Tesla Model S – why its diesel–powered rivals should be very afraid: motorists are moving away from diesel cars and opting for alternatively fuelled cars such as electric or hybrid, suggests new research
New car registrations in the UK achieved a 12-year high in January with 174,564 cars being registered – a 2.9 per cent increase on January 2016.
Figures collected by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and traders show that diesel car sales were down by 4.3 per cent in January.
The reason for the dip in interest for car buyers purchasing diesel cars could be due to the recent emissions scandals that have embroiled companies such as Volkswagen.
The government is now planning a diesel scrappage scheme to encourage motorists to ditch cars that are heavy polluters.
In total there were 78,778 diesel cars registered in January.
It is good news for electric car companies however as the alternatively fuelled vehicle segment grew 19.9 per cent to take a record 4.2 per cent market share.
Electric cars are becoming increasingly popular as car companies are looking to vehicles powered by alternative and sustainable fuel sources.
Figures show that 7,270 AFVs including hybrids, were sold in January.
Just about every analyst agrees that the electric vehicle market is poised for rapid growth. But how rapid?
It’s not an idle question. The rate of EV growth will have huge implications for oil markets, auto markets, and electric utilities. Yet it is maddeningly difficult to predict the future; forecasts for the EV market are all over the place.
I don’t think the wide range of projections means that we’re blind here, though — I think we can make educated guesses. Specifically, I think history justifies optimism, the belief that the high-end projections (like those in a new study I discuss below) are closer to the truth.
Let’s walk through it.
EVs could do serious damage to oil — or not much
Transportation accounts for a huge portion of US carbon emissions. As recently as 2014, it was behind the electricity sector — 26 percent of US emissions to electricity’s 30 percent. But as Vox has reported, and the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) just confirmed, as of 2016, they have crossed paths. “Electric power sector CO2 emissions,” EIA writes, “are now regularly below transportation sector CO2 emissions for the first time since the late 1970s.”
This is happening because power sector “carbon intensity” — carbon emissions per unit of energy produced — is falling, as coal is replaced with natural gas, renewables, and efficiency.
The only realistic prospect for reducing transportation sector emissions rapidly and substantially is electrification. How much market share EVs take from oil (gasoline is by far the most common use for oil in the US) will matter a great deal.
However, as Rice University’s Dan Cohan explains in The Hill, EV forecasts are all over the map.
The EIA’s “Annual Energy Outlook 2017” is much more bullish about EVs than in previous years — its forecast for the EV market is “nearly double its forecast from last year, and nearly 10 times its forecast from 2014.” It no longer thinks hybrids or plug-in hybrids will play a major role. It believes EVs are ready.
Solar power and clean cars are ‘gamechangers’ consistently underestimated by big energy, says Imperial College and Carbon Tracker report
Falling costs of electric vehicles and solar panels could halt worldwide growth in demand for oil and coal by 2020, a new report has suggested.
A scenario that takes into account the latest cost reduction projections for the green technologies, and countries’ pledges to cut emissions, finds that solar power and electric vehicles are “gamechangers” that could leave fossil fuels stranded.
Polluting fuels could lose 10% of market share to solar power and clean cars within a decade, the report by the Grantham Institute at Imperial College London and the Carbon Tracker Initiative found.
A 10% loss of market share was enough to cause the collapse of the coal mining industry in the US, while Europe’s five major utilities lost €100bn (£85bn) between 2008 and 2013 because they did not prepare for an 8% increase in renewables, the report said.
Big energy companies are seriously underestimating the low-carbon transition by sticking to their “business as usual” scenarios which expect continued growth of fossil fuels, and could see their assets “stranded”, the study claims.
Emerging technology, such as printable solar photovoltaics which generate electricity, could bring down costs and boost take-up even more than currently predicted.
Luke Sussams, a senior researcher at Carbon Tracker, said:
“Electric vehicles and solar power are gamechangers that the fossil fuel industry consistently underestimates.
“Further innovation could make our scenarios look conservative in five years’ time, in which case the demand misread by companies will have been amplified even more.”
The growth of battery-powered cars could be as disruptive to the oil market as the OPEC market-share war that triggered the price crash of 2014, potentially wiping hundreds of billions of dollars off the value from fossil fuel producers in the next decade.
About 2 million barrels a day of oil demand could be displaced by electric vehicles by 2025, equivalent in size to the oversupply that triggered the biggest oil industry downturn in a generation over the past three years, according to research from Imperial College London and the Carbon Tracker Initiative, a think tank, published Thursday. A similar 10 percent loss of market share caused the collapse of the U.S. coal mining industry and wiped more than a 100 billion euros ($108 billion) off the value of European utilities from 2008 to 2013, the report said.
