http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

--
Adam

ARWadsworth wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

If I were still working/commuting I'd be tempted because of the
exemption from the London Congestion Charge for wholly electric
vehicles, together with free parking in Westminster, the City and
Camden. I suspect many of the 892 are people gaming those systems.
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

In article ,
ARWadsworth wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

Perhaps we'll see a comeback of the Harrod's vans?

--
*How many roads must a man travel down before he admits he is lost?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

Does that make the many councils and sub-contractors using EV knobheads as
well? Several major sub-contract companies I go to have EV for transport and
tasks up to 3.5 tonnes. Very useful they are too.

Does that make milk floats which have been utilising batteries for decades
to lower noise when delivering early in the morning, keep costs lower and
provide services otherwise not available to elderly or sick people knobheads
too?

Does it make the people living in the cities that benefit from all the
concessions provided for EVs knobheads?


No, it's just people like you that provide links and derogatory statements
about technology you know little about because it doesn't fit into your
"Good old days" attitude lifestyle that are..
Perhaps the apprentices assisting the companies building them should be
shouted at more often, or sacked for not clearing the snow in the car park
so you can park your gas guzzler and given a thick ear to remind them who's
the boss eh.....

Luddite
Do keep up at the back, there's a good chap

On Feb 21, 9:37*pm, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

--
Adam

They didn't have the lack of take up problem with solar PV.
One here for TNP.
http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/S...city/et5_6.xls

harry wrote:
On Feb 21, 9:37 pm, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

--
Adam

They didn't have the lack of take up problem with solar PV.
One here for TNP.
http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/S...city/et5_6.xls

Sadly it appears completely blank in Open Orifice...

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

harry wrote:

http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/S...city/et5_6.xls

Sadly it appears completely blank in Open Orifice...

Old hat Granddad, get with the new kids using LibreOffice :-)

Top/Bottom *******s with domestic PV per parliamentary constituency

North Somerset (1268)
Isle of Wight (1216)
Weston super Mare (1016)
....
Cities of London & Westminster (8)
Glasgow North East (7)
Glasgow Central (3)

In article , The Natural Philosopher
scribeth thus
harry wrote:
On Feb 21, 9:37 pm, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

--
Adam

They didn't have the lack of take up problem with solar PV.
One here for TNP.
http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/S...city/et5_6.xls

Sadly it appears completely blank in Open Orifice...


Opens fine here in OO ...

Just a small question to start with re Macros to permit them or deny..
--
Tony Sayer
k

In article , Nthkentman
scribeth thus

"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

Does that make the many councils and sub-contractors using EV knobheads as
well? Several major sub-contract companies I go to have EV for transport and
tasks up to 3.5 tonnes. Very useful they are too.

Does that make milk floats which have been utilising batteries for decades
to lower noise when delivering early in the morning, keep costs lower and
provide services otherwise not available to elderly or sick people knobheads
too?

Does it make the people living in the cities that benefit from all the
concessions provided for EVs knobheads?


No, it's just people like you that provide links and derogatory statements
about technology you know little about because it doesn't fit into your
"Good old days" attitude lifestyle that are..
Perhaps the apprentices assisting the companies building them should be
shouted at more often, or sacked for not clearing the snow in the car park
so you can park your gas guzzler and given a thick ear to remind them who's
the boss eh.....

Luddite
Do keep up at the back, there's a good chap


I know that sometimes Adam refers to a spade as a shovel and not an
earth inverting horticultural instrument but...

Electric vehicles in the main, not milk floats, around there they have a
Petrol powered one wonder why?.

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

Electric motor power transmission is excellent but this power source.

To hear misguided politicos wittering on about "non polluting" when the
power is in the main supplied by coal and gas, the power generated
conversion a not to high percentage, and then transmitted and stored
with yet another conversion does indeed deserve the worthy comment Knob
head...
--
Tony Sayer

On 22/02/2012 09:32, tony sayer wrote:

Just a small question to start with re Macros to permit them or deny..

I always deny.

