Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

No new Diesel or Petrol cars after 2040 in UK

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

No new Diesel or Petrol cars after 2040 in UK

Old 26th Jul 2017, 10:18
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Norfolk
Age: 64
Posts: 4
Adopting the Cuban model and continuing to use existing fossil fuelled cars should allow for our transportation needs up to at least 2100. Start stockpiling spares now.
G0ULI is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 10:27
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,715
Well I'll be 86 by then, so I don't think it will greatly affect me.
ORAC is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 10:37
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: No longer in Jurassic Park eating Toblerone....
Posts: 2,654
G-CPTN you have a point, it takes 60-125MJ of energy to produce 1kg of Copper from sulfide ore but it takes 227-342MJ of energy to produce 1 kg of Aluminium from bauxite ore. How much energy does it take (on average) to produce 1 kilogram of the following materials? - LOW-TECH MAGAZINE

However a plus for Aluminium is that it's the 3rd most common metal vs Copper is the 26th. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abunda...arth%27s_crust
LowNSlow is online now  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 10:42
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 355
Originally Posted by UniFoxOs View Post
No, in the EU Beurocracy.

Sally - we can use aluminium in place of copper, it is only slightly higher resistance and is already in use in some places.
Aluminium is greatly inferior for distributing heavy currents. Much thicker conductors and/or power loss. In underground ducts it gets hot.
Sallyann1234 is online now  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 10:46
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 65
Posts: 59
You would have thought that a power plant plan to provide sufficient electricity would have gone hand in hand with this initiative as the two are so inextricably linked. Did I miss something?


It's quite easy to ban something. Providing an adequate replacement not so much.
meadowrun is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 10:51
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: No longer in Jurassic Park eating Toblerone....
Posts: 2,654
I'll be 83 so maybe I should get one of these which appears to have a pile cushion for a front seat Concept Zoe ZE electric car by Renault on display at Frankfurt Motor Show 2009 | iain masterton photography !!!
LowNSlow is online now  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 11:21
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 59
I think this is more likely than a pure battery driven car TOYOTA Mirai 113kW Auto - NewHydrogen (from NG) - CO2 0 g/km
Although very expensive now and lacking refuelling stations, hydrogen fuel cells must be the future.
jetcollie is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 11:25
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 355
Originally Posted by LowNSlow View Post
I'll be 83 so maybe I should get one of these which appears to have a pile cushion for a front seat Concept Zoe ZE electric car by Renault on display at Frankfurt Motor Show 2009 | iain masterton photography !!!
Nah, that's the methane collector for the auxiliary power supply.
Sallyann1234 is online now  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 11:27
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Luberon
Age: 68
Posts: 915
Motorway services battery charging area, circa 2040!

sitigeltfel is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 11:32
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 55
Posts: 910
Originally Posted by meadowrun View Post
It's quite easy to ban something.
Especially when the ban doesn't come into effect for another 23 years......
Andy_S is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 11:41
  #31 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 76
Posts: 1,863
Originally Posted by jetcollie View Post
hydrogen fuel cells must be the future.
Way back in the 1970s there was a surge of publicity about how hydrogen powered vehicles would displace fossil-fuelled ones.

This was after we were told that nuclear power would make electricity too cheap to expect people to pay for it.
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 12:06
  #32 (permalink)  

Controversial, moi?
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,590
...hydrogen fuel cells must be the future
That was said in the 1970s. There are many reasons why hydrogen powered cars are not as practical as Electric Vehicles (EVs).

Many, many posts above focus on the negatives and are also devoid of knowledge or facts about even the current position regarding EVs.

I know several people who own electric cars, often more than one, who have solar and also Tesla Powerwalls. They are completely independent of the grid for much of the year. Tesla Powerwalls are storage batteries for your house. Even in today's infant market they are extraordinary. Small (relatively, certainly no where near the size of your garden!), efficient and very clever.

What has to be remembered is that since time immemorial man has adapted to change. Why won't people with brains far better than mine develop ways around all the (few) valid points made above?

It is almost as if people fear EVs! All I would say is go and drive one, any one they are all impressive, do some serious research and then come back and debate from a position of knowledge. A great deal of the claptrap being spouted is becoming tedious.
M.Mouse is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 12:16
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 489
Good post from the mouse.

