Have electric vehicles been "oversold" to the detriment of public transport, walking and cycling?

[reddragon]

The new Sono EV is solar powered, so you can't even tax its 'fuel'

 

[Bald Rick]

The new Sono EV is solar powered, so you can't even tax its 'fuel'

Not so useful in the West of Scotland, I fancy.

 

[DustyBin]

Not really, There are two cars in my household but they are only used when there is a clear 'need', (and cold or wet weather does not create a need). As far as my expectation go, I don't expect any UK government to bring measures to realise whatever promises they may make in November with a step function, but the framework (some of which is already there) will be steadily reinforced until there is a significant volume of the electorate that does agree with stronger measures. Events like exceptional rainfall, extended periods of record high temperatures and the increasing fragility of our fuel, food and material resources will in time, drive (pun not intended) opinion towards more responsible road space and energy use.

Fair enough, we only use our cars when necessary but I suspect our definitions of “necessary” may differ. See my previous post regarding travelling into the city centre by Metro for example where driving often makes more sense. What we don’t do however is drive to the nearby shops which can be reached on foot in less than ten minutes. Just to be clear, I’m no fan of congestion and it annoys me when people choose to drive as a result of pure laziness and nothing else.

Part of the problem (as I see it) is the very title of this thread, or more so the answer to it which as I said previously is probably “yes”. I believe people will transition to EVs, that’s the easy bit. Telling them that they then need to use them less to save the planet is going to be a hard sell. I suspect the majority will think they’ve done their bit by acquiring an EV in the first place!

 

[Bald Rick]

I believe people will transition to EVs, that’s the easy bit. Telling them that they then need to use them less to save the planet is going to be a hard sell. I suspect the majority will think they’ve done their bit by acquiring an EV in the first place!

Agree 100%.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Part of the problem (as I see it) is the very title of this thread, or more so the answer to it which as I said previously is probably “yes”. I believe people will transition to EVs, that’s the easy bit. Telling them that they then need to use them less to save the planet is going to be a hard sell. I suspect the majority will think they’ve done their bit by acquiring an EV in the first place!

Not least because the more the grid is "greened" the less that pressure will actually be (remember those 1980s DMUs and HSTs on stopping services which have basically all already lost their environmental credentials?). It then comes down to the other negatives of cars - them hitting people, noise and making poor use of space to drive and park them - pressures which are basically all urban. Which might give you the answer regarding taxation - perhaps if you had motorway tolls and urban congestion charges plus parking taxes (and permits for all on-street residential parking) that would actually cover it, with no need for actual road pricing at all.

There is essentially very little negative of using an electric car purely in a rural area.

 

[reddragon]

There is essentially very little negative of using an electric car purely in a rural area.

When the only place you can walk is in the road, all vehicles have a negative impact. Rural areas just have different issues.

On the flip side with my EV I don't have to drive miles to find petrol.

 

[Bletchleyite]

When the only place you can walk is in the road, all vehicles have a negative impact. Rural areas just have different issues.

Fair point, though overall the impact is positive because there is no other viable way to travel in most rural areas, and being unable to travel would mean being unable to live there (even when working locally e.g. farming). And the bus would be more of a threat than a car, if anything.

By contrast, the private car is mostly negative in urban areas.

 

[AM9]

Fair point, though overall the impact is positive because there is no other viable way to travel in most rural areas, and being unable to travel would mean being unable to live there (even when working locally e.g. farming). And the bus would be more of a threat than a car, if anything.

By contrast, the private car is mostly negative in urban areas.

Which is why in several posts I have suggested that driving urban areas (especially where there is adequate public transport) will either be restricted by local prohibitions, or managed by asserting a cost premium both by specific road(s) and or times.
Once maximum eradication of road borne NOx etc. is achieved, there's still the issue of particulates, delays to essential services (which includes public transport) and the general inconvenience of traffic to commerce in the area. Drivers in towns may find themselves intentionally confined to totally inadequate roads as a deterrent once the essential traffic is given alternatives.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which is why in several posts I have suggested that driving urban areas (especially where there is adequate public transport) will either be restricted by local prohibitions, or managed by asserting a cost premium both by specific road(s) and or times.

Or taxed, which would allow the income to be maintained.

Once maximum eradication of road borne NOx etc. is achieved, there's still the issue of particulates

Once you remove engine generated particulates and use regenerative braking on EVs, particulates are then mostly just from tyres, which are minimal and will also be emitted from bicycles. So this can essentially be disregarded once this point is reached.

 

[ashkeba]

Once you remove engine generated particulates and use regenerative braking on EVs, particulates are then mostly just from tyres, which are minimal and will also be emitted from bicycles. So this can essentially be disregarded once this point is reached.

EVs are a long way from running solely on regenerative braking and emit many more times tyre particulates than bicycles.

Someone said EVs are the only viable transport in rural areas. Why not e-bikes? They are obviously enough for moving within rural areas and will get all but the most remote areas to a rail station in 30 minutes, without as many negativities to other road users as EVs. Even so, government should plant and support EV car/van clubs in the most remote areas.

