UK switching to electric vehicles discussion

[Bald Rick]

I meant in terms of petrol stations closing down around them.

There will still be penty of petrol stations, even in 30 years time. They won’t have many pumps, and won’t sell much petrol, but they will be there.

 

[E27007]

For all the people criticising Toyota, you do realise that it has 15% of the car market in Africa as a whole and over 24% in South Africa, as just two examples of markets where BEVs are irrelevant. Toyota will sell to areas where there is hardly any running water or electricity, let alone a car-park full of fast chargers. At present only 1% of its worldwide sales are BEVs.

The list of manufacturers who have abandoned their BEV targets grows longer by the day.

BMW are promising a production fuel cell vehicle in 3 years' time. You can buy one from Toyota today, it's called the Mirai. Toyota are well ahead of the competition there.

The market at the moment and for the foreseeable future is hybrid and Toyota are ahead of the game there. They are virtually the only choice for private hire drivers in many countries, especially the UK.

Do those who criticise Toyota know who is the benchmark in the industry? The company which others aspire to be?
Toyota vehicles noted with reliability and dependability, high customer loyalty and satisfaction, low levels of warranty claims, the Toyota Just-in-Time lean production system which others try to emulate. Their success in the toughest markets (USA). Toyota rarely post a loss, even in depressions when others are posting losses, Toyota profits are healthy.
If Toyota are investigating in alternative technology for motive power of a vehicle, 1) they can afford to, 2) they believe it has long-term potential benefits.

 

[Bald Rick]

If Toyota are investigating in alternative technology for motive power of a vehicle, 1) they can afford to, 2) they believe it has long-term potential benefits.

Indeed. I’m seeing an awful lot of Toyota EVs on the roads of St Albans now.

 

[The Ham]

But how many people are going to be prepared to play musical chairs with the spaces for charging their EV. When I am at home I want to park the car and then not move it for weeks. That means that if I had an EV then once I have got it on charge I am not moving it afterwards.

Whilst you do what you do I would argue that you are generally an edge case.

This is so unrealistic. There can be battles fought over parking spaces there is no way that a street will happily share a couple of charging points.

What I said was to show that it should be possible (at least until there's over 75% EV ownership) for a street to be able to manage charging their cars.

Of course there'll be times when that'll not work all that well. However, as others have pointed out, even if someone insists on parking next to the charger if they are not plugged in it could be possible to run a long cable (say up to 10m) to stop connect your car. Whilst that may cost you (say) £200 that's a one off cost and you can use with subsequent cars.

It's not uncommon for street lighting columns to be placed 30m apart (assuming 6m for each parked car that's 5 parked cars) and so (if the spacing is 30m) that's still about 2/3rds of the street which can be parked in and still access a charger (even if you're not willing to buy a longer cable there's places which do then up to 40m in length).

 

[bspahh]

It's not uncommon for street lighting columns to be placed 30m apart (assuming 6m for each parked car that's 5 parked cars) and so (if the spacing is 30m) that's still about 2/3rds of the street which can be parked in and still access a charger (even if you're not willing to buy a longer cable there's places which do then up to 40m in length).

When electric cars are common enough so need lots of chargers are required for on street parking, there can be a pop up bollard for each space, so they don't obstruct the pavement when they aren't being used.

 

[AM9]

When electric cars are common enough so need lots of chargers are required for on street parking, there can be a pop up bollard for each space, so they don't obstruct the pavement when they aren't being used.

Until the local philistine decides to park on the footpath, thereby preventing the bollard to rise over it!

 

[Peter Sarf]

If you leave a car on a public highway for weeks there's every chance the council will come and move it at some point.

Absolutely wrong. If the car is taxed and insured it can stay there unmoved subject to parking restrictions.

I am sure people will work it out amongst themselves. Don't park your car that isn't going to move for ages next to a place to charge. I'm sure there aren't many people who 'dump' a car on a road for any length of time, as they may question why they own one if they're never using it. Perhaps you have more than one car, which would make more sense.

I am sure it will cause tensions. I see how possessive people can get about "their" parking space even though they do not really need exactly that space. It does not help that there are almost no spaces available depending on the time of day.

If you buy a new car you're basically financing depreciation, ICE or EV. If that's not your thing, and it's not mine either, you should buy used, again ICE or EV as you prefer. It's not an issue that's specific to either.

That is my philosophy. Avoid the depreciation and go for a make, model and year that has proven reliable.

This is so unrealistic. There can be battles fought over parking spaces there is no way that a street will happily share a couple of charging points.

Yes. I have witnessed such - some people even think the space outside their house on the public road is "theirs". To then have to worry about charging opportunities will be interesting.

