JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Toyota says “The world is not yet ready to support a fully electric auto fleet.”

So the worlds car manufacturers are lining up: The Volkswagon group and GM are going “full electric” — so they say. Ford Motor Co claims its line-up in Europe will be fully electric by 2030,  while Tata Motors unit Jaguar Land Rover said its luxury Jaguar brand will be entirely electric by 2025.

But Toyota and Honda are not.

At least investors (and consumers) have a choice. Presumably , the US Democrats will want to change that.

Toyota Warns (Again) About Electrifying All Autos. Is Anyone Listening?

Bryan Preston, PJ Media

When Toyota offers an opinion on the car market, it’s probably worth listening to. This week, Toyota reiterated an opinion it has offered before. That opinion is straightforward: The world is not yet ready to support a fully electric auto fleet.

Toyota’s head of energy and environmental research Robert Wimmer testified before the Senate this week, and said: “If we are to make dramatic progress in electrification, it will require overcoming tremendous challenges, including refueling infrastructure, battery availability, consumer acceptance, and affordability.”

Of those, “Consumer Acceptance” is the easiest thing to change (especially with a law and the right amount of jail time).

But last time we looked, a quarter of UK drivers wouldn’t even buy an Electric car “in their lifetimes”.

Only 1 in 50 US cars are electric:

Toyota warns that the grid and infrastructure simply aren’t there to support the electrification of the private car fleet. A 2017 U.S. government study found that we would need about 8,500 strategically-placed charge stations to support a fleet of just 7 million electric cars. That’s about six times the current number of electric cars but no one is talking about supporting just 7 million cars. We should be talking about powering about 300 million within the next 20 years, if all manufacturers follow GM and stop making ICE cars.

The scale of the switch hasn’t even been introduced into the conversation in any systematic way yet. According to FinancesOnline, there are 289.5 million cars just on U.S. roads as of 2021. About 98 percent of them are gas-powered. Toyota’s RAV4 took the top spot for purchases in the U.S. market in 2019, with Honda’s CR-V in second. GM’s top seller, the Chevy Equinox, comes in at #4 behind the Nissan Rogue. This is in the U.S. market, mind. GM only has one entry in the top 15 in the U.S. Toyota and Honda dominate, with a handful each in the top 15.

California and Texas  don’t have grids big enough to deal with houses…
h/t Marvin W, Jim Simpson,
9.8 out of 10 based on 75 ratings

176 comments to Toyota says “The world is not yet ready to support a fully electric auto fleet.”

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    In the article Toyota warn against electrifying all autos…..

    But…those who are running the insane push to electrify everything under the demented environmental agenda appear to be driven by a twisted, dark religious agenda, and not open to common sense.

    This is why they are not open to reasoning or logic.

    480

    • #
      Klem

      That twisted dark religious agenda is called Marxism.

      320

      • #
        Senex

        I disagree, it is bourgeois elitist self-righteousness. The push to mandate electric vehicles is actually an all-out assault on the working and middle classes. Neither the electricity infrastructure, nor the supply of critical materials such as rare earth metals (neodymium, samarium and dysprosium mainly), cobalt or lithium will support the production of anything but a small percentage of current global internal combustion-powered vehicles. If an automobile maker that currently manufactures and sells one million vehicles per year is constrained by resource availability to only produce 1 or 2 hundred thousand electric vehicles per year, basic economics says they will concentrate production on high-end luxury models. The increase in unit profit per vehicle is far greater than the increase in manufacturing costs. Add to that the basic principles of supply and demand, and you end up with a regression to the early decades of the 20th century, when private automobiles are mostly owned by the wealthy and privileged, and the rest of the population has to rely on public transportation, bicycles or walking.

        Furthermore, the current trend of many major cities becoming increasingly unaffordable to people of modest incomes only worsens the situation, forcing them to move further away from the urban cores and making them even more reliant on affordable transportation.

        The manufacture of electric vehicles is much less labour-intensive than that of internal combustion vehicles. The drive components – the motors and batteries – are supplied as complete packages ready to install. There are no fuel or exhaust systems needed, and in many cases no conventional transmission or final drive. Engine casting and drive train factories will be shut down, and the electric drive package components will either be imported or will be dependent on imported raw materials. Coupled with the significant drop in total vehicle production I mentioned earlier, and a shift to electric vehicle production will result in massive job losses for the working and middle classes that make up the bulk of the labour force in the automobile industry – typically well-paying, often unionised jobs with substantial benefits. Add to that the coming obsolescence of many specialised automobile repair and maintenance services, and you have even more job losses.

        Finally, most governments rely on spot taxes and duties (plus the excreable carbon taxes) on fuel for a substantial portion of their revenue. With nobody buying fuel for their vehicles any more, governments will either have to deal with growing deficits, unpopular cuts to services, or equally unpopular new taxes.

        The proponents of this man-made economic and social disaster may call themselves “Left” but they are hardly Marxist. In fact, some of the harshest critics of this nonsense come from a traditional Marxist viewpoint.

        70

        • #
          Deano

          Glad you mentioned the earth’s very limited supply of rare earth (hence the term) metals required to make electric vehicles practical. Many ‘experts’ seem unaware of this huge problem of supplying literally a few billion vehicles over the next 30 years or so.

          50

    • #
      PeterS

      As you say they are not open to reason or logic but they are that way for one of two reasons. Either they are too stupid to realise it, or they know what we know and they are telling outright lies for some other agenda. Most of the time it’s easy to figure out which one it is. Sometimes it’s not and, for example, PM Morrison possibly falls into the second category, sadly.

      220

    • #
      Ronin

      There is a perfect storm approaching us, Electric Vehicles and an unstable grid.

      330

      • #
        Hanrahan

        There was chaos as people tried to flee NO as Katrina bore down on them, and that was with ICE cars, so much faster to fill. Wiki says over 1,800 deaths.

        Nothing like technology to make a bad situation worse.

        170

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          That is the general idea……

          If you assume the over all plan is to create a perfect storm to cull as many humans as possible, via a meeting of a degredation of technologies and the destruction of the ability to literally keep the lights ( and heat ) on, you understand why the Elite all have massive underground bunkers…….they are setting it all up it appears.

          71

        • #
          John F Hultquist

          Many Folks in NO started with tanks short of gasoline. Many coasted to a stop far behind those that started with a full tank. And, of course, stations run out of gas too.
          Maybe there is a lesson or two in that panic.

          30

          • #
            Hanrahan

            I used to spend a LOT of my time with less than a qtr of a tank of gas. I would fill up before a trip, use most of the tank on the trip and then delay the refill as long as I could before the next. Today, being retired I never fill far past half lest the fuel goes stale before I use it.

            On average half the drivers will have less than half a tank at any given time.

            00

            • #

              In Canada’s winter, condensation in the gas tank accumulates to freeze and cut off fuel flow. Keeping a tank near full cuts down the amount of air in the tank to weep water. Ethyl hydrate is often set at 10% of fuel content from the vendor these days, which is the only reason I do not bother adding it to dry the fuel. In my motorcycle, which sits for the cold season, I remove the battery and add fuel stabilizer to a full tank so as not to deal with disposal of degraded fuel. IOW There should be many people with more than 1/2 tank at any given time.

              10

    • #
      Jonesy

      At the turn of the last century was a huge upheaval in all civilization. Personal mobility. For centuries civilization was tied to how far you could go on horseback. The utilisation of steam heralded mass transit on sea and land but noting, one horse was the measure of distance for a person. Bicycles made an impact but the invention of the internal combustion engine running on refined oil (The stuff that DID save the whale) changed everything. The automobile..the mass produced automobile…changed everything. Nobody held a gun to anyone’s head to change from horse to car, it just happpened! There was no legislation decreeing the change from horse to auto the technology was just embraced wholesale.

      And now, we have alternative energy. This is not better technology. Legislation is attempting to pick a winner. The electric motor is THE KING of traction. What supplies the electrons to the undisputed means of motivation efficiency has yet to be decided and that is why the Japanese are urging caution.

      20

      • #
        James

        Electric motors work well in a diesel electric locomotive. I wonder if such technology would work in a diesel truck? It would save burning out clutches and gearboxes. Most people do not know how to use a clutch pedal in the USA these days. As a result the trucks of Eaton automatic gearboxes. A major failure point as they still have a clutch plus a bunch of electronics to work it.

        00

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    What the article doesn’t say is that Toyota is pushing Hybrids and Hydrogen fuel cells as well as all electric

    Face it, like other fossil fuels, petrol and diesel are on the way out.

    271

    • #
      PeterS

      as per usual you are totally wrong:
      https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels

      411

    • #
      robert rosicka

      We are looking at buying a 79 series dual cab Ute as a tug in a year or so but there is a rush on supply because the rumours of the demise of its big V8 Diesel engine , making a somewhat expensive variant even more expensive and second hand can be and are more expensive than new .
      Toyota have a niche market with the 79 series and it’s design has changed little , they have virtually no handbrake , drivers endure the worst road noise in the market , the air filters don’t seal , the clutch needs to be replaced as does the suspension if your towing plus a whole other list of problems but people are lining up to buy one either new or second hand and the reason again is that stinking big V8 diesel .
      Those in the know have said in oz the 79 will have a V8 as long as they are selling because of its huge popularity with farmers and tradies and even the government and mining etc .
      Toyota will however stop producing 200 series with the V8 but at over $100k even these are like hens teeth if your in the market.

