Category Archives: Opinion

‘It’s the future of motor travel’: readers on driving electric vehicles

With the UK planning to ban petrol and diesel cars and vans in 2040 we asked you what it’s like to drive the vehicle of the future.

Øivind Johansen with his e-NV200 charging at Teie, Nøtterøy in Vestfold county. Photograph: Øivind Johansen

Amid fears that rising levels of nitrogen oxides pose a major risk to public health, Britain plans to ban all new petrol and diesel cars and vans from 2040. As part of the government’s much-anticipated clean air plan it has said the move is needed because of the unnecessary and avoidable impact that poor air quality was having on people’s health.

With the inevitable demise of diesel and petrol vehicles we asked electric car drivers to tell us what it’s like to drive one, and why they are the future.

Christine Burns, 64, retired, Manchester: ‘The UK government’s policy isn’t really a policy – the market will get there before’
Drives a Nissan Leaf

In an electric car you glide around in virtual silence like a limousine, but it can also out-accelerate the boy racers at the traffic lights! A scheme where I live in Manchester, means I only have to pay £20 a year to have free access to chargers across the city. There are almost a dozen kerbside and car park chargers inside a 1-2 mile radius of my home, plus I can charge from empty to full in around four hours for less than £3 on domestic electricity.

Benefits of electric cars include a low-cost mileage, no road tax, no congestion charge and low servicing costs. They’re also easy to drive with just one pedal, and there’s no smelly flammable refuelling involved. People tend to be curious when they find out I have an electric car and want to know more especially as there are a lot of myths like low acceleration. However, charging infrastructure could definitely be improved in the UK.

The UK government’s policy isn’t really a policy. Saying you’ll ban internal combustion engine car sales in 23 years from now doesn’t make sense, as the market will get there long before that. Norway plan the same by 2025 so why can’t we?

Øivind Johansen, 52, craftsman, Vestfold, Norway: ‘Electricity is much cheaper’
Drives a Nissan Leaf and e-NV200

It’s beautiful to drive. And with just forward and reverse they are not difficult to drive. There is no clutch or shifting of gears. They are peaceful, without any noise and there are no stinking fuels. I just plug it in at home. It’s pre-warmed in the winter and pre-cooled in the summer which is wonderful when going to work. They’re fun. I’ll never go back to fossil fuel cars.

Where I live in Norway, most people have their own houses which makes it easy to install chargers outside. There are normally charging stations every 50km with most places having at least two. What it comes down to though is money. It’s expensive to pay for diesel and electricity is much cheaper. I can drive 10km for around 10p. They’re also so much cheaper, both in parts and repair. We save around £6,000-7,000 a year by not using a diesel car.

I think the UK government’s plan is too little too late. It’s crazy when you think about how much oil is burnt every day by internal combustion engine cars. I’m just glad to be able to do my bit for the environment.

Read more: The Guardian

Swing to electric cars will be a quiet evolution

The stone age didn’t end because we ran out of stones. It ended because we learnt how to make and work something even more versatile…metal. Bronze and then Iron.

Those “Ages” took us thousands of years to get through. But things have speeded up a bit as we have harnessed, made and learnt how to use many other things –the Industrial Age (revolution) leading to the Engine Age and then a rat-a-tat-tat of Jet Age, Atomic Age, Space Age, Digital Age (another revolution) and Information Age.

Tesla Model S

Many of those advances have taken place in an overlapping “Oil Age” which has lasted little more than a century. And picking up on the theme of this column last week, that Age is entering the beginning of its end not primarily because we are running out of oil. We could keep using this and other fossil fuels for at least another century, even at gas-guzzling rates.

But it will be replaced by the “Electric Age” because oil-sourced energy is ultimately finite, more expensive to extract, has some end-of-the-world-side effects and above all because we have discovered (but so far grossly under-used) more ways to make something better – electricity – using more powerful methods like nuclear fusion/fission and infinitely more abundant and planet-friendly sources like rivers (hydro power), the sun (solar power), the wind and ocean currents.