Whilst you do what you do I would argue that you are generally an edge case.

I am not so sure.

Also most roads I see have the streetlamp away from the curb up against the property boundaries.

Until the local philistine decides to park on the footpath, thereby preventing the bollard to rise over it!

You make me think - rising bollards - its more to go wrong. Lets just have fixed bollards. Preferably not painted black (like all the other street furniture).

 

[61653 HTAFC]

When electric cars are common enough so need lots of chargers are required for on street parking, there can be a pop up bollard for each space, so they don't obstruct the pavement when they aren't being used.

Much like the idea of everyone having a lamp post to charge at (or happy-clappy communities where neighbours will collaborate to make sure everyone is able to charge), this is yet another case of "jam tomorrow" from the pro-EV crowd. I've read on this thread about how quickly technology is moving in this area, but the reality in the economically deprived part of the North I live in is that there are no signs of this technological revolution actually arriving.
It's all very well saying that in the future these things will exist, but until I have it in writing from the council that there will be a charging point for me to use outside my building, and until I actually see the contractors turn up and start installing them, I can't realistically commit to purchasing an EV- Even if they were available within the price bracket that the ICE cars I drive are in.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2025 ==

If you leave a car on a public highway for weeks there's every chance the council will come and move it at some point.

If only that were true... There are multiple cars dumped on my street for months and even years, all owned by the garage across the street. Despite being reported to the council multiple times, nothing gets done

 

[jon0844]

...Until I have it in writing from the council that there will be a charging point for me to use outside my building, and until I actually see the contractors turn up and start installing them, I can't realistically commit to purchasing an EV- Even if they were available within the price bracket that the ICE cars I drive are in.

Are you currently filling up your car at home or on the street? No? Having to go to a petrol station to fill up like me?

So, if you can't charge at home then you'll only have to do what you've been doing for years. Yes you'll pay more, but it's still going to be cheaper than the petrol/diesel you're buying now. More companies are offering different rates through memberships or time of charging, so you may find you aren't paying a significant premium (which, again, is still cheaper per mile than the fossil fuel you're buying).

Now assuming you only need to charge once a week, as most people will (even more so if people own more than one EV) then it's even less of an issue.

My neighbour with an EV and their own wall charger (7kWh) doesn't even bother to plug in most days, and sometimes parks the EV on the street and keeps their petrol Audi on the drive instead. I'd probably charge an EV like my phone to keep it topped up whenever possible, but many EV owners are quite happy to operate it like an ICE car and only charge when it gets low.

Thus they won't be fighting for a parking space to charge every day, as they won't need or want to charge. While we've all seen videos of nightmare neighbours, the vast majority of people get along okay with their neighbours and besides the odd idiot, I am still adamant that if a road has spaces for EV charging and spaces without on a public road, people will figure things out for themselves.

 

[tomuk]

Are you currently filling up your car at home or on the street? No? Having to go to a petrol station to fill up like me?

So, if you can't charge at home then you'll only have to do what you've been doing for years. Yes you'll pay more, but it's still going to be cheaper than the petrol/diesel you're buying now. More companies are offering different rates through memberships or time of charging, so you may find you aren't paying a significant premium (which, again, is still cheaper per mile than the fossil fuel you're buying).

Now assuming you only need to charge once a week, as most people will (even more so if people own more than one EV) then it's even less of an issue.

My neighbour with an EV and their own wall charger (7kWh) doesn't even bother to plug in most days, and sometimes parks the EV on the street and keeps their petrol Audi on the drive instead. I'd probably charge an EV like my phone to keep it topped up whenever possible, but many EV owners are quite happy to operate it like an ICE car and only charge when it gets low.

Thus they won't be fighting for a parking space to charge every day, as they won't need or want to charge. While we've all seen videos of nightmare neighbours, the vast majority of people get along okay with their neighbours and besides the odd idiot, I am still adamant that if a road has spaces for EV charging and spaces without on a public road, people will figure things out for themselves.

It takes a few minutes to fuel an ICE it takes a lot longer for an EV.

 

[jon0844]

It takes a few minutes to fuel an ICE it takes a lot longer for an EV.

At the weekend I queued for 20 minutes at Costco to fuel for a 'few minutes'. About the same time I could probably charge a car to about 80% (depending on the car) from an EV charger in a car park, Gridserve or whatever.

Unlike queuing and having to remain in the car to keep moving, if I was charging an EV I could park up, plug in, and go for a walk and do something productive (which might just be sitting on my phone to doom scroll, but at least I'm not in a car when I can't do anything like that).

 

[The Ham]

am not so sure.

Also most roads I see have the streetlamp away from the curb up against the property boundaries.