      140

      • #
        OldOzzie

        The Troop Carrier received significant upgrades in 2017, with improved gearbox ratios and more dynamic and passive safety. However, some irritants remain.

        Market pressure – mainly from fleet buyers – for best-practice dynamic and passive safety has dictated much more electronic equipment in the MY 2017 vehicles that were launched in October 2016.

        The current machine has an electronically-controlled V8 turbo-intercooled diesel, because an electronic engine was necessary to meet Euro IV emissions levels. A plus for the V8 engine is oil drain periods of 10,000km, out from the six cylinder’s 5000km.

        The 4.5-litre V8 is under-stressed in Troopy, putting out 151kW at 3400rpm, with 430Nm in the 1200-3200rpm band.

        The principal negatives for this engine are the ridiculous location of the starter motor, in the engine ‘vee’ and the alternator, at the bottom of the engine bay.

        Both electrical components have proved vulnerable to corrosion: the starter because if the engine gets a bath water pools around the starter motor and the alternator gets wet at virtually every creek crossing. Dumb.

        Incidentally, getting the corroded starter out is a massive job that requires dismantling the fuel injection plumbing and the alternator is also relatively inaccessible. On our old LandCruiser 75 Series we can swap out a starter motor in around half an hour (had to it at 400,000km) and the alternator has never got wet or clogged with mud..

        The Troopy engine engine was ‘upgraded’ to Euro V emissions standard in late 2016 and a diesel particulate filter (DPF) was added. That’s not good news, because DPFs fill up with soot unless exhaust temperatures are kept high. Then it’s necessary to perform a ‘regeneration’ procedure, or the engine will shut down. This involves parking the vehicle and running the engine with an over-rich mixture to raise the temperature in the DPF. You don’t want to do that in Mitchell Grass country!

        This is a big problem for owners who trickle along bush tracks or around properties at idle revs, with low exhaust temperatures.

        DPF-related recall 2020

        There have been documented fires in 70 Series vehicles around Australia, caused by dry vegetation getting caught around the hot DPF housing and we’ve been warning potential buyers of this hazard since 2016 and so has Toyota, with a warning label on the driver’s door.

        In May 2020, Toyota Australia finally announced a recall of LandCruiser 70 Series vehicles produced between June 2016 and November 2018: “to improve outreach to consumers” – whatever the hell that means. We suspect what they mean is to prevent fires and subsequent lawsuits!

        60

    • #
      Travis T. Jones

      This comment comes with a warning for PF, it contains a link:

      Audi Snubs EVs, Says Will Continue To “Massively” Invest In Combustion Engines

      Audi CEO Markus Duesmann: combustion engines will be “alive for a very long time. This is why we continue to invest massively in the development of combustion engines.”

      https://cleantechnica.com/2020/07/11/audi-snubs-evs-says-will-continue-to-massively-invest-in-combustion-engines/

      270

      • #
        Analitik

        So VAG are hedging by keeping Audi ICE while they “commit” to EVs with the VW brand. They will take a bath when the subsidies end and EV sales tank but at least they will have preserved their ICE technology for the rollback

        60

      • #
        Deano

        Interesting. I remember hearing the ABC report that “all the European car makers have stopped investing in any further fossil fueled engine development”. They wished to convey the impression that the argument was over.

        00

    • #
      David Maddison

      And where will Japan get the hydrogen Peter?

      Why, from Australian taxpayer subsidised coal to hydrogen projects in Vicdanistan.

      And guess who gets to keep (for all time) the CO2 by-product from coal to hydrogen conversion?

      Why, stupid Australia, as usual….

      151

    • #
      Richard Owen No.3

      Peter F.
      William Stanley Jevons’ book The Coal Question predicted that the UK would run out of coal.
      He covered a range of issues central to sustainability, including limits to growth, overpopulation, energy return on energy input, taxation of energy resources, renewable energy alternatives, and resource peaking—subjects that may be of interest to you.
      Originally published in 1865.

      90

      • #
        David Maddison

        “Coal in truth stands not beside but entirely above all other commodities. It is the material energy of the country — the universal aid — the factor in everything we do. With coal almost any feat is possible or easy; without it we are thrown back into the laborious poverty of early times. With such facts familiarly before us, it can be no matter of surprise that year by year we make larger draughts upon a material of such myriad qualities — of such miraculous powers.”

        “…new applications of coal are of an unlimited character. In the command of force, molecular and mechanical, we have the key to all the infinite varieties of change in place or kind of which nature is capable. No chemical or mechanical operation, perhaps, is quite impossible to us, and invention consists in discovering those which are useful and commercially practicable….”

        70

    • #
      R.B.

      Hybrids are ICE. They are only usually only 5% more expensive than a petrol for the RAV4 while 40% more fuel efficient and better to drive. These are not plug-ins. They are just fuel efficient ICE. Not sufficiently less fuel for the extra outlay considering that hybrids have poorer resale, but the better stop-start and low speed behaviour makes them tempting for a city car.

      There is a good reason a plug-in hybrid is significantly more money.

      80

      • #
        Hanrahan

        I have a 10 yr old Camry Hybrid. It is low milage and Cardogin would never recommend I buy one, but I got it barely above the price of the conventional car and because I was intrigued by the technology.

        So far my only replacement items have been tyres and wiper blades, even the 12V battery is original. I hope to get a number of years more out of it with no expense.

        Yes, I could have bought a Corolla and get the same consumption but what the heck, I had the cash. 😀

        50

        • #
          sophocles

          The RAVs are very popular with the women of most ages. There must be something in them or about them which makes them so popular with the other halves of our lives. My sister reckons it’s their sheer convenience.

          I can’t argue against that.

          41

    • #
      Roger Knights

      Toyota’s monster new factory in Alabama will be producing over 150,000 PHEV RAM4 Primes starting this summer. Its Mazda rotary range extender is a winner (weighs only 50 pounds and runs constantly in its sweet spot, so no stress and no leaks) and will boost sales greatly.

      01

      • #
        R.B.

        The factory will produce 15 000 RAV4, not necessarily the Prime PHEV, which costs 25% more than the hybrid for a 42 mile electric only range.

        10

    • #
      Hanrahan

      Hybrids make sense and Toyota do them very well. Why shouldn’t they be pushing them?

      11

    • #
      Lance

      Peter, you do need to understand that the process of manufacturing, storing, delivering and using, Hydrogen requires 1.65 to 2.12 times MORE energy than the H2 contains.

      H2 has a negative efficiency.

      See: https://afdc.energy.gov/files/pdfs/hyd_economy_bossel_eliasson.pdf

      Now, if you have a lot of extra, free, energy, laying about, it makes more sense to generate ammonia or synthetic hydrocarbon liquids. But H2 as a fuel? That’s insane unless for space rockets.

      101

    • #
      Paul Miskelly

      Peter Fitzroy,
      You seem to be falling back into your old habits of making unsubstantiated statements and by implication, demanding that your audience accept them as fact.

      Let’s look at your various claims.

      As regards your first claim: at present, hybrid vehicles run on fossil fuels. That’s an unavoidable fact. That ends your argument.

      Second, as regards your claim that, Toyota “promotes” hydrogen fuels, it should not be surprising that one of the world’s largest and most astute automakers be conducting R&D into such as hydrogen-based fuels.

      Third, as for your comment that fossil fuels are on the way out, kindly do as I suggested to you in these columns some months ago, and go read what the UK’s Professor Michael Kelly has to say about the very real obstacles to the widespread electrification of the UK vehicle fleet. Also, rather than constantly denigrating the work of “TonyfromOz”, as seems to be your habit, take in what he says about the realities of powering the grid: here in Australia, some 80 percent of our generation continues to be fossil-fuel powered, for the simple reason that wind and solar cannot ever perform. Not wishful thinking on my part, just the plain facts. So, even if the grid could be strengthened sufficiently to run all the proposed EV’s, the greater part of any such fleet at any given instant of time, until nuclear generation substitutes for coal and gas, would be powered by fossil fuels.

      Far from their use being on the way out then, electrification of the vehicle fleet, became it would require more fossil-fired generation to be installed, will actually result in the greater consumption of fossil fuels than the present use of conventional engines, given the round-trip inefficiencies of the electrical energy supply process required.

      Wake up, Peter. Read Prof Kelly, Peter, as I told you to do several months ago.

      Do try to understand that I am not making “left” or “right” political statements here, Peter, I am merely making you aware of the engineering realities. Try to remember that engineering reality always trumps wishful thinking.

      Regards to all,
      Paul Miskelly

      171

      • #
        Analitik

        Peter Fitzroy,
        You seem to be falling back into your old habits of making unsubstantiated statements and by implication, demanding that your audience accept them as fact.

        Falling back? He has consistently posted in this manner.

        90

    • #
      Hasbeen

      Hydrogen is an expensive blind ally, just as ate plug in electric cars.Wind power id a dead end, that 3will never be practical.

      Before we can double the existing fleet of windmills, & we need to quadruple it to come near to replacing fossil fueled power, the existing fleet will be beyond their useful life, & need replacing.

      Trying to power a modern economy with wind & solar power is as useless as a dog chasing it’s tail, & even more stupid as we have the math to prove it is impossible.

      20

  • #
    Phillip Bratby

    There isn’t enough cobalt in the world to make all those batteries and there isn’t enough neodymium in the world to make all those electric motors (especially as China controls the market in exotic materials).

    270

    • #
      RossP

      Phillip, someone in the UK did the maths and worked if all the UK cars went electric they would need 2 times the current world production of cobalt to make them.