Major oil companies are waking up to the potential disruption plug-in vehicles could have on their industry. BP Plc says electric vehicles, or EVs, could erase as much as 5 million barrels a day in the next 20 years, while analysts at Wood Mackenzie say they could erode as much as 10 percent of global gasoline demand over that time. Global oil demand could peak in as little as five years, according to Royal Dutch Shell Plc Chief Financial Officer Simon Henry.
By 2040 16 million barrels a day of oil demand could be displaced, rising to 25 million by 2050, a
“stark contrast to the continuous growth in oil demand expected by industry,”
according to the report. The impact on the oil industry could exceed price slump of 2014 to 2016 that “wiped hundreds of billions off capex,” Stefano Ambrogi, a spokesman for the Carbon Tracker Institute, said by e-mail.
The cost of EVs is already falling faster than previous forecasts and they could reach parity with conventional internal combustion vehicles by 2020, eventually saturating the passenger vehicle market by 2050, the report said.
EVs may take 19 to 21 percent of the road transport market by 2035, according to the researchers. That’s three times BP’s projection of 6 percent market share in 2035. By 2050, EVs would comprise 69 percent of the road-transport market, with oil-powered cars accounting for about 13 percent.
Some people who study climate change believe that addressing it later — when economic growth has made humanity wealthier — would be better than taking drastic measures immediately. Now, though, one of this group’s most influential members appears to have changed his mind.
In the early 1990s, Yale’s William Nordhaus was among the first to examine the economics of reducing carbon emissions. Since then, he and colleagues have mixed climate physics with economic modeling to explore how various policies might play out both for global temperatures and growth. The approach attempts to weigh, in present-value terms, the costs of preventative measures against the future benefit of avoiding disaster.
Nordhaus has mostly argued for a small carbon tax, aimed at achieving a modest reduction in emissions, followed by sharper reductions in the medium and long term. Too much mitigation now, he has suggested, would damage economic growth, making us less capable of doing more in the future. This view has helped fossil fuel companies and climate change skeptics oppose any serious policy response.
In his latest analysis, though, Nordhaus comes to a very different conclusion. Using a more accurate treatment of how carbon dioxide may affect temperatures, and how remaining uncertainties affect the likely economic outcomes, he finds that our current response to global warming is probably inadequate to prevent temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius above their pre-industrial levels, a stated goal of the Paris accords.
Worse, the analysis suggests that the required carbon-dioxide reductions are beyond what’s politically possible. For all the talk of curbing climate change, most nations remain on a business-as-usual trajectory. Meanwhile, further economic growth will drive even greater carbon emissions over coming decades, particularly in developing nations.
Nordhaus deserves credit for changing his mind as the results of his analyses have changed, and for focusing on the implications of current policies rather than making rosy assumptions about the ability of new technologies to achieve emission reductions in the future. Many other analyses — including those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — don’t demand such realism.
Nonetheless, the shift in his assessment is stark. For two decades, the advice has been to do a little but mostly hold off. Now, suddenly, the message is that it’s too late, that we should have been doing a lot more and there’s almost no way to avoid disaster.
Perhaps the main lesson is that we shouldn’t put too much trust in cost-benefit calculations, the standard economic recipe for making policy decisions. In the case of climate change, they are inherently biased toward inaction: It’s easy to see the costs of immediate emissions reductions, and much harder to quantify the benefits of avoiding a disaster likely to materialize much farther in the future. By the time the nature and impact of that disaster become clear, it may be too late to act.
Renault’s new Zoe Z.E. 40 promises the greatest range of any mainstream EV on the market today.
With an official range of up to 250 miles depending on model, only Tesla’s line-up can beat that range figure, but they cost far more than twice the amount of the little Renault. Next Green Car got behind the wheel of the new longer-range EV to see how it performs on a cold and misty winter’s morning in the UK.
Review by Chris Lilly
We’ll start with the biggest and most significant change to the Zoe – the battery. Previous models were equipped with a 22 kWh battery which is good for an official range of 149 miles on a single charge. The new version now packs a 41 kWh battery with a quoted range of 250 miles. The previous 22 kWh model is still available in one specification, but it is the Zoe Z.E. 40 with almost double the battery capacity that is the big news and the model being pushed.