To get to 8,000 miles (fairly average car milage) someone would have to average about 150 miles a week. That's about 300 miles every fortnight or 450 miles every 3 weeks.

Even if you were to half those numbers (so 4,000 miles a year), that's still 75 miles a week

Given that on average people do less than 10 trips a year of over 50 miles, I would argue parking a car for weeks at a time it's far from typical.

Yes some people do it, but the typical cost of car ownership (especially if you have high insurance costs) means that the cost and inconvenience (car admin, taking it get fixed, etc.) isn't worth the benefits for (say) a once every three weeks use of the car.

 

[stuu]

At the weekend I queued for 20 minutes at Costco to fuel for a 'few minutes'. About the same time I could probably charge a car to about 80% (depending on the car) from an EV charger in a car park, Gridserve or whatever.

Why?

I have had a car for most of the past 32 years, and aside from the fuel protests in 2000 (?), I don't think I have ever had more than a couple of cars in front of me at any petrol station anywhere, so 5ish minutes wait at the most. Ever

I'm entirely in favour of EVs but they definitely need a different approach than ICE cars

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Are you currently filling up your car at home or on the street? No? Having to go to a petrol station to fill up like me?

So, if you can't charge at home then you'll only have to do what you've been doing for years. Yes you'll pay more, but it's still going to be cheaper than the petrol/diesel you're buying now. More companies are offering different rates through memberships or time of charging, so you may find you aren't paying a significant premium (which, again, is still cheaper per mile than the fossil fuel you're buying).

Now assuming you only need to charge once a week, as most people will (even more so if people own more than one EV) then it's even less of an issue.

My neighbour with an EV and their own wall charger (7kWh) doesn't even bother to plug in most days, and sometimes parks the EV on the street and keeps their petrol Audi on the drive instead. I'd probably charge an EV like my phone to keep it topped up whenever possible, but many EV owners are quite happy to operate it like an ICE car and only charge when it gets low.

This is the issue I have with the EV argument though. First we're told that we'll save money by switching, but that only applies if you can charge at home. If you can't charge at home then the economic argument doesn't apply.

I refuel my car every 2-3 weeks or so, with some variation depending on the journeys I've made. It costs about £50-55 and takes less than five minutes. Charging an EV at commercial charging points simply can't compete on cost or time currently, especially considering that if you use fast chargers every time you'll shorten the life of the battery- or at least that's what the manufacturers of EVs themselves tell us.
Hopefully these factors will have improved by the time we're all forced into EVs (or even better, public transport will have improved to the point that I no longer need to own a car at all) but as things stand I'm going to stick with ICE for as long as possible.

Even EV advocates aren't consistent. You say you don't need to plug in every night, but I've also heard EV owners say that the best way is "ABC" (Always Be Charging)- i.e. to top up to 80% at every opportunity. Even the thing about only charging to 80% is something that rubs me up the wrong way- we know to take manufacturers' range estimates with a pinch of salt, and that's also the case with ICE vehicles... but if I fill my car until it clicks off I won't damage my fuel tank, no matter how many times I do it.

 

[jon0844]

This is the issue I have with the EV argument though. First we're told that we'll save money by switching, but that only applies if you can charge at home. If you can't charge at home then the economic argument doesn't apply.

I refuel my car every 2-3 weeks or so, with some variation depending on the journeys I've made. It costs about £50-55 and takes less than five minutes. Charging an EV at commercial charging points simply can't compete on cost or time currently, especially considering that if you use fast chargers every time you'll shorten the life of the battery- or at least that's what the manufacturers of EVs themselves tell us.
Hopefully these factors will have improved by the time we're all forced into EVs (or even better, public transport will have improved to the point that I no longer need to own a car at all) but as things stand I'm going to stick with ICE for as long as possible.

Even EV advocates aren't consistent. You say you don't need to plug in every night, but I've also heard EV owners say that the best way is "ABC" (Always Be Charging)- i.e. to top up to 80% at every opportunity. Even the thing about only charging to 80% is something that rubs me up the wrong way- we know to take manufacturers' range estimates with a pinch of salt, and that's also the case with ICE vehicles... but if I fill my car until it clicks off I won't damage my fuel tank, no matter how many times I do it.

Tests of LiPo batteries suggests no issues with fast charging and limited/minimal harm on NMC, so if time is so important then rapid charging is what you're going to do. If you charge so infrequently, I respect that your life is so busy that 20 minutes is such a hardship over 5 minutes. For some reason, I have lots of dead time and it wouldn't be an issue.

If you use the right chargers then you may not be paying 6-7p per kWh as you could at home, but it will still be cheaper per mile than petrol or diesel. Tesla will let you charge for around 30p. That's 4p above the standard variable rate.

