Electric Car Battery Retention

[jimmy b]

On jimmy b Said:

I truly understand the term EVangelist now.

 

If an EV was made available, that did the things we all take for granted, such as versatility (big boot space) and speed of “refueling”, I’d seriously consider having one. But as petrol is very unlikely to dissappear in my lifetime, I’ll carry on with it.

 

Petrol engines are still being designed/developed for future car use.

 

The argument about the environment just does not work for me. From my day job, I know about the price we all pay and will pay for the batteries. Both in their manufacture and future disposal.

Jimb

This post was about BEV range retention but you’ve turned it into an anti EV rant again.

In answer to a couple of your points.

The last time I saw, over 90% of BEV drivers in the UK charged their vehicles overnight at home. No need to drive to a petrol station and stand there refuelling it. Just plug the car in when you get home and unplug when you go out. In this scenario it’s obviously much quicker (time taken) to refuel a BEV. I hasten to add this is not my experience as I don’t own one, but a comment I saw online from a happy BEV owner.

From figures I’ve seen, the vast majority of car journeys in the UK are under 50 miles so “refuelling” is probably not that frequent for many motorists. Speaking personally I fill up about once every 3 weeks.

The “Boot Space” seems to be a new anti BEV myth that I’ve not seen before so I did a quick Google. Obviously there must be BEV’s that you’ve personally experienced with tiny boots though.

 

[BazyleParticipant @bazyle]

For about 10 years I was doing about 20-25k per year and calculated that I spent an entire day each year just refuelling and waiting in the queue to pay (before pay at pump). Would have saved time with an electric but having to unwind the cable and plug in would still take a minute every few days so still an hour or two a year. Not least of the advantages when work form home some days was allowed was the time saved scraping the windscreen. Yes electric cars can save that chore with preheat and de-ice but so can IC cars if you are spending that kind of money.

[old martParticipant @oldmart]

I had a temperature problem with a lithium battery on a much smaller scale recently. I usually charge my Samsung smart phone using an old USB charger in my bedroom and for some reason changed the charger to use one of the fast chargers instead. The phone refused to charge saying it was too cold (about 12C at the time), the phone,a Galaxy A14 has a 5000mA battery and is about 2 years old, bought because I was afraid my ancient Nokia 1100 was about to become a small brick, but it is still getting signals.

[Bo’sun]

On Bo’sun Said:

On jimmy b Said:

I truly understand the term EVangelist now.

 

If an EV was made available, that did the things we all take for granted, such as versatility (big boot space) and speed of “refueling”, I’d seriously consider having one. But as petrol is very unlikely to dissappear in my lifetime, I’ll carry on with it.

 

Petrol engines are still being designed/developed for future car use.

 

The argument about the environment just does not work for me. From my day job, I know about the price we all pay and will pay for the batteries. Both in their manufacture and future disposal.

Jimb

Absolutely!  The issue many people have with EV’s is “choice”.  We are gradually being forced into vehicles we don’t want because of many factors.  The relentless pursuit for “Net Zero” seems to trump common sense.

Try thinking a few years ahead.

Just look at the recent weather/climate problems and changes around the planet.

Think about the damage to people who breathe in the tail-pipe emissions from fossil burned.

Think of how long the fossils have been sequestered (and how long it will take to replace them🙂).

Think, there are better things to use these commodities for – rather than simply inefficiently burning them.

Think why there is a drive to replace domestic gas boilers with heat pumps.

I went out on Sunday.  3.0 miles/kWh on the outward journey including 50 miles on dual carriageways.  Cruise control set at 63mph (I arrived spot on time).

The return trip was a more leisurely affair – 54mph set on the cruise and 3.5miles/kWh.  Some rapid overtaking.

Heating was used about the same both ways.  A fair amount of the difference was due to drag at different speeds, but some due to the cold battery.

The 15% reduction was quite acceptable – at only 9.5p/kWh, the difference in energy cost was not going to break the bank!