      160

    • #
      PeterS

      That’s possibly why China is considering mining the asteroids. Seriously though, when will that be possible? Way too late to save the earth from that so called global warming catastrophe. Let’s face it, the West is stupid for destroy itself economically by getting rid of fossil fuel powered vehicles and power stations. In the meantime, China is not so stupid and are gladly building hundreds more coal fired power stations. So, given CAGW is a hoax, what more evidence is require to see how the West is doomed if it continues its merry way of reducing emissions?

      152

      • #
        Jonesy

        Mining from space? That is a good one. Question how do you deorbit even a twenty tonne load of whatever you mine from outside the planet? Take your time 😉

        20

  • #
    Jojodogfacedboy

    What happens when your in a high voltage vehicle in water, like a flood…
    Electric batteries and panels are all under the vehicle and salt water is corrosive as well.
    Not a good viable alternative vehicle.

    130

    • #
      Ronin

      Just don’t crash your ev in salt water, DC + salt water = chlorine plus other nasties.

      60

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Thats assuming you werent electrocuted or burnt in the fire that follows…..

        If you look at all this from a detached distance, its appears its clear “the Elite plan” is to crash our way of life by death of a 1000 cuts and many DNA-modifying “vaccines”.

        The ones they cant starve to death or get killed in civil unrest or a war with China/Russia they will let self destruct form the inside as massive autoimmune destruction takes place of peoples’ organs. Then all they have to do is release the next designer virus to mop up those who wisely have refused the destructo-jab….

        It apepars there is a slow motion cull event of humans in progress by the Satanic worshipping Elite.

        Its on for young an old…..

        81

    • #
      James

      How about salty slush in the North East USA? It should do wonders for the electrics every winter.

      20

  • #
    Geoffrey Williams

    Surprised that the figure for electric cars is as high as 2 in 100 in US.
    Probably the ‘status’ factor has a lot to do with that . . people with money to burn.
    The impracticallity of electric cars is overwhelming. Look out for broken down cars on the side of the road . . And whatever you do, don’t buy a second hand one !!
    Hybrid technology is clever, but hydrogen will go the same way as the Hindeburg . .
    GeoffW

    190

    • #
      Maptram

      “Probably the ‘status’ factor has a lot to do with that . . people with money to burn.”

      People who have an EV in their collection of cars

      110

    • #

      It’s nothing but virtue signaling.

      131

      • #
        James

        You never see them on the road much in winter around here! Battery would go flat and you would freeze to death!

        10

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      Yea, I can’t believe that figure either.

      And even when a household does own an EV, it’ll be the wife’s car which doesn’t get a lot of mileage. The main vehicle still needs to be ICE.

      91

    • #
      Richard Ilfeld

      Is that of “cars sold” in a recent period? — more like 1 in a thousand of “cars on the road”.

      00

  • #
    Klem

    The $ subsidies required to bribe people to buy e-cars can be quite substantial at times.

    However, most people understand that whenever the government has to pay you to buy something, you know it’s going to suck.

    140

    • #
      Ronin

      We should all realise that government can’t give you anything that they haven’t previously taken from you.

      150

  • #
    Maptram

    Windlab was a ASX listed company that invested in wind plants. In 2020 it was taken over by a private investment fund. As has been said many times one of the issues with wind power is grid instability. Around October 2019 the CEO was giving a speech in which he said the grid could be stabilised by having 15000 EVs connected. My thought at the time was perhaps they could have a buy 1 get one free sale, one for driving and one connected to the grid.

    80

    • #
      Lance

      If you read the Tesla warranty, using the vehicle as a stationary power source will void the warranty in its entirety.

      I do hope the Windlab CEO knows that.

      Perhaps he is offering to absorb any warranty costs for any Tesla owners after they follow his advice.

      100

    • #
      James

      So you cannot drive your car if the wind is not blowing? Great!

      00

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    Always good for a laugh is Simon Holmes à Court’s (energy specialist) twitter feed, which often has ev comments, all saying their next car is going to be an ev.

    @simonahac: https://twitter.com/search?q=simonahac&src=typed_query

    If there really was a climate apocalypse, here, now, or, in the future, why would you wait to buy your next car, which will be an ev?

    Look out your window! Just Do it! Sell everything and buy your planet saving car now.

    What a bunch of virtue signalling climate [email protected] All corralled in one spot.

    Energy firms want the right to switch off electric cars charging at home

    “New powers being sought to allow energy providers to turn off high-drain devices to manage electricity network”

    https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/electric-cars/353209/energy-firms-want-right-switch-electric-cars-charging-home

    ‘Why did it take nine hours to go 130 miles in our new electric Porsche?’

    “A Kent couple love their new car – but their experience suggests there are problems with the charging network”

    https://amp.theguardian.com/money/2020/nov/28/electric-cars-porsche-charging-network

    100

    • #
      Hanrahan

      JCU has a fast charger. AFAIK it is the only one north of Brisbane.

      I looked a couple of days ago – Oz has 877,000 km of highway [undefined] but I’m willing to bet that Bris to Melb with spurs to Canb, the snow fields and popular beachside towns will be the extent of “easy” EV driving 10 years hence.

      20

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      The rate we are going, the only thing that will move soon will be steam engines. Burn anything you can find and move about slowly. But steam tech is 100% non-tech, which means it fully impervious to EMP and any electrical issues.

      The only issue is boiler safety. Maybe flash boilers might be feasible, but would require a steady supply of fuel…..

      Those old blokes at the local model railways will be the new community heroes. Another bunch targetted by the vaccines….coincidence?

      It seems the plan is to kill off the wisdom and brains provided by age, and leave the young and impressionable behind to create a Hunger Games type marxist corrupted world…..

      31

  • #
    Sirob

    Of those, “Consumer Acceptance” is the easiest thing to change…

    Krispy Kreme and Marlborough are offering freebies for vaccines so the Toyota is right it’s the easiest thing to change.

    But windfarm generated refuelling for mass scale EV’S? “tell ’em he’s dreamn’

    It’s hard to keep a straight face.

    40

  • #
    Yarpos

    Sounds like there are a few to many actual Engineers (and honest ones at that) left in the Japanese car makers management groups. This will need to be adjusted.

    30

  • #
    David Maddison

    There’s plenty of Leftist propaganda claiming the unreliables problem will be solved with pumped hydro (despite Leftists being opposed to dams!).

    They argue that if we have just a few more million or billion windmills and destroy more farmland with solar subsidy farms, and have enough pumped hydro to store this dirty and expensive civilisation-destroying energy, then we will be all living in utopia.

    But someone has done some HONEST science on this with regard to the US, a country that has many mountainous regions highly suitable for hydro (unlike Australia) and the results prove it simply isn’t doable.

    Article here:

    https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/11/pump-up-the-storage/

    101

    • #
      David Maddison

      Also, as pointed out above, there simply isn’t enough cobalt in the world to make enough electrochemical batteries for cars or storage.

      90

      • #

        Not to forget, child slaves are forced to mine cobalt in Southern Africa, so where are the planet-saving zealots on that issue?

        150

      • #
        Chad

        David,
        Remember the timescales here..20-30 years in the future. !
        Even now, there are viable options beyond Cobalt and Lithium for batteries.
        EG .. Al/Air battery tech has been demonstrated in vehicles.

        01

        • #
          David Maddison

          Aluminium air batteries are primary cells only and as far as I am aware not rechargeable. It is very difficult to make them both practical and recheagable.

          And in Australia, it’s difficult to get any major project done. Remember, the decision for a second Sydney Airport took 50 years…

          31

        • #
          Lance

          Yes, Please. We’ll have unlimited energy from Fusion reactors, always 30 years away.

          Chad, let me know about those magical batteries right after the anti-gravity boots, zero point subspace energy modules, antimatter reactors, and cloaks of invisibility arrive.

          The imaginary future is always “just over the next furthest hill you can see”.

          70

        • #
          Kevin kilty

          No battery having X-Air in its name is rechargeable. They might be fuel cells, but that is another issue.

          10

    • #
      Richard Owen No.3

      David,
      they’ve moved the goal posts again.
      Now it is HYDROGEN “the wonder fuel” which will power vehicles, provide energy storage and stabilise an all “renewables grid”.

      Possibly you would remember the first appearance of this saviour in the 1970’s, or its resurrection in the 1990’s. Reality caused its death both times, but “hope springs eternal in a green mind”.

      140

      • #
        David Maddison

        Yes, I remember Richard. The Left keep recycling old failed ideas hoping people have forgotten the previous times they were tried.

        Other members of the Left are fresh products of the Marxist-dominated education system and know no history (or much of anything else but I bet they could name all 57 (or whatever it’s up to now) supposed “genders”).

        101

        • #
          Richard Owen No.3

          I think even the politically correct would baulk at a number 57…..too obviously unWOKE (noWOKE?) to call someone a Heinz.

          So, taking their cue from the “world’s leading scientists” they leave out embarrassing details, and the list probably goes 54,55,56, 58 etc. What they will do after No.68 I don’t know.

          31

      • #
        Lance

        Something for file and reading

        https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/09/24/the-pure-evil-of-hydrogen-hyping/

        “The problems of hydrogen are innate – its physical properties are incompatible with the requirements of the energy market. As Eliasson and Bossel state, most of hydrogen’s problems cannot be solved by additional research and development. If hydrogen is irredeemable, what would be the ideal energy carrier? It would be a liquid with a boiling point of at least 60°C and a solidification point under 40°C. It would stay liquid under normal weather conditions and at high altitudes. Even if oil had never been discovered, the world would not use synthetic hydrogen but a synthetic hydrocarbon fuel.