As for the always charging 'theory', that does seem the best way for me and the way most people manage their other devices with batteries. LiPo batteries are fine to charge to 100% and will manage enough cycles to last 10+ years and hundreds of thousands of miles with little degradation. And NMC batteries are proving to be better than expected if the batteries are suitably conditioned. Larger batteries (which are usually NMC) have fewer cycles because of the extended range.

The reason many people charge to 80% only is, like your phone, laptop, tablet or any other battery, the charging slows down to protect the battery and 80-100% can be very slow. You will then be waiting a lot longer than necessary, although if it's charging overnight at home then who cares? People doing long journeys will often just stop and do a 5 or 10 minute top up, which is enough time to grab a coffee or go to the toilet.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2025 ==

Why?

Most likely because it's cheaper and prices are creeping up again. I suppose I could have gone up the road and paid 8p more per litre (and right now Shell is charging 12p a litre more).

I used to queue at my local Asda and Tesco also. Sure, not if it's late at night (or in the small hours) but queuing is a thing for many people - especially those that won't go to the likes of Shell and BP that might have more pumps but want over 50p a gallon more.

 

[Harpers Tate]

First we're told that we'll save money by switching, but that only applies if you can charge at home. If you can't charge at home then the economic argument doesn't apply.

It very likely will apply - but to a lesser extent. There are other costs ICE related that can't ever apply - or will apply to a lesser degree - with an EV. But even broadly equivalant costs are not in themselves any barrier to switching.

Even EV advocates aren't consistent. You say you don't need to plug in every night, but I've also heard EV owners say that the best way is "ABC" (Always Be Charging)- i.e. to top up to 80% at every opportunity. Even the thing about only charging to 80% is something that rubs me up the wrong way- we know to take manufacturers' range estimates with a pinch of salt, and that's also the case with ICE vehicles... but if I fill my car until it clicks off I won't damage my fuel tank, no matter how many times I do it.

The key word there is "opportunity" and that is why the "inconsistency" to which you refer arises. I can charge at home. So I'll keep it charged; why not? The next person may not have that option; but there are still "opportunities" that occur elsewhere. Whether it's charging at the pub while you lunch, or at the supermarket while you shop or whatever. Those are examples of opportunities that may occur. Or can be made to occur (eg by choosing one pub or shopping venue or whatever over another). By making use of them, every kWh you get into your car while you are otherwise occupied will reduce the time (perhaps to "not needed at all") you need to do what you have to do with your ICE. So doing costs no extra, either in money or in effect on the car. It's simple, really; just different. Charge where it's cheapest as the first choice, then when it's opportune, and finally when it's necessary.

And, to expand on that - as one who does have home charging, then I won't charge away from home at all, unless I'm not going to get back. Then and only then will (in my case) ABC come into play. Otherwise, I'll charge at home at ~10% roadside cost. As a total aside, though - as of yesteday, there is still a completely free array of four 7kW chargers not so far from here. If I cared to, I could drive for zero fuel cost for almost all of my mileage.

Even the thing about only charging to 80% is something that rubs me up the wrong way- we know to take manufacturers' range estimates with a pinch of salt, and that's also the case with ICE vehicles... but if I fill my car until it clicks off I won't damage my fuel tank, no matter how many times I do it.

If you want to be "rubbed up the wrong way" by that then so be it. What I'd say is that - by your own admission, you spend a lot of time in your ICE with its fuel capacity well below its maximum. And you fill it up when that becomes necessary. Same thing applies, but in a different manner. If you using an EV and are concerned about battery lifespan then you run at 80% unless you need to do otherwise. You can always go to 100% if/when you need to, and that should give you your range (which is unlikely to be precisely what the industry standard test - WLTP - claims, because your driving will vary from that standard, one way or another) - and won't do any material damage.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Part of the issue is clearly that EVs are relatively new technology. I've heard both EV owners and manufacturers talk about battery life, and how charging to 100% every time can reduce the lifespan of the battery- just as overuse of fast charging has been said to do so. Whether or not these things are true, and how true they are, would be a source of anxiety for me as an EV owner. Lithium Ion batteries in other devices can have their lives shortened by overcharging or repeated fast charging, which is why my mobile phone has software to manage how quickly it charges. Why would a much larger battery in a car be any different?

By comparison I know exactly where I stand with petrol: not only do I know that I can refuel in minutes and not worry that it might damage the engine, but it's mature technology that I'm familiar with. I can also do basic maintenance myself.

