Forum menu
By 2040 the majority of cars will be autonomous.
Charging outside your house becomes a non issue. The car drives itself to the charge - o - mat down the road and waits there until its summoned.
It can do the same when you are working - top itself up while you are at work then pick you up from your place of work.
This is assuming we still "own" cars rather then just summon them as an when we need them
Given the resistance being shown to EV's you have to wonder how ICE cars became so popular given the lack of infrastructure when they started to make it past the pretty wealthy. If the market for EV's really kicks of the technology will move faster and the infrastructure will be built.
I'd suggest there will be a number of ICE manufacturers a tad nervous today.
The problem is, look at that stock photo of on-street parking above, there are two lampposts and between 30 and 40 cars.
None of them can get petrol form the lamp post either....if charging points are numerous enough, and battery capacity sufficient why would they have to be charged on that street?
Most of them will go to a place of work and spend the whole day sat in a parking space for 8 hours where they can be charging.
Those that don't will likely end up at another charger at some point during the day whether that be a site visit or at the shops or a normal car park, charge there while you're busy.
And that still leaves the possibility of charging at a 'petrol station' style forecourt if needed.
It a mindset change and routine/behaviour change that's required, it's not even necessarily a difficult change, it might just be different.
Think about when cars first appeared, there were no fuelling stations, you had to have a supply at home (as well as a toolbox and an your own engineer!), and then as things progressed fuelling stations sprang up, still few and far between and needed planning for you journey. Then more and more widespread as ICE vehicles became more mainstream the infrastructure grew with them, same thing can happen here, but with the added bonus that the 'fuel' can be dispensed literally anywhere, it should/could be [i]easier [/i]than a petrol/diesel based fuel delivery infrastructure in the long run.
None of them can get petrol form the lamp post either....if charging points are numerous enough, and battery capacity sufficient why would they have to be charged on that street?Most of them will go to a place of work and spend the whole day sat in a parking space for 8 hours where they can be charging.
Those that don't will likely end up at another charger at some point during the day whether that be a site visit or at the shops or a normal car park, charge there while you're busy.
And that still leaves the possibility of charging at a 'petrol station' style forecourt if needed.
It a mindset change and routine/behaviour change that's required, it's not even necessarily a difficult change, it might just be different.
Think about when cars first appeared, there were no fuelling stations, you had to have a supply at home (as well as a toolbox and an your own engineer!), and then as things progressed fuelling stations sprang up, still few and far between and needed planning for you journey. Then more and more widespread as ICE vehicles became more mainstream the infrastructure grew with them, same thing can happen here, but with the added bonus that the 'fuel' can be dispensed literally anywhere, it should/could be easier than a petrol/diesel based fuel delivery infrastructure in the long run.
As I understand it these fast chargers that can top up your car in 30mins only refill to 80% capacity and also are not brilliant to the life of the battery - they prefer gentler charging. So in reality charging at the moment is something like 8hrs every 80 miles rather than 5mins every 400 so the 'petrol from lamp posts' analogy is not super accurate as the needs of the two are so dissimilar. Also from a national perspective you'll want cars charging efficiently at at low peak times not inefficiently (fast charging is not particularly efficient) and all at going home time.
That is today's technology however and with a couple of decades to tweak it I'm sure it will be so much better when we get there en masse.
[quote=amedias ]Most of them will go to a place of work and spend the whole day sat in a parking space for 8 hours where they can be charging.
Those that don't will likely end up at another charger at some point during the day whether that be a site visit or at the shops or a normal car park, charge there while you're busy.
And that still leaves the possibility of charging at a 'petrol station' style forecourt if needed.
Unfortunately the concept of slow charging overnight on spare capacity then falls down, so you're back to trying to solve that problem. I'm not saying it's a problem which can't be solved, but there are no simple solutions, and that certainly isn't one.
As for long trips - most of my long trips this year have been to campsites in remote places, the most recent was to a bunkhouse also in a remote area (with numerous other cars there, despite lots of lift sharing). I don't think any of these trips would have been doable there and back without recharging, yet I didn't stop for a rest on any of the journeys - and didn't need to. Presumably such campsites need to lay on electricity supplies for charging?
I'm not sure it is off-topic tbh.
I meant it's off-topic wrt the diesel/electric choice. Right now, if all other variables stayed the same except for my car turning electric overnight (at zero cost to me, obs) then I'd still be driving here tomorrow and the day after. My commuting choice is based on other factors.
I'm serious about getting a Tesla at some point though. I just can't afford one yet.