I don't know anyone (apart from my deceased Dad who was an aircraft
stress engineer) who even knows how to use them.
:¬)
You are very unlikely to find them on a regular "run of the mill"
spreadsheet. IME.

Pete
--
http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk/waterrower/ Yep. We sell WaterRowers here too.

"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

Pollution free at use vehicles. Fantastic. We need them everywhere.

www.GymRatZ.co.uk wrote:

On 22/02/2012 09:32, tony sayer wrote:

Just a small question to start with re Macros to permit them or deny..

I always deny.
You are very unlikely to find them on a regular "run of the mill"
spreadsheet. IME.

This spreadsheet has two macros, both for formatting cells, one for
revisions the other for provisional figures, I doubt they're needed once
the data is ready for distribution.

"Nthkentman" wrote in message
...

Does it make the people living in the cities that benefit from all the
concessions provided for EVs knobheads?

I always wonder at the mentality of those who deride pollution free vehicles
and still think that choking, smoking diesels are OK and we should have more
of them and kill ourselves quicker.

Doctor Drivel wrote:

I always wonder at the mentality of those who deride pollution free
vehicles and still think that choking, smoking diesels are OK

My previous diesel (Honda 2.2) would give a cloud of black smoke if you
suddenly hoofed it e.g. getting to speed up a motorway on-ramp. Current
car (Audi 3.0) has a DPF and I've *never* seen so much as a wisp of
smoke from it ... though, yes I've heard the horror stories of expensive
replacements being required ... will have to see about that if it comes
to it.

On 22/02/2012 10:17, Doctor Drivel wrote:

"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

Pollution free at use vehicles. Fantastic. We need them everywhere.

Unfortunately apart from the bicycle they don't exist.
My take on these matters is that they simply offload your polution to
somone elses part of the country/world and rape other countries
recources and materials because the users are happy to pay through the
nose for the "feel good" factor.

YMMV.... (but you won't do many befre needing a 12 hour recharge..

Pete
--
http://www.GymRatZ.co.uk Making Commercial Gym Equipment here in the UK.

On 22/02/2012 10:29, Andy Burns wrote:

My previous diesel (Honda 2.2) would give a cloud of black smoke if you
suddenly hoofed it e.g. getting to speed up a motorway on-ramp. Current
car (Audi 3.0) has a DPF and I've *never* seen so much as a wisp of
smoke from it ... though, yes I've heard the horror stories of expensive
replacements being required ... will have to see about that if it comes
to it.

There you go again see... all a DPF does is store your soot from
pootling around waiting for you to get on the motorway and drive to
somon elses neck of the woods whereby the engine will throw unburned
fuel into the DPF to "clean" it out or more accurately create far more
pollution than a car without a DPF.

Pete
--
http://www.gymratz.co.uk/strongman-training-equipment/
Stuff for strongman training and super heros.

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

Oh my God!!

An EV is fine for 90% of "all" car trips made per year - fine for 100% of
trips only in towns and cities. It is the odd long trips, which overall in
a country is small, which requires some focus - and this keeps advancements
down. The "poor" range extender in the Volt is giving a claimed ~60mpg with
the car not running on the battery. So not bad. The Russian rotary vane
engine range extender offers far more.

Note below, "90% charge in less than 5 minutes".

http://www.toshiba.com/ind/data/news/news_241.pdf
Toshiba International Corporation, January 27, 2010 - Toshiba proudly
announces that it has established US-based sales and technical support for
its new product, the Super Charge Ion Battery, SCiBT. This nano-based
breakthrough lithium technology is noted for its rapid charging capability
of 90% charge in less than 5 minutes, long life of more than 10 years even
at rapid charge rates, and excellent safety performance. The SCiBT product
line will be supported out of the Toshiba International Corporation
headquarters in Houston, Texas and the SCiBT team will focus on business
development activities, battery pack design, prototyping, assembly,
technical support, and service.

The SCiBT battery technology offers numerous performance advantages that
make it an ideal solution for many of today's toughest energy storage
challenges.

The secret is brake regen and supercapacitors/efficient batteries. The new
Russian hybrid using the rotary vane engines range extender uses
supercapacitors. Compressed air brake regen would have been feasible, and
air is free, but R&D in supercapacitors and batteries may have pushed air
into the background for now.