The extra range has been achieved by ‘chemical wizardry’ according to the presentation from Renault’s PR team, but essentially the engineers have made a battery with greater energy density through tweaking and improving the materials used. All of this means that the extra capacity battery is the same physical size, so it fits in the Zoe without the need for costly re-engineering.
Other changes include a new top-of-the-range trim level Signature Nav, which includes leather upholstery, bronze highlights inside, rear reversing camera, new alloy wheel design, and Bose stereo. All models get slight design tweaks inside and out, though you will be hard pushed to list them.
Charging has changed only in the sense that it now takes longer to top up the battery. Available in both rapid charge-capable 230 mile specification, and non-rapid 250 mile trim, the Zoe Z.E. 40 will take varying amounts of time to charge. The 250 mile model tested can connect to a 43kW rapid charger, but will only be charged from 0-80% in one hour and 40 minutes. A 7kW home charger – which comes free with a new Zoe Z.E. 40 – will complete a full charge in a little under seven and a half hours. The 230 mile model cuts rapid charging time to just over one hour, but increases the 7kW charge time by an hour. This is compared to the one hour rapid charge, and four hour 7kW charge offered by the 22kWh model.
Renault has launched its latest Zoe version, with a new 41kWh battery that promises 186-miles (real world) range, 124-mile worst case range and 250-mile official NEDC range. The new car also introduces new motor and charging options plus new colours and trim levels including BOSE sound system.
Meanwhile, the ever-enjoyable Twizy continues to provide on road open-air thrills (via a lack of windows) and a great way to travel the Cotswolds.
The world’s major electric car makers and charging equipment providers have agreed on a standardised specification for wireless EV charging points, allowing companies to develop components going forward that will seamlessly work with each other anywhere.
Although not as exciting on the surface as say a new high-powered rapid charger, the standardisation of wireless car charging is of vital importance to the EV market in the future.
All of the main EV and PHEV manufacturers are planning on incorporating wireless charging into future models, while it is also a crucial element of autonomous EVs that can drive off and charge themselves when not in use.
The new SAE J2954 standard will charge at either 3.7 kW or 7.7 kW in Level 1 or Level 2 respectively. These use current commonly found charging rates, with a Level 3 set-up charging at 11 kW planned for later this year.
The agreements were made at a meeting at Audi HQ in Ingolstadt, Germany, chaired by Jesse Schneider who has worked on the project since 2010.
Mr Schneider said:
“Charging your vehicle should be as simple as parking it and walking away — and wireless charging with SAE J2954™ enables that freedom and convenience to do this automatically. Automakers believe that wireless charging can greatly help to make both electrified and autonomous vehicle mainstream, and they have been active supporters of our standardization efforts.
“Reaching a decision for a common J2954™ RP test station, equipped with circular topology, provides automakers with the technical direction for their wireless charging system design, development and production release plans to meet industry compatibility, interoperability and performance standards. It is a major step forward for the industry.”
We have new deals available from 22 February for businesses looking to lease the new longer range BMW i3.
We are offering a BMW i3 (94Ah) auto hatchback on 3 year BCH (Business Contract Hire – effectively a long term rental) with either 3 or 6 months of upfront payment on a 3 year term (so ‘3+35’ or ‘6+35’ respectively). As these are business leases, there is no Fuel Included service as standard. However, you do get the usual free car tax (for the BEV version) and congestion charge exemption as well as often free public parking and charging.
These are the current prices (with the lowest ones highlighted):
The i3 is a very exciting car – arguably the most advanced in the world being 100% electric and the only mass production car made with a carbon fibre frame (plus aluminium chassis and plastic body panels). We have selected news and reviews (and blogging about our own i3) to read here.
A unique feature of the i3 is that it comes in two versions:
As a Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV) – the car just uses electricity from the battery to drive and you recharge it as necessary.
With a Range Extender (REx) – as an option the i3 can have a small petrol engine fitted under the boot which recharges the battery when it runs lows on charge.
In both cases we only provide the longer range version of the i3 battery known as the ’94Ah’ (which relates to the specification of the battery cells). Where the previous i3 battery had a range of 70-90 miles this new battery has a range of 120-140 miles. In the case of the REx version (with its engine and 9 litre petrol tank) the total range is over 200 miles.
The other offer terms are as follows:
Prices shown exclude VAT.
Prices are for a standard car (solid paint, options as listed) – ask us to quote for other options such as automatic cruise control and automatic parking.
Maintenance is not included.
You get free road tax for the BEV and congestion charge exemption for both versions.
While benefits for electric cars are changing, currently you get cheap charging on motorways and many public locations, plus free parking in many town centres and railway stations.