GM being outgunned by Tesla joined up with the sham hydrogen semi truck company Nikola

It really hasn't gone well Meanwhile, Tesla Semi scheduled for release 2021-not far away at all

 

 

My estimated mileage remaining always goes up after a period driving slower

Nothing unique there

 

Not in crawling traffic

 

NCAP are to bringing in an index of how green a vehicle is. The few so far list Hyundai Kona EV as a front runner.

 

Oh I’ll be sure to tune in ...

the deadliest car available is a mid/large sized suv driven by mum late for the school run

no matter how “green”

 

Hopefully they'll keep it sensible. And not grade everything zero because it doesn't tick a box.

I remember when they re-graded the Grand Punto to zero...But not the Corsa D....when they are structurally both the same f**king car.

The only reason it got zero was because of the older ABS/stability system...of which Corsa's also had (most didn't have ESP either and many had a fatal manufacturing defect in the ABS block that stoped the front left brake from working...big safety defect as as the car was unstable under hard braking yet it was never recalled!).


Same with ratings get skewed because of poorer pedestrian impact scores. Yet a car that has worse injuries to occupants gets a higher overall score

Meanwhile the latest crop of cars appear to have concerning problems with moose tests (have a look on youtube). Toyota are dangerously hopeless. Jeeps keep pulling the tyres off the rim (literally), and the lastest Audi/VW/Škoda/Seats perform worse than their older predecessors (a Mk5 Golf handles their moose test better than the latest MK8). The 15yr old Teves MK60 ESP obviously set the bar too high! Of course Ncap never tests this...but will downgrade an older car because a lack of ESP option whilst negating to test the effectiveness of any ESP systems fitted!

 

Just to add with moose tests:

Xantia Activa passes it at 85km/h

A lot of modern stuff still can't come close to 25year old family car!

 

Its a load of tosh as the current rating system only considers tailpipe emissions, so EVs ratings are massively inflated.
Apparently then intend to include full life-cycle costs at some point in the future, but until they do the scheme is completely meaningless!

 

Why do I feel like I've seen this before.

Everyone buy EVs because they have 0 emissions from the exhaust pipe. Wait a minute we are changing the rules now so its total emissions from the production line so we are going to tax new cars really high and we want all old EVs off the road now.

They knew the situation from the start but its us the buyers that have to pay for their mistake.

Diesel anyone.

 

I haven't yet seen a totalling up CO2 of oil/ gas exploration environmental impact, then impact of transportation of crude oil, then impact of refining crude into petrol/diesel etc, then transporting said fuels all over the country. Then you add on the tailpipe emissions burning said fuel, plus all the other pollution that comes out of an exhaust

Big crude oil companies are hiding most whilst trying to paint EVs as bad.

 

You know what Andy, you have a very valid point there. Hadn't thought about it that way

I'll be honest I didn't think the manufacturing etc would be that much because they have been doing it for so long and you would assume they are extremely efficient at it. But rightly said there are other factors to also add into the mix just like we all say about "Where does your electricity come from?". What is the cost to get the oil to your door step?

I really don't know what the answer is. But you can't deny we the people are being lied to by everyone and their dog. Whether its the governments, lobby groups, CEOs and bit corporations.

 

Its a problem with EVs vs Petrol as you can't simply compare like for like.

If you're trying to replace something dirty with something cleaner, then you have to be sure that the replacement really is cleaner, we shouldn't just blindly accept that zero tailpipe emissions automatically means its better. This is a common human problem to focus on a small detail and ignore everything else and plough on regardless!

Yes we also need to consider the environmental costs of fuel production, but we also need to consider that not all oil is used to make fuel and a substantial amount of electricity is also produced from natural gas often extracted from the same oil wells and of course coal.

In the US, the CO2 emissions for electricity generation are almost equal to the CO2 from all transport! Of course very little of the electricity is currently used to charge EVs, but at the same time, very little of the transportation CO2 is from private passenger vehicles!

 

I pay for a 100% renewable energy sources, but I cannot say for 100% that Im getting what I pay for.

We are soon moving to a farm of our own. It has hundreds of square metres of barn roof tops, which I will want to cover in solar panels. I will also have battery storage. I hope to sell back any excess.

There are new tariffs that fluctuate with energy demand, overnight can go negative in tariff if there is excessive wind or solar earlier. That would allow me charge vehicles and top up storage for when the tariff goes high on peak demand.

But the vast majority would be my own solar generated energy

 

Thats just not possible for everyone in UK cities.

I'd love to put up solar panels on my house but can't be done due to the roof

 

Tailpipe emissions are not a small problem, it is a humongous problem throughout the world. Elimination of of paramount importance.

Just concentrating on CO2 as a stick to hit EVs with is pointless. We all produce CO2 and trying to reduce it is to promoted unless.

We all decide to go and live in caves do away with modern lifestyle.