        All the above is known to the promoters of the glorious hydrogen economy to come. Theirs is a cynical exercise in duping the public in order to advance the globalist agenda. Australia’s politicians are either foot soldiers in that globalist putsch or easily deluded simpletons.”

        70

        • #
          Bozotheclown

          Lance, it is all wrong. The problem with hydrogen is easily solved by the introduction of carbon. Naturally this happens and viola: cheap, easily stored, energy dense fuels.

          00

        • #
          Kevin kilty

          Don’t they mean a solidification point under -40°C?

          30

        • #

          Lance
          I have actually worked in Industrial Gases and with hydrogen.
          Hydrogen is just another carpetbaggers mother lode of subsidies and handouts. It is not suited at all as a transport fuel – it is far too light and far too dangerous.

          Those pushing it clearly have no idea about its physical properties or about the inefficiency of electrolysis.

          This will go absolutely nowhere long term.

          80

  • #
    • #
      Interested

      Thanks for the link, ‘jim2’.
      Looks like some young police officers have joined the “lycra-shorts-cycling-brigade” these days – looking suspiciously like they share the mindset of the enviro-zealots they rushed to protect!
      And being young, I imagine those policemen have been through the same degraded education system that produced the Extinction Rebellion movement in the first place. Likewise their superior officers back at the station.
      I think there are – or used to be – laws about obstructing highways(?), which presumably should have resulted in the ER nutters themselves being dragged away, not the irate driver who tried to disperse them. But evidently the police prefer supporting their deluded enviro-compatriots rather than enforcing the law. And apparently, the courts are now accepting that breaking the law to “save the planet” is permissible anyhow because preventing an imaginary “climate crisis” is looked upon as a noble cause.

      A guy I went to school with in London nearly 50 years ago became a GP. He seemed intelligent enough in his teens and he doesn’t have the excuse that the education system let him down either, because I remember the school taught actual reproducible science, and independence of thought to go with it. Nevertheless, that highly educated guy is now a staunch Extinction Rebellion supporter!
      But I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised because half the twits I ever met in my life I met at university. And that was a long time ago – when the climate was regarded as just the average of the weather over long periods of time, and not a reason for civil unrest.
      These days, of course, when even sociology is called a science, everything’s much worse.
      The world’s gone barking mad! Unless we stand up to this orchestrated, institutionalised, climate alarmist nonsense – and SOON(!) – it can only end in tears.

      70

    • #
      Graeme#4

      The problem was that he is a known right-wing activist. I doubt that he was driving by purely by chance…

      00

      • #
        Lucky

        “..he is a known right-wing activist”

        This means that, he was arrested not for what he did but for what his thoughts were presumed to be.

        00

  • #
    TdeF

    It’s odd. When I went to university, only 10% of people studied science. Now I suspect it is even fewer. But those who did not study science now consider they are scientists, climate scientists. Dr. Tim Flannery is a classicly deluded make believe scientist. And they get credibility or assume it. I was appalled when he was interviewed on the merits of nuclear power. And his advice that the technology in the SA hot rocks project where the Federal government lost a quick $100Million, was that the ‘technology was straight forward’. So there.

    Now with matters of electricity, the weather, gender, viruses, thermodynamics and energy, the world is full of pseudo scientists and activists and a second generation of children who are told Winston Churchill was the problem and Greta Thunburg is a genius, a modern day Joan of Arc. And the world will be burned to a steak.

    Except none of it is true. And fully electric cars and windmills are likely to be the worst thing to happen to the environment in a lifetime.

    It’s costing us a fortune. And such opportunists as our former Chief Scientist are in the business of telling us to go electric, hydrogen and even gas. Even warmist economist Bjorn Lomberg in the Australian complains he is being ‘cancelled’ because he is saying it does not make economic or social or even environmental sense, not the global warming, the solution.

    191

    • #
      TdeF

      And last night on Extreme Railway journeys, I watched a documentary on the peat trains of Ireland, peat which has warmed homes and provide power for hundreds of years now. Jobs, tradition, factories, railways closing but better to lose the jobs than the planet, according to the host. Surely after 33 years of ‘Global Warming’ and rising sea levels and dying polar bears and vanishing caribou and sky high electricity prices and blackouts, someone needs to question it all. But you will be cancelled, shut down, yelled down. We must save the planet. Ignorance triumphs even over common sense because no one can point to anything wrong or any prediction which has come true in 33 years!

      161

      • #
        TdeF

        How do you deprogram a whole population? Even the truth does not work. There is no global warming. And CO2 levels are perfectly natural and unconnected with human activity, as was confirmed by the ‘pause’ in temperatures, temperatures which are now going down while CO2 growth continues steadily utterly unaffected by 500,000 windmills, a year long worldwide shutdown or any natural event like massive bushfires.

        161

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          Shut off the media. Once the leftist insanity is not being pumped at the public, they will regain thier senses……

          42

      • #
        Geoffrey Williams

        Unfortunately the climate, carbon bogey-man permeates everything that the ABC/BBC puts out . .
        Everything; news, energy and electricity, all of politics, current affairs, food, health, cooking, art and entertainment, gardening, jobs, history, cultural affairs, aboriginal history, immigration, education, farming and agriculture, the bush, holidays, fishing, all businesses, construction and engineering, and much, much more, even good old fashioned programmes like ‘great railway journeys’.
        Why cannot these these fools see what is happening to our society, The brainwashing is all around. Surely young people out there will one day see the reality of the greatest scam of all time. How long will it take?!
        GeoffW

        91

      • #
        Ronin

        We don’t need to save the planet, it will look after itself, it will still be here long after we have gone, after all it’s been around for 4.5 billion years or so, no, if there is a problem, it’s overstocking the globe with idiot humans, nearly 8 billion have to be fed, clothed and supplied with utilities, that takes a lot out the planet.

        32

      • #
        sophocles

        But, TdeF, you made two true statements in that diatribe: sky high electricity prices and blackouts.

        Careful! With two truths you are in danger of creating a reputation!

        Ignorance triumphs even over common sense surely will cement it.

        40

    • #
      DOC

      The real problem is, how do you ‘deprogram’ 30year olds that have had AGW and its supposed disasters rammed into their brains since infanthood? Currently isn’t the education system under requirement to have AGW addressed in someway,in every course a student chooses?

      Look at the penalty anyone gets for daring to question the religion. It can be reputational and occupational death, the equivalent of becoming a social outcast. Universities were established for free-thinking, open debate and consequent advancement of society; no longer! Our freedoms are similarly corralled once we leave the education system.

      We are becoming the systems we have wisely abhored for a centuries – marxist, communist or dictatorship. How is the Green movement any different, in enforcing philosophical adherence, to the CCP?

      One big exception; the CCP doesn’t need the progressive philosophies to enforce compliance of citizens with its demands. The CCP just uses bullets and inhumanity. To destroy the democratic West, the progressives just use personal reputational destruction and social isolation to force us to their idea of an idyllic future where they will rule unhindered by ‘freedom’ – except to their way of thinking.

      60

  • #
    Ronin

    What with Range Anxiety, Grid Inadequacy and Recharge Roulette Syndrome, the only winners out of the EV revolution will be the shrinks.

    80

    • #
      Geoffrey Williams

      Range Anxiety; I can see the day when greenies travel around the country with a permenantly attched trailer full of back-up batteries for their power hungry, short range EV’s . .
      Cost no problem to these people just have to have that EV for the status and virtue signalling.
      GeoffW

      80

      • #
        TdeF

        It’s a good point. I can see that cars will soon have battery packs. One to use and one on charge. So they can go to their holiday homes or even go to work. Like our windmills and solar, they are just more unreliables when the real world needs power on demand.

        60

      • #
        Richard Owen No.3

        I think towing a (hidden) diesel generator would be better – lighter and more power output.

        90

        • #
          TdeF

          Yes. But if you could buy a plug in system, you could double the range. Plus a similar sized battery at home could be used for much faster recharging using step up voltages. Personally electric cars are a joke but they could be better with a second battery. And you would not tow it. These things weigh 600kg!

          20

          • #
            TdeF

            However when you calculate solar energy at 5 hours a day you can get 1.5Kwhr of solar day. A telsa with an 80 kwhr battery would require 53 days to charge from scratch with home solar. Or with say 10 amps from a 240volt coal socket, 2.4kw, about 33 hours, 1 /2 days.

            So firstly, you cannot store enough solar power to charge your car more than once every two months. And if you don’t have that, you rely on at least 24 hours on the charger. If you go to 1,000 volts and 20 amps, for 20kwhr you would only need 4 hours of waiting. Now that would be some system, comparable to a plasma arc cutter.

            The real value of batteries as established by Formula 1 is the ‘light’ hybrid at around 16%, enough to recover kinetic energy (KERS) and double mileage. In terms of CO2, this means to reduce CO2 output, it would be better to get a hybrid in world where most of the power comes from fossil fuel.

            50

            • #
              TdeF

              That’s of course if you believe man controls the CO2 levels of the planet. And why anyone would believe that has me puzzled.

              53

              • #
                TdeF

                Why anyone would red thumb a statement has me puzzled. Who has actually proven we humans control CO2 levels? You can prove it is not true.