HUGE APPETITE

The fundamental point here is that imminent swing from petrol and diesel to electric and hybrid motor vehicles will dominate the headlines for a while, but in practice this change will be a quiet evolution. The real “Revolution” will be how we generate the electricity and how we use what will be massive advances in that process in myriad ways other than the propulsion of your car.

All existing technology for generating electricity will improve exponentially in efficiency, availability and versatility – at prices that get progressively lower and for sure there will be new technologies not yet thought of.

Read more: Daily Nation

A Brighter Future for Electric Cars and the Planet

There is simply no credible way to address climate change without changing the way we get from here to there, meaning cars, trucks, planes and any other gas-guzzling forms of transportation.

That is why it is so heartening to see electric cars, considered curios for the rich or eccentric or both not that long ago, now entering the mainstream.

A slew of recent announcements by researchers, auto companies and world leaders offer real promise. First up, a forecast by Bloomberg New Energy Finance said that electric cars would become cheaper than conventional cars without government subsidies between 2025 and 2030.

At the same time, auto companies like Tesla, General Motors and Volvo are planning a slate of new models that they say will be not only more affordable but also more practical than earlier versions. And officials in such countries as France, India and Norway have set aggressive targets for putting these vehicles to use and phasing out emission-spewing gasoline and diesel cars.

Skeptics may see these announcements as wishful thinking. After all, just 1.1 percent of all cars sold globally in 2016 were electrics or plug-in hybrids. And many popular models still cost much more than comparable fossil-fuel cars.
The skeptics, however, have consistently been overly pessimistic about this technology. Electric cars face challenges, yet they have caught on much faster than was thought likely just a few years ago. There were two million of them on the world’s roads last year, up 60 percent from 2015, according to the International Energy Agency.

The cost of batteries, the single most expensive component of the cars, fell by more than half between 2012 and 2016, according to the Department of Energy. Tesla has indicated that it can produce batteries for about $125 per kilowatt-hour. Researchers say the cost of electric cars will be at parity with conventional vehicles when battery prices reach $100 per kilowatt-hour, which experts say is just a few years away. Electric cars are more efficient, of course, but they also require less maintenance, which should make them cheaper to own over time.

Read more: The New York Times

Is a carmaker about to save the planet?

Volvo’s move to electric demonstrates the role ethical business can play in shaping our society for the better

think a lot about electric cars,” Tesla CEO Elon Musk famously said at a party at the very end of the 80s. “Do you think a lot about electric cars?” The problem with thinking a lot about electric cars is that certain things become impossible to unthink: powering a car with fossil fuels, meeting 21st-century challenges with 19th-century answers, become more than irresponsible. It becomes ridiculous.

You’ll never know when the tipping point is – it’s possibly as little as five minutes – but think enough about electric cars, especially if you’re a car manufacturer, and wham … you’re Volvo. They were rolling along perfectly happily until they thought too hard: about their business model and benefit to society; about climate change and their future customers; and so they made the decision that all their cars would be fully electric, or at least hybrid, by 2019. Not one car solely powered by internal combustion engine will come off a Volvo production line by 2020.

It is impossible to overstate the significance of this, and not because you are ever likely to buy a brand-new Volvo. If every branded car is a Veblen good – that is, something you want precisely because it is expensive, to flag to the world your ability to own it – then the Volvo is a peculiar inversion, the car you buy that looks less flash than it is, to show the world that you’re not the kind of person who shows off what they’ve bought. Nope, nobody here is buying a brand-new Volvo in 2019.

Yet this will instantly change the charging infrastructure for electric cars: there have already been pretty extraordinary advances in charge speed. You can fully charge an electric vehicle – one with a range of about 105 miles – in half an hour from a supercharger in a garage, which is the difference between being able to use an electric car in a normal way, and having to rebuild your life around it. However, there aren’t enough superchargers, in Europe or the US, and, maddeningly, a lot of the slower chargers – which take four to six hours – still call themselves “high speed” because that’s what they were when they were installed. Volvo will shunt progress forward worldwide on genuinely high-speed charging points, as well as battery production and research and development into battery storage.