I’ll never go back to a dirty, noisy, fossil burner.

 

 

[FulmenParticipant @fulmen]

I simply did the math and it said electric cost 1/5 to 1/10 of petrol. Combined with no VAT and usually free passing on toll roads it’s a real money saver. And it’s comfortable to drive. As long as it’s cheaper and I don’t require long road trips I’ll stick with BEV.

[old mart]

On old mart Said:

I had a temperature problem with a lithium battery on a much smaller scale recently. I usually charge my Samsung smart phone using an old USB charger in my bedroom and for some reason changed the charger to use one of the fast chargers instead. The phone refused to charge saying it was too cold (about 12C at the time), the phone,a Galaxy A14 has a 5000mA battery and is about 2 years old, bought because I was afraid my ancient Nokia 1100 was about to become a small brick, but it is still getting signals.

Unlike a BEV, phones have no means of warming (conditioning) the battery for receiving fast charging without causing damage. So it says ‘no’

You need to be careful these days with USB quick chargers.

USB power delivery
USB Power Delivery (USB-PD) is the latest technology for USB ports. It gives more output power than the default power range of the existing USB standard. It delivers power up to 240 watts. It is capable to output power in different voltages simultaneous to the data transfer.

The USB-PD outputs include 5V@3A(15W), 9V@3A(27W), 15V@3A(45W), 20V@5A(100W), and 48V@5A(240W). Most of the USB Type C ports support USB-PD protocol.

[not done it yet]

On not done it yet Said:

On Bo’sun Said:

On jimmy b Said:

I truly understand the term EVangelist now.

 

If an EV was made available, that did the things we all take for granted, such as versatility (big boot space) and speed of “refueling”, I’d seriously consider having one. But as petrol is very unlikely to dissappear in my lifetime, I’ll carry on with it.

 

Petrol engines are still being designed/developed for future car use.

 

The argument about the environment just does not work for me. From my day job, I know about the price we all pay and will pay for the batteries. Both in their manufacture and future disposal.

Jimb

Absolutely!  The issue many people have with EV’s is “choice”.  We are gradually being forced into vehicles we don’t want because of many factors.  The relentless pursuit for “Net Zero” seems to trump common sense.

Try thinking a few years ahead.

Just look at the recent weather/climate problems and changes around the planet.

Think about the damage to people who breathe in the tail-pipe emissions from fossil burned.

Think of how long the fossils have been sequestered (and how long it will take to replace them🙂).

Think, there are better things to use these commodities for – rather than simply inefficiently burning them.

Think why there is a drive to replace domestic gas boilers with heat pumps.

I went out on Sunday.  3.0 miles/kWh on the outward journey including 50 miles on dual carriageways.  Cruise control set at 63mph (I arrived spot on time).

The return trip was a more leisurely affair – 54mph set on the cruise and 3.5miles/kWh.  Some rapid overtaking.

Heating was used about the same both ways.  A fair amount of the difference was due to drag at different speeds, but some due to the cold battery.

The 15% reduction was quite acceptable – at only 9.5p/kWh, the difference in energy cost was not going to break the bank!

I’ll never go back to a dirty, noisy, fossil burner.

 

 

On not done it yet Said

Think why there is a drive to replace domestic gas boilers with heat pumps.

No thanks.  I remember the Government telling us “diesel was good”.  Look how well that worked out?

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

No thanks.  I remember the Government telling us “diesel was good”.  Look how well that worked out?

Did they?  Diesels, at the time had surpassed the economy of petrol engines.  The emissions (acid rain) was not considered at the time – typical short-sightedness of most governments.

This is a global issue, not just for a parochial UK.  Do open your eyes and look a bit wider, rather than operating with tunnel vision.  China is undoubtedly on the right course – just look at their recent advancements in reducing use of fossils in their transport and electrical grid.  Remember that manufacturing was moved, by the west, to China to reduce labour costs and the transfer of pollution from our own backyards.