To hear misguided politicos wittering on about "non polluting" when the
power is in the main supplied by coal and gas, the power generated
conversion a not to high percentage, and then transmitted and stored
with yet another conversion does indeed deserve the worthy comment Knob
head...

Coal smoke stacks can be controlled. Gas is very clean. So, 40% efficient
from power station to socket. 80^ of the energy in cars tank is wasted, so
20% efficient. A battery wastes only 10% at most so 90% plus efficient. It
does not take much maths to see the EV is more energy efficient from station
generator to EVs wheels - as it stands RIGHT NOW !!!!

Clean up the towns and cities and its cascades to all over.

On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.

On Feb 22, 11:16*am, Lee wrote:
On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.

knobheads++

You mean like a tankful of petrol or diesel?

MBQ

In article ,
Nthkentman wrote:
Does that make milk floats which have been utilising batteries for
decades to lower noise when delivering early in the morning, keep costs
lower and provide services otherwise not available to elderly or sick
people knobheads too?

Haven't seen a milk float for many a year. Once they were a common sight.
But in any case a very specialist application. Travels a short distance
with many start/stops. No other deliveries has the same pattern.

--
*Does fuzzy logic tickle? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Feb 22, 10:29*am, Andy Burns wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:
I always wonder at the mentality of those who deride pollution free
vehicles and still think that choking, smoking diesels are OK

My previous diesel (Honda 2.2) would give a cloud of black smoke if you
suddenly hoofed it e.g. getting to speed up a motorway on-ramp. Current
car (Audi 3.0) has a DPF and I've *never* seen so much as a wisp of
smoke from it ... though, yes I've heard the horror stories of expensive
replacements being required ... will have to see about that if it comes
to it.

The former is the EGR system. Expensive as well, but not as eye
watering as the DPF can be. Apparently there is a place in london that
will drill a sodding great hole through the DPF and remap the engine
as a "bodge".

My next car will not be a diesel.

MBQ

On Feb 22, 10:39*am, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk" wrote:
On 22/02/2012 10:29, Andy Burns wrote:

My previous diesel (Honda 2.2) would give a cloud of black smoke if you
suddenly hoofed it e.g. getting to speed up a motorway on-ramp. Current
car (Audi 3.0) has a DPF and I've *never* seen so much as a wisp of
smoke from it ... though, yes I've heard the horror stories of expensive
replacements being required ... will have to see about that if it comes
to it.

There you go again see... all a DPF does is store your soot from
pootling around waiting for you to get on the motorway and drive to
somon elses neck of the woods whereby the engine will throw unburned
fuel into the DPF to "clean" it out or more accurately create far more
pollution than a car without a DPF.


knobheads++

On Feb 22, 10:31*am, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk" wrote:
On 22/02/2012 10:17, Doctor Drivel wrote:



"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

Pollution free at use vehicles. Fantastic. *We *need them everywhere.

Unfortunately apart from the bicycle they don't exist.

knobheads++

Pollution free at [point of] use certainly do exist.

There can be advantages in centralizing the "pollution" er greenhouse
emissions to be dealt with efficiently. The issue is whether that
actually happens in practice.

MBQ

Man at B&Q wrote:

Apparently there is a place in london that
will drill a sodding great hole through the DPF and remap the engine
as a "bodge".

Plenty of life left in the warranty yet, yes I've seen places offering
to remove DPF and remap, not clear what this will mean with the new MOT
regime, no doubt reports will crop up on forums if it's a problem.

My next car will not be a diesel.

IF the green faction hadn't pushed for Euro 4/5/6 engines we wouldn't
have DPFs or engines that squirt extract of **** into the exhaust.

On 22/02/2012 11:20, Man at B&Q wrote:

There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.

knobheads++

You mean like a tankful of petrol or diesel?

LOL

"Robin" wrote:
ARWadsworth wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

If I were still working/commuting I'd be tempted because of the
exemption from the London Congestion Charge for wholly electric
vehicles, together with free parking in Westminster, the City and
Camden. I suspect many of the 892 are people gaming those systems.

