Read this a few moments ago:
http://news.sky.com/story/petrol-and...-2040-10962075
I guess that the target date might be a moveable feast but the politicians seem to be signalling their intent
"Grandad, what's a petrol station?"
I've gotta say it's too little too late !
I love my cars but the harm they do both to our health and the surroundings is very serious.
I don't think electric cars are the solution either.
Better a much more efficient public transport system.
www.webwatchmaker.com
Perhaps the fully integrated transport system that Lord Prescott and New Labour promised in 1997 would have helped?
Looks like hybrids will still be sold - though I expect that most cities will have electric only zones.
FWIW I think the only thing that will slow this trend down is how quickly new electricity generation and charging infrastructure gets rolled out. Also worth noting that full autonomy will be closely linked to the speed of these developments, and my guess is that most of the change will happen much faster than we expect - well before 2040. Put it this way, I think that the chances that my sub 1 year old grandson will never hold (or need) a DL is slightly more likely than not....
As others have said, expect more changes in personal transport in the next decade than the past 100.
Indeed, where does the power come from?Originally Posted by Webwatchmaker
There may be an improvement in air quality on a localised basis but there's going to be an environmental impact somewhere
The internal combustion engine was promoted by the State because it generated/generate a lot of income both directly as well as indirectly for the politicians themselves from the oil companies.
The latter and the electricity providers are the large investors in the“renewable“energy scam we are sold and the rest is the same old brainwashing of the populus so the money & shit pump keeps pumping. Money up, shit down.
For the environment it is just a scam. Less transport/mobility and better public transport would be promoted/provided if the environment were the issue. Heck bicycles would be promoted/supported instead of discouraged by the State!!
It's certainly a good idea - whether entirely realistic or not - although I think EV is going to reach critical mass fairly soon, so they'll no longer be primarily for the more-affluent eco-conscious.
We're going to need some serious infrastructure investment to make it work.
I'd love to see a fully integrated public transport system but would people like me still ditch their cars. We have two cars but I walk to work most days and the kids walk to school most days. I'm sure, if we ever did the sums, it would work out much cheaper to sell one of the cars and hire for days when we absolutely need two self-drive vehicles.
I'd love to go electric but we are terrace street parking, often some distance from our house. I guess 20 years is long enough to sort that one though.
In the mid 90's we tried being a car free household, I sold mine as did my wife. The plan was to use public transport (we lived on the outskirts of a large town in the SE at the time) and hire a car for holidays etc.
It was a total nightmare, getting to a number of things on time was a pain and spontaneous trips were fraught with difficulty. After two years we gave up.
2040? I'll probably be past caring.
I'd hope the Government has better things to do right now.
A very sad day for the petrol heads. But having read a small column in Evo today about an Electric Zoe concept which Renault have made there may still be hope for the enthusiast. A Zoe-E Sport with 450bhp and all wheel drive, 0-60 in 3.2 seconds; sadly just a concept and never likely to make production, but hopefully it is a taster of what is to come in future.
http://www.evo.co.uk/renault/19742/r...-the-hot-hatch
I just think I need to invest soon for a howling N/A flat six which I can hopefully enjoy when I retire around 2040.
I suspect that I will have more interest in the latest Zimmer frame models and size of Matrons arse than the internal combustion engine by then too.
In my opinion the Beeching axe to the railway system in the 1960s was a monumental error.
There was a massive transport infrastructure which was virtually destroyed in favour of the revenues generated by the motor car.
I think that this has made us insular and self gratifying.
The railway system was also an integrated social network and people of all classes shared it.
The car has caused social as well as environmental breakdown.
Brendan(webwatchmaker)
Just off the top of my head, the balance is difficult to judge, isn't it?
Even if the electricity for EVs was generated with the oil that would've been used by the IC cars, it could be done at fewer locations, more efficiently, and with a lot less transportation (both crude and refined). That's a net gain, certainly with cleaner air in cities.
Not sure about the environmental impact of producing all the batteries and scrapping the old cars though.
I assume they're making an informed prediction of clean electricity becoming more plentiful over the next 20 years.
I notice there was a small caveat on the R4 news this morning mentioning the huge issues with extra electricity production and distribution; something that the EV fans seem to ignore. Just do the maths, it's not hard to work out how much extra electricity production we'll need to dump the IC altogether. I did the sums last year and ISTR it was massive! Let alone the issues of charging logistics i.e. each home will need a charging point etc...
Very funny !
There's nothing quite like pure optimism.
