I love it when people add facts to a thread
I wonder how far EV's will go on one charge by the time Hydrogen cars can get anywhere near 400km
Electric cars.
- Thread starter Polcho
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
I love it when people add facts to a thread
I wonder how far EV's will go on one charge by the time Hydrogen cars can get anywhere near 400km
Stop letting facts get in the way of a good anti skateboard/hoover/hairdryer rant
They are EEEEEVIL
Bring on the hydrogen
Honestly, my FB page is full of this and literally 3/4 of them think that the honda mirai or the new BMW 7 series hydrogen car are actually ICE that uses hydrogen like petrol and are NOT EV .
You literally cannot cure stoooopid
They are EEEEEVIL
Bring on the hydrogen
Honestly, my FB page is full of this and literally 3/4 of them think that the honda mirai or the new BMW 7 series hydrogen car are actually ICE that uses hydrogen like petrol and are NOT EV .
You literally cannot cure stoooopid
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2019
- Messages
- 2,205
- Reaction score
- 2,096
That's because "equality" between EVs and ICE is already baked in to the most prominent example of road charging in the UK, EVs are currently exempt from the London congestion charge (if they pay a £10 annual fee) but from Christmas 2025 will have to pay it as though they were ICEs.
So road pricing is already happening, and logic suggests that it will start in the form of congestion charge zones that expand until they cover all of major cities, at which point you may see a tradeoff happening where the road charges increase and the fuel duty reduce a bit (without going to zero), it won't be all or nothing as you imply.
As for hydrogen filling stations - we've already seen eg Shell closing its hydrogen network in California, it's just not going to be a thing.
To be fair, I don’t see as many kilometres from a 100kWhr of power. But I went for the performance Model 3 and I’ve got a heavy footI love it when people add facts to a thread
But, I think the overall info is relatively robust.
My view, i was on car wow earlier, they had the new Kia 7 seater ev on base model range 369km £66,000, GT model all bells and wistles 4 wheel drive 315km both weigh 2.5 tons feckin hell you could buy a doer upper house for that
We’ve been through this. The cheapest car on the road at the minute is an EV and the all the most expensive ones are ICE. You could buy feckin two houses for the price of insert luxury ICE car of your choice here
The cost argument belongs to EV.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2013
- Messages
- 3,555
- Reaction score
- 1,714
Nick, can I ask, do you work in this industry?
Hydrogen cars seem to be one of those things that a certain group of people cling on to as the alternative to EV problems, but without realising the huge problems of hydrogen.
Also that horse has long bolted - there’s zero hydrogen adoption compared to millions of EVs.
Also that horse has long bolted - there’s zero hydrogen adoption compared to millions of EVs.
I indirectly work with green hydrogen on the IT side and it's certification
I agree. Do feel free to give it a try sometime...I love it when people add facts to a thread
You are right that the London CC shows us how this might go - but the big point is this. There are two diametrically opposed policy objectives here - one is financially incentivising the takeup of EVs and the other is the tax revenue required, currently delivered by fuel duty and likely in future delivered by road pricing. The only way I can think of to fix the revenue issue, whilst providing the same incentive for EVs is to introduce road pricing for all vehicles and leave overall fuel tax at the current very high level. I think that is likely to produce a national level outcry on a par with the London ULEZ objections (which swung the Uxbridge by-election, suggesting it will influence how people vote). It will disproportionally affect lower income ICE drivers, just like ULEZ. As you suggest, fuel duty could be lowered a bit to take the sting out of the protests, but this would also reduce the relative incentive to buy an EV.... one goes against the other. This is why the Lords (rightly) are saying politicians should start an honest conversation on how these two opposing forces will be dealt with.
It's interesting the derision Hydrogen attracts amongst those same people who are so sensitive regarding any criticism at all of EVs. I think it is obvious that very brief refuelling stops appeal to those who cannot easily charge at home, or like to go on long journeys - and this sector of the market will have to be catered for if the 100% conversion to EVs that politicians seem to advocate is to be achieved. As for the maturity of hydrogen, it is hardly a surprise it is so far behind Lithium EVs when one considers the level of subsidy that the latter has received.
There are pros and cons of all vehicle types, and therefore my view has always been that the 100% EV model is the wrong target, I agree with those like Toyota who advocate a mix of solutions. Recent coverage suggests they may be on to something. I think our politicians are stupid enough to keep gunning for 100% EV though. Labours current policy (I think, unless I have missed the latest U turn) is to reinstate the UK only 2030 ban on ICE car sales, taking us out of step with the rest of Europe. That's obviously an absurd stance.
https://fortune.com/2024/02/08/toyota-hybrid-vehicles-carmakers-strategy-electric-vehicles-hype/
Finally, I think when a solution for HGVs, far, equipment etc is delivered that tech (whatever it is) could end up permeating the car market.
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree. Do feel free to give it a try sometime...
It's obvious you havent read all 80 pages of this thread as if you had you wouldn't have posted such a stupid statement!
Last edited:
it was a joke ! Like when you said one of my links contained "total BS" even when you admitted you hadn't read it..... which i found hilarious.....
Please send me a link to that post as I rarely comment on anything I haven't taken time to read.
Last edited:
here you go, post 1100 in this very thread. If you want to give it out that's fine, but I think you need to prepare yourself for some banter in return.....
https://www.thehomebrewforum.co.uk/threads/electric-cars.100585/page-55#post-1244652
https://www.thehomebrewforum.co.uk/threads/electric-cars.100585/page-55#post-1244652
Maybe calling it BS was a little over the top but the fact remains you said "suggests" not "proves" so i stand by what i said.
If that had said "that proves" instead of "that suggests" I would have read it, saying "that suggests" to me suggests its a load of BS.
Sorry if that sounds confrontational.
I may have read all 80 pages or not, I can't remember. Sometimes I wonder if I imagined a post on the forum or read about something on t' internet.
As for stupid statements, I can well believe I've made some in my time.
I most certainly did see a video about running cars on compressed air. Instead of a carburetor it could run on compressed co2 and attached to beer kegs and be called a carbonator.
P.S. - why am I replying to a post not directed at me? - I forget.
I am not sure these are the posts you refer to
I agree. Do feel free to give it a try sometime...
It's obvious you havent read all 80 pages of this thread as if you had you wouldn't have posted such a stupid statement!
Nice to hear the comment - we have to protect the occupants and the battery.
Bernie
Landlord.
That would be equivalent to saying "We have protect the occupants and the fuel tank" on an ICE car. Essential for safety.
so why did they say it?