I've had an electric car for a couple of years now and I find myself shaking my head at the absurdity of old-fashioned piston-bangers. That such 19th century technology is still being used so widely this far into the 21st century is quite amazing. The damned things belong in museums and should only be let out for occasional days at village fetes, like steam engines.
Cazalet33 is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 12:19
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by M.Mouse View Post
That was said in the 1970s. There are many reasons why hydrogen powered cars are not as practical as Electric Vehicles (EVs).

Many, many posts above focus on the negatives and are also devoid of knowledge or facts about even the current position regarding EVs.

I know several people who own electric cars, often more than one, who have solar and also Tesla Powerwalls. They are completely independent of the grid for much of the year. Tesla Powerwalls are storage batteries for your house. Even in today's infant market they are extraordinary. Small (relatively, certainly no where near the size of your garden!), efficient and very clever.

What has to be remembered is that since time immemorial man has adapted to change. Why won't people with brains far better than mine develop ways around all the (few) valid points made above?

It is almost as if people fear EVs! All I would say is go and drive one, any one they are all impressive, do some serious research and then come back and debate from a position of knowledge. A great deal of the claptrap being spouted is becoming tedious.
As an example, currently the display in my car tells me that in the three years and a half years since it was made, 45% of the energy it has consumed has been electricity, 55% has been petrol. At least 50% of the electricity was generated by our own solar panels.

Our new house is a bit better, since built it has generated just over 20,000 kWh of electricity and has consumed 7,500 kWh of electricity. It is all-electric, electric heating and hot water. We have no energy bills.

When it comes to driving, I couldn't go back to a car that didn't have electric motors and an all-electric transmission. Not because of the cost effectiveness of running a car that's fuelled to a significant extent by the sun, but simply because driving an electric car is addictive. When I have to drive a hire car it feels like going back decades, in terms of the driving experience, and not in a good way, either.
VP959 is online now  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 12:23
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 489
How will you drive across Australia? - not to mention Africa
By aeroplane of course.
Cazalet33 is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 12:29
  #36 (permalink)  
Cunning Artificer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 73
Posts: 3,117
I'm not too bothered. I won't be here in 2040.
Blacksheep is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 13:04
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,244
Why do I get the feeling this has disaster written all over it. The last time the Government tried to intrude in the market for 'green' reasons we ended up with the Diesel debacle.

When electric cars are more technologically advanced, cheaper and more efficient than the competition they will take over - until then the Government needs to get out of the way.
Jet II is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 13:42
  #38 (permalink)  
Tabs please !
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Biffins Bridge
Posts: 719
The best way for a car to be powered by hydrogen is to stick the molecules to a long chain of another element and then carry out an exothermic decomposition. Carbon works well and the resulting energy density is hard to beat. I can get about 800 miles out of 60 litres of hydrogenated carbon.
B Fraser is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 13:59
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: La Rochelle.
Age: 45
Posts: 500
How will you drive across Australia? - not to mention Africa
By aeroplane of course.
Not allowed as they will be burning all that nasty fuel. They will have to be electric quad-copters
clareprop is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2017, 14:16
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 92
Originally Posted by ATNotts View Post
23 years is a very long time, and I believe battery technology, along with energy storage and generation will change radically between now and then.
Unfortunately, your belief system will not change the physics of battery technology. Energy density from any of the chemical storage batteries hasn't risen more than about 10% in the past 90 years. Sure, we've put different anodic materials in them, and preserved the charge a bit longer but the limits of energy density of a 'battery'(as we colloquially use that term) are at or near their finite limit.

One of the things that makes gas so nice is its thermodynamic conversion. It goes from nice and cool and liquid to very hot, and very expansive quickly. Batteries, even when they blow up and are converted to gasses and bits of plastic are still a long, long way from the energy given off by fuel being burned. Heck, even a coal fired steam engine is more efficient than a battery.

Sorry, but electric mechanical efficiency will never, ever overcome the thermodynamic efficiency of gasoline. Now, if you want to change the meaning of 'battery' to something that flows and is converted like gasoline, well - then all bets are off. But if you mean 'battery' in the conventional sense, not gonna happen.
ethicalconundrum is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.