Absolute Zero

[Gone West]

15 hours ago, joe90 said:

My son is a car salesman and he told me that within the industry there is a plethora of second hand EVs as some are going back to ICE.

We've just had the first service carried out on our hybrid and chatting to the salesman we were told they now need a company directors approval to take an EV in part exchange.

[JohnMo]

What does ICE mean in the context of the above?

[joth]

Just now, JohnMo said:

What does ICE mean in the context of the above?

Internal combustion engine 

[SteamyTea]

23 minutes ago, JohnMo said:

What does ICE mean in the context of the above?

BEV is battery electric vehicle.

PHEV is plug in hybrid electric vehicle.

DI is direct injection, though not used much, most large diesels are DI.

HFC is hydrogen fuel cell, better known as fool sells.

 

There are too many of these and sometimes they change meaning.

 

ABS is anti lock breaking system, or the plastic the bumper is made from.

[joth]

10 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

DI is direct injection, though not used much, most large diesels are DI.

DI used more in live audio engineering

https://www.palmer-germany.com/en/blog/what-is-a-di-box/

[SteamyTea]

30 minutes ago, joth said:

DI used more in live audio engineering

MI, manufacturers instructions.

Or, as @pocster thinks, meat injection.

[Nick Thomas]

After a bit of a palaver with different people wanting to be in different places over the easter weekend, I've been browsing for an EV for a second car. The current car is a mid-size Mazda 3, and we can't really fit the whole family (including pets) in it, so I was thinking we should supplement with either a tiny runabout that can just about do 100km with a couple of people in; or something huge (seven-seater?).

 

So far, I've come to the conclusion that there are lots and lots of second-hand (and even new) EVs that are affordable in the mid-size sort of bracket, but very little going on in the tiny and huge brackets - it's really just Citroën at the moment.

 

The Ami is just a bit too small, sadly, or I'd have been unable to resist one. I just can't see it on rural single carriageways though (we have a 100km round-trip we do pretty regularly, including a hill with a very steep gradient). The electric Fiat 500 is ridiculously expensive.

 

On the big side, the e-Berlingo with 7 seats would do the trick if we accepted a charge midway through each leg of our semi-annual long trip (not the end of the world, although missing the ferry is a real possibility in case of delays). It's just very expensive new, and not really available second-hand.

 

The book (and associated game) Half-Earth Socialism goes into some detail about what staying below 1.5'C of warming might actually look like from, uh, a certain ideological standpoint. They're (unfairly, IMO) biased against nuclear, and even more so against meat, but food for thought nonetheless. As mentioned upthread, the gap between what politicians are willing to publicly advocate for, and what we actually need to do, is huge. 

Edited April 12, 2023 by Nick Thomas

[jack]

18 hours ago, Kelvin said:

Not the present for who? We’ve done 32k in ours in 18 months.

 

We've just ticked over 50k miles in just short of three years in ours. Occasional charging drama, mainly when we do a long trip that we aren't familiar with, but 99% very comfortable motoring at much lower running cost than an ICE car.

[Nick Thomas]

25 minutes ago, Nick Thomas said:

t's really just Citroën at the moment

 

Huh. Having said that, maybe the new Twizy is *just* about capable of doing what I need on the small side.

 

Ugly as sin though.

 

Hah, it'll have to wait, since the only suitable car seat is for babs 3 and older. 

Edited April 12, 2023 by Nick Thomas
baby car seats!

[Iceverge]

31 minutes ago, Nick Thomas said:

The Ami is just a bit too small, sadly, or I'd have been unable to resist one.

 

I too would like one but the kids would have to sit on the roof.  

 

I've been keeping my eyes open for another fiat panda which I miss but they've gotten expensive. 

 

High fuel prices will sort it all out. There were many smug EV owners running on PV last summer. An in-law who installs solar is booked out until next year. This has everything to do with the cost of a bought in kWh and little with individuals desire to mitigate climate change. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kelvin]

People’s reasons for doing the ‘right thing’ are irrelevant really. It’s why the Government puts incentives in. If it was left to people to do the right thing purely for altruistic reasons little would get done. 
 

My BiL is involved with the minimum unit pricing (MUP) for alcohol in Scotland. They can see it’s starting to make a difference in terms of reducing alcohol related deaths and illness. It’s early days of course and part of a long term study. It’s effectively nudge economics in practice and arguably it’s had the biggest impact compared to any other programme. 

