2040 deadline for Diesel and Petrol cars.

Advert

New Replies

Report Bug

Help/FAQs

2040 deadline for Diesel and Petrol cars.

This topic has 87 replies, 49 voices, and was last updated 27 July 2017 at 16:25 by Barnaby Wilde.

Viewing 13 posts - 76 through 88 (of 88 total)

← 1 2 3 4

Author

Posts
27 July 2017 at 11:36 #308999
Howard Lewis
Participant
@howardlewis46836
IF, we take a politician's soundbite at face value, the UK has 13 years in which to develop practical power sources for not just private transport, but for freight.

Today's Daily Telegraph quotes the best selling electric car as the Nissan Leaf, with a range of 124 miles. That won't even get me to Hereford this week end to The WaterWorks Museum, (140 miles each way) and even IF it did, it would need 12 -15 hours to recharge before I could return home. The down hill stretches off Motorway will need lots of Amps to climb (1 in 8 = 12% in places) on the return journey, so regenerative braking will be balanced out.

There is a VAST amount of work to do before political aspiration becomes practicable.

The genes of King Canute still seem to course through the veins of politicians.

No one, in power seems to be capable of thinking the process through from source to end product.

Electric power is only likely to be a pollution free source if it is generated by solar, wind, hydro or wave power.

And that ignores making all the hardware and infrastructure!

Anything which involves combustion will produce pollution.

Maybe politicians and their advisors should take extended courses in logic, and engineering, before pontificating.

Utopia is still over the horizon!

Howard
Advert

27 July 2017 at 11:43 #309001
duncan webster 1
Participant
@duncanwebster1
Couldn't agree more Russell, a combination of nuclear and renewables, with a lot of energy storage, seems like the way forward. No doubt the greenies will object to flooding large areas of upland Britain for hydro and pumped storage schemes, even if we could find suitable sites.

As for hydrogen, most of it is made by reacting methane with steam to produce hydrogen and carbon dioxide, so hydrogen powered cars are no better than petrol unless the overall cycle produces less CO2 which I doubt. If it ever did take off, the big oil men would find a way of using other hydrocarbons, so have no interest in squashing it. The big problem as someone else said is storgae and transportation.
27 July 2017 at 11:55 #309003
Howard Lewis
Participant
@howardlewis46836
AND whatever machines we use, some sort of lubrication will still be needed.

No mineral oil? well use vegetable, or composites such as Nylon for bearings. Then think about the quantity of energy in producing your choice, before committing.

If only life was simple

Howard
27 July 2017 at 12:18 #309009
Gordon W
Participant
@gordonw
One other problem, maybe- the Chinese seem to have bought up all the rare earths and other stuff needed , at least to make the current batteries .see what I did there!
27 July 2017 at 12:18 #309010
Gordon W
Participant
@gordonw
One other problem, maybe- the Chinese seem to have bought up all the rare earths and other stuff needed , at least to make the current batteries .see what I did there!
27 July 2017 at 12:29 #309012
Bikepete
Participant
@bikepete
I'm with the optimists here. Solutions will be found – maybe we'll have to do things a bit differently, but no reason to think it'll all be bad.

As a terraced house dweller I'm particularly interested in solutions to this charging problem – trailing wires over the footpath obviously being no good as a proper solution. Streetlight posts are not an option either on our street – the (widely spaced) lights are mounted direct onto house walls, and the pavements are also quite narrow. Interestingly, they've all recently been dug up and relaid for fibre – along with much of the rest of the city – so it's not hard to imagine this being done again to lay some more heavy duty power cable.

There's a trial about to start in Oxford with proposed solutions including gullies for you to lay a cable through from your house (obviously depends on you being able to get a space right outside) or smallish charging bollards.

Seems to me the most likely solution is that the equivalent of the current fibre installer companies will simply dig up our pavements again, install a charging bollard every 10m or so, then let it pay for itself in fees over the next few years. You'd maybe have to tap a contactless card onto the bollard before it lets you charge so it can bill you correctly – or maybe it will recognise your car automatically.

A bit of the already narrow pavement width would be lost, but needs must…and presumably a lot of extra work would also be needed 'upstream' to ensure the grid could cope… but all seems very do-able.

Edited By Bikepete on 27/07/2017 12:31:32
27 July 2017 at 12:45 #309015
MW
Participant
@mw27036
For the temperature to rise to an average of +5C globally by the end of 2100 would be disastrous, to the point where it would render some already hotter climbs of the world uninhabitable. 35C at 100% humidity for e.g is practically unbearable for a human.

It would be a miracle if we could get to a point where we level off the increases before this happens and luckily they are now starting to make some inroads into achieving this. If this means we have to say bye bye to regular usage of I.C's then fine.

By this I don't mean an outright ban, you can't effectively ban technology. So long as the regular "get about car" is replaced with a green affordable alternative then good. all power to that.

I was once a sceptic on the reasons why these changes were occurring (not necessarily doubting the occurrence of it as such),I think much of the scepticism stems from a lack of trust, when experts and what like are wheeled out in front of the public and they automatically switch off to what they say, even if it is right, because we've been lied to in the past. At that point, it no longer matters if what you say is right or wrong, because there's no trust.

but it surely has to be common sense that artificially plugging away as many gases as you can, on an industrial scale, into your normal breathable atmosphere is bad news.