My off-roader is congestion charge exempt. It has a range of 700 miles and
can tackle driving across Europe within a day and a half. Which electric
vehicle should I be looking at?

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 11:22:16 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Nthkentman wrote:
Does that make milk floats which have been utilising batteries for
decades to lower noise when delivering early in the morning, keep costs
lower and provide services otherwise not available to elderly or sick
people knobheads too?

Haven't seen a milk float for many a year. Once they were a common sight.
But in any case a very specialist application. Travels a short distance
with many start/stops. No other deliveries has the same pattern.

Post (well, 90% of local deliveries/collections)
Meter readers



--
Regards, Paul Herber, Sandrila Ltd.
http://www.sandrila.co.uk/

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 03:20:52 -0800 (PST), Man at B&Q wrote:

There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher
density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much
potential
to be "unsafe".

You mean like a tankful of petrol or diesel?

Tanks of petrol are nasty, the vapour produced at normal temperatures
will burn (explode) with a tiny source of ignition. Diesel has to be
got fairly hot before it vapourises enough to catch fire. Starting
from cold it doesn't even burn well on a wick of some sort. Biggest
danger from a diesel spill is slipping on it rather than fire.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Feb 22, 12:07*pm, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 03:20:52 -0800 (PST), Man at B&Q wrote:
There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher
density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much
potential
to be "unsafe".

You mean like a tankful of petrol or diesel?

Tanks of petrol are nasty, the vapour produced at normal temperatures
will burn (explode) with a tiny source of ignition. Diesel has to be
got fairly hot before it vapourises enough to catch fire. Starting
from cold it doesn't even burn well on a wick of some sort. Biggest
danger from a diesel spill is slipping on it rather than fire.

We do not, however, deem them to be too unsafe to use in millions of
vehicles all over the worls.

MBQ

On 22/02/2012 11:48, www.GymRatZ.co.uk wrote:
On 22/02/2012 11:20, Man at B&Q wrote:

There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.

knobheads++

You mean like a tankful of petrol or diesel?

LOL


Sarcasm aside, I would personally be wary enough of a 3000KWh battery
let alone a device 10 or 50 times that....

Lee wrote:
On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.

Balderdash. Such higher density portable energy solutions blecch - you
know someone is bull****ting as soon as the say "solution" already exist.
They are smaller, lighter, cheaper and safer than giant LiIon batteries.

They can also be recharged within a few minutes.

Doh! Where did those extra zeroes come from?

Man at B&Q wrote:
On Feb 22, 11:16 am, Lee wrote:
On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.
There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.

knobheads++

You mean like a tankful of petrol or diesel?

More like a IED actually.

MBQ

On Feb 22, 9:42*am, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Nthkentman
scribeth thus







"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

Does that make the many councils and sub-contractors using EV knobheads as
well? Several major sub-contract companies I go to have EV for transport and
tasks up to 3.5 tonnes. Very useful they are too.

Does that make milk floats which have been utilising batteries for decades
to lower noise when delivering early in the morning, keep costs lower and
provide services otherwise not available to elderly or sick people knobheads
too?

Does it make the people living in the cities that benefit from all the
concessions provided for EVs knobheads?

No, it's just people like you that provide links and derogatory statements
about technology you know little about because it doesn't fit into your
"Good old days" attitude lifestyle that are..
Perhaps the apprentices assisting the companies building them should be
shouted at more often, or sacked for not clearing the snow in the car park
so you can park your gas guzzler and given a thick ear to remind them who's
the boss eh.....

Luddite
Do keep up at the back, there's a good chap

I know that sometimes Adam refers to a spade as a shovel and not an
earth inverting horticultural instrument but...

Electric vehicles in the main, not milk floats, around there they have a
Petrol powered one wonder why?.

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

Electric motor power transmission is excellent but this power source.

To hear misguided politicos wittering on about "non polluting" when the
power is in the main supplied by coal and gas, the power generated
conversion a not to high percentage, and then transmitted and stored
with yet another conversion does indeed deserve the worthy comment Knob
head...
--
Tony Sayer- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If I had one I could charge it up off my PVpanel. That would be
green.
But at that price to be used twice a week, I don't think so.