Last edited by Webwatchmaker; 26th July 2017 at 09:05.
I am seriously thinking of buying an electric bicycle. Living in Devon I can park up my car and visit local villages in a more relaxed manner.
Brendan(webwatchmaker)
For our kids sake I hope we move to electric cars all charged up by renewable energy. I'm still keeping my Maserati for fun days though.
Maybe petrol cars will become like mechanical watches. Impractical in every way compared to the readily available alternative, but highly prized by a few. Or maybe a petrol car will become a status symbol - you can afford the punitive taxes (and they will hold their value if you leave the stickers on).
Good points of course. Remember we had no oil refineries, pipelines or petrol stations to speak of before the 20th Century.
Maybe these will help:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/science...rm-in-scotland
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...tric-vehicles/
https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/solarroof
It's only a ban on new cars, no need to scrap old ones. It's 20+ years away so they'll be gradually scrapped anyway (as old cars always are) as electric cars become more prevalent.
That's a good point, however more and more these days our electricity comes from renewable sources. Given the increase and improvement in technology to harness renewables, and a target in a lot of countries to remove fossil fuel vehicles from sale, there's likely to be a surge in the area of renewables.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/renewabl...all-investment
Ironically the human race managed fine for thousands of years on renewable energy, only in the last 200 years has burning oil been a requirement.
I'll get my big rocks out, I'm going to do some washing at the river (that's not a euphemism by the way).
It doesn't sound like they are doing anything right now (with respect to the diesel/petrol cars).........
But - one thing that is missed, is the increase in tax on diesel cars in 3yrs' time (or thereabouts).
We can do little to influence the global warming problems but we can influence local air pollution. This should've been a priority in the recent past but sadly the politicians became obsessed with CO2 reduction, thus encouraging the diesel engines that are so prevelant on today's roads. The problems weren't difficult to predict but the polititians insisted on backing the wrong horse.
Travel and transport problems exist in most areas of the UK. Public transport isn't a viable alternative for many, it simply isn't practical. Ironically, given the huge developments in communication, we haven't seen a significant change in working habits; working from home and teleconferences instead of meetings would take some traffic off the roads but I'm not aware of it happening to a significant extent.
Electric cars will help improve air quality in some areas, that's irrefutable, but the electricity still needs to be generated somewhere. That needs managing sensibly but it's not an insurmountable problem.
I still think we're a long way from seeing electric cars in large numbers, but it'll happen. However, if we all stop buying petrol/diesel how will the government address the shortfall in taxation? Tax revenue from motor fuel is very significant so the money will have to be raised by other means . Looking to the future I guess the technology will exist to electronically tax cars based on mileage covered etc, but that smacks of 'big brother' and poses another set of problems!
If we could turn the clock back to 1960 The Beeching Report would've been thrown in the bin and we'd have far more railways left. Would that have made a big difference?...........I'm not convinced. Most of us are wedded to our cars through a combination of desire and necessity and that's not going to change. People spurn the public transport option for several reasons, many prefer the privacy and social isolation offered by their w wheeled metal box.
If I'm still around in 2040 I doubt whether I'll care about cars, transport or anything else.
Paul
Last edited by walkerwek1958; 26th July 2017 at 09:52.
I guess we've got to start somewhere, fossil fuels will run out in the future, the sooner we start future planning the better. We are right at the start of electric tech, see how far the internal combustion engine has come in 100 years ( I know the basics are the same now but the development has been huge ) the next 100 years will Im sure show a similar development curve.
I can see more nuclear power stations being the future of National Grid generation.
Fossil fuels may run out but we could use (more) renewable replacements like bio-diesel or ethanol in the internal combustion engines we already have.
Unless nuclear fusion can be harnessed, nuclear power (waste treatment, storage and decommissioning) will be a massive liability for generations to come
That's the thing that a lot of people forget. I was reading about the Rolls Royce L410 V8 engine, and saw this bit on Wikipedia...
"...by 2006 almost all the 1959-specification engine components had been upgraded, so that the current twin-turbo 6.75-litre engine produces over 150% more motive power and torque than at the beginning of its life, has 40% better fuel economy, and produces 99.5% less exhaust emission."
That's a lot of emission reduction from essentially the same engine over 47 years. Given that we're now ten or so years into all-electric vehicles, one doesn't have to use much imagination where we'll be in 15 years time. The same goes for clean power generation too.
If there was a viable public transport option for me to get to work and back each day I'd take it, believe you me! The problem is the multiple buses and trains involved plus the fact there's only ONE bus from/to our village each day make this a complete no-no.