I see EVs as a great step forward for the better. In time science will provide a near limitless energy source without pollution or demanding vast amounts of energy to get there

Fusion anyone

 

I dont think anyone is saying emissions arn't a concern. The industry always bangs on about emissions this, emissions that, but never mentions anything about anything else. So ask yourself why is that? Remember how they said diesel was the big saviour? yeah they have changed their tune on that havn't they.

On the flip side i dont think the mass's arguing against EV are anti EV, im certainly not, they are arguing that its far too early to be going down that route. why can't you get a warrenty that includes the batterys on a nissan leaf after 5 years? as an example. When you look into the warrentys you can get you'll find a clause that has a charge reduction exclusion.

Renewable energy sources are not at the stage they can produce the required energy.

Did you know that Solar cells are only about 18-25% effceint in peak condtions, add in weather and they reduce rapidly, even too much heat can be a problem.

Wind power is proving to be more difficult long term than expected, pic below shows wind turbine blade damage after 2 years with a reduction of around 20% efficeincy.

https://www.altenergymag.com/images/.../image3(5).jpg


Nuclear is prob the only viable option for the amount of power produced vs pollution, but then it's nuclear and people argue against it (although i would sugest it is very safe overall as how )



So where does that leave us? well right now, were up **** creek without a paddle if we blindly set arbitray dates. The technology simply is not ready and will drop us back decades as far as transport goes.

But there is hope.

First off new battery tech is being developed, carbon fillament and nanotube batterys are still being talked about, but is still esitmated to be a decade+ away from being viable for things such as cars. They produce alot less pollution to make and are much easier to recycle, they also hold alot more charge and are smaller than current technology, so simplyu put if they can be perfected will swing the whole argument well in the favour of EV.

So the next thing is about Electric generation. This could also be on the horizon of being fixed. Current nuclear tech is all about fission, it produces nasty waste which just goes into land fill. Fusion is now going to the large scale prototyping stage, this again will be a massive step forward as there is alot less risk with it as far as fuel it uses, reaction control and general overall safety. They are talking 10-20 years till this is reday for wide scale deployment

If those two items happen, the argument will become null and void.

So it's not really a case of if, it's a matter of when, jumping too soon will just have the oposite effect of whats being tried to be achieved.

 

Its the new token gestrure , with the Main selling point that we shouldnt be allowed pollute local city streets

What we Will be doing is importing shed load nuclear from across the channel

 

Virtually all EV manufacturer come with 8 year 100,000 to 150,000 mile warranty on their batteries
Im aware of the efficiency of solar. I was going to install more arrays to offset lack of efficiency to get necessary power, I predict ive got enough roof space for upto 250,000 Watts Dont need that much btw

 

On the back of a YouTube video about GM's involvement with Nikola and its hydrogen fuel cell haulage truck and badger pickup truck.

GM has announced its severing its direct business links. It has left the option that GM can supply its fuel cell tech into anything that Nikola can produce. This is highly unlikely given the authorities are looking into Nikola for fraud and other accusations

Nikola is effectively no more

 

you dont seem to enjoy the idea anyone challenging domination tesla -

curious given your free market mantra

 

and go and look at the tc's

 

Here's Andy's new favourite drink from the company that can do no wrong
https://www.theverge.com/21578576/te...on-musk-mexico

 

On the contrary, I want to see legacy car makers step up to keep on the toes of Tesla. This is what drives forward innovation.

Setting aside driving performance and range, charging network

Some of best features which are probably overlooked but make owning a Tesla really nice.

First is the OTA updates, without having to visit a dealer and the mobile app. Driving, safety improvements

Second, The app just works, as link to interrogate the car, set features running or stop, arrange appointments. Its a key too if you want it.

 

OTA updates means the car was not properly finished when they sold it to you! From a safety perspective, I prefer my car to be finished before I buy it and not need any updates!

 

Everyone loves free upgrades, keeps their equipment upto date. Think mobiles, I bet you never refuse the latest version of ios/android

Tesla vehicles are upgraded with improvements, where legacy manufacturers just bring out a refresh model every few years. Poor customer has to buy a whole car to get upgrades.

Tesla preload their vehicles with all the features of the top end models. If you want the features pay later. not for a whole car.

Ive had range improvement, performance improvements, added features, like in-built dashcam utilizing all the cameras, app control for security features.

My model S has had CCS upgrade for absolute peanuts, I got a HW computer free when I went full fat FSD from AP. Tesla didn't need to offer the HW computer, it worked with the older version. Musk promised all FSD purchasers would be upgraded to the latest Model 3 HW.


It will be the way all do it in the future.

 

Well you paid for the hardware from day 1 !

 

I'm not going to die if my phone crashes!
Sure everyone loves updates, but the public are as a whole blissfully unaware about safety critical software and the processes involved in validating it.
No problem if a manufacturer just wants to update my entertainment system, but in a Tesla, there is no real separation from entertainment system and critical dashboard functions.

 

That's one of the few things you have said that I disagree with! New features? Bug fixes? No system is perfect, better they can fix it like that than you have to visit some dealer in these restricted times!