DennisCooper

UK to ban sales of new Petrol & Diesel cars by 2040

51 posts in this topic

As already mentioned, the drain on the grid will be massive, they will have to upgrade the whole power infrastructure in the country.

 

All of them little cottages in the country with their little overhead cables feeding them from a pole mounted transformer will be melting once all the Tesla owner demands 40A on a fast charge.

 

 On a positive note, with all the underground cables that will be glowing red hot any ice or snow will soon melt off the roads and pavement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/26/2017 at 9:45 AM, E39mad said:

And how are they going to raise the massive £27.6 billion revenue lost through fuel duty and VAT on fuel?? 

 

That will be taken care of by Smart Meters talking to Smart Devices and charging accordingly. 1kW/H for an electric light will be 15p and £1 for a car.

 

As for petrol mowers, well I think their days are numbered anyway. Cordless mowers are nearly as good these days.

 

The real solution to pollution is to stop commuting. They need to build local office complexes where you can hire a room or cubical and work from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I work in engineering research, mainly for automotive and aeronautical products. Much of what I do is looking at energy usage. Discussions like this frustrate me due to the sheer lack of knowledge that is available to the general public, with which they may draw informed conclusions. The government and the media not understanding the problems doesn't help. On that note, and from wanting to understand myself the demands EVs will place on our infrastructure, I've done some original research of my own this morning.

 

First off, my take on the 2040 target: it will be largely irrelevant as the market will naturally have moved in this direction. It's completely achievable and sensible. What we're talking about here is bulk transport for the masses, not V8 weekend toys or garden power tools. Lawnmowers don't sit in queues in central London or on the M6. They also don't produce 250bhp at the instant whim of an impatient suit that wishes to be three car lengths further up the road. From a political standpoint, this has been prompted by the fact that we have failed to hit clean air targets that were set in 2010; and I would suspect that there is a drive to meet them before we are released from our contract with the EU. Due to the aforementioned lack of public knowledge, the government needs to issue a big statement like this in order for the media to propagate the message - if they simply said "cars are likely to be all-EV by 2040" it wouldn't have caused headlines and we wouldn't be discussing it now.

 

As for the national grid energy balance, I'm going to share my best conservative estimate. Assuming 30M cars and 4M vans on the road at present, and that all of those cover 8k mi per year, we drive 745M mi per day in total. Assuming current technology (Golf GTE figures - which is a car not designed as a pure EV and as such has a compromised pure EV range), 30 mi requires 9kWh. Add in a bit of variation and charging inefficiency and you're looking at 235GWh required from the grid per day, to charge all those nasty slow boring Golf GTEs. Sounds like a lot.

 

So assuming that the grid infrastructure was in place that we could charge all of these cars evenly throughout the 24 hr day, we would need an extra 10GW from the grid. Our current capacity is 50GW and as I type this we're using 31.7GW. Our day / night swing is about 12GW. So if we say we all want to charge our cars in a shorter period of time, and we push the grid to capacity (on top of normal demand), we can charge at 15GW and it will take about 16 hrs. Spread those 16 hrs throughout the day, and that's doable I reckon.

 

So now consider this: our oil refinery business in the UK produces 73M tons of refined fuel per year. That equates to around 74M kg petrol per day and 50M kg diesel per day. Depending on who you ask (and it's difficult to measure) around 4-6kWh is required from the grid per gallon of refined fuel produced. Taking the more conservative figure, that's 1.2kWh per kg petrol and 1kWh per kg diesel. I'm going to ignore the business case here (but there won't be one when everyone uses EVs) and say that the total load of our petrol and diesel refinery efforts on the grid is 140GWh per day: assume we lose all of that and the grid gains 5.8GW of capacity.

 

Now for the question of Hydrogen. Yes, fuel cell technology is great; and yes, Hydrogen is unbelievably energy dense. It's the perfect solution - or, it might be in about 20 years when the technology has matured. For a lot of complex reasons that I don't understand, we can't extract it cheaply and we can't store it for very long. These aside, and briefly tacking the issue that large vehicles can't justify batteries because the energy density isn't good enough (yet), if we put this 140GWh saving back into H2 production we would be able to produce about 2.1M kg of H2 per day (based on current electrolysis efficiency of ~60%). Current fuel cell efficiency of ~50% yields 34GWh to power some of those EVs. It's a pretty poor return, but it would then mean that the net increase in demand on our grid is 8.3GW. With a couple more nuclear reactors coming on-line soon, this is easily doable. And this assumes current technology - things will get exponentially better.