Edited April 12, 2023 by Kelvin

[Nick Thomas]

53 minutes ago, Iceverge said:

High fuel prices will sort it all out

 

I admire the optimism, but sadly, individual change is not sufficient, even in the presence of well-intended nudges, even in aggregate. What we actually need is systemic changes - and lots of them.

 

Trains that run reliably, frequently, and generally on time, should be a bigger priority than EV rollout, for example. In my own case, it's very sad that I can't rely on public transport to get us where we need to go. Relying on high fuel prices to push people into inadequate public transport immiserates people, rather than improving things.

 

I might put "ban private jets" on the list - that would have a ridiculously outsized impact compared to the number of people it would inconvenience. Although you can get (very) short-range planes that run on batteries now, which is a bit of a wonder.

Edited April 12, 2023 by Nick Thomas

[jack]

17 minutes ago, Nick Thomas said:

Trains that run reliably, frequently, and generally on time, should be a bigger priority than EV rollout, for example. In my own case, it's very sad that I can't rely on public transport to get us where we need to go. Relying on high fuel prices to push people into inadequate public transport immiserates people, rather than improving things.

 

One of my kids is in central London every day this week for rehearsals and performances. Even with the congestion charge (which I never got around to registering our electric car for so we could get an exemption), public transport would be way more than double the price of us going up there in the car twice a day to drop him off and pick him up.

 

Even off peak on a Sunday it costs well over £50 for us as a family to go up and back on the train, less than an hour each way.

 

17 minutes ago, Nick Thomas said:

I might put "ban private jets" on the list - that would have a ridiculously outsized impact compared to the number of people it would inconvenience. Although you can get (very) short-range planes that run on batteries now, which is a bit of a wonder.

 

There're very few things I'm in favour of outright banning, but this is one of them. It'll never happen.

 

[TonyT]

I have  owned an EV for over 2 years, ideal for me, as it’s 10miles to the office,10 mikes back and I have a charger in my drive.

when we go further afield we use my wife’s diesel car.

Never owned an automatic before and I generally didn’t like driving, the EV is just pointing it in the direction, easy to drive. 

 

the same issues crops up all the time with people buying unsuitable products for their home/lifestyle.

i think Forrest Gump’s mother had an appropriate saying.

 

 

Edited April 12, 2023 by TonyT

[Nick Thomas]

1 hour ago, jack said:

Even off peak on a Sunday it costs well over £50 for us as a family to go up and back on the train, less than an hour each way.

 

Yeah, I probably should have included "cheap" in my list as well 😅. Or do a Luxembourg and don't bother charging at all.

 

About the only train that makes sense for us here is to a pleasant town ~30 minutes away by car. It's slightly faster by train, and costs bus fare prices to get there and back. Of course, the first time I tried it, two trains in a row were cancelled, then the one that arrived was almost full. It doesn't have to be like that.

[ProDave]

1 hour ago, TonyT said:

I have  owned an EV for over 2 years, ideal for me, as it’s 10miles to the office,10 mikes back and I have a charger in my drive.

when we go further afield we use my wife’s diesel car.

That just the conclusion I have come to, one of the cars in the house can be an ev and get used for a lot if not all the local journeys. But I just can't contemplate that leap of not having an ICE car for the long journeys.

[Iceverge]

1 hour ago, Nick Thomas said:

I admire the optimism, but sadly, individual change is not sufficient, even in the presence of well-intended nudges, even in aggregate. What we actually need is systemic changes - and lots of them.

 

High fuel prices, through raw material price changes or something like carbon taxes would create a systematic change I think. Folk would figure it out.

 

1 hour ago, jack said:

public transport would be way more than double the price of us going up there in the car twice a day to drop him off and pick him up.

 

The sums differ depending on your starting point. When I lived in London I had a car that maybe ended up doing 2,000 miles per year. Once i factored in parking, tax, insurance, maintenance and fuel it was an expensive way of travelling vs the train. I sold the car after a year. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kelvin]

5 minutes ago, ProDave said:

That just the conclusion I have come to, one of the cars in the house can be an ev and get used for a lot if not all the local journeys. But I just can't contemplate that leap of not having an ICE car for the long journeys.