Your choice, but I do think that anyone who believes that continuing burning fossils for space heating or transport are either short sighted, blind or just don’t care about the climatic changes which are seriously affecting parts of the planet.

But just carry on in your own small unthoughtful manner.  2030 cannot come quickly enough, from the point of banning the sale of new ICE cars.  I’ve known, for years, of the need to change, and have had the opportunity to change, so I’ve changed.  The 100% fossil burning cars will start to reduce rapidly from 2030 as only secondhand options will be available for that sector.  Fuel prices will increase and more towns will refuse to allow entry to fossil burners (or make it increasingly prohibitive) for public health reasons.

Secondhand fossil burning cars may well become more expensive in the short term, after 2030, but the increasing popularity of the then cheaper EVs will soon persuade most to leave behind the dinosaurs.🙂

[jimmy bParticipant @jimmyb]

Enjoy your cheap EV while you can.

Tax will be raised on these “green” things. Best not to think about where the battery and motor raw materials come from.

 

Jimb

[jimmy b]

On jimmy b Said:

Enjoy your cheap EV while you can.

Tax will be raised on these “green” things. Best not to think about where the battery and motor raw materials come from.

 

Jimb

No motoring is ‘cheap’.  The government regard motorists as an ‘easy touch’ for raising taxes.  Nothing will change.  But the government might well increase taxes for fossil burners at a greater rate than those on EVs.  Watch that space.🙂

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

For what it’s worth … here is Which? on the topic:

https://apple.news/AWFk9hHxATtWNYX0xW9hi7Q

MichaelG.

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

BEV is great IF you don’t reguarly make long time constrained journeys AND have a suitable means of charging at home for low cost. Unfortunatly there are a lot of people don’t fit in that space.

That includes me on both count’s. So I bought a plug-in hybrid EV. Even then costs are incresing. From theis year road tax is no longer zero rate for my car. The cost of recharging at a motorway services is now much more expensive than using petrol.
My work commute is “free” as I can charge at work and it’s within the battery range.

Robert.

[jimmy b]

On jimmy b Said:

Enjoy your cheap EV while you can.

Tax will be raised on these “green” things. Best not to think about where the battery and motor raw materials come from.

 

Jimb

Not sure why ICE cars are seen as being better than EVs.  Perhaps Jimb can explain?   The case in favour of EVs includes:

• cheaper fuel
• can be recharged at home overnight without major electrical upgrades – no need to refuel at a pump
• accelerate faster than IC
• low pollution, important in town centres
• simpler to build using fewer materials and less energy during production: no clutch, gearbox, or cooling system etc.
• more space inside (no clutch etc.)

Main disadvantages of EVs are all to do with the battery.   EVs easily have the range to do the UK average commute,  but long distance travel requires lengthy recharge stops.  ICE cars have more range, otherwise they’re inferior!  My range needs, and those of the majority, are met by an EV, so we don’t care what’s under the bonnet!  Arguing exceptions doesn’t alter the big picture: not many regularly drive from Land’s End to Hammerfest!

Those who don’t believe there’s a serious environmental problem brewing either don’t understand the facts or have their heads in a hole.   The issue has developed over the last 40 years as predicted by the models, actually a bit worse.  In the same period there is no evidence that harm isn’t being done; what is it please?

Not about choice either.   Like it or not, the world doesn’t exist to keep us happy. We’re all constrained by reality, not wishful thinking.   As oil stocks run low, fuel prices will become so expensive there is no choice.  We old chaps might all be dead before rising prices really hurt, but my kids will certainly suffer.  Ditto global warming, which is already forcing people to migrate in large numbers.  Both problems are real and require urgent attention.   Unless you don’t care about the future!

Warning from history: all previous civilisations collapsed, often due to shortages, and there is no reason to suppose that ours is invulnerable.

Dave

[Dave HalfordParticipant @davehalford22513]

Yep EVs are great commuter cars. Take them away for a weeks holiday and the wallet starts to sweat a bit.