Read more: The Guardian

The Uninhabitable Earth

Famine, economic collapse, a sun that cooks us: What climate change could wreak — sooner than you think

I. ‘Doomsday’

Peering beyond scientific reticence.

It is, I promise, worse than you think. If your anxiety about global warming is dominated by fears of sea-level rise, you are barely scratching the surface of what terrors are possible, even within the lifetime of a teenager today. And yet the swelling seas — and the cities they will drown — have so dominated the picture of global warming, and so overwhelmed our capacity for climate panic, that they have occluded our perception of other threats, many much closer at hand. Rising oceans are bad, in fact very bad; but fleeing the coastline will not be enough.

Indeed, absent a significant adjustment to how billions of humans conduct their lives, parts of the Earth will likely become close to uninhabitable, and other parts horrifically inhospitable, as soon as the end of this century.

Even when we train our eyes on climate change, we are unable to comprehend its scope. This past winter, a string of days 60 and 70 degrees warmer than normal baked the North Pole, melting the permafrost that encased Norway’s Svalbard seed vault — a global food bank nicknamed “Doomsday,” designed to ensure that our agriculture survives any catastrophe, and which appeared to have been flooded by climate change less than ten years after being built.

The Doomsday vault is fine, for now: The structure has been secured and the seeds are safe. But treating the episode as a parable of impending flooding missed the more important news. Until recently, permafrost was not a major concern of climate scientists, because, as the name suggests, it was soil that stayed permanently frozen. But Arctic permafrost contains 1.8 trillion tons of carbon, more than twice as much as is currently suspended in the Earth’s atmosphere. When it thaws and is released, that carbon may evaporate as methane, which is 34 times as powerful a greenhouse-gas warming blanket as carbon dioxide when judged on the timescale of a century; when judged on the timescale of two decades, it is 86 times as powerful.

Read more: New York Mag

This is how Big Oil will die

Big Oil is perhaps the most feared and respected industry in history.

Oil is warming the planet — cars and trucks contribute about 15% of global fossil fuels emissions — yet this fact barely dents its use. Oil fuels the most politically volatile regions in the world, yet we’ve decided to send military aid to unstable and untrustworthy dictators, because their oil is critical to our own security. For the last century, oil has dominated our economics and our politics. Oil is power.

Yet I argue here that technology is about to undo a century of political and economic dominance by oil. Big Oil will be cut down in the next decade by a combination of smartphone apps, long-life batteries, and simpler gearing. And as is always the case with new technology, the undoing will occur far faster than anyone thought possible.

To understand why Big Oil is in far weaker a position than anyone realizes, let’s take a closer look at the lynchpin of oil’s grip on our lives: the internal combustion engine, and the modern vehicle drivetrain.

BMW 8 Speed Automatic Transmission

Cars are complicated.

Behind the hum of a running engine lies a carefully balanced dance between sheathed steel pistons, intermeshed gears, and spinning rods — a choreography that lasts for millions of revolutions. But millions is not enough, and as we all have experienced, these parts eventually wear, and fail. Oil caps leak. Belts fray. Transmissions seize.

None of these failures exist in an electric vehicle.

The point has been most often driven home by Tony Seba, a Stanford professor and guru of “disruption”, who revels in pointing out that an internal combustion engine drivetrain contains about 2,000 parts, while an electric vehicle drivetrain contains about 20. All other things being equal, a system with fewer moving parts will be more reliable than a system with more moving parts.

And that rule of thumb appears to hold for cars. In 2006, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration estimated that the average vehicle, built solely on internal combustion engines, lasted 150,000 miles.

Current estimates for the lifetime today’s electric vehicles are over 500,000 miles.

Read more: NewCo Shift

What difference will electric cars make to our electricity demand

Simple calculation[s] as to the impact on electricity demand as we progressively switch over to electric cars.

National Grid estimates up to 7% increase in electricity demand by 2040 for EVs

There are around 30 million cars on the road today [1]. National Grid’s Future Energy Scenarios 2016 presents 4 scenarios – in the most ambitious ‘Gone Green’ scenario there are 9.7 million electric vehicles (EV) on the roads in 2040 using an extra 24 TWh/year. Relative to current electricity demand that is an increase of 7%[2].