We are the other way around. ICE car for mucky dogs locally etc and the EV for long journeys or when we don’t have the dogs. 425 mile trip from here to where we go in England every 6 weeks or so. Two charging stops that take about 20 mins each charge. Enough time for a loo stop and coffee. 

Edited April 12, 2023 by Kelvin

[Nick Thomas]

10 minutes ago, Iceverge said:

High fuel prices, through raw material price changes or something like carbon taxes would create a systematic change I think. Folk would figure it out.

 

It does have some effects. Just not enough in the time we have.

 

Cap 'n trade was introduced in 2005, the UK's Carbon Price Support thingy in 2013. They've both gotten stuff done at the institutional level, including helping to drastically reduce how much coal we burn for power.

 

But we're still really, really far away from where we need to be.

[SteamyTea]

One of the problems the public have is caused by governments hanging their tune.

"Greenest government ever"

"Get rid of this green crap"

Same bloke said it.

So if a government says something will be done, or something must never happen again, we all know to ignore it.

[Carrerahill]

On 11/04/2023 at 10:48, Post and beam said:

Yep, complete Bo!!ox. Is it likely that architects designed ' just enough' strength into Multi storey car parks.

First of all, architects design no strength into any structure. Structural engineers do. As for the spare capacity, I think it would be fair to say most would be built to a Kg per meter squared loading based on car weights and percentages of car types on the road at a given time, they will always allow a safety factor and the chances are it will be absolutely fine, but, a bit like the unofficial loft conversion, it works, it seems to be fine, but its totally structurally unsound and everything is sitting near limits and it just takes one decent snow load and it could all be down, so yes, I do believe they are structurally capable of large increased loads, I am not saying they will all fall down, though, some might.

 

For years I only designed enough electrical capacity into buildings for the building electrics, which in many cases were gas heated. No ASHP and no EVC's. If I try to add redundancy then or even today, the client will go with the cheaper option 9 in 10.

 

The conversation in a design team meeting for a carpark would be like this:

 

"As a very forward thinking structural engineer, and also as I have the ability to predict the future a bit, I think we should allow for most cars to weigh about 2200Kg in 20 years time" 

 

"What, no, what if we just allow for what we have on the roads today, I will be selling this carpark in 10 years to another operator, I want it designed to current expected loadings."

 

"OK, we can save 50 tons of steel and 150 cubes of concrete"

 

"Great, that will do nicely." 

 

Or me having a discussion with a guy building a carpark for an outdoor/community centre.

 

"I have allowed for 100% of your parking bays to eventually be equipped with fast chargers."

 

"How many do we need to comply?"

 

"20% of bays with normal, 7kW chargers"

 

"Just put in enough to run the 20%."

 

"What about sizing the local transformer, main switchboard and sub-mains and putting in duct to all bays so you can at least just hook them up when you need to"

 

"Nah, it will be years till we need all that shit, just put in the minimum to comply"

 

I have had the above conversation in various guises about 20 times in the last 12 months.

 

[Nick Thomas]

https://source.thenbs.com/literature/are-our-car-parks-fit-for-the-vehicles-of-the-future-a-sika-specialist-report/siARj8goNrz3DLsDsZzfnV/xswQvwsBWw6hZqvgHdGuuN

 

It's almost like we might have to... plan... some aspects of this transition.

[Roger440]

4 hours ago, Nick Thomas said:

 

I admire the optimism, but sadly, individual change is not sufficient, even in the presence of well-intended nudges, even in aggregate. What we actually need is systemic changes - and lots of them.

 

Trains that run reliably, frequently, and generally on time, should be a bigger priority than EV rollout, for example. In my own case, it's very sad that I can't rely on public transport to get us where we need to go. Relying on high fuel prices to push people into inadequate public transport immiserates people, rather than improving things.

 

I might put "ban private jets" on the list - that would have a ridiculously outsized impact compared to the number of people it would inconvenience. Although you can get (very) short-range planes that run on batteries now, which is a bit of a wonder.

 

There zero possibility that public transport will become good in this country. The structure of it, and its control by D(a)FT simply ensures it cant.

 

Realistically, thats not going to change. Busy scrapping trains wholsale at the moment as a result, partly, of a drive to cut operator costs. This is being lead by D(a)FT. 

