In article ,
polygonum wrote:
On 10/08/2013 02:22, Bill Wright wrote:
My worry about electric cars would be that I'd leave it on charge
overnight, only to find in the morning that something had tripped (or
whatever) and the car wasn't charged. Then what would I do? Lose a day I
suppose while I waited for it to charge.

Bill

That could cause chaos if there were a major overnight power cut in an
area with high electric car usage. Lots of people failing to get to
work, school, etc.

Says a lot of modern society if they'd fail to get to work or school
because their car won't go.

--
*Haunted French pancakes give me the crepes.*

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

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The government would collapse from tax starvation take if E-cars ever
took off.

There will be road pricing long before that. Where you pay so much a mile
travelled.

--
*The older you get, the better you realize you were.

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

In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
Incidentally what is the purpose behind buying a car and renting a
battery? Does that mean you can actually rent several batteries and
leave one at home while driving on the other one? Or do they expect them
to pack up so early they need to keep renewing them, a bit like 1970s
Colour TVs?

Reduces the initial purchase price. I doubt the battery is easy to change.
Likely too heavy as well.

--
*Why isn't there mouse-flavoured cat food?

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

On 10/08/2013 11:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Says a lot of modern society if they'd fail to get to work or school
because their car won't go.

If it is just a few vehicles that are taken out, then alternatives are
often feasible - at the level of public transport, asking a friend, etc.
But if you take a large town with a large proportion of electric
vehicles, then that is much less likely to work. Our infrastructure is
such that walking or cycling is often not viable.

--
Rod

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would drive
that distance without stopping - especially in the UK.

It means I fill up about once a month.

Do you live a very long way from a filling station?

About six miles.

If not, why carry all that fuel around for no reason?

Convenience.

Even on my fairly heavy Rover SD1 with a not particularly large petrol
tank, there is a noticeable difference in performance (when just the
driver on board) between a full and near empty tank.

--
*Wrinkled was not one of the things I wanted to be when I grew up

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

In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
On 09/08/2013 23:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would drive that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me a
better range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I won't do it
non-stop, but I also don't have to buy fuel at motorway prices.

Where do you stop for the night? Not on a motorway, surely? So buy
your fuel there?

Precisely. With a 600+ mile range I can fill up at whatever town or city
I stop in for the night.

Which means you are using only motorways when touring abroad?

--
*To be intoxicated is to feel sophisticated, but not be able to say it.

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

On 10/08/2013 09:19, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/08/13 16:59, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
" wrote:

As your pricing example points out, EV's are *nearly* there, and the Renault pricing deal will be enough to bring-in more early adopters.

Not with a ****y 130 mile range they aren't; I get a 600 mile range with a dizzle C4.

the lithium air technology could get to around the same if and when it becomes a reliable safe, cheap practical commercial solution.

An awful lot of ifs though.

If fossil fuels do price themselves out of the market, you might be interested to ponder how things will pan out...

I like this idea:

http://www.gereports.com/thorium-las...-nuclear-cars/

Colin Bignell

On 09/08/2013 21:09, Andy Burns wrote:
Nightjar wrote:

On 09/08/2013 15:25, Steve Firth wrote:

I'm struggling to see what makes the electric car a good idea.

Around here, a choice of four empty parking spaces in every local
authority run car park, no matter how busy the rest of the parking is.

There are some charging points in the NCP in town, nothing preventing
ordinary cars from parking in them though ...


My LA has taken to putting road cones in front of them to stop that.

Colin Bignell

On 10/08/2013 11:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
On 09/08/2013 23:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would drive that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me a
better range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I won't do it
non-stop, but I also don't have to buy fuel at motorway prices.

Where do you stop for the night? Not on a motorway, surely? So buy
your fuel there?

Precisely. With a 600+ mile range I can fill up at whatever town or city
I stop in for the night.

Which means you are using only motorways when touring abroad?

My destinations are usually at least a couple of days' motorway travel
away. Whether or not I use the car once there will depend upon the
destination. Places like Vienna or Berlin are best seen on foot or using
public transport. The Black Forest is somewhere to tour around.

Colin Bignell

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The government would collapse from tax starvation take if E-cars ever
took off.