But the impact on peak demand will be minor, if drivers respond to time of use pricing.

However, this demand is highly unlikely to be spread evenly through the day and year. Firstly, people tend to drive more in the summer, presumably because it is considerably more pleasant than driving in the winter [3]. Fortunately our peak electricity demand is in the winter so this helps to even out the load.

Secondly, assuming time of use pricing is widely adopted drivers will try quite hard to charge their vehicles at times of the day when the electricity is cheap. Most people will have quite a lot of flexibility and during the peak time a lot of drivers are on the road anyway.

This means electric car charging will increase non-peak demand much more than peak. The chart below shows a typical January day. If electric car charging is spread over non-peak times it will start to fill in the yellow area but not impact on the peak demand. 24 TWh/year is 66 GWh/day so it could fill in just over a quarter of the yellow area.
A typical day’s UK electricity demand in January

If all cars were electric there would be more impact on peak demand

However, 66 TWh/day is from only 9.7 million electric vehicles. If we replaced all 30 million cars, it would be nearer 200 GWh/day. This does still fit into the yellow area – just – but it would be quite a challenge to ensure that there was no ‘leakage’ and it did not impact on the winter peak at all.

Read more: Blogspot

Electric Cars Are the Story Now, but Battery Power Is the Future for Tesla Inc.

You know Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) as a builder of electric cars. But that’s not necessarily what the company is about in the long run.

The electric car thing has become a temporary stop on a longer and much more ambitious journey, as Tesla’s mission has since expanded beyond just sustainable transportation. Tesla CEO Elon Musk wants to change the world, and that includes getting people used to replacing gas-powered vehicles with electric cars.

Tesla Model X

The Model X car is a good example of Tesla’s public image so far. .

Secrets and speculation?

This is not speculation on my part, or even a closely guarded secret. Musk laid out his master plan in some detail 11 years ago, and doubled down on the same theme last year.

In short, Tesla was always meant to develop and promote sustainable energy sources for everyone and everything. The expensive Tesla Roadster sports car only aimed at raining the capital to develop more affordable electric cars for a larger mass-market demographic — and even the Tesla Model S and Model X are just cash-generating stepping stones on the road to a clean-energy revolution.

Along the way, Musk is using Tesla’s capital platform and wide-ranging media reach to introduce and popularize other technologies for the good of humanity. Self-driving cars will make the road a safer place, while saving even more energy. Taking emotions and human error out of the driving experience can do both of those things.

Tesla’s early forays into electric vehicles and self-driving cars got the ball rolling. Now, Detroit and Japan are falling all over themselves to beat Tesla at its own game.

Read more: Madison.com

Trump just passed on the best deal the planet has ever seen

His rationale for abandoning the Paris agreement is outdated and false. Now, America forges its own, lonely path in being shackled to coal and fossil fuels

Since day one as a contender for the Oval Office, current US President Donald Trump has pushed a dominant narrative: he’s a businessman. He gets economics. He knows the art of the deal. This week, with his decision to withdraw the US from the Paris agreement, the president has given the world strong reason to reject that narrative.

His rationale – that it’s a choice of economy over environment, and a fossil fuel economy is the top priority – is outdated and false. States and nations around the world have harvested the fruits of clean energy, and are redefining their economies and energy sources accordingly. Yet under false pretenses that “clean coal”, natural gas and other fossil fuel fixes are better than energy conservation and clean energy, the US forges its own, lonely path.

The idea that clean, renewable energy will generate power for our planet for generations to come is not rhetoric. The extent of human-caused climate change – and the rapidly improving economics driving the proliferation of renewable energy sources – make it fact.

If the US administration isn’t ready to move forward, hundreds of individual states and other countries will.
California is already a world leader on climate policy. Texas is rapidly expanding its wind energy capacity. In Germany, clean energy has become a movement itself, focused on thousands of small-scale projects under the Energiewende program. In Scotland, wind generation has increased by 81% over the past year, and in March this year, it produced enough energy to satisfy 136 % of the country’s household energy needs. These are just a few examples.