Going by EV is an option but the sums (running costs i.e. depreciation and still needing two cars) just don't add up at the moment. However I reckon give it another 10 years and EV vehicles will have got themselves sorted i.e. cost, charging, so going pure EV for the commute might be a consideration. Of course I won't be working then so the need for a convenient and cost effective way to do the 40 miles a day won't be such an issue.
I don't understand though how they are going to get the distributed charging problem sorted.... charging points next to every parking bay in each car park? Just think of the issues with that idea. Went to York for the day yesterday. With an EV vehicle that wouldn't have been possible. There were no charging points in the park-and-ride car park and remember you're need charging stations at just about EVERY parking spot for this idea to work. EV fans harp on about increased range. Well you only get increased range by higher capacity batteries. That's means putting more electricity in. Unfortunately c. 85KWh is about the limit with normal over night charging from a domestic source (32Amps in 12hours) and we're already at that limit.
You live in Torquay, which is a zillion miles from anywhere at all and you want public transport? Try carting two kids' holiday luggage on a bus from Yorkshire and back.
Last edited by Glamdring; 26th July 2017 at 10:31.
Battery production isn't without it's environmental problems, especially on the huge scale needed in the future.
Agree, unfortunately big decisions on transport are made predominantly by those that live in big cities with good infrastructure.
I live in a congested medieval city with no trams (they went in 1935), no local rail network (our village route was closed in 1981 - now parts of the track have been built on), and no underground.
It's a ballache just to get to the other side of town on a bus.
I'd like to see building regs updated so all new homes generate all the power they need with ground source heat and solar panel roofs. Each home should be capable of generating enough energy for itself and an electric car. The big energy/fuel companies won't be lobbying for that though.
Ive been saying this for years, its common sense really. It would drive down cost of the hardware with economy of scale too.
Hydrogen vehicles are the only real solution, but oil companies will not allow it.
Of course public transport is abysmal right now. Little is spent on it. This is what makes small towns a 'zillion' miles from anywhere.
I'm talking about a huge investment in infrastructure. The alternative is to poison your 2 kids with fossil fuel fumes. Either bus or car, and ultimately kill all of us.
Brendan(webwatchmaker)
If you could show us one shred of evidence to support this then maybe I'd believe you.
IMHO, hydrogen is a dead end which is supported by governments as it allows them to continue to use the current taxation model.
Dynamic induction in electric roads covered made from solar panels generating renewable energy is the best way forward.
I know cost is considered an issue at the moment but it's still st the start o it's lifecycle; costs will reduce considerably.
Charging as you drive will eliminate the requirement for large batteries, even the 30kwhr ones available today or smaller would be sufficient.
where is all the electricity going to come from................maybe whoever came up with this rubbish knows something about cold fusion or reads a lot of science fiction books
Apparently covering Spain with solar panels could power the entire Earth.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/map-sh...e-earth-2015-9
PS It wasn't me who chose Spain.
Even if the investment was there the timescales are ridiculous. Current estimates on HS2 completion are 2033! That's one piece of upgraded infrastructure. Imagine if Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds or Edinburgh want an underground system groundworks would need to start now to have any chance of having an useful public transport network by 2040 anywhere outside of the capital.
Maybe so. But your solution ?
Brendan(webwatchmaker)
Petrol/electric hybrids. They're there, they just need to be made cheaper. With the London Crossrail costing £15bn what will it be to...
It can't be done. Even if you cancelled Trident and most of the NHS you couldn't do it. So you improve what you have.
And if you can't pry the guns out of the hands of the Americans you won't pry their V8s out of their cars either. Nor should you. Wonderful animals, those V8s.
Last edited by Glamdring; 26th July 2017 at 11:38.
Cars are evil and should be punished.
Fas est ab hoste doceri
Integrated transport plan, my arse.
We live in a small village between Wigan and Southport, so hardly remote.
There is a once hourly train in either direction.
Buses are hourly and stop at 7pm.
If I get the train to the office in London, I have a 40 minute wait on the way down, and 55 minute on the return for the local service.
Is it so difficult for Virgin West Coast and Northern Rail to collaborate and have feeder trains that arrive/depart within 10-15 minutes of major rail services ?
When Virgin are charging over £250 for a standard class return at acceptable travel times, where is the incentive to change ?
When a pure electric vehicle can do that sort of distance in one hop, then they become viable.