                52

  • #
    William Astley

    This is google maps Lake Jackson to Houston…. drive route, distance, and time.

    https://www.google.ca/maps/dir/Lake+Jackson,+Texas,+USA/Houston,+Texas,+USA/@29.3933183,-95.6898998,10z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x864043c8e9ae4935:0x902bd953a5fb41c6!2m2!1d-95.4343859!2d29.0338575!1m5!1m1!1s0x8640b8b4488d8501:0xca0d02def365053b!2m2!1d-95.3698028!2d29.7604267!3e0

    Toyota is a smart company.

    There are practical engineering reasons …… Like people will not want to pay more for their electricity to enable the electrical grid, to power the EV vehicles. The practical problem of course is a say 90% investment, is required to power the first 20% of the idiotic EV scheme. The first real engineering problems like overloaded electrical grids and brownouts will force all of the needed upgrades.

    The drive distances in the US are longer than in Europe.

    It is not practical in normal weather to make long distance trips with a family using an EV, in some US regions. In times of extreme weather… it would be criminally dangerous to use an EV vehicle to transport a young family, on a long trip, at certain times in the US. Too dangerous.

    Politicians every country, are very sensitive to family safety.

    Those pushing EV vehicles live in a San Francisco like mild climate and don’t care about the safety those, who do not. There is more to the US, than San Fran.

    Normal extreme regional weather in many US regions, makes it unsafe, to evacuate out of an area, or to even take longish trips during extreme weather, or to travel on a super highway that gets grid locked from time to time, in an average EV.

    EV’s have a range of about 200 miles as compared to the typical gasoline powered car that is for a family prime vehicle, around 450 miles.

    Here is a practical real life example of the extreme weather danger in the US, which makes EV not safe for travel. The Drive time from Lake Jackson to Houston is normally a little over an hour.

    However, when there is a coastal Hurricane and everyone must evacuate from the Lake Jackson area, the only road becomes a single lane parking lot…

    Because…. In Houston it is not physically possible to sit in a non moving vehicle in the summer, without air condition running, because of the high humidity. The body cannot cool. People are wet with sweat. Those who are overweight die quickly of heat stroke. The humidity is unbelievable high. This is true for many regions in the Southern US during some summer months.

    To avoid dying of heat stroke, everyone that is caught in a Houston traffic jam (traffic jams, in big cities like Houston, happen daily and when there are accidents can tie up traffic for hours), or evacuating from Lake Jackson, must keep their vehicles running…. … the constantly running vehicles, run out of gas and block traffic which blocks off ramps if people are forced to leave their car.

    The design of US large freeways is unsafe if for vehicles that run out of charge. In many locations, those in an EV dead car would have to walk for miles to get off of the freeway. With young children, or overweight people a nightmare.

    So my friend, fleeing a hurricane were he lives in Lake Jackson, took 20 hours to get from Lake Jackson to Houston (where he went for shelter) and ran out of gas twice.

    If 10% of the gasoline vehicles were replaced with EV vehicles, the same situation would result in preventable deaths. (What was/is the reason we are forcing people to drive EV’s? It is not going to change our CO2 footprint. Ignoring the fact that all of the CAGW science is incorrect.)

    It is not safe or possible to walk from your car to find the nearest town or hotel or home that would let strange people spend the night. EV stranded people would require helicopter removal.

    The humidity is high enough in many regions in the US in some summer months, that an overweight body (40% of the Houston bodies are extremely overweight) cannot cool, and will get heat stroke/heart attack on a longish walk, in daylight.

    Similar problem for Northern US during blizzards or any winter storm with high winds. In winter, it is not safe without full Arctic like snow gear and boots, to leave a vehicle or to turn a vehicle off. In cold weather EV range is cut by up to 40% as the vehicle must use electricity to keep the people warm and the batteries are less efficient when it is cold. Similar problem high temperature.

    171

    • #
      Lance

      It isn’t just Houston that presents dangerous heat conditions.

      Nearly the entire states of Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia, South and North Carolina, do, as well. You are speaking of some 82 Million people.

      In the Northern US and central plains, you are looking at some 110 Million subject to sub freezing.
      In many cases below -30C.

      EVs are worthless in these areas.

      90

      • #

        Lance
        Even in Missouri where I lived the humidity in summer was quite unbelieveable. We found out first hand when we put our washing out to dry the first time shortly after we arrived (in summer). It remained wet for days. We had to use the dryer all the time.

        And the problem in winter if you get caught is you have to run your car as well to keep warm. Those EVs are a complete accident waiting to happen when bad weather strikes.

        And if the wretched thing goes flat its not a case of a jerry can and away you go as with petrol, or a jump start, they have to tow it away.

        10

    • #
      sophocles

      I see a potential market for very long, like incredibly long, electric extension cords.

      10

  • #
    Fookes

    Why stop at cars? Why not the electrification of all forms of transport including trucks, buses, trains and ships. And why stop there – lets do away with any form of electricity generation that involves burning hydrocarbons including the hidden diesel generators keeping the lights on in South Australia. This is no more than crass stupidity continually given the oxygen of publicity in the media – perhaps it’s about time the public were educated rather than indoctrinated…..

    00

  • #

    Let’s pretend for a microsecond that they can actually supply the batteries for an Austalia wide (just the piddlingly small market in Australia mind you) complete change to electric vehicles.

    Let’s pretend for a microsecond that they can actually find the electrical power to charge every single vehicle as needs arise.

    “Say mate, what trade in can I get on my Toyota Hi Lux that I paid 70 grand for on one of those electric vehicles” (and here, let’s pretend for a microsecond that an electric vehicle can do exactly what a 70 grand Hi Lux can do)

    “Naah! Look mate, we can’t give you anything for that, not even a penny. You’ll have to find your own way of environmentally disposing of that. We’re not accepting any ICE vehicles as trade ins.”

    If you actually think people will stand for that, then you really are dreaming.

    I suppose that the Government could always just take them all back.

    Tony.

    181

    • #
      Chad

      But, Tony..
      It could swing the other way…
      That Dual Cab UTE could be in BIG demand on the 2nd hand market when no new ones are available.
      The Whole “disposable” attitude to car ownership could reverse with rebuild shops becoming big business again, and ICE vehicles becoming an investment !!
      Hoe much is a totally impractical “Blower Bently” worth now ?

      70

      • #

        Chad
        My thoughts exactly. In the UK if they continue with their brain dead policy second hand ICE vehicles will skyrocket in value.

        01

        • #
          robert rosicka

          Prophet the diesel cars will be worth more especially if they phase out or limit fuel , diesels will run on vegetable oil .

          10

    • #
      Hanrahan

      I suppose that the Government could always just take them all back.

      “Cash for clunkers”. It has been tried.

      80

  • #
    Dipole

    Something I did not realise until I read the article is that car batteries are DC charged and home charging is AC resulting in reduced efficiency to charge. Do cars convert the AC home connector into DC ?
    Remote charging points, are they DC or AC ?

    Perhaps we need a huge solar deep cycle powered battery (DC) at home to charge the car at night,

    This is getting complicated,folks.

    50

    • #
      Chad

      Not too comlicated….
      EV batteries store DC electricity.
      Chargers are both AC and DC…EVs have an on board “charger “ that converts the AC supply to DC and controls the charge process.. those are about 95% efficient.
      “FAST” chargers of 100+kW capacity are generally DC from the off vehicle charge point (Tesla “Superchargers” etc )..and those can be 98+% efficient ( some power loss to heat )
      This is no more complicated than different fuel requirements in ICEs.. Super, Leaded, Unleaded, 10%Ethanol, *%% Ethanol, LPG, Diesel, etc
      It is just a matter of what you have become familiar with.

      21

      • #
        Hanrahan

        The Tesla 3 has an 11kV onboard rectifier which will can give 75 km range per hour on charge. You can have industrial power supply to your premises but that 11kv is a carved in stone max charge rate. It would be a fire hazard if you “tweaked” your system to speed up the process.

        BTW An Australian 10 A 240 V GPO can provide 2.4 kW (V X A) so that is 25 km/h*, even less range in the cold or the heat with the heater/aircon on. Aircons reduce range on a non-aerodynamic ICE vehicle by 12%. I would expect more with a “slippery” EV because there are no “slippery” aircons.

        *The official Tesla site says 15 km/h.

        Output Power Power Settings Range added per hour* (km/h)
        Power (kW) Phase + Amps Model 3 Model S Model X
        16.5 3phase 24A 75 90 80
        11 3phase 16A 75 60 54
        7.4 Single phase 32A 50 38 34
        3.7 Single phase 16A 25 19 17
        2.3 Single phase 10A 15 13 11

        30

        • #
          Chad

          .OR .. you plug into a public 150kW DC charger and put in 450kms in 30 mins !
          .. at a cost of approx $35 !

          11

          • #
            Dennis

            Add as ICEV fuel excise revenue declined a road tax on EV to replace that tax revenue, as Australian governments are already flagging.

            20

          • #
            Analitik

            OR .. You plug into a public 150kW DC charger and put in 450kms in 30 mins

            Please provide us with a list of locations for these, Chad

            00

        • #
          sophocles

          Teslas are already enough of a fire hazard without making them any worse.

          40

          • #
            Dennis

            Australian State Governments now require all EV to display a blue sticker front and rear on registration plates to alert road traffic authorities that Lithium Ion batteries hazard is present when attending traffic accidents.

            The same applies to dual petrol-liquid petroleum gas equipped vehicles which must display red LPG stickers.

            ICEV using petrol only or diesel only do not require stickers.