Also if you're trying to argue about how much money I could save, Tesla is not the example to use. We've all heard of the "VW Tax" on ICE vehicles (a used Golf will be a fair bit costlier than a comparable Skoda or Seat based on the same platform), the "Tesla Tax" on EVs is the Volkswagen Tax on steroids... and that's before you get on to panel gaps you could park a motorcycle in!

 

[ainsworth74]

Absolutely wrong. If the car is taxed and insured it can stay there unmoved subject to parking restrictions.

As far as I'm aware a vehicle can still be classed as abandoned and moved by the Council even if it is taxed and insured. Though those are factors that points to a vehicle not being abandoned.

 

[jon0844]

Part of the issue is clearly that EVs are relatively new technology. I've heard both EV owners and manufacturers talk about battery life, and how charging to 100% every time can reduce the lifespan of the battery- just as overuse of fast charging has been said to do so. Whether or not these things are true, and how true they are, would be a source of anxiety for me as an EV owner. Lithium Ion batteries in other devices can have their lives shortened by overcharging or repeated fast charging, which is why my mobile phone has software to manage how quickly it charges. Why would a much larger battery in a car be any different?

By comparison I know exactly where I stand with petrol: not only do I know that I can refuel in minutes and not worry that it might damage the engine, but it's mature technology that I'm familiar with. I can also do basic maintenance myself.

Lithium based batteries have been around since the 1980s and were developed in the 1970s.

Also, I had to spend a fortune repairing a diesel engine after I was told that the damage was likely done by low quality fuel. Cost over a grand to sort. I am sure that's quite a rare event, but you can't be 100% certain of fuel not damaging anything.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2025 ==

As far as I'm aware a vehicle can still be classed as abandoned and moved by the Council even if it is taxed and insured. Though those are factors that points to a vehicle not being abandoned.

We had a car removed on our road but it took months. It had a notice served on it for a period of time.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Lithium based batteries have been around since the 1980s and were developed in the 1970s.

Also, I had to spend a fortune repairing a diesel engine after I was told that the damage was likely done by low quality fuel. Cost over a grand to sort. I am sure that's quite a rare event, but you can't be 100% certain of fuel not damaging anything.

That diesel situation is unfortunate, but isn't representative of normal use or an inherent flaw with diesel engines. That's quite different to being told that your battery has x capacity, but you should only use 0.8x except in extremis.

 

[jon0844]

That diesel situation is unfortunate, but isn't representative of normal use or an inherent flaw with diesel engines. That's quite different to being told that your battery has x capacity, but you should only use 0.8x except in extremis.

As I said above, you can charge a battery to 100% but it's very slow to charge from 80 to 100% precisely because it can otherwise damage the battery. There's no point charging 10-80% in 15 minutes and then sitting another 15-20 minutes for the final 20%. Do that when you're sleeping or not in the car.

That's why your smartphone has similar tools now (well mine do), allowing me to choose to charge to 80%, 90% or 100% or allow it to predict when I need a higher charge based on my expected usage (which is learned from previous usage). My wireless charger charges slower overnight, partly because it expects I don't need it charged as fast and also so the fan doesn't run and stop me sleeping (yes, it has a fan as it charges at 100W!).

Rapid charging isn't actually causing as much damage as people first feared but a lot of guidance is based on older battery chemistry.

Interestingly, Ford actually has different guidance for different battery types - whereas a lot of car makers seem to just play safe. Thus people may be out there not aware they have a battery that is fine for charging to 100% fast, and letting it drop to 0% (not that you'd want to do that for obvious reasons!) and not harming it.

 

[Bikeman78]

As far as I'm aware a vehicle can still be classed as abandoned and moved by the Council even if it is taxed and insured. Though those are factors that points to a vehicle not being abandoned.

There is a car on Cornwall Street in Cardiff that hasn't moved in 20 years. If you look on street view, I think you will spot it easily. Pretty much sums up Cardiff council.

 

[Harpers Tate]

Why would a much larger battery in a car be any different?

Typically - far more sophisticated battery management, including (but not limited to) temperature control. Heat is the main cause of premature failure in domestic devices and they typically have little or no temperature management. Cars, on the other hand (with few exceptions) do.

I'll mention this again: most (or all?) cars come with a main battery warranty against capacity reduction* or other failure for 7 or 8 years and 100k+ miles. No manufacturer is going to knowingly put a product out there with a warranty on which there is a high probability of claim.

(to some threshold below 100%; 70% is typical, I believe).

 

[trebor79]

I refuel my car every 2-3 weeks or so, with some variation depending on the journeys I've made. It costs about £50-55 and takes less than five minutes. Charging an EV at commercial charging points simply can't compete on cost or time currently,

Just plug it in whilst you're doing the shopping.

especially considering that if you use fast chargers every time you'll shorten the life of the battery-

No. It won't.