Today its far cheaper, and time neutral to drive :(
My expectation is that it will be large. With small moons orbiting it.
Perhaps we can convince Omega to bring out a special edition.
Has anyone got the source of this report that states 40000 premature deaths per annum ??
Rumours abound that statistical averages mean that the deaths are "premature" by three and a half hours per head.
I would like to see what this and the French data sources are.
I sniff political hypocrisy at either end of the arguments
Last para, post #30. Each house to generate enough energy to run a home and a car. Solar is a massive virtually endless supply of energy that is currently under used. The technology exists and is used already but on a large scale will improve immeasurably, and become very cheap.
So let's say you are an average xkids and 2 cars household with central heating etc.... How much energy do you need each day? I reckon more than a roof full of PV panels.
And flats?
I suspect that achieving reentry at the age of 80 will be something of a challenge but this could help.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using TZ-UK mobile app
Yes good point that I hadn't considered.
EV fans are mostly interested in their lower bills and a slight self-satisfaction that they're saving the planet. A handful like the tech or the silence or the insane performance of things like a Teslar (If I had the money, I might have one, they're lovely cars!), but mostly it's people wanting to feel good about themselves and pleased with themselves for saving money.
If we all have EVs, that will change. All the electricity will have to come from somewhere. Do we build masses of unpopular Nuclear powerstations? Allow windfarms all over the countryside or go on burning gas and oil to generate it? I don't think any of those options is going to be popular, especially with people who like the idea they're 'environmentally friendly' for having an EV.
People are grumbling on the news that 20 years is too long, but there's no infrastructure for electric cars, the tech is still (relatively) in its infancy and despite the protestations in some threads here, range is still an issue for a lot of journeys. Not the majority, or probably even a significant minority, but enough to be a problem right now for the majority of people now and then.
I saw Caroline Lucas say "We can put people on the Moon" (when challenged about charger infrastucture) - To which I thought, well, no the Americans could when money was no object - The UK couldn't, then or now, afford that and I'm not sure we can afford the massive infrastructure change that EVs will require.
If we start putting in charging stations now, what's to say that they won't be redundant as a technology by the time IC cars are banned?
To be fair to Ms Lucas, she did say the better approach was a better, more integrated public transport system in towns and cities, which I agree with. If I had the misfortune to live in London I wouldn't use my car except to get out (and the cost of ownership may be so high that I'd rent when I needed one, but I'll never live in London, so it's a moot point).
This smacks of safe "We'll never have to worry about it" popularism by a very unpopular government, keen to be doing something positive.
I will give everyone on this forum today a quid in 50 years time - Bet you all think I'm a little bit nicer now, don't you?
Disagree here - Back in the 1970s oil crisis the V8s almost disappeared (only the government really kept buying big V8 cars) - Just make petrol/gas dear enough and Americans will buy 4 cylinder cars like the rest of us! In fact, whenever I go to America I hear people constantly moaning about 'how much' they have to pay for fuel already!
For the record, I'm hoping to still be alive in 20 years time and still driving!
M.
Last edited by snowman; 26th July 2017 at 12:59.
Actually, my parents did exactly that in the early 60s! OK, it was Yorkshire to Bournmouth but the point's the same. I was 4 or 5 and I still remember it, travelling on the London Underground between trains.
For reasons I don't fully understand, folks with kids seem to need to travel with far mor paraphanalia than in the past. We managed to fit parents, young kids+ boxer dog in a Ford Anglia for trips to the seaside........god knows how but we did.
I agree with Brendan to a point, better public transport would offer a viable alternative in some cases. However, unless travelling alone the cost equation always favours using the car for most journeys. The cost of rail travel is prohibitive in many cases and I blame privatisation for that.
Ideally, transport strategy should be de-politicised. I'd like to see an all-party coallition to tackle the problems at a strategic level, a group with excecutive power that wouldn't be swayed by the nuances of wining the next election. It'll cost a lot of money to make major improvements but it'll prove costly (and painful) to continue in the current vein. As a retiree I don't need to travel much but I sympathise with those who do. Regardless of the power source we've simply got too many vehicles on the roads and our railways are overcrowded (and expensive).
I could come up with a few constructive ideas, I'm sure we all could, but the politicians don't want to listen. Here' s one: make the offer of flexitime working compulsory unless an employer can make a good case against it. That'll allow people to work around bus and train times more easily and it'll potentially ease the rush-hour peaks. That was an easy one...... there are plenty more!
Paul
Last edited by walkerwek1958; 26th July 2017 at 13:52.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