Most of them will go to a place of work and spend the whole day sat in a parking space for 8 hours
Hmm. Most places I go to the car parks are full, and if you're not there before 8am you have to go hunting around for some other side street or verge on which to park. If the office car park was the only place to charge your car it could get ugly.
I agree the problems need solving, but simple it aint.
Well I have to say there are a lot of good considered arguments on here today.
Nobody has yet resorted to calling anyone a Liberal Nut Job or Right Wing Tory Flounder.
Good effort, but I feel I'm in the wrong forum.
"I'm serious about getting a Tesla at some point though. I just can't afford one yet."
Me also, they seem a good car particularly the X. I do wonder if Tesla cars will actually make any money, the company seems to have been going long enough to start to turn a profit. There has been a charging point at Oxford services on the M40 for a number of years now. It seems to be getting increased use, according to my latest scientific survey (I count the cars parked there on monthly drive past).
The rapid chargers don't do any harm to the battery, neither does charging to 100%.
There are taxi firms in London and other big cities with emission controls, they have Leafs with over 100,000 miles on them in a two to three year period.
They could only manage these sorts of mileages by using rapid chargers.
The normal charging will be fine,
so the 'petrol from lamp posts' analogy is not super accurate
nor was it supposed to be, it was supposed to highlight that we're stuck in thinking about 'how things are done now' and applying that to future technology when it might not be appropriate. ie: the charge at work/shops/elsewhere ideas. I don't fill my car up with diesel at home now, why should I need to fill it with electricity at home? The only reason EV users are doing that now is because charging infrastructure doesn't exist (and peace of mind over range anxiety).
If the office car park was the only place to charge your car it could get ugly.
Good job nobody suggested it would be then 😉
Unfortunately the concept of slow charging overnight on spare capacity then falls down,
As above, think outside of current ideas, battery warehousing/caching for storage during off-peak and then re-delivery when needed is one idea. There may be a surplus overnight, that doesn't mean the only time you can use it is overnight, if you have storage capacity it can be re-delivered when needed.
As for long trips - most of my long trips this year have been to campsites in remote places, the most recent was to a bunkhouse also in a remote area (with numerous other cars there, despite lots of lift sharing). I don't think any of these trips would have been doable there and back without recharging, yet I didn't stop for a rest on any of the journeys - and didn't need to. Presumably such campsites need to lay on electricity supplies for charging?
Maybe it wouldn't have been doable without re-charging, maybe in future it will be? or maybe the campsite will (or should) think about having a charging station on site in future, it'd certainly be easier than having a petrol station on site, again it's about thinking how we [i]could [/i]do things, not how badly we currently do things. The nice thing about electricity is it's already everywhere, and the cost of charging points wouldn't necessarily have the be foisted upon the campsite/shops/businesses etc.
None of it is going to be simple, but then neither is dealing with the existing ICE related issues of air quality, and diminishing resources (or increasing cost of extracting them).
Personally I think EVs are only one part of the solution, a general change in approach to transport is needed as well, along with energy gneration and consumption habits, but that's another set of non-simple problems to think about 😀
Simple it 'aint, worthwhile and necessary it is....
Well I have to say there are a lot of good considered arguments on here today.Nobody has yet resorted to calling anyone a Liberal Nut Job or Right Wing Tory Flounder.
Nor have we got to Godwin's law yet
As far as I know there is no such thing (yet) as a commercially available electric HGV or LGV?
Plenty of work seems to be going on in this area - see e.g. [url= https://nikolamotor.com/ ]https://nikolamotor.com/[/url]. Plenty of electric vans and taxis running around too. I wouldn't be surprised if commercial traffic went mostly electric before domestic.
(fast charging is not particularly efficient)
Actually the Zoe charges more efficiently at higher rates... the R90 ZE40 is 71% at 2.3kW but 91% at 43kW. (The rapid charge version, the Q90, is even worse at 59% at 2.3kW... this is why they don't bother providing a 3-pin plug charger with a new car).
[quote=amedias ]Maybe it wouldn't have been doable without re-charging, maybe in future it will be? or maybe the campsite will (or should) think about having a charging station on site in future, it'd certainly be easier than having a petrol station on site, again it's about thinking how we could do things, not how badly we currently do things. The nice thing about electricity is it's already everywhere, and the cost of charging points wouldn't necessarily have the be foisted upon the campsite/shops/businesses etc.