That diesel situation is unfortunate, but isn't representative of normal use or an inherent flaw with diesel engines. That's quite different to being told that your battery has x capacity, but you should only use 0.8x except in extremis.

That isn't the advice though. Firstly with LiFePo batteries the advice is actually to always charger to 100%. With other chemistries 80% or 90% is advised for everyday use butjits perfectly fine to charge to 100% before a long drive. What they are trying to avoid people doing is charge to 100% and leave it sat fully charged for days on end.
And it really doesn't matter anyway. 80% is enough for at least 3 hours driving in winter and at least 5 in summer. I need a break anyway by then and a 15 minute rapid charge will see the journey completed.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

As I said above, you can charge a battery to 100% but it's very slow to charge from 80 to 100% precisely because it can otherwise damage the battery. There's no point charging 10-80% in 15 minutes and then sitting another 15-20 minutes for the final 20%. Do that when you're sleeping or not in the car.

That's why your smartphone has similar tools now (well mine do), allowing me to choose to charge to 80%, 90% or 100% or allow it to predict when I need a higher charge based on my expected usage (which is learned from previous usage). My wireless charger charges slower overnight, partly because it expects I don't need it charged as fast and also so the fan doesn't run and stop me sleeping (yes, it has a fan as it charges at 100W!).

Rapid charging isn't actually causing as much damage as people first feared but a lot of guidance is based on older battery chemistry.

Interestingly, Ford actually has different guidance for different battery types - whereas a lot of car makers seem to just play safe. Thus people may be out there not aware they have a battery that is fine for charging to 100% fast, and letting it drop to 0% (not that you'd want to do that for obvious reasons!) and not harming it.

That's essentially what I was getting at when I mentioned that EVs are relatively new technology- they're not as familiar as ICEs, so there are way more unknowns (both known and unknown, to paraphrase Dick Cheney). I've seen what you've posted here, and I've read and heard other things which contradict that- and I lack the knowledge and experience to know which is accurate.

Typically - far more sophisticated battery management, including (but not limited to) temperature control. Heat is the main cause of premature failure in domestic devices and they typically have little or no temperature management. Cars, on the other hand (with few exceptions) do.

I'll mention this again: most (or all?) cars come with a main battery warranty against capacity reduction* or other failure for 7 or 8 years and 100k+ miles. No manufacturer is going to knowingly put a product out there with a warranty on which there is a high probability of claim.

(to some threshold below 100%; 70% is typical, I believe).

My car is approaching 14 years old (11 plate) and I bought it at 12.5 years old, so if I buy a comparable EV in a few years any warranty on the battery will have expired. Electric cars don't lend themselves to bangernomics or even to not-quite-bangernomics, and for many people (myself included) it's that or the bus.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2025 ==

That isn't the advice though. Firstly with LiFePo batteries the advice is actually to always charger to 100%. With other chemistries 80% or 90% is advised for everyday use butjits perfectly fine to charge to 100% before a long drive. What they are trying to avoid people doing is charge to 100% and leave it sat fully charged for days on end.
And it really doesn't matter anyway. 80% is enough for at least 3 hours driving in winter and at least 5 in summer. I need a break anyway by then and a 15 minute rapid charge will see the journey completed.

The advice seems to change as often as the weather. I'll refer you to my above point about it being a relatively new technology. I know where I stand with a petrol car, so I'll stick with that for now.

 

[ainsworth74]

We had a car removed on our road but it took months. It had a notice served on it for a period of time.

Yeah the impression I have is that if it's actually blocking the highway (or pavement) then the police will get it shifted abandoned or not. But if it's just abandoned but not really causing an obstruction? Settle in, it'll take a while...

There is a car on Cornwall Street in Cardiff that hasn't moved in 20 years. If you look on street view, I think you will spot it easily. Pretty much sums up Cardiff council.

I guess has anyone actually reported it as abandoned? I don't think Councils are especially proactive in hunting for abandoned vehicles!

 

[Bletchleyite]

My car is approaching 14 years old (11 plate) and I bought it at 12.5 years old, so if I buy a comparable EV in a few years any warranty on the battery will have expired. Electric cars don't lend themselves to bangernomics or even to not-quite-bangernomics

How do they not? There's less to go wrong, and while the battery life is depleted from new it's still of use as a runaround. Nissan Leafs are great for that and very cheap. And if the battery fails, you scrap it and get another one - that's the core of bangernomics - you don't spend a fortune on repairs, you just do basics to get it through a few MoTs then once that becomes uneconomic you scrap it and buy another.