On Feb 22, 10:42*am, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:
"tony sayer" wrote in message

...

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

Oh my God!!

An EV is fine for 90% of "all" car trips made per year - fine for 100% of
trips only in towns and cities. *It is the odd long trips, which overall in
a country is small, which requires some focus - and this keeps advancements
down. *The "poor" range extender in the Volt is giving a claimed ~60mpg with
the car not running on the battery. *So not bad. The Russian rotary vane
engine range extender offers far more.

Note below, "90% charge in less than 5 minutes".

http://www.toshiba.com/ind/data/news/news_241.pdf
Toshiba International Corporation, January 27, 2010 - Toshiba proudly
announces that it has established US-based sales and technical support for
its new product, the Super Charge Ion Battery, SCiBT. *This nano-based
breakthrough lithium technology is noted for its rapid charging capability
of 90% charge in less than 5 minutes, long life of more than 10 years even
at rapid charge rates, and excellent safety performance. The SCiBT product
line will be supported out of the Toshiba International Corporation
headquarters in Houston, Texas and the SCiBT team will focus on business
development activities, battery pack design, prototyping, assembly,
technical support, and service.

The SCiBT battery technology offers numerous performance advantages that
make it an ideal solution for many of today's toughest energy storage
challenges.

The secret is brake regen and supercapacitors/efficient batteries. The new
Russian hybrid using the rotary vane engines range extender uses
supercapacitors. Compressed air brake regen would have been feasible, and
air is free, but *R&D in supercapacitors and batteries may have pushed air
into the background for now.

To hear misguided politicos wittering on about "non polluting" when the
power is in the main supplied by coal and gas, the power generated
conversion a not to high percentage, and then transmitted and stored
with yet another conversion does indeed deserve the worthy comment Knob
head...

Coal smoke stacks can be controlled. *Gas is very clean. *So, 40% efficient
from power station to socket. *80^ of the energy in cars tank is wasted, so
20% efficient. *A battery wastes only 10% at most so 90% plus efficient.. It
does not take much maths to see the EV is more energy efficient from station
generator to EVs wheels - as it stands RIGHT NOW !!!!

Clean up the towns and cities and its cascades to all over.

If everybody had such a charger the national grid couldn't meet th
eload.

On Feb 22, 11:16*am, Lee wrote:
On 22/02/2012 09:42, tony sayer wrote:

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

There is another problem here, namely that if a much higher density
portable energy solution was developed it would have too much potential
to be "unsafe".
Whether deliberately or not.

There is other technology on the horizon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_capacitor

Instant charging is possible.

On Feb 22, 11:23*am, "Man at B&Q" wrote:
On Feb 22, 10:39*am, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk" wrote:

On 22/02/2012 10:29, Andy Burns wrote:

My previous diesel (Honda 2.2) would give a cloud of black smoke if you
suddenly hoofed it e.g. getting to speed up a motorway on-ramp. Current
car (Audi 3.0) has a DPF and I've *never* seen so much as a wisp of
smoke from it ... though, yes I've heard the horror stories of expensive
replacements being required ... will have to see about that if it comes
to it.

There you go again see... all a DPF does is store your soot from
pootling around waiting for you to get on the motorway and drive to
somon elses neck of the woods whereby the engine will throw unburned
fuel into the DPF to "clean" it out or more accurately create far more
pollution than a car without a DPF.

knobheads++

The purpose is to remove tiny carbon particles in diesel exhaust that
cause cancer. CO2 is not reduced

On Feb 22, 11:22*am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article ,
* *Nthkentman wrote:

Does that make milk floats which have been utilising batteries for
decades to lower noise when delivering early in the morning, keep costs
lower and provide services otherwise not available to elderly or sick
people knobheads too?

Haven't seen a milk float for many a year. Once they were a common sight.
But in any case a very specialist application. Travels a short distance
with many start/stops. No other deliveries has the same pattern.