            40

  • #
    Chad

    There is a lot of unnecessary concern over this whole EV “invasion”.
    For a start, even if only EVs were available for new buyers starting now,… it would still take 15-20 yrs for australia to replace its existing road fleet to all EV.
    BUT as the availability of EVs will continue for at least 10 years ,..likely 25+… serious numbers of EVs are. Unlikely to be seen for many , many, years…25 ++ !
    In that time, battery technology , capacity, weight, cost etc will change dramatically , as will the charging systems etc.
    As we have discussed previously, and i have shown, even a 50% change to EVs WILL NOT put excess load on the existing Grid capacity ( look it up or run the calcs if you dont believe me )
    EVs are going to happen , even if CAGW is exposed as a scam. There are major issues to be resolved and dealt with , but fundamentally Electric drive train for transport make are a logical progression, especially in urban areas (IE, most of the population,)
    A separate issue which is of concern however, is what the grid may be like in 10+ years time.
    ………..If we continue with the RE madness then obviously there will be major issues …even without EVs.
    But if grid capacity is maintained and hopefully improved with more “dispatchables” , then it is obvious that it can be designed to suit any foreseeable demand.

    14

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      I still see Camaros and VW Combies getting around the coast. I owned an old 59 Pontiac until it was 52 years old on open plates. And I’m in the market for a 34 Ford Hotrod.

      Way too many car enthusiasts to ever say 100% EVs.

      60

    • #
      Hanrahan

      In that time, battery technology , capacity, weight, cost etc will change dramatically

      Ya reckon? They have been developing battery technology for over 100 years, since they first put starter motors on cars, so it is a mature technology* where gains will be hard to find. The point of diminishing returns.

      It’s stinkin thinkin to extrapolate past gains and say there is an order of magnitude gains in the next ten years, that it is low hanging fruit. It ain’t, the LiIon battery is a once only development.

      BTW The ICE is still improving after all these years with two new demonstrated technologies coming to a show room near you: Continuously variable electronic valves and the spark assisted compression ignition cycle, the Mazda Skyactiv-X is available in the US today. So when doing a cost/benefit analysis the fuel cost of an ICE is decreasing as fast as efficiencies are achieved in EVs. One day when EVs are taxed, not subsidised, there will be too little cost savings to warrant the range anxiety.

      *In spite of being made by the millions/year, lead/acid batteries show zero tendency for economies of scale to limit price increases. They are priced exactly like a commodity, not a technology as LiIon batteries are now.

      40

      • #
        Chad

        H’ … you know the debate/decision is nothing to do with efficiency or costs. !
        The EV movement is driven by Green ideology, which we seem unable to stop so far.
        But, even if they only keep the air cleaner and noise levels down in the Citys,.. they are doing a worthwhile job. We all know that the emmissions are just being relocated, but that in itself is a good thing for most.
        And YES, i do think battery technology for EVs will change, and i also believe ICE hybrids are the best option currently in OZ..
        ( did you know you can get a “TRIFUEL” Hybrid ?… electric, petrol and LPG !)
        Sure lead cells are still with us as a “cheap” option for ICE starter motors, but many ICEs are noe using Lithium packs instead.
        Battery storage has many evolutions since the lead/acid was developed, significant steps were Nickel Cadmium,..Nickle Metal Hydride, and the current Lithium Cobalt ..Lithium Manganese Aluminium,.. , etc. but there are others waiting in the wings with various combinations of advantages like the Al/air cell , Lithium Titanium Oxide, and the liquid salt cell.
        At the same time , Capacitor development is working towards general power storage applications rather than just electronics.
        Once you peel back the skin on power storage, there is a whole gammut of potential possibilities being developed….even ignoring Hydrogen / Ammonia , which is currently hot favorite for some reason.

        10

        • #
          Hanrahan

          Chad, yours is a selfish city dwellers’ attitude where dirty air and noise are problems.

          I am a selfish country dweller. GEarth says I have a 25m elevation. From my upper level patio I can see the ocean and constantly get clean air and few cars per hour pass my door so I have no noise pollution.

          You have two choices as I see it: Decentralise and go where life is cleaner, quieter, saner or solve your city problems without making demands of me by insisting that I drive a car I don’t want and taxing me unfairly to solve YOUR problems.

          50

          • #
            Chad

            Hanrahan
            March 24, 2021 at 2:37 pm ·
            Chad, yours is a selfish city dwellers’ attitude where dirty air and noise are problems.
            …………making demands of me by insisting that I drive a car I don’t want and taxing me unfairly to solve YOUR problems.

            Ha ! A classis case of “Assumption” over information !
            What makes you think i am a city dweller,..or selfish ..?
            Careful what you assume next !
            Infact , i am an UNselfish coastal/country dweller, who happens to think that EVs are better suited vehicles for cities than Dual Cab utes !
            I drive 2 diesels, ( + a Tractor !) and see the need/benefit of them over EVs here at the moment ( Cost & choice mainly).
            But when i do have to visit a city i find the congestion and filthy air an unnecessary and unpleasant experience.
            I have no intention of forcing you to do anything, but i am certain that eventually you will at least realise the advantages of EVs for citys .

            00

        • #
          Dennis

          Are you aware that “Diesel Gas” mixed fuels was invented in Europe and using the early not so efficient system “fumigation” reduced particulate emissions by around 20 per cent, the average Diesel Engine before common rail technology burns about 80 per cent of the fuel and exhausts the rest, by mixing 20-30 per cent LPG with Distillate the fuel burn is around 95 per cent.

          This typically results in an increase in power and torque, a vehicle (Mitsubishi 4WD) I owned with later technology injected LPG increased power and torque at the rear wheels on a dynometer by over 20 per cent. Obviously because of the more efficient use of fuel.

          However fuel consumption improvement was maybe 5 per cent.

          00

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    Plugging into solar (CSIRO)
    To address this challenge, the Victorian Government provided funding to CSIRO, Nissan Australia and Delta Electronics to create a system linking solar photovoltaics, a battery and smart charging technology. Combined, this makes a solar-powered electric vehicle charging system which draws upon renewable energy to charge a vehicle at any time of day, and in any weather, with little impact to the electricity grid.

    There you go – one problem cited by the Toyota Dinosaur fixed

    114

    • #
      robert rosicka

      Hooray free energy has been invented .

      80

    • #
      David Maddison

      Peter’s quote comes from:

      https://www.csiro.au/en/research/technology-space/energy/solar-charging

      All it is is a large number of solar panels connected to a big battery and a charger into which an electric car is plugged.

      What is the point?

      You need a huge area of solar panels and a huge battery and so that the system does not run on coal it would have to be self sufficient which means it must be able to charge in winter and accommodate multiple winter days with no sun.

      It would require an infeasibly large and expensive solar array and battery.

      It is a pointless virtue signalling exercise, but hey, if the taxpayer is partially paying for it….

      Proponents of solar and wind never seem to understand the low energy density of these intermittent energy sources. Sure, they are “free” but just ask any sail boat owner how much it costs to utilise this “free” resource.

      91

      • #
        Peter Fitzroy

        Charging 4 cars at a time. It is working now. It is none of the assertions that you make.

        what is your problem David, progress in technology?

        Then don’t read the other piece on placing solar panels on the car itself, which give you about 50% of the charge, just sitting outside

        214

        • #

          Generally I don’t like to point out flies in ointment, but you cannot charge at any time on renewables but only when the renewables are available. It is the same issue as relying on renewables for the grid, just at smaller scale. And what automobile can supply half its charge demand with solar panels glued to the car? Think about it for a microsecond, as Tonyfromoz would say. How much surface area has your car? What area of panels do you need for 2.4kW at midday? at Midnight? You need something above 200Whr per km of range I would say.

          120

          • #
            Hanrahan

            Back of the envelope, a good sunny day’s output of a typical 5kW rooftop system would charge a Tesla 3 for 100 km, adequate for a daily commuter, BUT your your commuter is at work, not in the garage so this calc is moot.

            If your EV is in the garage all day, why do you have it?

            110

            • #
              Sceptical Sam

              Peter Fitzroy says:

              Then don’t read the other piece on placing solar panels on the car itself, which give you about 50% of the charge, just sitting outside.

              Hanrahan says:

              a good sunny day’s output of a typical 5kW rooftop system would charge a Tesla 3 for 100 km,

              I can just see it now, 5.0 kW of solar panels on the roof of the motor vehicle. Yeah. That’ll work.

              Rule of thumb; 100 square feet of panels per 1.0 kW.

              Five kW = 500 square feet of panels.

              Even if you divide it by two, what you’ve got is a motorised glider, not a motor vehicle.

              You’ll need a pilot’s licence for that.

              http://www.suncyclopedia.com/en/area-required-for-solar-pv-power-plants/

              30

        • #
          Chad

          That CSIRO “solution, is just a technical answer to a problem.
          It does not mean it is a financially economical or practical solution.
          Its easy to solve problems if you ignor practicalities and costs.

          70

        • #
          Graeme#4

          Peter, my 5 kW solar system in sunny Perth only contributed 13% of my yearly power. So to say that a home solar system, or even one mounted on the vehicle, will somehow recharge an EV all year round, and in places in Australia that have less sunshine, is at best wishful thinking.

          10

    • #
      Hanrahan

      Fitz, why do you believe the proven liars CSIRO over some VERY smart contributors to this blog?

      I am choosy what topics I engage lest my ignorance on real science shows. Science is above my pay grade, as I suspect it is yours.

      131

      • #
        Peter Fitzroy

        Very Smart – well thanks Hanrahan.