The whole point though is that there is no need for a campsite to have a petrol station on site - it's the change to vehicles with a lower range and slower refuelling which starts requiring such things. As for electricity being everywhere, that's a maybe - I'm sure all those campsites had it, but I'm not sure the infrastructure supplying electricity into the Ogwen valley is sufficient to cope with the number of cars just on the one campsite I was on (and there are also a couple of other campsites and a YHA there). I've also been to events where the organisors were using generators with over 100 cars parked on site. I'm also interested in who you think is going to pay for the cost of recharging points (and required infrastructure) in remote locations?
First point last, I'm not seeing orders of magnitudes differences in range in the next 23 years. I'm certainly not one to suggest automotive technology has advanced a huge amount in the last 23 year (my previous car was 19 years old, with technology remarkably similar to now), and I'm somewhat sceptical about the amount of advances in the next 23, even in the relatively immature field of electric cars. I note that examples of huge differences in the last 23 years earlier in the thread all involved relatively new and fast changing areas of technology - the car is over 100 years old.
on a side note....
I do wonder if Tesla cars will actually make any money
One of the interesting things about Musk's current exploits (Tesla/SpaceX/Neuralink eetc.) is that the goal of the companies is not [i]primarily [/i]to turn a profit, it's to achieve an advance in technology adn capability in a particular sector*. That then drives a demand for that sector and grows the industry and the profit is a by-product of the success, not the success itself.
He doesn't set out with the goal 'how can I make a profit in sector X', he starts with the goal 'How can I [i]make [/i]sector X a viable industry in order to achieve Y'
The goal of Tesla was not to make money from Electric cars, but to reduce our reliance on fossil fuel powered vehicles and thus improve air quality and move us away from a finite resource. The only way he could see that happening was to kick start decent EV development to try and stimulate the industry in a way the existing mainstream manufacturers weren't going to.
Same with SpaceX, it's all very well trying to create a company to produce re-useable launch vehicles and dramatically reduce the cost of space travel, but his reason for doing so is to allow us as species to branch out beyond this planet, SpaceX is the vehicle to acheive the goal, not the goal itself.
Obviously ultimately Tesla and SpaceX need to make money to grow but there's a subtle but important difference in the reason they came to exist.
*The sector being an area that he thinks will bring significant benefit to us as a race, not him as a person/bank account.
@aracer, you make many valid points, but ultimately whats your solution, to stick with ICE?
Or to look at how we can make the alternatives* work because we [i]have [/i]to? (or even just because it's the right thing to do)
I'm also interested in who you think is going to pay for the cost of recharging points (and required infrastructure) in remote locations?
Many options to think about here, franchised stations, national private (or public) distribution company, the battery manufacturers, vehicle manufacturers, electricity/power companies. I'm not sure exactly what would be the best option but if there's a commercially viable business model in there someone will make it happen.
If you look at Tesla they're currently going it alone by putting their own chargers in, but a multi-company co-operation could vastly increase the reach, as could government mandate if they were serious about moving away from FF.
Hey, I don't claim to have all the answers but I do honestly believe the answers are out there and and that FF are not a long-term solution, based on that belief, I'd rather we started looking into it and planning for it well in advance and with a designed rollout rather than a short-term panic in years to come.
*alternatives doesn't have to mean EV, but it's looking like the most viable option for the near to medium future. Any replacement for petrol or diesel is going to mean infrastructure upheaval, and being bound to petrol and diesel is not a good long-term strategy...even if you could do full-exhaust product capture to deal with the air pollution issue it's still not a viable fuel source unless you can move to a renewable-fuel ICE.
Those are the two things you need to address.
1 - renewable - because it has to be
2 - non-polluting - because is [i]should [/i]be
I'd be behind[i] any [/i]alternative that can hit both of those, and I know the 'leccy generation for EVs doesn't fully hit point 1 or 2 yet, but it it's easier to move central generation in the right direction, and EVs at least deal with 2 on a local level.
[quote=phiiiiil ]Actually the Zoe charges more efficiently at higher rates... the R90 ZE40 is 71% at 2.3kW but 91% at 43kW. (The rapid charge version, the Q90, is even worse at 59% at 2.3kW... this is why they don't bother providing a 3-pin plug charger with a new car).
Where are those figures from? I'm not suggesting they're wrong, but dubious about whether they're comparing apples with apples - basic physics suggests that slow charging shouldn't be less efficient, so I'm wondering where the losses are (and 91% efficiency seems incredibly high for fast charging).
From my understanding of the physics involved in charging batteries, fast charging shouldn't be hugely less efficient if you do it right - not as efficient as slow charging, but the difference is one of the less important issues here.
[quote=amedias ]@aracer, you make many valid points, but ultimately whats your solution, to stick with ICE?