There is apparently a huge space under what was the bonnet, but my lads Megane has that full of motor and control boxes no frunk to speak of.

Accelerate faster than IC, what is the point of that? All I want is something with long range that will tow, but long range batteries only come with bigger motors that suck more and towing means you have to uncouple to recharge.

Back to the OP most batteries seem to hold up well, the original Leaf’s are according to Autotrader ads are mostly decent considering their age. I’m betting the lady uses prewarm + defrost and some Renault bev do not have heat pumps in them.

[SillyOldDuffer]

On SillyOldDuffer Said:

Got to disagree Dave

Not sure why ICE cars are seen as being better than EVs.  Perhaps Jimb can explain?   The case in favour of EVs includes:

• cheaper fuel
  Only at home or certain places. Even that may change
• can be recharged at home overnight without major electrical upgrades – no need to refuel at a pump
  Only if you have asuitable parking space at your home.
• accelerate faster than IC
  My previous estate car was faster 0-60 than a Nissan Leaf….
• low pollution, important in town centres
• simpler to build using fewer materials and less energy during production: no clutch, gearbox, or cooling system etc.
  Not really, just different. EV’s HAVE got gearboxes and cooling systems
• more space inside (no clutch etc.)
  Depends on model.

Main disadvantages of EVs are all to do with the battery.   EVs easily have the range to do the UK average commute,  but long distance travel requires lengthy recharge stops.  ICE cars have more range, otherwise they’re inferior!  My range needs, and those of the majority, are met by an EV, so we don’t care what’s under the bonnet!  Arguing exceptions doesn’t alter the big picture: not many regularly drive from Land’s End to Hammerfest!

Those who don’t believe there’s a serious environmental problem brewing either don’t understand the facts or have their heads in a hole.   The issue has developed over the last 40 years as predicted by the models, actually a bit worse.  In the same period there is no evidence that harm isn’t being done; what is it please?

Not about choice either.   Like it or not, the world doesn’t exist to keep us happy. We’re all constrained by reality, not wishful thinking.   As oil stocks run low, fuel prices will become so expensive there is no choice.  We old chaps might all be dead before rising prices really hurt, but my kids will certainly suffer.  Ditto global warming, which is already forcing people to migrate in large numbers.  Both problems are real and require urgent attention.   Unless you don’t care about the future!

Warning from history: all previous civilisations collapsed, often due to shortages, and there is no reason to suppose that ours is invulnerable.

Dave

 

[Nick WheelerParticipant @nickwheeler]

EVs are only cheap to charge at the moment because they’re not being taxed as road fuel. Anyone who thinks that will continue when they are the majority of vehicles is deluded. Or an idiot. Or, more likely, a deluded idiot. Remember when diesel was cheaper than petrol?

I like the way EVs drive and now that I only do a few 250+ mile round trips every year, my usage is well suited to one. But I don’t need a big car which the more popular ones seem to be and I can’t afford to buy one. When this terraced house was built in 1913, for some reason they considered rear gardens(that have no vehicular access) to be more important than off street parking. My car is currently parked nearly 1/2mile away as it was the closest space I could find when I got home at 22:00 last night. That’s hardly unusual, which makes reliable charging a pipe dream.

EVs are being touted as a complete, simple solution to a complex problem, and as we claim to be engineers that should immediately set off alarms: it’s three lies for the price of one! Add politicians thinking that saying you’re going to do something means the problem is solved, and the outlook gets even worse.

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

I run a Euro 6 compliant petrol. Now that is cleaner than engines produced twenty years ago, let alone more!

So I am an oddball.

The long journeys that i undertake will tax the range of any EV; especially in winter, and there is no facility to recharge at any of the destinations. So the journey time would be extended by nearly an hour, in each direction, en route.

There is a lot of work to be done, to solve all the problems of electric vehicles and machines. Things are improving, but utopia still eludes us.

How do you recharge the battery of an electric construction machine, across a mile of muddy ground!