--
*Does fuzzy logic tickle? *

* * Dave Plowman * * * * * * * * London SW
* * * * * * * * * To e-mail, change noise into sound.

There used to be pedestrian electric vehicals too.
The operator walked in front controlloing and steering it with a pole.

In article , Doctor Drivel
scribeth thus
"tony sayer" wrote in message
...

But there are still serious problems with implementing these the main
one is the primary power system. Batteries, unless someone does invent
one that is neigh on 100% efficient and has much greater capacity and
costs and weighs sod all, will always be their great limitation.

Oh my God!!

An EV is fine for 90% of "all" car trips made per year - fine for 100% of
trips only in towns and cities. It is the odd long trips, which overall in
a country is small, which requires some focus - and this keeps advancements
down. The "poor" range extender in the Volt is giving a claimed ~60mpg with
the car not running on the battery. So not bad. The Russian rotary vane
engine range extender offers far more.

So what are all those motahs doing on the A14 earlier, just tootling
from one village to the other?..

I've been on a 120 mile round trip today I might end up doing that again
or more next week. I might not go anywhere the week after ...

A car that is only capable of some 60 miles range without recharge is
about as useful as tits on a bull.

I rather expect that is the Case with a lot of other vehicle users...



Note below, "90% charge in less than 5 minutes".

http://www.toshiba.com/ind/data/news/news_241.pdf
Toshiba International Corporation, January 27, 2010 - Toshiba proudly
announces that it has established US-based sales and technical support for
its new product, the Super Charge Ion Battery, SCiBT. This nano-based
breakthrough lithium technology is noted for its rapid charging capability
of 90% charge in less than 5 minutes, long life of more than 10 years even
at rapid charge rates, and excellent safety performance. The SCiBT product
line will be supported out of the Toshiba International Corporation
headquarters in Houston, Texas and the SCiBT team will focus on business
development activities, battery pack design, prototyping, assembly,
technical support, and service.

The SCiBT battery technology offers numerous performance advantages that
make it an ideal solution for many of today's toughest energy storage
challenges.


Right so what power can that store then compared to a conventional
battery and if so is it cost effective for a motor vehicle application
giving say a "useful" capacity and range?. I'd like a range of say 400
odd miles on a tankful or charge...

The secret is brake regen and supercapacitors/efficient batteries. The new
Russian hybrid using the rotary vane engines range extender uses
supercapacitors.

Well if your going to add in another engine why bother with all the
electric traction?..


Compressed air brake regen would have been feasible, and
air is free, but R&D in supercapacitors and batteries may have pushed air
into the background for now.


Regen?, Perhaps some use around town for a Taxi but on a Motorway at
around the 70 limit?. Doesn't seem that practical..


To hear misguided politicos wittering on about "non polluting" when the
power is in the main supplied by coal and gas, the power generated
conversion a not to high percentage, and then transmitted and stored
with yet another conversion does indeed deserve the worthy comment Knob
head...

Coal smoke stacks can be controlled.


Gas is very clean.

Except you might have missed it that it wasn't that much spare in supply
around a week or so ago. Not too practical is it..

So, 40% efficient
from power station to socket. 80^ of the energy in cars tank is wasted, so
20% efficient.

Really, as low as that?..

A battery wastes only 10% at most so 90% plus efficient. It
does not take much maths to see the EV is more energy efficient from station
generator to EVs wheels - as it stands RIGHT NOW !!!!

Even if that is right where are we going to get all this extra energy
from?..

Clean up the towns and cities and its cascades to all over.

Yes so why aren't we doing that right now with electric vehicles?..
--
Tony Sayer

Steve Firth wrote:
"Robin" wrote:
ARWadsworth wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17107715

If I were still working/commuting I'd be tempted because of the
exemption from the London Congestion Charge for wholly electric
vehicles, together with free parking in Westminster, the City and
Camden. I suspect many of the 892 are people gaming those systems.

My off-roader is congestion charge exempt. It has a range of 700
miles and can tackle driving across Europe within a day and a half.
Which electric vehicle should I be looking at?

One with a 700 mile extension lead?

--
Adam