 

Will the wires under our homes melt? Not likely. No-one needs to charge at 50kW at home. If your daily requirement is 9kWh and you have 11 hr to charge your EV overnight, you'll be pulling 820W - in other words, 3.6A from a single phase outlet. Leave the fast charging to publicly funded networks with dedicated sub-grids.

 

TL; DR: from an electricity generation capacity point of view, we can nearly support every single car and van in the UK switching to fully electric, overnight. With no changes to our infrastructure. Winter demand will be a bit tight - why I say nearly, and the grid will need some serious investment to get us there (in terms of management and storage). We are talking incremental changes though, not a quadrupling of capacity as some might have you believe.

 

The real benefit of EVs from an energy balance perspective, is that you take the responsibility of the source of the energy and the rate at which it is consumed it away from the general public - who can't be trusted to minimise their energy usage. Reference the suit above who goes everywhere with the loud pedal in the carpet. Add to that the economies of scale found when producing electricity on mass, and you can start to significantly reduce the amount of energy we require on the whole. Do that long enough, and the costs for everyone come down because we're not taxing our natural resources as hard. And yes, currently we produce a lot of our energy from natural gas and other non-renewables; but a car with a combustion engine can never be converted to run on solar - an EV can. It doesn't make any difference to the end user whether the juice comes from Ratcliffe, Sizewell, or the turbine on next door's roof.

 

I love my 535i. It returns 22mpg. I'll never sell it. Would I commute in it when I could have a Golf GTE that I can charge for free at work? Nah.

Calypso-E34 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tom - that cheered me right up!

 

I'm quite looking forward to electric cars.  Maybe on long runs we'll have to plan a decent length stop, but that is no different to most of my family journeys in the 70s, when life was a bit more relaxed.  That can only be a good thing.

TomGC likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TomGC said:

I work in engineering research, mainly for automotive and aeronautical products. Much of what I do is looking at energy usage. Discussions like this frustrate me due to the sheer lack of knowledge that is available to the general public, with which they may draw informed conclusions. The government and the media not understanding the problems doesn't help. On that note, and from wanting to understand myself the demands EVs will place on our infrastructure, I've done some original research of my own this morning.

 

First off, my take on the 2040 target: it will be largely irrelevant as the market will naturally have moved in this direction. It's completely achievable and sensible. What we're talking about here is bulk transport for the masses, not V8 weekend toys or garden power tools. Lawnmowers don't sit in queues in central London or on the M6. They also don't produce 250bhp at the instant whim of an impatient suit that wishes to be three car lengths further up the road. From a political standpoint, this has been prompted by the fact that we have failed to hit clean air targets that were set in 2010; and I would suspect that there is a drive to meet them before we are released from our contract with the EU. Due to the aforementioned lack of public knowledge, the government needs to issue a big statement like this in order for the media to propagate the message - if they simply said "cars are likely to be all-EV by 2040" it wouldn't have caused headlines and we wouldn't be discussing it now.

 

As for the national grid energy balance, I'm going to share my best conservative estimate. Assuming 30M cars and 4M vans on the road at present, and that all of those cover 8k mi per year, we drive 745M mi per day in total. Assuming current technology (Golf GTE figures - which is a car not designed as a pure EV and as such has a compromised pure EV range), 30 mi requires 9kWh. Add in a bit of variation and charging inefficiency and you're looking at 235GWh required from the grid per day, to charge all those nasty slow boring Golf GTEs. Sounds like a lot.

 

So assuming that the grid infrastructure was in place that we could charge all of these cars evenly throughout the 24 hr day, we would need an extra 10GW from the grid. Our current capacity is 50GW and as I type this we're using 31.7GW. Our day / night swing is about 12GW. So if we say we all want to charge our cars in a shorter period of time, and we push the grid to capacity (on top of normal demand), we can charge at 15GW and it will take about 16 hrs. Spread those 16 hrs throughout the day, and that's doable I reckon.

 

So now consider this: our oil refinery business in the UK produces 73M tons of refined fuel per year. That equates to around 74M kg petrol per day and 50M kg diesel per day. Depending on who you ask (and it's difficult to measure) around 4-6kWh is required from the grid per gallon of refined fuel produced. Taking the more conservative figure, that's 1.2kWh per kg petrol and 1kWh per kg diesel. I'm going to ignore the business case here (but there won't be one when everyone uses EVs) and say that the total load of our petrol and diesel refinery efforts on the grid is 140GWh per day: assume we lose all of that and the grid gains 5.8GW of capacity.