The US’s withdrawal doesn’t mean Americans and US investors will sit still, either. There is substantial economic opportunity in renewables. The US solar industry alone creates one in 50 new jobs. Worldwide, nearly 10 million people already work in renewable energy. Global clean technology exports doubled between 2008 and 2015, surpassing $1.15tn per year. Even America’s corporate giants – from Apple and Google to Walmart, and even oil giant Exxon Mobil – support the Paris agreement.

When news of the potential withdrawal reached the United Nations, the organization’s Twitter page read:

“Climate change is undeniable. Climate change is unstoppable. Climate solutions provide opportunities that are unmatchable.”

A Globe and Mail report showed that even fossil fuel companies – the likes of ExxonMobil, BP and Shell – think the US should stick with Paris.

This withdrawal is an ugly decision, made by a country that ought to be leading the transition to a cleaner future – not only because of its stature as an international economic powerhouse, but also because of its less-than-desirable environmental track record.

Read more: The Guardian

Cheap Motoring

Electric Cars Are Growing In Popularity, But Will The Bubble Burst?

As recently as five years ago the prospect of our roads being filled by electric cars seemed unlikely. Although the technology had accelerated dramatically in the previous five years, there were still so many obstacles to overcome, not least of which were the vehicle’s limited run time and the non-existent infrastructure necessary to accommodate them (no charging points).

Nay-sayers still look askance at the electric car even now, but with London sales rocketing up 85% this year, it’s hard to deny that it is beginning to come into ascendance.

In cars as in practically every other part of life, London can be easily dismissed as being in its own reality-free bubble. Journeys in England’s south-east are typically shorter than elsewhere in the UK, and because it’s home to most of the ‘people who matter’ for at least half of the year, developments happen at a far speedier pace – the likelihood of finding an electric vehicle charging point in London is, one would imagine, far higher than in rural Shropshire or the Scottish highlands. However, it would be wrong to reject these figures out of hand; with more than 10,000 electric vehicles now owned across the UK, this is more than just a Capital-based blip. So why are electric cars gaining such popularity, and are they worth it?

Firstly, it’s important to know that there are two types of electric powered car. The most common runs on a battery which needs to be charged before use. Less common is the hydrogen fuel-cell battery powered car, which uses the engine’s motion to fuse hydrogen with oxygen to create electricity: clever but expensive and therefore currently less popular – although that may change as prices stabilise.

Regardless of the type of battery it uses, there are three key reasons why it makes sense to go electric:

Cutting costs

Costing as little as 2p per mile to charge, the electric vehicle is extremely economical to run. And because their inner workings are a lot less complicated than a traditional combustion engine, electric cars are cheaper to maintain; it’s estimated that the Nissan Leaf costs a meagre £11 per month, versus £30p/m for the Ford Focus.

Cutting carbon

Air pollution is increasingly appearing on the international agenda, with a recent report stating that more than 40,000 early deaths per year are linked to the problem in the UK alone. Electric cars produce no emissions, so driving one is no worse for the environment than walking.

Add to that, in purchasing an electric vehicle you’re purchasing cutting edge tech and that applies as much to the driver interface as it does to the internal mechanisms. In short, if you want the bells and whistles you’ll find them in electric cars.

So what about the flip side?

Range anxiety

There’s no arguing with the fact that even though electric cars can travel far further than they ever could before, they still come with the niggling concern of ‘what if I run out of power?’ No one wants to be stuck on a country lane with no way of powering their vehicle.

Expense

Going green has always come with government subsidies, but even still electric vehicles do still require a higher than average initial outlay and this can present a major deterrent.

Whether an electric car is worth the investment is entirely down to individual perspectives. As independent vehicle supply professionals, at OSV we’ve watched the development of electric with close interest. The environmental credentials are deeply appealing, and with the global issue of diminishing oil supplies producing very real concerns for the future, in our view green could be the way to go.

Read more: Huffington Post