Take a diesel generator to it?

Hydrogen would be a clean alternative, but very limited infrastructure. And unless produced using nuclear or hydroelectric power, what is the clean method of production?

And whilst “clean” in operation, has anyone looked at the energy used and emissions produced in manufacturing the vehicle, especially the battery containing rare metals.

BEV HGVs will suffer a major loss of payload (A bus running locally can balance the weight saving of fuel tank, engine and transmission against the weight of battery and control systems) more difficult to do for a trunker, liable to be away from home for days on end.

To reach a sensible conclusion, we all need to stand a little further back to consider the overall picture.

(There was a time when asbestos was thought to be a good material!)

Howard

[SillyOldDuffer]

On SillyOldDuffer Said:

On vintagengineer Said:

I’ll stick to my 5.0 ltr Ford F100. It’s 46 years old still on it’s original England has just passed 450k miles!

Not living in London then! A Ford F100 would cost vintage £4562.50 per year in congestion charges…

Transport pollution has long been a problem in London.   Before the Tube and internal combustion the city was ankle deep in horse poo.   ‘Crossing Sweepers’ made a living by clearing paths through it for pedestrians.   A stinky health  hazard – upset tummies very common.

IC was initially welcomed in London because most of the incontinent horses went for cat food and glue. but it slowly became apparent that the Carbon Monoxide, Lead, Nitrous Oxides, Sulphuric Acid and particulates emitted by vehicles were also nasty.

Removing Sulphur, banning Lead, and fitting Catalysers reduced the problem, but internal combustion is still bad news for town dwellers.   Came to head in London after an asthmatic child died and the Coroner found she lived within 100 metres of a pollution monitoring station whose records showed that the authorities had ignored the fact that motor pollution persistently exceeded legal limits.  Hence ULEZ.

Whether or not electric is good or not depends on the circumstances.   I rarely travel more than 100 miles per day, and am more likely to be stuck in a traffic jam than living the dream on the open road!   Electric would have easily coped with my work commute, let alone retirement travel, and recharging one slowly overnight wouldn’t be a problem.    For me not having to refuel at a petrol pump is an advantage.

Electric doesn’t suit everyone!  Others do long motorway journeys, tow caravans, tour Europe, go off-road, and lose money if they have to wait for the battery to recharge.  ICE is better for them.

Whilst a significant minority better off with ICE, most people most of the time would do better with electric.   And the advantage of electric over IC will increase because the cost of petrol is going to sky-rocket.

Historically oil has been cheap due to supply meeting demand easily.  This happy surplus state is ending:  demand is rising, many existing oilfields are depleted, and not many new ones have been identified.  Over the next 30 years demand will gradually exceed supply and petrol prices will rise.  ICE motorists will find themselves queuing to buy expensive fuel.   At some price point, it will be cheaper to go electric.

Ironically ICE fans should be promoting electric, not rubbishing it.   Reason being that every electric car on the road reduces demand for petrol and that helps keep petrol prices low.

Dave

 

Recent scientific research does not support the hypothesis that crude oil fuel is of fossil origin.

There is a growing theory that crude oil is not the result of the decay of prehistoric long dead dinosaurs, protozoa and squashed fish, but that it is created by reactions between elements deep within the earth’s mantle, at elevated temperatures and pressures.

This is biotic theory -vs -aboiotic theory.

 

Has Abiotic Oil Eliminated Peak Oil?

 

My inclination is to allow this theory to propagate. it has a ring of truth about it.

 

 

 

 

 

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

The question of EHGV’s is interesting. The Services nearest to me serve a traffic off th end of a motorway and a A road that is a major truck route. There is no truck parking nearby They currently don’t have enough parking for trucks despite having given over most of the parking to trucks. There are only 9 car EV chargers and they are often occupied.
How are they going to provde power to charge 50  plus trucks at once? And they will need charging almost every day.

 

[Howard Lewis]

On Howard Lewis Said:

 

How do you recharge the battery of an electric construction machine, across a mile of muddy ground!