 

Now for the question of Hydrogen. Yes, fuel cell technology is great; and yes, Hydrogen is unbelievably energy dense. It's the perfect solution - or, it might be in about 20 years when the technology has matured. For a lot of complex reasons that I don't understand, we can't extract it cheaply and we can't store it for very long. These aside, and briefly tacking the issue that large vehicles can't justify batteries because the energy density isn't good enough (yet), if we put this 140GWh saving back into H2 production we would be able to produce about 2.1M kg of H2 per day (based on current electrolysis efficiency of ~60%). Current fuel cell efficiency of ~50% yields 34GWh to power some of those EVs. It's a pretty poor return, but it would then mean that the net increase in demand on our grid is 8.3GW. With a couple more nuclear reactors coming on-line soon, this is easily doable. And this assumes current technology - things will get exponentially better.

 

Will the wires under our homes melt? Not likely. No-one needs to charge at 50kW at home. If your daily requirement is 9kWh and you have 11 hr to charge your EV overnight, you'll be pulling 820W - in other words, 3.6A from a single phase outlet. Leave the fast charging to publicly funded networks with dedicated sub-grids.

 

TL; DR: from an electricity generation capacity point of view, we can nearly support every single car and van in the UK switching to fully electric, overnight. With no changes to our infrastructure. Winter demand will be a bit tight - why I say nearly, and the grid will need some serious investment to get us there (in terms of management and storage). We are talking incremental changes though, not a quadrupling of capacity as some might have you believe.

 

The real benefit of EVs from an energy balance perspective, is that you take the responsibility of the source of the energy and the rate at which it is consumed it away from the general public - who can't be trusted to minimise their energy usage. Reference the suit above who goes everywhere with the loud pedal in the carpet. Add to that the economies of scale found when producing electricity on mass, and you can start to significantly reduce the amount of energy we require on the whole. Do that long enough, and the costs for everyone come down because we're not taxing our natural resources as hard. And yes, currently we produce a lot of our energy from natural gas and other non-renewables; but a car with a combustion engine can never be converted to run on solar - an EV can. It doesn't make any difference to the end user whether the juice comes from Ratcliffe, Sizewell, or the turbine on next door's roof.

 

I love my 535i. It returns 22mpg. I'll never sell it. Would I commute in it when I could have a Golf GTE that I can charge for free at work? Nah.

So what your saying is we won't "need" to turn off our freezers at certain times to "smooth" flow.....

:rolleyes::lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with EV's for general use, I'd have an i3 in a heartbeat if it didn't mean selling my M5 to fund it. For my 12 mile commute an EV makes perfect sense. 

 

I love my petrol cars though, I'm lucky enough to own 4 M cars and the buzz of driving them cannot be matched by an EV. I don't know what will happen to classic vehicles and whether it will be possible to own and run one in practical terms. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Calypso-E34 said:

Thanks Tom - that cheered me right up!

 

I'm quite looking forward to electric cars.  Maybe on long runs we'll have to plan a decent length stop, but that is no different to most of my family journeys in the 70s, when life was a bit more relaxed.  That can only be a good thing.

 

No worries, I quite enjoyed doing the sums. It's satisfying to see that the numbers nearly add up but I wish we had more discussion about our energy supply as a whole. There's a lot of scope to optimise it. Like I said, frustrates me how far out of proportion everything gets blown by politicians and the media - just give us the facts and explain the realities. Most people will understand if you talk to them like adults.

 

Long trips are going to take a bit of working out, but even now Tesla have enough of a network to get you comfortably round the country and most of Europe at a reasonable touring pace. They're also demonstrating a few "smart" ideas like only charging the car enough to reach the next charge point - minimising your journey time as a whole.

 

2 hours ago, Yokozuna said:

So what your saying is we won't "need" to turn off our freezers at certain times to "smooth" flow.....

:rolleyes::lol: 

 

I've heard that suggestion and it's stupid, because we need fridges in a domestic setting. But I can kind of see where they're coming from because a modern domestic fridge has a constant draw of about 100W (according to my smart meter) - so if everyone (25M homes) turned them off all at once we would gain about 2.5GW (5%) of capacity. This is significant enough to help with charging EVs for example. But to put that properly in context: our average electricity consumption over the last few weeks has been about 720GWh per day. Everyone turns their fridge off for an hour and we reduce that by 0.3%. It's small fry; and completely wrong to put the onus on households when office buildings have lights, AC, heating and hot water always on and the windows open all day, for example.