 

[trebor79]

EVs are a long way from running solely on regenerative braking

Not true. When I hired an EV for a few days earlier this week I found that I could drive from Glasgow city centre to Ayr, and then all over the countryside visiting different farms without touching the brake pedal once. The only time I used the brake pedal was when someone pulled out in front of me, and another time when someone slammed their brakes on in front to let someone out of a side road (always annoying when some idiot does that when there's a massive gap behind!). The regenerative braking was quite powerful.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Someone said EVs are the only viable transport in rural areas. Why not e-bikes?

You live in the UK right? You've seen the weather?

They are obviously enough for moving within rural areas and will get all but the most remote areas to a rail station in 30 minutes, without as many negativities to other road users as EVs. Even so, government should plant and support EV car/van clubs in the most remote areas.

Car clubs in areas where alternatives are poor are of low value. They have value in cities, where people own cars because they need to use one once a week but everything else can be done well enough by foot, bike or public transport, and secondarily where parking provision is low. In rural areas it is necessary to own a car if you want any level of quality of life, and it is fairly pointless to try to fight that.

 

[johncrossley]

You live in the UK right? You've seen the weather?

Dutch weather is very similar, though. They seem to cycle in the countryside quite a lot, as well as in towns. A temperate climate appears to be optimal for cycling, unlike extreme heat or cold.

Are there any statistics to show the percentage of the time that it rains in various locations?

 

[DustyBin]

Dutch weather is very similar, though. They seem to cycle in the countryside quite a lot, as well as in towns. A temperate climate appears to be optimal for cycling, unlike extreme heat or cold.

Are there any statistics to show the percentage of the time that it rains in various locations?

100% of the time in Manchester!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Dutch weather is very similar, though. They seem to cycle in the countryside quite a lot, as well as in towns. A temperate climate appears to be optimal for cycling, unlike extreme heat or cold.

Are there any statistics to show the percentage of the time that it rains in various locations?

One thing people seem to ignore about the Dutch is that they also drive cars. And they do that when the weather is bad.

It is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a no-car or even low-car country.

 

[johncrossley]

One thing people seem to ignore about the Dutch is that they also drive cars. And they do that when the weather is bad.

It is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a no-car or even low-car country.

Oh, of course, but famously a large proportion of short trips are by bike. Is that despite the weather, or would it be even higher if it wasn't for the rain? Or does it not actually rain that much there at all? As I say, it would be interesting to see rain statistics.

 

[reddragon]

Dutch weather is very similar, though. They seem to cycle in the countryside quite a lot, as well as in towns. A temperate climate appears to be optimal for cycling, unlike extreme heat or cold.

Are there any statistics to show the percentage of the time that it rains in various locations?

The Netherlands is flat. The hill up from the station for me is bigger than their biggest mountain!

They also have bike lanes everywhere, we have few. There are no twisty unlit dark narrow lanes there either.

 

[Bald Rick]

Oh, of course, but famously a large proportion of short trips are by bike. Is that despite the weather, or would it be even higher if it wasn't for the rain? Or does it not actually rain that much there at all? As I say, it would be interesting to see rain statistics.

The climate in the Netherlands is broadly the same as the climate in South East England.

 

[johncrossley]

The Netherlands is flat. The hill up from the station for me is bigger than their biggest mountain!

They also have bike lanes everywhere, we have few. There are no twisty unlit dark narrow lanes there either.

The earlier question though was about e-bikes, which will get you up the hills. Obviously bike lanes need to be installed.

 

[ashkeba]

The earlier question though was about e-bikes, which will get you up the hills. Obviously bike lanes need to be installed.

If British people spent a fraction of the time they spent this century arguing that good bike lane networks are impossible instead on lobbying government for building them, then its network would already dwarf the Netherlandic one and be ready for mass e-bike use.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Oct 2021 ==

The Netherlands is flat. The hill up from the station for me is bigger than their biggest mountain!

I am not familiar with it but your profile says your station is Churn and the web tells me Churn Hill is 162m tall. That's about half the height of the Vaalserberg, so I think you may be misinformed.

 

[biko]

Oh, of course, but famously a large proportion of short trips are by bike. Is that despite the weather, or would it be even higher if it wasn't for the rain? Or does it not actually rain that much there at all? As I say, it would be interesting to see rain statistics.

In the Netherlands, many people also cycle when it rains, but you can notice more congestion on the roads and more standing in buses. Mainly for longer trips people change modes depending on the weather. A real changer has been the introduction of apps which show the rain forecast for the coming hour, which makes it easy to decide to wait a few minutes to start the trip after the shower has stopped.

It is difficult to find statistics on the number of days with rain, but overall the precipitation is very similar: 854.7 mm annually in the Netherlands vs 854.8 mm in England according to Wikipedia's statistics based on the Met Office. But I see that the amount varies over England, most of southeastern England is drier than the Netherlands.