Take a diesel generator to it?

 

Hydrogen would be a clean alternative, but very limited infrastructure. And unless produced using nuclear or hydroelectric power, what is the clean method of production?

JCB have been doing Hydrogen machinery for a few years now and generators. Some Dakar race trucks also on Hydrogen as well as other motorsport. As for how it’s made same applies to the electricity for charging batteries.

As for your electric machine, you would take a powerpack to it not a diesel gennie. Same way you can charge a car from a power wall.

[Bo’sunParticipant @bosun58570]

Some good points from Howard Lewis.  Not to mention that a large number of people can’t charge at home, and disabled drivers that may have to wrangle their on-board charging cable in the rain.  How many petrol stations aren’t under cover?

[howardb]

On howardb Said:

On SillyOldDuffer Said:

On vintagengineer Said:

I’ll stick to my 5.0 ltr Ford F100. It’s 46 years old still on it’s original England has just passed 450k miles!

…lHistorically oil has been cheap due to supply meeting demand easily.  This happy surplus state is ending:  demand is rising, many existing oilfields are depleted, and not many new ones have been identified.  Over the next 30 years demand will gradually exceed supply and petrol prices will rise.  ICE motorists will find themselves queuing to buy expensive fuel.   At some price point, it will be cheaper to go electric.

 

 

 

 

Recent scientific research does not support the hypothesis that crude oil fuel is of fossil origin.

There is a growing theory that crude oil is not the result of the decay of prehistoric long dead dinosaurs, protozoa and squashed fish, but that it is created by reactions between elements deep within the earth’s mantle, at elevated temperatures and pressures.

This is biotic theory -vs -aboiotic theory.

 

Has Abiotic Oil Eliminated Peak Oil?
My inclination is to allow this theory to propagate. it has a ring of truth about it.

 

 

 

Best way to deal with Abiotic Oil is to ask Howard to justify it.  Where’s the evidence? However, wven though Brandolini’s Law applies, I’ll try and explain.  Read on only if willing to put the effort in!  (Emotional beliefs are much easier than reading long posts calling for logic skills!)

Abiotic Oil is a theoretical possibility only because it can be made in a lab or synthetic fuel plant.   It doesn’t exist on Planet Earth in commercial quantities.   If it did, we’d be extracting it already.   There is no known process that could be producing it in quantity, or in recoverable form.   To be of any use it has to exist in huge quantities, and it doesn’t.  Try and buy some.

Coal, Oil and Natural Gas do exist.  Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Geography all provide strong evidence they’re of fossil origin.  Coal and Oil reserves both occur in regions that were obviously underwater in the extreme distant  past.   Hundreds of millions of years ago flat swamplands covered large areas of the world that collected organic matter from dead plants and animals.  The remains were then covered in sediment, crushed, and sealed in.   Taking millions of years.   The Carbon came from the atmosphere, which contained far more CO² than it does today and was much hotter.  Mountain ranges were appearing – all very unstable, with huge areas of land moving about.   The Americas were once joined to Europe and Africa, now the Atlantic intervenes.

Very large quantities of Carbon were captured by marine animals and ended up as Chalk and Limestone – Calcium Carbonate.    Smaller quantities ended up as coal and oil.  Hard to prove Oil came from animal remains because everything is liquidised, but where Oil occurs correlates with seawater lagoons.   Solid fossil evidence confirms Coal came from plants, hence fresh water lagoons.  The geological evidence for lagoons is rock solid, ho ho!

Deep coal mines sink shafts through layers of clay, gravel, limestone and Iron Carbonate to get to the coal.   These minerals are all deposits, again lagoon related.    In other words the ground slowly sank over millions of years and filled the shallows in. Much later the area was pushed back up, and we get the geography we know today.

Oil comes from much the same process, the main difference being that animals converted Carbon from plants to flesh, died, and sank to the bottom where the remains eventually fossilised in the same way as coal.  Mostly micro-organisms like protozoa and bacteria rather than big dinosaurs!  Millions of tons over millions of years.