 

Freeing up capacity for spikes in demand where charging EVs is concerned isn't going to be a great problem. If most of them are plugged in all night and most of the day in the office car park, they talk to the grid and schedule their charging in order to "smooth the flow" amongst themselves. Combine that with some investment in energy storage so that we can run our plants at a more consistent (rather than cyclic) load, the plants can be more efficient and we have a bit of spare capacity for when someone has forgotten to slow charge overnight and they need to use an ultra-rapid 200kW charger for 10 minutes.

 

3 hours ago, kobayashi said:

Nothing wrong with EV's for general use, I'd have an i3 in a heartbeat if it didn't mean selling my M5 to fund it. For my 12 mile commute an EV makes perfect sense. 

 

I love my petrol cars though, I'm lucky enough to own 4 M cars and the buzz of driving them cannot be matched by an EV. I don't know what will happen to classic vehicles and whether it will be possible to own and run one in practical terms. 

 

Upfront cost is a big one. The only way round that (I can see) is for government incentives. Grants, 0% finance, guaranteed residuals, free charging. Get lots more of us into them as everyday propositions, that funds and persuades the automotive industry to start developing them properly which in turn makes them more affordable. EVs will become cheap, and cheaper eventually than traditional cars, because the end product is so much simpler. They're expensive at present because we're not geared up to build them and the manufacturing industry is slow to react.

 

For those of us that like proper engines, I don't see why we won't be able to keep them. The trick is to get people who don't care (most of them) to transition. Fuel will probably become expensive to persuade people to switch, but once demand for it falls because everyone is using EVs, fuel cost will fall again. I would suspect that the proportion of fuel burnt at any given moment by people who are actually enjoying themselves is pretty small. A few of us thrashing old M3s at the weekends isn't going to challenge our oil supplies for the time being. Plus I think we're likely to see some serious performance hybrids while we're still allowed, in the vein of the Golf GTE but better. Lighter batteries and motors, lighter and more aerodynamic shells (driven by EV development): 1200kg RWD saloon with 350bhp, regenerative braking, electrically assisted turbo, torque fill, torque vectoring and a plug-in range of 40 miles, anyone?

 

Also, there's the whole question of whether we will actually need to own cars in the future. It's conceivable that a lot of people will be happy with the "driverless Uber" type model - we could be seeing stuff like that by 2040. Or heaven forbid we might improve our public transport links and make them a worthwhile proposition for more people.

 

I get my national grid info from here, if anyone's wondering. It's pretty cool.

NuckingFuts likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TomGC said:

 

For those of us that like proper engines, I don't see why we won't be able to keep them. The trick is to get people who don't care (most of them) to transition. Fuel will probably become expensive to persuade people to switch, but once demand for it falls because everyone is using EVs, fuel cost will fall again. I would suspect that the proportion of fuel burnt at any given moment by people who are actually enjoying themselves is pretty small. A few of us thrashing old M3s at the weekends isn't going to challenge our oil supplies for the time being.

I don't think we won't be allowed to keep them, it's whether the disincentives imposed make it impossible to run them in practical terms. If there are huge areas that they will not be permitted to enter for instance. The lack of availability of spares may also make maintenance very difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, kobayashi said:

Nothing wrong with EV's for general use, I'd have an i3 in a heartbeat if it didn't mean selling my M5 to fund it. For my 12 mile commute an EV makes perfect sense. 

 

I love my petrol cars though, I'm lucky enough to own 4 M cars and the buzz of driving them cannot be matched by an EV. I don't know what will happen to classic vehicles and whether it will be possible to own and run one in practical terms. 

Give me a Tesla, decent range and a giant iPad in the middle to play with

NuckingFuts likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I drove past a rather good looking tesla 4x4 type SUV thing last week, it was stuck in traffic and causing zero pollution and there where bunny rabbits and unicorns walking next to it! So I pressed the black smoke pedal to even out the universe! :lol: 

Blobby likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I share the enthusiasm for this type of thing, and the implementation leaves a bit to be desired, but an interesting proposition nonetheless:

 

 

Sacrilegious maybe? That was certainly my first thought. The weight would put me off more than anything else. But maybe I can see what they're trying to do here. (Other than bandwaggoning and making a quick buck on the absurd classic car market...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Infrastructure to generate the electricity aside i can only see electric cars being viable if the range can be address and recharging time.