Michael W

Edited By Michael-w on 27/07/2017 12:47:56
27 July 2017 at 12:46 #309016
derek hall 1
Participant
@derekhall1
Drive into any major city at night and all the empty office blocks are lit up like a xmas tree….start by switching half of those lights off…or all of them.

Was in Nairobi last year for work. Took 2 hours to travel from hotel to office in the morning and another 2 hours back to hotel in the evening…distance 10 miles. No one turned off their engines, ancient old buses and lorry engines continuously belching out black fumes. I am sure its taken 1 week off my life span.

Then back in olde England we worry about turning our tV's off and not leaving them on stand by….

Regards

Del
27 July 2017 at 12:48 #309017
SillyOldDuffer
Moderator
@sillyoldduffer
Posted by Howard Lewis on 27/07/2017 11:36:21:

…

No one, in power seems to be capable of thinking the process through from source to end product.

…

Howard

So who does know the answer Howard, and what is it? All I know is that we cannot carry on as we are.

Unfortunately politicians are our best bet. Their problem is that they have to deal with public opinion as well as party prejudices. As this is usually self-interested, ill-informed, emotional, shallow and short-sighted we get what we deserve.

No disrespect here: no-one has the time to understand money, religious fundamentalism, Chinese politics, risk analysis, economics, exhaustion of natural resources, climate change, statistics, information, consumerism, antibiotics, artificial intelligence, any of the sciences, most technologies etc. etc. Or how these might interact in future.

I do feel that most people should try harder, and am in favour of no-one over (say) 70 being allowed to vote. Not because old people are stupid, but because experienced minds fear change.

Dave
27 July 2017 at 13:28 #309027
Fowlers Fury
Participant
@fowlersfury
Many postings of wisdom and lateral thinking here but such are apparently sadly lacking in the politicians’ mentality.

I don’t buy that their primary motivation is the toxicity of NOx and particulates. As with tobacco related deaths, cold economics dictate – as we are now finding – that reducing premature deaths from such causes actually costs the country billions per year which can only be funded through unpopular, higher taxation and cutting services. Whilst not denigrating the value of prolonging human life, my cynicism suggests that to keep votes, all political parties subscribe to ill-conceived measures such as this latest one.

I drive a diesel car made to conform to the latest Euro cat 6 emissions regulation. AdBlue is added at minimal extra cost/mile and reduces NOx output significantly. I get about 20 to 30% more miles/gallon of fossil fuel than with my previous petrol engine. Since 1990, particulate emissions from diesel engines have been reduced by around 99 percent, while modern diesels emit some 98 percent less NOx than comparable vehicles from the early 1990s. The “problem”, however it’s defined, is the continued use of old technology on the roads.

Who can foresee that North America or Russia would follow suit? Shale oil extraction and natural reserves in those areas are primary economic activities. Trump has already flagged up his attitude to green issues. Add to that the third world's dependence on old polluting vehicles and the UK & France contribution to improving health & climate change is insignificant and disproportionate.

As for “I do feel that most people should try harder, and am in favour of no-one over (say) 70 being allowed to vote. Not because old people are stupid, but because experienced minds fear change”. I prefer the philosophy advocated by my old prof “Don’t vote – it only encourages them”.
27 July 2017 at 14:42 #309031
larry Phelan
Participant
@larryphelan54019
Never saw so much hot air produced over any subject .Just reading Dave,s posting regarding politicians and artificial intelligence.This could be of some use to them since intelligence of any kind seems to be something in which they are somewhat deficient,to put it mildly.

Regarding the over 70,s not being allowed to vote,I,d be all in favour of this,provided that since we would not be allowed to vote,neither should we be allowed to pay taxes or contribute in any way to the running of our country.

Fair is fair. Let them get on with it,funded by their own age groups,while we stay out of their way.

Maybe after nearly 80 years of listening to such rubbish from them,I,m just a bit cynical,but as far as I can see,their aim seems to be to hang in there long enough to get a pension for life after only four years in office ! Nice work,if you can get it.

Does anyone really believe that they would write off the tax they get from petrol and diesel? Think again,my friend

I think I will go out to my workshop and do my bit to overheat the planet,before they put a tax or a ban on that too.
27 July 2017 at 15:53 #309038
Barnaby Wilde
Participant
@barnabywilde70941
We've never had a stable climate !
27 July 2017 at 16:25 #309041
Barnaby Wilde
Participant
@barnabywilde70941
Posted by larry Phelan on 27/07/2017 14:42:54:

Never saw so much hot air produced over any subject .Just reading Dave,s posting regarding politicians and artificial intelligence.This could be of some use to them since intelligence of any kind seems to be something in which they are somewhat deficient,to put it mildly.

Why do we keep fooling ourselve's that our politicians are all stupid?

When was the last time the village idiot stood for parliament & who was it that voted them in?

They are not the stupid ones . . . we are.
Author

Posts