All happened long before mammals existed.  Reptiles ruled, and creatures that bore and suckled live young were far in the future.  Humans, optimistically, are as old as about 200,000 years, so fossil fuels were forming unimaginably long before we evolved.  The planet was geologically much more active than it is today, with tectonic movements creating mountains and subsiding huge areas repeatedly.  Not now, the conditions needed to create fossil fuels no longer exist.   If you prefer, God isn’t making any more.

Unfortunately riches based on energy obtained by burning oil, coal and natural gas are not sustainable.   Wasting time on fantasies like  Abiotic Oil is dangerous now that humanity is within 30 years of running out of oil and gas, because we rely on them so much.   (Coal is good for about 300 years).   Fortunately for humanity there is an alternative:  the sun puts far more energy into the planet than we need, plus geothermal.  Extracting alternative energy is harder than setting fire to dug up minerals, but solar panels, tidal systems, hydroelectric, and windfarms all work.   We just need to get on with it!

I feel that most of the objections to ‘Green’ are political or emotional rather than technical.   Folk who understand how the world worked yesterday hate change, and, ignoring the evidence, want to believe in the status quo.   That can only end badly – in the foreseeable future, cheap personal transport based on oil, will end perhaps abruptly, more likely with millions slowly forced off the road by rising prices.  Fortunately EVs are a viable alternative, and Hydrogen is promising too; not perfect but much better than waiting in the sleet for a horse-drawn omnibus!

Is dissolving optimism and hating novelty an age thing?  Old men are notorious for becoming unimaginative and fearing anything that rocks their boat.   I feel it myself!  Got really annoyed earlier in the week by changes made by my bank.   I want to be left alone, not troubled by change. History and personal experience tells us change is inevitable.  Therefore I have to stay real, otherwise I’ll end up in a home being asked who the Prime Minister is.   Unfortunately evolution has left us with brains that think 5 or 10 years is a long time so we struggle with issues that are a decade or more away.  That’ll never happen we think, but that’s rubbish, of course it will…

The choice is to either party-on with fossils or to plan ahead.  Party-on is cheap and easy, but it will end badly.  The end of Gas and Oil is in sight and hoping lots more will be found is wishful thinking.   And even if more was found, Climate Change is real, even though many refuse to accept the evidence.    Chaps my age need not worry about what’s brewing because time puts an end to us before the worst, but our children and grandchildren will have to deal with horrible consequences.

Dave

 

[noel shelleyParticipant @noelshelley55608]

With our own generating and grid system already unable to supply the needs of the country, would anybody care to tell me WHERE all the electricity is going to come from ? France, Belgium, Norway ? With the 1.5 million new homes that are to be built, many on air source heating, and simple observation of no significant building of power generation that does not rely on wind or sunlight, somethings got to give.

I live in a rural village of some 300 souls, we only have 2 phases, anybodies guess as to what happened to the 3rd one. With many new homes built the local system must be near it’s limit.

It would only need a prolonged cold spell across europe for many to find out that there is a function in their smart meter that nobody says much about.

If your on fibre communication,heavily pushed by many providers now, then your telephone will not work EVEN for 999 calls if there is a power cut. It might be time to think about a generator or at least a UPS for your phone.

Interesting times ! Noel.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Get that Dynomo made Noel, then you can use a steam engien to run it and charge your phone.

My brother up in Scotland was without power for 4 days due to the recent wind, ran one of the cars to charge his mobile.

[mark costello 1Participant @markcostello1]

I don’t know if I am the only one that thinks this way, but, all these type of discussions are dependent on believing the facts and what is the reputation of the People giving out the supposed facts. I suspect that sometimes there is an hidden agenda behind things and We are being deliberately deceived and being pushed down the wrong path. Separating the wheat from the chaff is nothing like separating the bull from bs.

[Author]

Posts