 

As i see it you either need a hydrogen cell so you can fill up with water like petrol and make your own electricity as you run such as the Honda Clarity or batteries that are universal and you swap for a charged one at a "filling station" or a final option use induction charging.

 

The later i see as induction loops in motorways and major A routes to charge as you drive (or at least maintain your charge) then once off the motorway you are into your battery range and home charging?

 

Whatever route there are going to need to be major changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Range and charge time are closely related through energy consumption. We need to design EVs to be EVs - significantly lighter, less draggy, and less powerful. Climate control is a big problem, both for the cabin and the powertrain. There has been no point doing this with traditional cars because the powertrain is so inefficient, the gains are incremental. With some investment in this direction, it'll come together.

 

There's nothing special about the Tesla Model S for example. The battery, motor, and structural technology in it is pretty old; and it's heavy at 2-2.25 tons depending on spec. 100 kWh of charge at around 320 Wh / mi gives a realistic 315 miles on a charge. Tesla reckon their Superchargers will give "170 miles in 30 mins" - about 110kW. Decent already, but the projection for battery technology improvement says the Model S could save nearly 200kg from the battery alone by 2020 (it's 600kg now and about 20kg of that is the cooling system). Call this a 20% reduction in required power (combined with drag savings, etc.) and your range looks more like 385 miles.

 

The battery is going to be the weak point for the foreseeable. A 60 kWh lithium pack is never going to weigh much less than 250 kg and they don't like a charge more than 1.5 - 2C at a push (90-120 kW). This is what we will be stuck with until someone gives us a new chemistry and associated step-change in performance. Even still, 300 miles should be doable in the near future on 60 kWh. 10 hr overnight charge would be enough for 600 mi in 2 days. Combine this with a few quick charges at wee stops, would comfortably get you to Le Mans and back. Induction loops in the road are an interesting idea but my gut feeling is we will never need them. PITA to maintain if nothing else.

 

The fuel cell hybrid will be great, but Hydrogen is 20+ years away unfortunately. Fuel cell tech is OK, bit heavy and bulky at the moment and it has some air supply difficulties to work through (lots of clean, dry air required at pressure) - the problem is the gas. It may be abundant but it's very difficult to separate and store with today's methods. My example above gives about 25% yield from electrolysis (compared to something like 90% between the plug and the wheels in a pure EV). H2 is a pain because of the way it behaves at different temperatures and pressures - it can't be liquefied easily as can propane for example. You can store it as a pressurised (700 Bar) gas in massive cylinders but the system mass and volume aren't good and it takes a lot of energy to compress; or you can liquefy it at (really) low temperature, insulate the container and let it slowly boil off. Neither solution is ideal in a car. Add to this the fact that it seeps through the walls of pretty much anything you care to put it in and it's a bit unobtainable really. For now anyway, we've solved bigger problems.

pidgeonpost likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see a group of Italians have pushed the range of a Tesla P100 over 1000km, they changed the tyres to low rolling resistance shut all the windows turned of the air con and averaged 25mph. it took 27 hours to do this in the August heat.. Still pretty impressive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what your saying blobby is your either going to die a slow agonizing death in a red hot car whilst doing 1000km but it's saving bunnies and unicorns or your going to die a slow agonizing death if you use a carbon based fuel as you breath in the toxins but you will get there quicker? 

I know which one I'm choosing....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, TomGC said:

Induction loops in the road are an interesting idea but my gut feeling is we will never need them. PITA to maintain if nothing else.

 

How so Tom, would it not just be big coils in the road? if so you'd obviously have accessible terminal connections on the side if the road and ensure the cables were damped from vibration but no moving parts?

 

If i recall they have done it with buses at say airports?

 

Not sure of the maths and efficiency but as i saw it it potentially takes the battery out of the equation on a long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How's about going back to horse and cart :P We could recycle the horse waste ( being green) :D and those tuckers down Westminster would get  sweet FA because of no gasses ...  :D 

 The insurance would be little ...and we could all be John Wayne at the weekends :D

Edited by Carl-e34

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, duncan-uk said:

 

How so Tom, would it not just be big coils in the road? if so you'd obviously have accessible terminal connections on the side if the road and ensure the cables were damped from vibration but no moving parts?

 

If i recall they have done it with buses at say airports?

 

Not sure of the maths and efficiency but as i saw it it potentially takes the battery out of the equation on a long run.

