Temp

Charging points (rate of installation)

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Carrerahill said:

Many of the smaller cars just will not last reliably past a decade and that is the ICE versions with traditional technology.

They end up down here. And last a good few years more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ProDave said:

I am still not convinced "transport" is the big villian in pollution.  It is without doubt an easy target and a convenient thing to blame and demonise and easy to tax to the hilt in the guise of "solving" the problem.  But our previous house used to burn about 2000 litres of Kerosene each year, that is roughly twice as much as the petrol my car burns in a year. Yet we don't see domestic fuel taxed at road fuel rates and we (so far) hear little about domestic fuel usage.

 

 

All road vehicle transport emissions in the UK amount to about 20% of harmful air pollution.  Burning wood for fuel is responsible for ~18% of harmful air pollution in the UK.  Curious thing is that you can still get a government subsidy for burning wood to heat a home...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

We polluted more, per capita when we had half the population.

You have fallen into the Malhusian trap.

If you halved the population of the globe tomorrow, current pollution issues are solved. 

 

We were at somewhere around half the current global population sometime in the 1960's but using heaps of coal and oil to and fuel the world, and generally didn't have a clue about the pollution many of the industries created, they were not regulated the Thames was a dumping ground so on and so forth.

 

You cannot say 1 person created the same amount of pollution as 2 people do today and make that argument stand unless you consider the reduction in pollution generation. 

 

Simply put. If my grandfather drove 12miles it took him a gallon of dirty lead filled petrol, if I drive 12 miles I reckon it takes me 1/3 of a gallon of much cleaner fuel. So yes he polluted far more than me, but had they had today's tech...

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Carrerahill said:

If you halved the population of the globe tomorrow, current pollution issues are solved.

So which half of the world do you want to exterminate. Don't be shy, or politically correct. Just say it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

 

All road vehicle transport emissions in the UK amount to about 20% of harmful air pollution.  Burning wood for fuel is responsible for ~18% of harmful air pollution in the UK.  Curious thing is that you can still get a government subsidy for burning wood to heat a home...

However, the wood burning statistic is critically flawed.

 

The calculations were based on a null and void figures, they worked out how many wood burning appliances there were (I think they said 1.5million at the time) and basically calculated the burn time as an average of something like 15 hours a day every day. Most wood burners I reckon are only on at weekends and for the evening. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

Hard to see how they could have any problem with something that presents less of a hazard to a partially sighted person than a paving slab

Until a cable comes out. Then it is an unexpected hazard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

So which half of the world do you want to exterminate. Don't be shy, or politically correct. Just say it.

If it's just Carbon reduction, then removing the richest 10% of the population would apparently reduce emissions by about half. Don't know how that translates to particulates though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

So which half of the world do you want to exterminate. Don't be shy, or politically correct. Just say it.

You know what I am saying - it is just a point. 

 

Global single child policy?


 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

Until a cable comes out. Then it is an unexpected hazard.

 

 

The cable comes out right at the very edge by the curb, from the cut out there.  The parked car's wing mirrors present more of an obstruction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Carrerahill said:

However, the wood burning statistic is critically flawed.

 

The calculations were based on a null and void figures, they worked out how many wood burning appliances there were (I think they said 1.5million at the time) and basically calculated the burn time as an average of something like 15 hours a day every day. Most wood burners I reckon are only on at weekends and for the evening. 

 

 

 

 

However, most wood burning for heating happens in residential areas, so the relative air pollution impact is greater than road transport, where the highest density of traffic is on major trunk routes and motorways, which tend to run for most of their length away from connurbations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jamieled said:

If it's just Carbon reduction, then removing the richest 10% of the population would apparently reduce emissions by about half. Don't know how that translates to particulates though.

Be careful, on a global stage many of us are the richest 10%!

 

To be in the richest 10% of the globe, all you need is about a net worth of £100,000.