Or to look at how we can make the alternatives* work because we have to? (or even just because it's the right thing to do)
No - I'm certainly in favour of such changes, probably far more than most people. But as an engineer (there I've said it) my hackles always rise at people suggesting they have solutions for things which are quite complex. Yes we do need to find solutions, but it will be far from straightforward, and my gut feeling (based partly on involvement in numerous long term engineering projects) is that 23 years seems an incredibly tight timescale to make the change. It's an interesting discussion, but you need sceptics like me to make it an interesting discussion 😉
In reality there will likely be other changes before then which will drive things, though I'm not quite sure what there is to force future governments to stick to that timescale.
Given the resistance being shown to EV's you have to wonder how ICE cars became so popular given the lack of infrastructure when they started to make it past the pretty wealthy.
Because ICE cars were faster than horses and carts. Even then local deliveries were still horse and cart in the 1930s some 40-50 yrs after the ICE car was invented. An early car could carry enough fuel for long journeys and didn't depend on widespread filling stations.
The problem with current EVs is that they are much more expensive and than ICE car,don't do anything an ICE car can't, and have a shorter range.
I'm not sure early cars where more capable, practical or inexpensive than horse and carts.
but it will be far from straightforward
on that I'll never disagree!
is that 23 years seems an incredibly tight timescale to make the change.
How much of that do you think is because we (as a society/species) are not trying hard enough? (not being facetious, genuine question by the way)
so was a car Vs horse, change still happened. Economy of scale and adoption will change that, even if it's not EVs, but some other fuel, it'll always be more expensive initially.The problem with current EVs is that they are much more expensive
and than ICE car,don't do anything an ICE car can't
Au contraire! they do do something an ICE can't, or rather they don't do something bad that an ICE does, namely they don't (locally) poison the air we breathe. Nor do they deplete a rather precious natural resource. (Yes lithium blah blah blah I know, but it CAN be recycled, it's just hard and expensive at the moment, you can't recycle your burnt petrol back into petrol)
and have a shorter range.
gap is closing, and as discussed numerous times, for the majority of trips this is a theoretical problem not a practical one. And like your horse and cart analogy, there's nothing stopping ICE still being around for the fringe cases.
[img] 
[/img]
Personally I'm not a fan of either.
[quote=amedias ]How much of that do you think is because we (as a society/species) are not trying hard enough? (not being facetious, genuine question by the way)
We tried incredibly hard on all sort of other engineering projects which took a long time. There are just such a huge number of problems which need to be solved here, and right now we don't even know problem solving process for some of them! It's a bit of a finger in the air feeling, but you have to appreciate the requirement to find solutions in far less than 23 years in order to allow time for implementation and roll out stages.
[quote=wilburt ]I'm not sure early cars where more capable, practical or inexpensive than horse and carts.
By the time they made it past the wealthy they were. irc makes a very good point - sure wider scale infrastructure might have been lacking, but there was still an advantage to ICE vehicles despite that in comparison to the alternative.
I note that ICE vehicles became widespread despite the continued sale of horses and carts.
so how quickly did we go from the first ICE cars to widespread rollout of infrastructure to support them?
I know broadly speaking we're talking ~60-80 years from 'car as a curiosity' to 'car in most household', but the bulk of the change happened in a much smaller time frame.
I'll go back to one of my earlier points though, we don't have to jump from now -> perfect in one go, all we have to do is take steps in the right direction. All those typical <5 mile journeys for example, if we cant get rid of the journey then we have to look at ways to make it more efficient and cleaner, bikes, car-share, EVs, whatever but the main goal is to stop them being made by big heavy FF powered ICE vehicles.
Even a small percentage swap away from current transport choices could make a big difference, and note I'm not even talking EV here, just a move away form single occupancy over-sized inefficient vehicles could make as much difference as many people swapping to EV use.
A bigger picture transport strategy is what's needed, I do think EVs play a part in that, however big that part might be.
I am also very proud of this thread, it hasn't degenerated yet, some people must be on holiday 😀
[quote=amedias ]so how quickly did we go from the first ICE cars to widespread rollout of infrastructure to support them?
On the scale of what we need for EVs in 23 years time? Way more than 23 years.
Even a small percentage swap away from current transport choices could make a big difference, and note I'm not even talking EV here, just a move away form single occupancy over-sized inefficient vehicles could make as much difference as many people swapping to EV use.
I'm right with you there - simply swapping from ICE powered large fast vehicles to large fast EVs seems to be missing an opportunity. The trouble is, it's the journeys where there isn't any other practical alternative to a large fast vehicle where EVs don't provide a good alternative.
so how quickly did we go from the first ICE cars to widespread rollout of infrastructure to support them?