        37

        • #
          robert rosicka

          There is a reason that solar challenge is Darwin to Adelaide not Victoriastan to Sydney Peter and the “Cars” used are not exactly family sedans , One day there will be cars that fly powered by moonbeams but that’s a long long long way off into the never somewhere.

          30

    • #

      Peter
      Here on the eastern seaboard we have just been through one of those periods your renewable friends don’t want to talk about. The cloud and rain over large areas for days wrecks renewables output and the batteries are all empty after the first 24 hours. The panels on my roof were generating at less than 10% of bright sunny day levels at midday when I checked several times.

      Where will the power come from then, or do we just have our cities full of dead cars everywhere? Homes with no power? Factories idle? No refrigeration to keep food, no water being pumped and no power for the wokes precious mobile phones.

      This is just so idiotic it defies description.

      30

  • #

    So then, here’s an exercise I have not done before, (and Tony, there’s a whole new idea for a new Post) the ratio of renewable power to the total power consumption, and now add on the proposed advent of electrical vehicles.

    As per the image at this link for that relationship between renewable power and total power consumption, well, renewables deliver just 26% of all the generated power.

    To cover EV battery charging, we’ll need to scale up power generation by as much as, well, there are a number of ways of looking at that, but let’s take the low mark, considering not every vehicle will be charging up every day, so it might be that we may only need to scale up overall total power generation by perhaps as little as just 50%, and keep in mind that the list is endless, so it will be higher than that, but I’ll just go low to show you the ridiculous nature of the whole exercise.

    So now, we need to replace all fossil fuels and also add on the extra for charging up all those EVs.

    So now we just need to scale up all those renewables by a factor of SIX.

    Now, while that 26% of is the overall average, look at that image again and note the difference between power consumption and all four renewables at 6PM, you know, when everyone is now home from work and school, and between that time and the early AM when everyone goes back to work etc is most probably the time when the vast majority of owners will be charging up their EVs and the difference in power at those times is (Sun now gone down) around three times, so overall power consumption X 4 and then + the 3 times needed for EV charging.

    So now we need to scale up all the existing renewables by a factor of 7.

    There is currently 33,400MW of renewables. (hydro, wind, solar plants, and rooftop solar) So to cover the missing solar at night, then (ballparking here) half the total of solar Nameplate will have to be added grid scale batteries (oh, yes of course Tony, nudge nudge!) you know, half to use during the day, and half to charge the batteries to use at night, oh, minus the huge losses now entailed with a huge bank of batteries. (current Nameplate for solar plant and RTS comes in at 17400MW now X 7 and divide by 2, so, umm, 61,000MW of batteries plus extra for losses, oh, LOL Tony)

    The task now becomes enormously enormous, or put another way, enormously enormous on an enormous scale.

    So, existing Nameplate multiplied by seven.

    Hmm, let’s hope the price of renewables comes down, and down, and down, and down.

    Oh, see that Nameplate for renewables of 33,400MW, (August 2020) so now probably 34,000MW PLUS considering ten zillion homes get rooftop panels every other day.

    34,000MW of renewables and they deliver 25% of all the generated power.

    And Surprise surprise surprise, the total Nameplate for fossil fuels is ….. wait for it now ….. 34,000MW, and fossil fuels deliver the remaining 75% of all generated power, three times as much as all four renewables.

    Coal Fired power alone has a Nameplate of 23,000MW, and delivers 67% of all that consumed power.

    Perhaps now you can gain the slightest teensiest insight into why EVs will NEVER become the whole car fleet.

    Perhaps also you can now see that maybe, just maybe, we cannot afford to shut down coal fired power.

    Mathematics and the word ‘green’ are totally and utterly incompatible.

    Tony.

    110

    • #
      Chad

      To cover EV battery charging, we’ll need to scale up power generation by as much as, well, there are a number of ways of looking at that, but let’s take the low mark, considering not every vehicle will be charging up every day, so it might be that we may only need to scale up overall total power generation by perhaps as little as just

      Tony,
      Sorry , but i think your estimates ore off a little..
      Assume there were 10 million EV cars on ozzie roads today .
      Currently , the average distance distance traveled per day by each car is 30 km (from oz stats )
      An ev needs < 6kWh to travel 30 km. (@200Wh/km)
      So the daily power demand to do that is 10m x 6 kWh. =. 60 GWh.
      Which is about 11% more than current daily consumption
      And i think you will agree that 11% is within the current generation capacity potential of the grid. ?
      And 10 million represents approx 65% of current registered cars.
      But we all know that it will take a LONG time to get 10 million EVs on our roads anyway.

      02

      • #
        Hanrahan

        But, but, an EV doing 30 km/day is being used as a daily commute ergo it will not be at home charging from rooftop solar but at work so such an EV would exaggerate the duck curve, not moderate it.

        A second hand Corolla is FAR cheaper to buy, economical to drive and with no range anxiety.

        50

        • #
          Chad

          This is where “Smart” metering and devices with “Demand Response” functions can control the “Duck curve” to limit peaks
          A ^ kwh average charge can be done at any time of the night (or day)
          Used intelegently, “Smart “ devices could improve grid efficiency and generation utilisation.

          13

          • #
            Hanrahan

            Why is your response MORE complexity. not less?

            11

            • #
              Chad

              Because people are lazy.buggers .
              They will just plug in and forget about any potential “Peak” problems.
              So its easier to just utilise modern tech to decide when the best time to charge is…..it could also be linked to variable TOD charge rates.
              Im not suggesting it “should” be done… just that it could be done if there is a problem such as you suggested.

              12

              • #
                Hanrahan

                A bit rich calling your friends and neighbours “lazy buggers” because they don’t understand the complexities of a power grid. You have little understanding yourself.

                An elegant solution to a problem reduces complexity not adding more. You should realise that left alone, without political interference, our engineers would STILL be providing power that we mere mortals did not have to concern ourselves about and doing it with long term price rises less than inflation.

                What we have now is expensive band aids on gaping, self-inflicted wounds, each one taking us further down the vortex.

                Smart meters are an expensive way to charge suburban families more for less.

                20

              • #
                Chad

                Hh,
                Politicians did not invent Solar or Wind.
                That came from “Engineers” and Scientists looking for cheaper generation systems. Unfortunately their enthusiasm led them to convince authorities these new systems were viable. That was then seized on be “Green” movements with political influence ….and here we are !
                The real problem isthat the public voters have allowed, encouraged, supported, that “Green” idealology and let this mess develop to where it is now.
                But, this is a developing world still, and you cannot expect systems to remain as they were 50 years ago, this is a “Smart Technology” age, which we have to adopt or be left behind..

                11

              • #
                Sceptical Sam

                Chad,

                You keep on forgetting that, by definition, 50% of the population has below average intelligence. Most of them are greens.

                30

              • #
                Chad

                S Sam..
                No i have not forgotten ,..as i said above.
                What concerns me more is the other 50% who just keep allowing the Minority interest groups , to dictate policy.

                10

  • #
    Earl

    An interesting video on YouTube is the race between aTesla and TModel Ford.. 110 year old car versus the state of the art modern electric technology.. watch it…

    41

    • #
      Dennis

      The first attempt at selling EV late 1800s to early 1900s was brought to a standstill after Henry released his Model T Ford with internal combustion (gasoline) engine, far easier to refuel, longer trips could be done with spare fuel cans on board and the Model T was cheaper.

      New York City USA provided power points at many locations around that city for recharging taxi cabs and privately owned EV with lead acid batteries but recharging took many hours.

      Free market capitalism, let the buyers pick winners and losers, and EV lost.

      40

      • #
        Chad

        Dennis, it was not the “T” that killed the early electric cars, but ironicly it was the development of the ELECTRIC STARTER MOTOR on ICE engines that made then so much easier to use.

        31

        • #
          Dennis

          Not so Chad, the Ford Model T was cheaper and far more convenient to use than electric vehicle of that time, electric starter motor was first used by General Motors;

          1903: Clyde J. Coleman is issued a patent for an electric automobile starter.

          Coleman originally applied for the patent in 1899, but his early designs proved impractical. The need for this kind of starter for an internal combustion engine was obvious. Automobiles were getting larger, and hand-cranking � the method used to get the pistons moving in order to make ignition possible � was not only cumbersome, but physically demanding and potentially injurious.

          ADVERTISEMENT

          The hand cranks in use at the time were built with an overrun mechanism meant to disengage the crank from the spinning drive shaft, but it was designed to work in forward drive only. If the car backfired, the engine could slip into reverse, forcing the crank backward sharply. The result could be a broken thumb, or worse.

          The electric starter motor, when perfected, meant the end of the hand-cranked automobile.

          “Coleman sold his patent to the Delco Company, which was taken over by General Motors. Charles Kettering, a Delco engineer who joined GM, did some tinkering with Coleman’s design and received his own patent for an improved version. The 1912 model Cadillac became the first car to replace the hand crank with an electric starter motor.

          Most automobile manufacturers switched over to the electric starter during the teens, although Ford’s Model T continued using the hand crank through 1919. With the exception of those old Model T’s, almost every American car on the road boasted an electric starter by 1920.

          30

          • #
            Hanrahan

            The need for this kind of starter for an internal combustion engine was obvious. Automobiles were getting larger, and hand-cranking � the method used to get the pistons moving in order to make ignition possible � was not only cumbersome, but physically demanding and potentially injurious.

            As I read it Coleman had a fiend who gallantly tried starting a damsel’s car, broke his arm and died of an infection. This was his motivation.