 

[johncrossley]

It is difficult to find statistics on the number of days with rain, but overall the precipitation is very similar: 854.7 mm annually in the Netherlands vs 854.8 mm in England according to Wikipedia's statistics based on the Met Office. But I see that the amount varies over England, most of southeastern England is drier than the Netherlands.

Wikipedia also shows the number of rain days per month and year. For example, London and Amsterdam have 109.6 and 132 rain days per year respectively. But what I would really like to know is the proportion of time that it rains, which would presumably be a lot less than 132/365.

 

[apk55]

Cycling appears to have gone out of many peoples mentality. When I went to school in the 60/70s most kids cycled to school and a block of 200/300 cycles heading to Altrincham at school finishing time was a common sight. Now the same school does not even have cycle sheds and outside is one SUV hell at start and finishing time.

 

[HST274]

I am not familiar with it but your profile says your station is Churn and the web tells me Churn Hill is 162m tall. That's about half the height of the Vaalserberg, so I think you may be misinformed.

Considering Churn station closed in 1962, it is 1.3km from the nearest road along dirt tracks and the railway track no longer exists I would say it is probably harder to get there than you think

 

[telstarbox]

Cycling is on the rise in the UK but people need to feel safe and that means proper infrastructure. Just saying "you need to cycle on this busy road" doesn't help anyone.

 

[The Ham]

You live in the UK right? You've seen the weather?

Yes, I rarely get wet walking to and from work, even when it's raining. For instance the other day whilst cars had their wipers on constant it wasn't raining enough to need much more than a fleece for a 15 minute walk and certainly not enough to bother stopping to put my waterproof on.

Of course all the car drivers probably thought that they would have got wet and so were justified in driving.

Wikipedia also shows the number of rain days per month and year. For example, London and Amsterdam have 109.6 and 132 rain days per year respectively. But what I would really like to know is the proportion of time that it rains, which would presumably be a lot less than 132/365.

Indeed, there's often a lot of days when it rains overnight, whilst inside (say at work) or (as indicated above) the rain is light. As such I rarely (compared to those numbers) need to worry about putting my waterproof on and if I do is then fairly rare that it's very wet.

I certainly would get wet if I didn't have a reasonably good waterproof, but that would be a fairly unreasonable benchmark (given that you'd only be slightly better off on that benchmark if you drove).

 

[DustyBin]

Cycling appears to have gone out of many peoples mentality. When I went to school in the 60/70s most kids cycled to school and a block of 200/300 cycles heading to Altrincham at school finishing time was a common sight. Now the same school does not even have cycle sheds and outside is one SUV hell at start and finishing time.

I used to enjoy cycling when I was young (i.e. school age) and like you I used to cycle to school sometimes. My school was about 1.5 miles away from our house but if I didn’t cycle I’d generally walk. Occasionally if the weather was bad (or I had lunch money left over!) I’d treat myself to a ride on a Leyland National .

I absolutely detest SUVs, I’m hoping they’re a fad but I fear they’re here to stay and the body shape lends itself to EV technology. What I don’t understand is why so many people think they need one. My GFs sister bought one when she had her first child as apparently you can’t manage with a normal car once you have children. I seem to remember we managed perfectly fine with a MK2 Fiesta when I was a child however!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why do you detest a car simply because of its body shape? The hate on SUVs makes the mind boggle.

UK style SUVs are convenient, practical and generally not much different on fuel consumption to a classic estate car (my Kuga for example does 50mpg average). Is it because American ones that share the term are basically small lorries?

 

[The Ham]

Fair point, though overall the impact is positive because there is no other viable way to travel in most rural areas, and being unable to travel would mean being unable to live there (even when working locally e.g. farming). And the bus would be more of a threat than a car, if anything.

By contrast, the private car is mostly negative in urban areas.

I am one of the 15% of the UK population (circa 10 million) who lives in a rural location.

As rural means any settlement with a population of less than 10,000 people.

Where I live has 2tph and 1bph and it's possible to walk or cycle to most places you want to get to locally with the train allowing you to get to most other places fairly easily.

Now whilst there may not be many rural locations of 8,000 or more people, however even 240 would be about 2 million if that 10 million total. Likewise a further 400 places with an average of 5,000 people gets you another 2 million.
However if you get to places with much lower population than that then there's unlikely to be a lot of traffic (unless it's on the route between two places, but then it's likely that it'll have public transport between those places).

In realty the number of people who truly need a car as they live in a rural area compared to the number of cars on the roads is tiny.

Whilst there's likely to be lots of people who live in urban areas who wish to visit rural locations it's not that common that they do so with much frequency.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am one of the 15% of the UK population (circa 10 million) who lives in a rural location.

As rural means any settlement with a population of less than 10,000 people.

Where I live has 2tph and 1bph and it's possible to walk or cycle to most places you want to get to locally with the train allowing you to get to most other places fairly easily.

I think this is getting quite finiticky over the meaning of rural. You know full well what kind of place I mean, and it does not have 2tph of train service unless you are very, very lucky.