 

If you earn over £25K you are in the top 1% of the globe by earnings. 

 

 

 

Edited by Carrerahill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, as much as I am enjoying this interesting discussion, and I do enjoy many of the discussions on this forum - we have some brilliant minds here and it would be great to sit in a pub with many of you and discuss many things from concrete pours to EV's, but I must shut my laptop down for the night (lowering my carbon footprint by shutting down and I switch off at the wall!) and go home!

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

 

 

The cable comes out right at the very edge by the curb, from the cut out there.  The parked car's wing mirrors present more of an obstruction.

Iti s never goign to be allowed -- it will be dangerous 

 remeber they started cutting down conker ttrees for the fear of being sued --so cables coming out of pavements --not a chance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JSHarris said:

The reason that Tesla are doing so well, has a lot to do with their Supercharger network.  When you can just rock up somewhere like here:

 

image.png.35b5d5f3a1b722d468d77a1b7dda7be2.png

 

plug in (no need for cards, codes or anything) charge up in half an hour whilst having a cup of tea etc, and carry on, then it makes life a heck of a lot simpler.  Coupled with a range of over 300 miles on a charge means that only one charge/rest break is likely for any long journey.


That looks like an old photo of Hopwood Park before it was upgraded to 16 bays?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: charging without off street parking - we’ve just switched to an EV and face this issue however I was pleasantly surprised to learn that in Hampshire at least I can (at my own risk and liability) run a cable over the pavement with protection to charge an EV

 

See  https://www.hants.gov.uk/transport/ev-charging-points/ev-charging-guidance

 

I fully appreciate the issues this could cause for less able persons so try to do this for overnight charging only. If I need it during the day then I pay for a rapid or use a destination charger...so far it’s working out well. 

 

Lots of good comments on both both sides on this thread - I’m pro the environmental side of things but I also fear the infrastructure isn’t quite there yet, but it’s improving daily with Polar now introducing a proper contactless pay as you go approach like instavolt. 

 

I also agree that simply replacing cars isn’t going to be a magic fix, we need improvements across the whole transport sector and one bit in particular that I’m disappointed in is our current ban on e-scooters and other types of e-mobility. I was recently in Singapore (yes I flew for work, not very eco) and they have fully embraced e-mobility and no one was running each other over, very respectful usage, everyone zipping around nicely. Great for short journeys. 

 

Anyway, it’s a big problem and is going to take effort from everyone to change for the better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, widespread use of electric motorcycles would massively reduce congestion and pollution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ProDave said:

Yes, widespread use of electric motorcycles would massively reduce congestion and pollution.

would also be good for organ donation   LOL

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, ProDave said:

Yes, widespread use of electric motorcycles would massively reduce congestion and pollution.

All the rules for an existing driver to get a bike test is too high a barrier to entry.

And, the range of electric motorbikes is pitiful.

Odd thing with EVs, it is the large ones that have the range, not the little ones.  The opposite to ICE cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Carrerahill said:

Be careful, on a global stage many of us are the richest 10%!

 

To be in the richest 10% of the globe, all you need is about a net worth of £100,000.

 

If you earn over £25K you are in the top 1% of the globe by earnings. 

 

 

 

 

A full Uk basic state pension is very roughly the equivalent of a 200k pension pot, plus you get the extra security. Approximating using pension value x 30 .. recently I have seen index linked Final Salary Pensions being bought out at multiples of close to 40.

 

I think Uk minimum wage puts you well into to the top few % globally, but watch out for cash vs PPP. Cannot finds source which is not spinning the numbers.

Edited by Ferdinand

Share this post


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

recently I have seen index linked Final Salary Pensions being bought out at multiples of close to 40.

 

I know of a few that have been a bit above that. Mine was only x 34 but still enough to persuade me to take the cash. This can put you up to (or above) the lifetime allowance however whereas defined benefit pensions are only valued as x 20 when assessed against the lifetime allowance. 

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