            20

          • #
            Chad

            Dennis, Not just the “T” or the electric starter…

            Electric Cars Almost Become Extinct by 1935
            For the following reasons, the electric car declined in popularity. It was several decades before there was a renewed interest in these vehicles.

            *By the 1920s, America had a better system of roads that connected cities, bringing with it the need for longer-range vehicles.
            *The discovery of Texas crude oil reduced the price of gasoline so that it was affordable to the average consumer.
            *The invention of the electric starter by Charles Kettering in 1912 eliminated the need for the hand crank. By 1920 nearly all American made cars had Electric starters.
            * The initiation of mass production of internal combustion engine vehicles by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and affordable, in the $500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the less efficiently-produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In 1912, an electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car sold for $650.

            20

    • #
      Hanrahan

      A search on that showed only match-ups on drag strips where EVs shine.

      But a standard Tesla can’t compete on Nurburgring because the batteries overheat and they go into “crippled” mode.

      A comment on the Tesla 3 @ Nurburgring:

      The lap itself was around 10 minutes Bridge to Gantry (in heavy traffic) but unfortunately the car went into a reduced power mode about 3 minutes in due to excess battery heat (at least, that’s my guess).

      30

      • #
        Chad

        H, You are correct, the Tesla overheats when driven hard.
        But do another search on the Porche Taycan at the Nurenberg ring tests .!
        ..and for 5h1ts and giggles, look up the Porche 919 Hybrid there also ! (It holds the lap record.)

        Its easy as a “armchair” designer to contemplate solutions, but my thinking is a Trifuel Hybrid running a 1o0kW LPG/Diesel engine and a 50kW electric motor from a Capacitor pack, Would be a good solution for Oz ! .

        10

      • #
        Dennis

        I have read comments in reply to comments revealing the shortcomings of EV referring to how fast EV are, zero to one hundred in, my words added, speed most likely to attract police attention – wink!

        10

        • #
          Chad

          Most modern cars are capable of accelleration /speeds that will attract attention from the law.
          But that is due to a flaw in the “NUT “ attached to the steering wheel.
          A common fault that can be associated with any vehicle !

          20

  • #
    neil

    There is a simple metric that applies to all changes in technology fairly consistently.

    A new technology will completely replace older tech within 50 – 70 years, if it hasn’t by then it never will.

    Petrol cars replaced horses in 70 years.
    Airplanes replaced passenger liners in 70 years.
    Computers replaced all other forms of calculating in 50 years.

    The electric car was invented in 1846 forty years before the petrol car, 175 years ago and it has failed to achieve any significant market penetration let alone replacement.

    Toyota is right the future is hybrid petrol/electric, EV’s can fill niches but they will never be dominant. Most people understand what they are “COAL BURNERS”, throughout most of Australia EV’s produce more CO2 than hybrids and will until our electricity grid goes nuclear.

    91

    • #
      Dennis

      It is well known that EU member nation governments are being pushed to convert their ICEV fleets to EV and the EU European Standards has made ICEV rules tougher to handicap them, many nations provide incentive subsidies on EV purchases and some have exhaust analysis testing and fines if ICEV enter Central Business Districts that cannot meet European emission Standard.

      Even so buyers are reluctant to change over to EV, apart from cashed up city and suburban drivers who are so often quoted, not identified, by the average kilometres they travel, a sales pitch from EV brands attempting to explain why buyers should ignore the inconvenience of recharging time.

      60

      • #
        Hanrahan

        Saying an EV meets average demand is as meaningless as saying a bridge is designed to meet average load – not quite good enough.

        Admittedly, when an EV fails to meet demand the result isn’t as catastrophic as when a bridge fails.

        I can’t see far enough into the future to predict when an EV will be the car of choice for a single car family living in country Australia. Earlier I spoke of the red-eye flight Pert/Cairns, 3,500 km where the only lights you see at cruising altitude are likely to be Alice Springs. No matter how sparsely populated, people still travel the roads. ICE rules, OK!!!

        30

  • #
    Dennis

    Toyota Australia made representations to The Australian Government to drop European Standard on motor vehicles (EV focused) and to adopt The North American Standard instead.

    Apparently Toyota realises that for Australian country drivers and city drivers who travel regularly outside of cities and suburbs Hybrid Technology is far better than EV Technology.

    60

  • #
    Dennis

    I suppose that people have noted that the same “renewable transition” left leaning globalist mob are pushing electric vehicles transition?

    Climate hoaxers or crony capitalists creating wealth from the warming trend creative accounting.

    Also note that in October 2015 UN Official Christian Figurers admitted that “climate change” politics is not about climate, it is targeting capitalism for destruction as the Marxists have long been planning to achieve. Her speech was not long before the UN IPCC Paris Conference late November into December 2015. Other leftists have made similar admissions.

    31

  • #
    David Maddison

    IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer, speaking in November 2010, advised that:

    “…one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth…”

    30

    • #
      neil

      The UN has been trying this on since 1946, they have always insisted that they should have control of 0.7% of the western worlds GDP for some noble leftist cause.

      War reconstruction
      Centralised control of nuclear weapons
      Global nuclear disarmament
      African poverty
      Global poverty
      Global warming
      Climate change
      Global extinction

      But what they really want is wealth redistribution under their control.

      41

  • #
    Michael Spencer

    And then there’s the work that’s going on in making fuel from sea water using cheap electricity from ‘modern’ nuclear energy.

    See page 13 of this little introduction: http://www.galileomovement.com.au/media/SaveThePlanetStart.pdf

    10

  • #
    Robdel

    In regard to the headline of this article: you don’t say!

    00

  • #
    UK-Weather Lass

    There were 33m cars in the UK in 2019, almost 50% population ownership. Where on earth is all the stuff needed to build the electric cars and their batteries, and have enough left over to maintain them let alone fuel them, going to come from? Is this the stupidity of the Woke or is it the stupidity of policy makers, starting with the UN but spreading rapidly like a virus among a chattering class. That chattering class no longer believes that having a healthy debate will do anything but damage what few grey cells they have left.

    This bunch of religious zealots believes that somehow human beings can control their local and global climates without a huge number of inconvenient truths, known knowns, known unknowns, unknown unknowns and unknown knowns standing in their way? Life is given to us in the full knowledge that it comes with huge and largely random risks which have to be survived or not as the case may be. And what will be the saving in CO2 if the science is right? It’ll be absolutely unnoticeable and unmeasurable in terms of weather and temperature alike. It will not make any difference to CO2 at all. What will be different is the misery suffered by those who will not be able to heat their homes in the very cold winters that we can experience in the UK. That is already happening not that our two faced chattering classes actually give a damn.

    We need debate now and every day until the so-called Woke confess to the truth that they seriously have no idea what they are doing, and not for the first time wearing my religious hat for the occasion.

    20

  • #
    Deano

    A pattern emerges: Every few years the promise of electric cars becoming the ‘norm’ soon is promoted. The price of oil steadily rises. Shares are invested in electric vehicle companies based on favourable reports and promises. Oil price falls suddenly. Electric vehicle share values fall suddenly – leaving a sour taste in the mouths of investors as they sell off to cut their losses. Oil price starts rising again….

    30

  • #
    Gary H

    Just can’t wait to take that electric Land Rover across the outback or on that African Safari.

    20

    • #
      Dennis

      It can be done.

      Equipment needed one four wheel drive diesel flatbed truck with long range fuel tanks.

      10

  • #
    Tilba Tilba

    I read the whole thread – lots of interesting information.

    I’m sceptical about the practicality, and cost, of EV technology as many are here – especially if a net reduction in fossil fuel emissions is the goal.

    However I have a couple of observations:

    (1) While there is a lot of criticism of the global warming consensus “driving” the EV agenda, there seems to be no mention of Peak Oil, and the reasonable likelihood that liquid fuels for transportation will become more scarce, and also much more expensive. The fracking (and tar sands) industries are not profitable, and the easy-to-get fuel in the major producer nations is declining. New discoveries are rare.

    There is a price at which oil becomes too expensive for societies (economies) to afford, and they then face many problems, and meanwhile there is a price below which the oil companies are not profitable. It seems there is no sweet spot. There might come a time within the next generation when there will be a very serious oil crisis.

    (2) If there is going to be a concerted effort grow the EV market, then I think there has to be some examination of how we use vehicles, and what vehicles suit those purposes. I appreciate that a city main road is busy and often dangerously fast – whether those ICE vehicles are doing just 20 km a day, or they have travelled 400 km.

    However it seems to me that small, basic EVs for city use could be viable … sort of like glorified (and enclosed) golf-carts – so long as they are not trying to compete with big ICE vehicles that want to do 80-100 kph. Most of my (now retired) life I’m not commuting to a central city or to a distant suburb – and the overwhelming majority of trips are local ones, within 5 km, when not using public transport.

    Future thinkers might need to consider what are “reasonable” expectations, in terms of individual use of a long-range vehicle; jumping in the big vehicle and tootling from Melbourne to Cairns can be nice (having done it a few times), but it might becomes cost-prohibitive in petrol-diesel, or it might be taxed into unaffordability, or even restricted.

    Same thing in the US – the number of long-distance tris taken is simply enormous from my experience there – perhaps people believe it’s right there in the Bill of Rights somewhere!

    00

  • #
    CHRIS

    Just like us Aussies, Yanks love their cars to death, and will fight tooth and nail to preserve their right to go wherever they want. Whether these cars are EV, gas, hydrogen, solar or whatever, the underlying principle is FREEDOM TO DO WHAT YOU WANT, and bugger the government. The individualism of Americans and Aussies are paramount in this debate.

    00