There will be road pricing long before that. Where you pay so much a mile
travelled.

We already have road pricing of a sort. The further you drive, and the
less efficient your car is, the more tax you pay on the fuel you use.

The only benefit from most of the proposals I've seen for road pricing
would be a reduction in use of busy roads at peak times, which might
save some road building.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On 09/08/2013 17:23, wrote:
On Friday, 9 August 2013 16:59:13 UTC+1, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,

" wrote:



As your pricing example points out, EV's are *nearly* there, and the Renault

pricing deal will be enough to bring-in more early adopters.



Not with a ****y 130 mile range they aren't; I get a 600 mile range with

a dizzle C4.

It isn't all about price and specification for early adopters of new technology (or for that matter for a large proportion of car-buyers generally).

I suspect Renault will get sufficient volume of sales now, with their "rent a battery" deal, to get governments to support a wider roll-out of subsidy deals, public charging infrastructure etc.

The beneficiaries are likely to be well-heeled 2nd car owners that have a well-defined niche for that vehicle (in fact rather like the car scrappage scheme of a few years ago).


Quite. Plus a (possibly misplaced) concern about environmental issues.
That's a cost that has a price some are willing to pay.

--
Cheers, Rob

On 10/08/2013 12:48, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would
drive
that distance without stopping - especially in the UK.
It means I fill up about once a month.
Do you live a very long way from a filling station?

About six miles.

If not, why carry all that fuel around for no reason?

Convenience.

Even on my fairly heavy Rover SD1 with a not particularly large petrol
tank, there is a noticeable difference in performance (when just the
driver on board) between a full and near empty tank.


Maybe it's where the weight is, unsettling the suspension? I would be
surprised if such a lardy car's acceleration is affected much by 50-odd
kg of fuel.

Really? Can't say I've noticed it on my bucket 'o bolts.


Me neither.

--
Cheers, Rob

On 10/08/13 11:26, polygonum wrote:
On 10/08/2013 11:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Says a lot of modern society if they'd fail to get to work or school
because their car won't go.

If it is just a few vehicles that are taken out, then alternatives are
often feasible - at the level of public transport, asking a friend,
etc. But if you take a large town with a large proportion of electric
vehicles, then that is much less likely to work. Our infrastructure is
such that walking or cycling is often not viable.

It never really was.
Towns exist because we have motorised transport.

remove that and towns die.

which is probably going to happen,

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

On 10/08/13 12:48, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would
drive
that distance without stopping - especially in the UK.
It means I fill up about once a month.
Do you live a very long way from a filling station?

About six miles.

If not, why carry all that fuel around for no reason?

Convenience.

Even on my fairly heavy Rover SD1 with a not particularly large petrol
tank, there is a noticeable difference in performance (when just the
driver on board) between a full and near empty tank.

Really? Can't say I've noticed it on my bucket 'o bolts.


talk to the F1 boys..

My spridgets ran much faster without the toolkit in the boot.
And on misty mornings with the mist in the air..as good as 100 octane
petrol..

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

On 10/08/13 12:48, John Williamson wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The government would collapse from tax starvation take if E-cars
ever took off.

There will be road pricing long before that. Where you pay so much a
mile
travelled.

We already have road pricing of a sort. The further you drive, and the
less efficient your car is, the more tax you pay on the fuel you use.


er no, the less you drive and the more inefficient your car is the MORE
tax you pay per mile.

A double whammy. Once on the fuel then on the car tax.

The only benefit from most of the proposals I've seen for road pricing
would be a reduction in use of busy roads at peak times, which might
save some road building.



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

On 10/08/13 12:40, Nightjar wrote:
On 10/08/2013 11:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
On 09/08/2013 23:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would
drive that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me a
better range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I won't do it
non-stop, but I also don't have to buy fuel at motorway prices.

Where do you stop for the night? Not on a motorway, surely? So buy
your fuel there?

Precisely. With a 600+ mile range I can fill up at whatever town or
city
I stop in for the night.

Which means you are using only motorways when touring abroad?

My destinations are usually at least a couple of days' motorway travel
away. Whether or not I use the car once there will depend upon the
destination. Places like Vienna or Berlin are best seen on foot or
using public transport. The Black Forest is somewhere to tour around.

