting small nukes, somewhat akin to a modernized version of the US nuclear fleet. A container ship that doesn't burn obscene amounts of bunker fuel would be beneficial to the health of our air and oceans. The problem will be regulating the safety of them. It's one thing for the NSC to monitor power plants, its quite another for them to monitor mobile sea-going vessels in private hands.

 

[DoubleWasp]

Nuke/electric is another matter entirely. The nuke sub program has made that very clear.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Nuke/electric is another matter entirely. The nuke sub program has made that very clear.

Indeed, same with the carriers. It's incredible, quite frankly.

 

[Shannow]

For those interested in the little nukes.

http://www.sydneyminingclub.org/presentations/2013/march/worley/index.htm

Here's a presentation by an engineer that I've worked with a lot over the years on small nukes and their applicability in the remote mining sector.

Alas in Oz it will never happen, but distributed generation on a regional basis just makes so much good sense over a small handfull of power stations and thousands of km of high voltage lines...and infinitely more sense than batteries.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Don't get me wrong I will probably never see it in my lifetime and with the third world infrastructure in many places its doubtful they could implement a wide scale grid reliable enough in the next 100 years but the writing is on the wall.

This is where I agree. The writing is on the wall. However, the "visionaries" (i.e. charlatans) act as if they've got the infrastructure in place, not to mention the dealerships and production, and can have us set in the next five years, which is clearly a load of manure.

As already mentioned in the thread, constant R&D on the internal combustion engine and the surrounding technology has been going on for many decades. There's a lot of catchup to be done.

Originally Posted By: PeterPolyol
"He may be rolling in a 0-60-in-3-seconds, 100K Tesla EV, but he's still colder than I am in the winter." is my immediate rationale right now. It's easy to cling to perfect ideologies when one pushes the practical problems just out of the realm of one's cognition..

This. Show me what the interior temperature of a Tesla is when it's -40 in Saskatchewan. And, if that temperature is acceptable, how much did range go down?

 

[Motor_Boater]

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
...An alternate approach is to have a rapid battery swap as part of the EV design; mfg would be smart to standardize form factor to aid in adoption; pull into a station and swap it out; A lot like propane cylinders
That's how they were supposedly doing things, in Norway. In Japan, swapping the battery pack is quicker than complete fill-ups.
I'd prefer having a natural gas- or propane fueled- hybrid, as opposed to a fully electric-powered vehicle. For this type of application, you don't need as large an internal combustion engine as you would for a standard car. Electric recuperation would charge the battery, while the vehicle is slowing down and braking. The internal combustion engine could also heat the passenger compartment

 

[Garak]

Note that even hybrids haven't exactly lit this province on fire, as it were, for winter heating capabilities.

 

[Bjornviken]

Did read that Norway gorverment is rising the taxes on ev cars now. Funny that a oil country recommends ev cars. They where one of the poorest country in europe before they did find oil. And 800 k jobs in germany will be gone if ev cars take over.
And EUs tax system will fail too. Main reason EU wants EV cars is that they force you to use a gps unit that register your car and driving style in a data system and tax you for evry km you drive and thats been on the news. Its time for me to move to America if this gets real!

 

[Motor_Boater]

Germans will simply manufacture cars using electric drivetrains. The question is, what will happen with all the tooling for manufacturing internal combustion engines?
The EU is indirectly funded with extortionately high taxes on fuel. Governments will simply tax alternative fuels heavily, to compensate for their insatiable hunger for money to waste.
A vehicle doesen't need to be electric powered for GPS implantation. They could, and maybe are already doing, implant tracking devices into existing board electronics, not only to find out how much and how far you drive. But, also could collect data on where you are travelling and maybe even stall the vehicle, if they don't approve of where you intend going with it
Originally Posted By: Garak
Note that even hybrids haven't exactly lit this province on fire, as it were, for winter heating capabilities.

This is true. Smaller engines cannot produce the amount of heat that larger ones can. Even modern diesel engines need supplement electric heat, to defrost windows, during warm-up. Hybrids will need fuel-fired supplement heaters, if the task won't be partially taken over by electric heating

 

[Claud]

The Oil companies will do as they are told in Europe, the government regulates the oil industry, not the other way round. They know this and are at the forefront of researching alternative fuels.
Of course there is no infrastructure for ev's in place yet. There weren't many roads at the dawn of the affordable passenger car either. Plenty of railroads by then to accommodate the established method of rapid mass transit though.
I love driving my old gas guzzling V8 Chrysler, but I am aware I'm part of the problem. The days of unlimited fossil fuel burning are limited, partly by the predictable way demand will outstrip supply, and partly by the as yet undefined and denied time when nature will say enough, time for catastrophic change to Planet Earths infrastructure.

Claud.

 

[Bjornviken]

Oh they can do pretty much i EU. Just see how big Shell is and other oil companys. Lobbing is a powerful tool in the corrupt eu. Its all about money. BTW Britan was smart to leave EU.
If it was about saving the earth then they wuold produce all products we need in EU. Just one of the world’s largest container ships can emit about as much pollution as 50 million cars.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Motor_Boater
Germans will simply manufacture cars using electric drivetrains. The question is, what will happen with all the tooling for manufacturing internal combustion engines?
The EU is indirectly funded with extortionately high taxes on fuel. Governments will simply tax alternative fuels heavily, to compensate for their insatiable hunger for money to waste.
A vehicle doesen't need to be electric powered for GPS implantation. They could, and maybe are already doing, implant tracking devices into existing board electronics, not only to find out how much and how far you drive. But, also could collect data on where you are travelling and maybe even stall the vehicle, if they don't approve of where you intend going with it
Originally Posted By: Garak
Note that even hybrids haven't exactly lit this province on fire, as it were, for winter heating capabilities.

This is true. Smaller engines cannot produce the amount of heat that larger ones can. Even modern diesel engines need supplement electric heat, to defrost windows, during warm-up. Hybrids will need fuel-fired supplement heaters, if the task won't be partially taken over by electric heating


The problem is, with EV's, what's the ceiling on taxing electricity? Germany and Denmark already pay obscene electricity prices that make the highest prices in North America look like bloody bargains. If they try to recoup lost fossil fuel revenue from electricity rates, the whole thing is going to collapse.

 

[PandaBear]

Diesel is only popular there for tax reason, if it is taxed the same as petro / gas it would be just the same price if not slightly more expensive.

Yes the fuel economy is better but the particulate and Nox is worse. It would be easier if they can just remove the tax incentive on diesel but that'll anger the industrial and commercial users. So just banning passenger cars diesel is easier.

Not sure how EV gets involved into this. The cheapest route would be to go through hybrid or some sort of fuel economy cap, like CAFE. Either way EU as a group need to deal with who is worse to deal with: the OPEC for oil or Russia for natural gas (to generate electricity).

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Diesel is only popular there for tax reason, if it is taxed the same as petro / gas it would be just the same price if not slightly more expensive.

Yes the fuel economy is better but the particulate and Nox is worse. It would be easier if they can just remove the tax incentive on diesel but that'll anger the industrial and commercial users. So just banning passenger cars diesel is easier.

Not sure how EV gets involved into this. The cheapest route would be to go through hybrid or some sort of fuel economy cap, like CAFE. Either way EU as a group need to deal with who is worse to deal with: the OPEC for oil or Russia for natural gas (to generate electricity).


There's no beneficial treatment to diesel down here (primary producers and mines claim their taxes back), and it's price fluctuates from cheaper than RUG to about the same price as mid grade Premium...and people are flocking to them.