There aren't many banger EVs about aside from Leafs because EVs haven't been a thing for long enough - give it chance.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Much like the idea of everyone having a lamp post to charge at (or happy-clappy communities where neighbours will collaborate to make sure everyone is able to charge), this is yet another case of "jam tomorrow" from the pro-EV crowd. I've read on this thread about how quickly technology is moving in this area, but the reality in the economically deprived part of the North I live in is that there are no signs of this technological revolution actually arriving.
It's all very well saying that in the future these things will exist, but until I have it in writing from the council that there will be a charging point for me to use outside my building, and until I actually see the contractors turn up and start installing them, I can't realistically commit to purchasing an EV- Even if they were available within the price bracket that the ICE cars I drive are in.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2025 ==


If only that were true... There are multiple cars dumped on my street for months and even years, all owned by the garage across the street. Despite being reported to the council multiple times, nothing gets done

Living in terraced land and having plenty of public transport means I too need plenty of cheap public charger availability.

I think there is a danger of a two tier society.
Those who can charge next to the comfort of their own home.
Those who have to begotiate for spaces on the road outside their house.
Haves and have-nots ?.

I believe a car is not at risk of being removed until its road tax runs out.

Are you currently filling up your car at home or on the street? No? Having to go to a petrol station to fill up like me?

So, if you can't charge at home then you'll only have to do what you've been doing for years. Yes you'll pay more, but it's still going to be cheaper than the petrol/diesel you're buying now. More companies are offering different rates through memberships or time of charging, so you may find you aren't paying a significant premium (which, again, is still cheaper per mile than the fossil fuel you're buying).

Now assuming you only need to charge once a week, as most people will (even more so if people own more than one EV) then it's even less of an issue.

My neighbour with an EV and their own wall charger (7kWh) doesn't even bother to plug in most days, and sometimes parks the EV on the street and keeps their petrol Audi on the drive instead. I'd probably charge an EV like my phone to keep it topped up whenever possible, but many EV owners are quite happy to operate it like an ICE car and only charge when it gets low.

Thus they won't be fighting for a parking space to charge every day, as they won't need or want to charge. While we've all seen videos of nightmare neighbours, the vast majority of people get along okay with their neighbours and besides the odd idiot, I am still adamant that if a road has spaces for EV charging and spaces without on a public road, people will figure things out for themselves.

Because of the mileage I do the cost of the petrol is not significant. To pay the same for electricity because I do not have a home charger means that "fuel" cost is not a big part of ownership for me.

I very very rarely have to queue for petrol.

Like your neighbour I would not be charging every day BUT I would not want to be moving my car just because it is charged.

Your neighbour seems to prefer to not play musical chairs with their cars because tey are leaving the EV on the street and the ICE hogging their own charging space ?.

To get to 8,000 miles (fairly average car milage) someone would have to average about 150 miles a week. That's about 300 miles every fortnight or 450 miles every 3 weeks.

Even if you were to half those numbers (so 4,000 miles a year), that's still 75 miles a week

Given that on average people do less than 10 trips a year of over 50 miles, I would argue parking a car for weeks at a time it's far from typical.

Yes some people do it, but the typical cost of car ownership (especially if you have high insurance costs) means that the cost and inconvenience (car admin, taking it get fixed, etc.) isn't worth the benefits for (say) a once every three weeks use of the car.

For me it is sub 2,000 miles. A few long trips per year then any local trips carrying more than I can carry. The rest is public transport because I choose to be ecological and it is less hasle for parking on local journeys. BUT I live in London..

Why?

I have had a car for most of the past 32 years, and aside from the fuel protests in 2000 (?), I don't think I have ever had more than a couple of cars in front of me at any petrol station anywhere, so 5ish minutes wait at the most. Ever

I'm entirely in favour of EVs but they definitely need a different approach than ICE cars

I agree. Last time I nearly queued for petrol was around early 2000s - fuel crisis/protests. I left it a couple of days.

How would EV owners cope with Power unless they are privileged enough to have off street parking and a charger ?.

This is the issue I have with the EV argument though. First we're told that we'll save money by switching, but that only applies if you can charge at home. If you can't charge at home then the economic argument doesn't apply.

I agree, the arguments risk being inconsistent. Haves and have-nots.

I refuel my car every 2-3 weeks or so, with some variation depending on the journeys I've made. It costs about £50-55 and takes less than five minutes. Charging an EV at commercial charging points simply can't compete on cost or time currently, especially considering that if you use fast chargers every time you'll shorten the life of the battery- or at least that's what the manufacturers of EVs themselves tell us.
Hopefully these factors will have improved by the time we're all forced into EVs (or even better, public transport will have improved to the point that I no longer need to own a car at all) but as things stand I'm going to stick with ICE for as long as possible.