Colin Bignell
Germany and Italy are less than a days drive.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

The Natural Philosopher :
On 10/08/13 12:40, Nightjar wrote:

My destinations are usually at least a couple of days' motorway
travel away. Whether or not I use the car once there will depend upon
the destination. Places like Vienna or Berlin are best seen on foot
or using public transport. The Black Forest is somewhere to tour
around.

Colin Bignell
Germany and Italy are less than a days drive.

That's pretty meaningless if you don't say where from.

--
Mike Barnes

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/08/13 12:40, Nightjar wrote:
On 10/08/2013 11:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
On 09/08/2013 23:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would
drive that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me a
better range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I won't do it
non-stop, but I also don't have to buy fuel at motorway prices.

Where do you stop for the night? Not on a motorway, surely? So buy
your fuel there?

Precisely. With a 600+ mile range I can fill up at whatever town or
city
I stop in for the night.

Which means you are using only motorways when touring abroad?

My destinations are usually at least a couple of days' motorway travel
away. Whether or not I use the car once there will depend upon the
destination. Places like Vienna or Berlin are best seen on foot or
using public transport. The Black Forest is somewhere to tour around.

Colin Bignell
Germany and Italy are less than a days drive.

from where?

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

In article , Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
As your pricing example points out, EV's are *nearly* there, and the
Renault pricing deal will be enough to bring-in more early adopters.

Not with a ****y 130 mile range they aren't; I get a 600 mile range with
a dizzle C4.

I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would drive that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.

Many people occasionally want a long range without stopping for hours
to recharge an electric car (much faster charges are possible, but
suitable charging points aren't common).

On the other hand many families have more than one car, and only need one
of them to have a long range.

charles wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/08/13 12:40, Nightjar wrote:
On 10/08/2013 11:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
On 09/08/2013 23:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would
drive that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me
a better range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I
won't do it non-stop, but I also don't have to buy fuel at
motorway prices.

Where do you stop for the night? Not on a motorway, surely? So
buy your fuel there?

Precisely. With a 600+ mile range I can fill up at whatever town
or city
I stop in for the night.

Which means you are using only motorways when touring abroad?

My destinations are usually at least a couple of days' motorway
travel away. Whether or not I use the car once there will depend
upon the destination. Places like Vienna or Berlin are best seen on
foot or using public transport. The Black Forest is somewhere to
tour around.

Colin Bignell
Germany and Italy are less than a days drive.

from where?

A French surrender.

--
Adam

On 10/08/2013 14:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/08/13 12:40, Nightjar wrote:
On 10/08/2013 11:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
On 09/08/2013 23:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would
drive that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me a
better range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I won't do it
non-stop, but I also don't have to buy fuel at motorway prices.

Where do you stop for the night? Not on a motorway, surely? So buy
your fuel there?

Precisely. With a 600+ mile range I can fill up at whatever town or
city
I stop in for the night.

Which means you are using only motorways when touring abroad?

My destinations are usually at least a couple of days' motorway travel
away. Whether or not I use the car once there will depend upon the
destination. Places like Vienna or Berlin are best seen on foot or
using public transport. The Black Forest is somewhere to tour around.

Colin Bignell
Germany and Italy are less than a days drive.


That depends upon how many hours you want to spend on the road and
whether you keep to speed limits.

Colin Bignell

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would drive that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me a better
range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I won't do it non-stop,
but I also don't have to buy fuel at motorway prices.

Where do you stop for the night? Not on a motorway, surely?

Why not? Motorway hotels are reasonable when abroad.

So buy your fuel there?

Could do or as above. It depends on where one is.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
[snip]

Germany and Italy are less than a days drive.

I live close to the south coast, and in Italy. Italy is only less than a
day's drive away in the sense that it takes 14 hours to get to the
destination. In terms of what's sensible and safe it is two days away.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

"Brian Gaff" wrote:
Incidentally what is the purpose behind buying a car and renting a battery?
Does that mean you can actually rent several batteries and leave one at home
while driving on the other one?
Or do they expect them to pack up so early they need to keep renewing them,
a bit like 1970s Colour TVs?