 

Not necessarily difficult to install in theory, I guess, but you have to rip up the roads at great expense and probably put them back with something of a different design. If a wire breaks under the surface you have something potentially quite dangerous - access for repair means ripping the road up again. You know how national-scale civil engineering projects tend to go...!

 

Totally agree on taking the battery out of the equation. Takes a lot of the up front cost away from the customer, helps with the problem of uptake, less lithium mining, etc. Wasn't meaning it's not a good idea - I think we are more likely to get there with a simpler solution.

 

Looks like there are a couple of buses in Korea that they've trialled with it, and some work ongoing in France. I'll have a look at the conferences and journals, see if I can find some hard data on their feasibility, could be interesting.

 

An article from a respected source.

Edited by TomGC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed a big effort but tech is fairly simple i thought and attempts to the inherent flaw with electric cars - range, performance drop off (or that maybe just my experience from R/C cars) and refill time.

 

For all its faults petrol is bloody convenient!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/08/2017 at 8:00 AM, duncan-uk said:

 

How so Tom, would it not just be big coils in the road? if so you'd obviously have accessible terminal connections on the side if the road and ensure the cables were damped from vibration but no moving parts?

 

If i recall they have done it with buses at say airports?

 

Not sure of the maths and efficiency but as i saw it it potentially takes the battery out of the equation on a long run.

You'd need a sign for people with pacemakers to stand well clear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Interesting responses and an excellent insight from TomGC!

 

The R&D into new battery technology is substantial and currently, here in late summer 2017, there's a number of experimental technologies specifically being developed and tested for road cars which can be recharged to full or around 80% capacity in around 15 minutes. If that technology could be 'pushed out' today, then that's 'too much' longer than the time it takes currently to fillup and pay for fuel currently. Many people already grab and have a cup of coffee and/or have something to eat just after filling up currently so they'd not feel too indifferent. Yes, those who want/need to fillup and drive away asap will not like/moan about it, but hey. 

 

Over the next decade or so it looks like the speed at which the technology to provide very fast charging will press ahead so that a 85% or full charge can be done in around 5 minutes or so, any quicker would be a nice bonus!

 

In amongst all that, the whole 'range anxiety' thing will perhaps reduce. I was running low on Diesel today and only realised when I saw the warning light, so I had 'range' anxiety due to only being able to fill at a BP station (specific contract vehicle), but there's little people 'fearing' range anxiety in a fossil fueled car, but when many stations move to have charging stations, that'll also help to reduce electric car range anxiety too. 

 

As for the whole 'generation' thing, there are concerns for sure. In Iceland, they have Geo Thermal electricity generation. When contracting for a high end IT consultancy in 2008, I wrote a white paper looking at future methods of powering Data Centres given their 'power and heat' issues using conventional methods. Some of my research was included when I found that Iceland produces 99% of it's electricity via Geo Thermal production. Only due to its remote location is why big electrical cables couldn't be laid to 'connect' it to the top of Scotland and the coast of Norway. If it could, then calculations found that electricity to power the entire northern hemisphere could be sourced from Iceland! - https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/iceland-geothermal-power/ 

 

Of course, there's going to be the usual political, environmental and engineering/technological barriers to new technologies, the biggest perhaps being the reduction of perhaps 95% of the fossil fuel industry if Iceland powered the northern hemisphere! In recent years and times, the advancement in solar technology has been substantial, Tesla are just beginning to offer their solar roof tiles for use on domestic homes and IKEA have already got a home Solar Power solution available right now in stores. 

 

Another thing, although the 2040 data has been given, I'd suspect that the various companies at all areas of this topic will move quite a bit faster than that! This would partly be driven by the fact many other countries including 3rd world ones, have set ambitious (and perhaps slightly unrealistic targets) dates to make the shift over to non fossil fueled cars. In reality I think the actual 'transition' period will be longer, but it might also be faster - the UK given it's historic 'slow to change attitude' might just look foolish/silly if other countries press ahead much quicker!

 

I think Petrol might well remain on forecourts, it'll be for those 'high value' cars that'll be in excellent condition in 10/15/20 years time - things like Lamborghini's, Ferrari's, Porsches, Rolls Royces and certain other car models/brands. Of course, in the UK it'll be £5+ per litre, and VED will be a minimum of £2/3K per year, putting fossil fueled motoring in reserve of those with big/deep enough pockets to run them. 

 

Cheers, Dennis!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now