Even EV advocates aren't consistent. You say you don't need to plug in every night, but I've also heard EV owners say that the best way is "ABC" (Always Be Charging)- i.e. to top up to 80% at every opportunity. Even the thing about only charging to 80% is something that rubs me up the wrong way- we know to take manufacturers' range estimates with a pinch of salt, and that's also the case with ICE vehicles... but if I fill my car until it clicks off I won't damage my fuel tank, no matter how many times I do it.

For me plentiful (and free as over 60) public transport within London makes car ownership almost a nice to have. I still need the car for longer trips (e.g holidays) and local trips carrying heavy/bulky (council tip, diy or large shopping). I do still need a car but it has marginal use. I am not really a low enough user to relay on hiring a van as and when needed - I have tried working it out but it is not worth it.

Yes my feel is if I had an EV I would want to be gently charging it most of the time and only going for a faster charge if in the middle of a long trip.

Tests of LiPo batteries suggests no issues with fast charging and limited/minimal harm on NMC, so if time is so important then rapid charging is what you're going to do. If you charge so infrequently, I respect that your life is so busy that 20 minutes is such a hardship over 5 minutes. For some reason, I have lots of dead time and it wouldn't be an issue.

If you use the right chargers then you may not be paying 6-7p per kWh as you could at home, but it will still be cheaper per mile than petrol or diesel. Tesla will let you charge for around 30p. That's 4p above the standard variable rate.

As for the always charging 'theory', that does seem the best way for me and the way most people manage their other devices with batteries. LiPo batteries are fine to charge to 100% and will manage enough cycles to last 10+ years and hundreds of thousands of miles with little degradation. And NMC batteries are proving to be better than expected if the batteries are suitably conditioned. Larger batteries (which are usually NMC) have fewer cycles because of the extended range.

The reason many people charge to 80% only is, like your phone, laptop, tablet or any other battery, the charging slows down to protect the battery and 80-100% can be very slow. You will then be waiting a lot longer than necessary, although if it's charging overnight at home then who cares? People doing long journeys will often just stop and do a 5 or 10 minute top up, which is enough time to grab a coffee or go to the toilet.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2025 ==



Most likely because it's cheaper and prices are creeping up again. I suppose I could have gone up the road and paid 8p more per litre (and right now Shell is charging 12p a litre more).

I used to queue at my local Asda and Tesco also. Sure, not if it's late at night (or in the small hours) but queuing is a thing for many people - especially those that won't go to the likes of Shell and BP that might have more pumps but want over 50p a gallon more.

My bold - There is that dreaded ten year life span of the battery. I will not be interested in EVs if battery life is too degraded beyond 10-15 years. Even if the battery life might be good enough when I buy the second hand EV at over ten years old - but will it be usable ten or more years after that ?.

Lithium based batteries have been around since the 1980s and were developed in the 1970s.

Also, I had to spend a fortune repairing a diesel engine after I was told that the damage was likely done by low quality fuel. Cost over a grand to sort. I am sure that's quite a rare event, but you can't be 100% certain of fuel not damaging anything.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2025 ==



We had a car removed on our road but it took months. It had a notice served on it for a period of time.

Bad fuel happens rarely but I doubt it is a permanent damage situation.

Voltage surges - would they damage an EV battery and are they more or less likely than bad fuel.

That car was probably not taxed - otherwise the notice would have gone to the owners address and stuck.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2025 ==

How do they not? There's less to go wrong, and while the battery life is depleted from new it's still of use as a runaround. Nissan Leafs are great for that and very cheap. And if the battery fails, you scrap it and get another one - that's the core of bangernomics - you don't spend a fortune on repairs, you just do basics to get it through a few MoTs then once that becomes uneconomic you scrap it and buy another.

There aren't many banger EVs about aside from Leafs because EVs haven't been a thing for long enough - give it chance.

This is my hope. That there will be enough usable old EV bangers around by the time second hand ICE supplies dwindle.

And that charging gets easier.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Just so people are aware, I've started a separate thread for discussing long-term abandoned vehicles:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/abandoned-cars-your-experiences.280934/

 

[Bald Rick]

Lithium Ion batteries in other devices can have their lives shortened by overcharging or repeated fast charging, which is why my mobile phone has software to manage how quickly it charges. Why would a much larger battery in a car be any different?

Please read up on the subject, including on this thread. EV batteries are very different beasts (for the better) compared to your phone.

Also, I had to spend a fortune repairing a diesel engine after I was told that the damage was likely done by low quality fuel. Cost over a grand to sort. I am sure that's quite a rare event,

Not that rare, I’ve had the same, and so has my best friend. Different makes / models / locations too.