It's that last, I think Brian. Batteries that are run down to the limit
don't have as long a life as hybrid batteries that are kept topped up.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Nightjar wrote:
On 09/08/2013 19:40, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
As your pricing example points out, EV's are *nearly* there, and the
Renault pricing deal will be enough to bring-in more early adopters.

Not with a ****y 130 mile range they aren't; I get a 600 mile range
with
a dizzle C4.


I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would drive that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me a better
range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I won't do it non-stop,
but I also don't have to buy fuel at motorway prices.

Also on those sorts of drives fuel stops are a significant drag consuming
as much as a half hour every few hundred miles. With a long range tank
it's
possible to get much further with less stress. And of course there's "fill
up in Luxembourg" syndrome. A fill there with a large tank can save "quite
a bit" of money.


But it costs a lot (of fuel) to haul that weight of fuel around.

"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 10/08/2013 11:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
On 09/08/2013 23:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would drive
that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me a
better range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I won't do it
non-stop, but I also don't have to buy fuel at motorway prices.

Where do you stop for the night? Not on a motorway, surely? So buy
your fuel there?

Precisely. With a 600+ mile range I can fill up at whatever town or city
I stop in for the night.

Which means you are using only motorways when touring abroad?

My destinations are usually at least a couple of days' motorway travel
away. Whether or not I use the car once there will depend upon the
destination. Places like Vienna or Berlin are best seen on foot or using
public transport. The Black Forest is somewhere to tour around.


You spend your holidays driving????
Boring.

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
Steve Firth wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would drive
that distance without stopping - especially in the UK.

South coast to The North West and back will see a driver getting close
to Six hundred miles. Easy to do in a diesel Mondeo and a fairly
typical
drive for an engineer or sales rep.

In one day? If you average 60 mph - difficult to do - that's driving for
10 hours. Doesn't leave much time for actual work.

They wouldn't want to have to wait overnight for a "fill".

It only takes a few minutes to fill a diesel Mondeo. Last time I tried.
Or
am I missing something?

Yes, the original topic was about electric cars and they will take a lot
more than "a few minutes" to refuel.


No they don't.
Speaking from your usual position of total ignorance again I see.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 09/08/13 16:59, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
" wrote:

As your pricing example points out, EV's are *nearly* there, and the
Renault pricing deal will be enough to bring-in more early adopters.

Not with a ****y 130 mile range they aren't; I get a 600 mile range with
a dizzle C4.

the lithium air technology could get to around the same if and when it
becomes a reliable safe, cheap practical commercial solution.

An awful lot of ifs though.

If fossil fuels do price themselves out of the market, you might be
interested to ponder how things will pan out.


People will travel by train.

"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 10/08/2013 09:19, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/08/13 16:59, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
" wrote:

As your pricing example points out, EV's are *nearly* there, and the
Renault pricing deal will be enough to bring-in more early adopters.

Not with a ****y 130 mile range they aren't; I get a 600 mile range with
a dizzle C4.

the lithium air technology could get to around the same if and when it
becomes a reliable safe, cheap practical commercial solution.

An awful lot of ifs though.

If fossil fuels do price themselves out of the market, you might be
interested to ponder how things will pan out...

I like this idea:

http://www.gereports.com/thorium-las...-nuclear-cars/


What aload of bollix.
(Man invents atom bomb in garage syndrome.)
Up there with cold fusion.
You can tell he's mad by the picture offered of a weird looking car.
The optimum shape for a car has long ago been arrived at.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 09/08/13 16:49, wrote:
(I wonder if anyone's collecting up car-full's of free electricity,
taking it home, and dumping it into their feed-in tariff?).
harry?

And use some of it to get home?
Not worth the effort.

On 10/08/2013 19:46, harryagain wrote:
"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 10/08/2013 09:19, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/08/13 16:59, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
" wrote:

As your pricing example points out, EV's are *nearly* there, and the
Renault pricing deal will be enough to bring-in more early adopters.

Not with a ****y 130 mile range they aren't; I get a 600 mile range with
a dizzle C4.

the lithium air technology could get to around the same if and when it
becomes a reliable safe, cheap practical commercial solution.

An awful lot of ifs though.

If fossil fuels do price themselves out of the market, you might be
interested to ponder how things will pan out...