^ I'm genuinely curious about this by the way, trying to track some figures as I know petrol stations have been on the decline since the 90s but I'm wondering when it went from being an enthusiast hobby needing your own fuel supply, to being able to drive anywhere in the Uk and knowing you'd be able to get fuel.
EDIT - from brief reading it seems (obviously) the boom time was 1910 > 1930, at the beginning you'd be buying fuel from chemists or specialists, and then in the 20's licensed pumps were allowed and things spread, but the war and rationing got in the way so hard to make assumptions from there.
A side note/curiosity at most but interesting historical context 🙂
It may have already been posted but I read something today about Toyota and solid state batteries.. 2-3 x range and fast charging in minutes.
Yes of course its incremental, but again the question has to be why do you want oil burners so much ?? Its irrational.
Here are some stats btw to inform how to actually reduce pollution rather than have the usual car tribe nonsense. .
6% of journey under a mile..lazy ****ers!
50 years from invention to a bloody nuisance (at a guess).
The trouble is, it's the journeys where there isn't any other practical alternative to a large fast vehicle where EVs don't provide a good alternative.
Yup, but I still think that this is actually a smaller problem than we want to admit. There's still a lot of people hanging on to the idea that they couldn't swap to an EV because the range isn't big enough for that trip they take 3 times a year. Logically speaking that's a problem we should be able to find a solution to. Maybe there is more scope for hybrid tech here for that kind of use?
If you could crack the problem* of getting people not to use a car for (even some!) short trips I dare say you'd already have them in the right mindset for an entire plethora of other changes!
* it's cheaper, often quicker, better for you, and better for everyone else apparently aren't good enough arguments 🙄
[quote=wilburt ]Yes of course its incremental, but again the question has to be why do you want oil burners so much ?? Its irrational.
I'm not sure who that is replying to, but just in case it's me, I don't. I'd love to have an EV - an EV which is capable of driving to a campsite in North Wales, the Lakes or Dartmoor and back without having to wait hours at a recharge station on the journey. I still wouldn't use it on trips of less than a mile - I still feel a bit awkward making the 2 mile trip to where I park to go into my nearest town because it's so short (most people would drive 4 miles in from here, I tend to cycle/skate the last bit as it's far more convenient).
As said many times already, the UK does not have enough power generation for the country to go electric. So you hate coal and nuclear, but the gas powerstations produce nowhere near enough (not far off peak now). Can't have your cake and eat it lads. Bring in nuclear I say, just jettison the waste into space.
[quote=amedias ]There's still a lot of people hanging on to the idea that they couldn't swap to an EV because the range isn't big enough for that trip they take 3 times a year. Logically speaking that's a problem we should be able to find a solution to.
I'm sure it is - I just want it to be something for which a solution is found, rather than being ignored as too difficult, or not important.
[quote=robowns ]just jettison the waste into space.
A bit harsh on JRM and BJ
I'm sure it is - I just want it to be something for which a solution is found, rather than being ignored as too difficult, or not important.
+ eleventy million!
still, a lot can happen in 23 years... 😉
I need a car regardless of the technology ... 😆
[b]Car is freedom ... [/b]
All I know is we are exchanging one form of pollution for another. 🙄
I just hope it does not take two days to travel to London from the North ... you know battery running out of juice and you need to have a place to charge for 8 hours or so ... 😆
If that's true than I shall be first person to buy one coz I like Toyota me.theocb - Member
It may have already been posted but I read something today about Toyota and solid state batteries.. 2-3 x range and fast charging in minutes.
A side note/curiosity at most but interesting historical context
Also remember that a filling station network is fundamentally easier to build than an electricity grid.
Ah, but the grid itself is already there, so is it easier to build a filling station network than to install chargers on an existing grid*?
Rhetorical question really as neither you nor I know the answer for sure, just
it's another one of those 'not simple' situations.
*even if the grid does need upgrades,
Ah, but the grid itself is already there, so is it easier to build a filling station network than to install chargers on an existing grid*?
As you say, it needs major upgrades. Who's going to pay for it?
Of course it should be government. But the government should have been investing in rail in the last 80 years to keep pace with developments. So we'd be able to hop on a train to go wherever we want and just pick up a local electric car at the other end. OR even put our local electric car on a train Eurotunnel style.
Maybe there is more scope for hybrid tech here for that kind of use?
Hybrids remove the normal imaginary range problem.
Hybrids remove actual range problems.
Hybrids sort of remove the recharging-on-a-crowded-street-parking problem.
Important point you raise there - far easier for the government to just ban something rather than help provide infrastructure for its replacement.