 

In the unlikely event of someone making a decision to get more passengers on the network, there wont be enough trains. Because we are scrapping them. Scrapping stuff we only just spent bucktloads of cash making compliant 3 years ago!

 

And anything government dont want to get involved in, they just make it the councils problem. Can you imgaine a council trying to manage the installation of on street chargers at scale? The same organisation that cant fill in a pothole in less than 18 months!!! Never going to happen,

 

Anyway, public transport is of no use to the vast majority of people as it doesnt go from where they are to where they want to go. Public transport is not an answer, just a small part of the answer.

[Roger440]

2 hours ago, Iceverge said:

 

High fuel prices, through raw material price changes or something like carbon taxes would create a systematic change I think. Folk would figure it out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

High fuel prices will just make everyone poorer. Thats it.

 

If you cant afford the capital cost of an EV, heat pump, insulation etc, doesnt make any difference what the pay back is. You will just be poorer

 

People proposing that as a solution, are, invariably, in a much more comfortable position than those who will suffer the most.

 

And thats before you even consider how you would do all the things required at scale. To meet Starmers objective of no fossil fuel burning in domestic dwellings by 2030, we need to install 77000 heat pumps. a week. From now until 2030. Not going to happen. Ever. Its impossible. Anyone that thinks it is, is, frankly, a moron.

 

Increasing the fuel price, wont make 77k installs a week happen, no matter how high the price. Which returns us to my first sentance.

[Carrerahill]

1 hour ago, Carrerahill said:

First of all, architects design no strength into any structure. Structural engineers do. As for the spare capacity, I think it would be fair to say most would be built to a Kg per meter squared loading based on car weights and percentages of car types on the road at a given time, they will always allow a safety factor and the chances are it will be absolutely fine, but, a bit like the unofficial loft conversion, it works, it seems to be fine, but its totally structurally unsound and everything is sitting near limits and it just takes one decent snow load and it could all be down, so yes, I do believe they are structurally capable of large increased loads, I am not saying they will all fall down, though, some might.

 

For years I only designed enough electrical capacity into buildings for the building electrics, which in many cases were gas heated. No ASHP and no EVC's. If I try to add redundancy then or even today, the client will go with the cheaper option 9 in 10.

 

The conversation in a design team meeting for a carpark would be like this:

 

"As a very forward thinking structural engineer, and also as I have the ability to predict the future a bit, I think we should allow for most cars to weigh about 2200Kg in 20 years time" 

 

"What, no, what if we just allow for what we have on the roads today, I will be selling this carpark in 10 years to another operator, I want it designed to current expected loadings."

 

"OK, we can save 50 tons of steel and 150 cubes of concrete"

 

"Great, that will do nicely." 

 

Or me having a discussion with a guy building a carpark for an outdoor/community centre.

 

"I have allowed for 100% of your parking bays to eventually be equipped with fast chargers."

 

"How many do we need to comply?"

 

"20% of bays with normal, 7kW chargers"

 

"Just put in enough to run the 20%."

 

"What about sizing the local transformer, main switchboard and sub-mains and putting in duct to all bays so you can at least just hook them up when you need to"

 

"Nah, it will be years till we need all that shit, just put in the minimum to comply"

 

I have had the above conversation in various guises about 20 times in the last 12 months.

 

I realise a blinding error in my text above, I wrote, "so yes, I do believe they are structurally capable of large increased loads..." however, I should have said "so yes, I do not believe..." simply put I don't think things are build with all this spare capacity, you would be somewhat shocked at how close to the bone some things are. "Sweating the asset" is something we say a lot at work. 

 

I think, sadly, other things will overshadow the push for net zero, I cannot see this country remaining civil for much longer, too many things are now eroding the grounds on which global peacefulness was founded in the mid 40's and further bolstered in 1991 with domestic issues now becoming as big a threat of unrest with other nations. I hope I am so wrong, but I don't see the next decades of my life being as simple, trouble free and peaceful as those that preceded them. 

 

I am sure Ukraine had some national projects planned... 

 

I hear myself all too often buying bits and pieces and joking it's part of my apocalypse planning. I bought 12/24V solar charger controllers last week - this is my plan to be able to convert some of my PV system to totally off grid for little financial outlay, just in case. 

 

 

Edited April 12, 2023 by Carrerahill