I like this idea:

http://www.gereports.com/thorium-las...-nuclear-cars/


What aload of bollix.
(Man invents atom bomb in garage syndrome.)
Up there with cold fusion.
You can tell he's mad by the picture offered of a weird looking car.
The optimum shape for a car has long ago been arrived at.


The picture was a car produced by General Motors and shown at the
Chicago Motor Show 2009 - not some mad person in a garage.

--
Rod

On 10/08/2013 19:34, harryagain wrote:

"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 10/08/2013 11:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
On 09/08/2013 23:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would drive
that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me a
better range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I won't do it
non-stop, but I also don't have to buy fuel at motorway prices.

Where do you stop for the night? Not on a motorway, surely? So buy
your fuel there?

Precisely. With a 600+ mile range I can fill up at whatever town or city
I stop in for the night.

Which means you are using only motorways when touring abroad?

My destinations are usually at least a couple of days' motorway travel
away. Whether or not I use the car once there will depend upon the
destination. Places like Vienna or Berlin are best seen on foot or using
public transport. The Black Forest is somewhere to tour around.


You spend your holidays driving????

More usually a couple of days or so at each end than the whole holiday.

Boring.

That rather depends upon where you are driving and what you see when you do.

Colin Bignell

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 10/08/13 09:29, tony sayer wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
scribeth thus
On 09/08/13 16:27, Fredxx wrote:
On 09/08/2013 15:25, Steve Firth wrote:
Renault are starting to really push their Zoe electric car. It's an
amusing price, but massively subsidised by European governments (ie
by you, me and every other taxpayer).

Renault advertise it as 130 mile range but in the small print is
detail that the real world range is closer to 60 miles. But the
interesting detail is that you have to rent the battery. That will
cost the driver £80 a month for 7500 miles a year.

So that's 13p/mile just for the battery. And my wife's boring old
petrol car costs.... 13p/mile in petrol.

So the battery charging costs are on top?
yeah, but the gas that runs the power stations doesn't come with a
massive fuel duty slapped on top.
for a 33% efficent car, a litre of fuel is around 3kwh of electricity
worth after the engine has ****ed most up te exhasut.

so at 12p or so per unit, that comes down to 36p a litre for the 'fuel';


The government would collapse from tax starvation take if E-cars ever
took off.

That comment from you of all TNP!

Noooo!, they just find it expedient to tax the Leccy for "road use" !...

I am sure they will simply add a battery disposal tax, a soundless driver
tax, and a smart meter to every charging point, and charge you 100quid to
park in the middle of cambridge even if its an electric car, whether or
not you want the supplied electricity or not.

It will be illegal to charge a car other than through a completely
dedicated circuit with a totally unique plug and socket, for which a
separete meter will be provided and VAT added at 300%.


Suppose that Red non - road fuel leccy with be a bit difficult, they'll
prolly
have to invent a way of adding "Red electrons" to it;?...

Simple
There will be a black box in every car soon recording every movement.
The technology already exists.

But for now all they need is your odometer reading.
Taken at every MOT and tax added to your MOT.

"harryagain" wrote:
"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Nightjar wrote:
On 09/08/2013 19:40, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
As your pricing example points out, EV's are *nearly* there, and the
Renault pricing deal will be enough to bring-in more early adopters.

Not with a ****y 130 mile range they aren't; I get a 600 mile range
with
a dizzle C4.


I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would drive that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me a better
range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I won't do it non-stop,
but I also don't have to buy fuel at motorway prices.

Also on those sorts of drives fuel stops are a significant drag consuming
as much as a half hour every few hundred miles. With a long range tank
it's
possible to get much further with less stress. And of course there's "fill
up in Luxembourg" syndrome. A fill there with a large tank can save "quite
a bit" of money.


But it costs a lot (of fuel) to haul that weight of fuel around.

Yes harry, having to lug around 80kg of fuel is a real burden when compared
to having to lug around 300-600kg of batteries in order to have half the
range (at best) of a petrol car.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
Incidentally what is the purpose behind buying a car and renting a
battery? Does that mean you can actually rent several batteries and leave
one at home while driving on the other one?
Or do they expect them to pack up so early they need to keep renewing
them, a bit like 1970s Colour TVs?


It's so the up front cost of the car is reduced.
An inducement to buy.

On 10/08/2013 19:46, harryagain wrote:
"Nightjar" wrote in message
...
On 10/08/2013 09:19, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/08/13 16:59, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
" wrote:

As your pricing example points out, EV's are *nearly* there, and the
Renault pricing deal will be enough to bring-in more early adopters.

Not with a ****y 130 mile range they aren't; I get a 600 mile range with
a dizzle C4.

the lithium air technology could get to around the same if and when it
becomes a reliable safe, cheap practical commercial solution.

An awful lot of ifs though.

If fossil fuels do price themselves out of the market, you might be
interested to ponder how things will pan out...

I like this idea:

http://www.gereports.com/thorium-las...-nuclear-cars/


What aload of bollix.
(Man invents atom bomb in garage syndrome.)
Up there with cold fusion.
You can tell he's mad by the picture offered of a weird looking car.

You missed the bit about that being a Cadillac concept car and nothing
to do with Charles Stevens?

The optimum shape for a car has long ago been arrived at.

Concept cars are usually strange looking. In practice, if anybody
produces a thorium powered car, it will probably only be the badge that
gives it away.

If it is a practical system, I would expect it to appear in military
vehicles first. The military have large budgets and having vehicles with
unlimited range would be a tremendous tactical advantage.

Colin Bignell

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 10/08/13 11:26, polygonum wrote:
On 10/08/2013 11:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Says a lot of modern society if they'd fail to get to work or school
because their car won't go.

If it is just a few vehicles that are taken out, then alternatives are
often feasible - at the level of public transport, asking a friend, etc.
But if you take a large town with a large proportion of electric
vehicles, then that is much less likely to work. Our infrastructure is
such that walking or cycling is often not viable.

It never really was.
Towns exist because we have motorised transport.

********, there were towns long before we had any mechanical transport.
Towns were started for commerce and protection.

remove that and towns die.

which is probably going to happen,

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members
of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded
with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On 10/08/2013 19:52, Steve Firth wrote:
"harryagain" wrote:
"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Nightjar wrote:
On 09/08/2013 19:40, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
As your pricing example points out, EV's are *nearly* there, and the
Renault pricing deal will be enough to bring-in more early adopters.

Not with a ****y 130 mile range they aren't; I get a 600 mile range
with
a dizzle C4.


I doubt many people actually need a 600 mile range. Few would drive that
distance without stopping - especially in the UK.


I bought the long range tank for my car specifically to give me a better
range than that for when I go touring in Europe. I won't do it non-stop,
but I also don't have to buy fuel at motorway prices.

Also on those sorts of drives fuel stops are a significant drag consuming
as much as a half hour every few hundred miles. With a long range tank
it's
possible to get much further with less stress. And of course there's "fill
up in Luxembourg" syndrome. A fill there with a large tank can save "quite
a bit" of money.


But it costs a lot (of fuel) to haul that weight of fuel around.

Yes harry, having to lug around 80kg of fuel is a real burden when compared
to having to lug around 300-600kg of batteries in order to have half the
range (at best) of a petrol car.

I've always thought that extra weight is a significant penalty when
climbing hills and when accelerating, but relatively little penalty when
travelling at a more or less constant speed on a moderately flat motorway.

That would tend to make the battery-carrying impact even more on the
stop-start/short range electric car than the fuel weight on long journeys.

--
Rod

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
No and I'm getting fed up with that weird commercial for the Adam as well.
Another problem is that they are practically silent, and crossing roads if
you cannot see well suddenly has a very real extra danger. EU say they
make having a sound manditory, but they allow the driver to switch it off.
Logic?

Different rules in different countries.
In the UK they are illegal.
ie you are not allowed to make a continuous audible warning
So they have to be turnable off.
http://www.dvlni.gov.uk/Freedom%20of...%20Warning.pdf

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

That could cause chaos if there were a major overnight power cut in an
area with high electric car usage. Lots of people failing to get to
work, school, etc.

Says a lot of modern society if they'd fail to get to work or school
because their car won't go.

But that's how things are nowadays.

Bill