Carryfast:
lancpudn:
Hot of the press looks like synthetic e-fuels is no better than ordinary petrol or diesel after tests were carried out 
transportenvironment.org/di ⌠as-petrol/
So now itâs not CO2 after all.
What was the point of fitting those expensive catalytic converters.
Also what facts show that hydrogen produces any or all of those emissions even in measurable amounts let alone the same amounts as diesel.
.
CO2 hasnt gone away as a problem. Just because other problems are being talked about as well doesnt mean CO2 doesn`t matter.
Catalytic converters are for cleaning up carbon monoxide, nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide and hydrocarbons.
It may be necessary to consider more than one narrow aspect when thinking of these things!
It depends how the hydrogen is produced. If it from hydrocarbons then it is producing CO2.
If from electrolysis, from green electricity, it is much nearer zero emissions.
If we want reduced emissions we need to make hydrogen by electrolysis. It is an intermediary between the solar/wind/water energy and the vehicle to be moved.
So if hydrogen is to be used as a âgreen fuelâ it is effectively a means of storing and moving electric energy.
So is hydrogen a good way of storing/moving energy? How does it compare with batteries?
Problems with both, but batteries seem the choice, for now anyway.
lancpudn:
Porsche is heavily invested in a e-fuels plant in Chile south America which will start producing synthetic fuels from next year to keep their classic 911âs etc & Porsche race series going. The big drawback is the price of the stuff, between $4.50-$6.00 per litre, Fuel for the wealthy.
evcentral.com.au/synthetic-petr ⌠ambitions/
If you can afford to race a Porsche, I don`t reckon the price of the fuel is high up on your list of worries. 
Franglais:
lancpudn:
Porsche is heavily invested in a e-fuels plant in Chile south America which will start producing synthetic fuels from next year to keep their classic 911âs etc & Porsche race series going. The big drawback is the price of the stuff, between $4.50-$6.00 per litre, Fuel for the wealthy.
evcentral.com.au/synthetic-petr ⌠ambitions/
If you can afford to race a Porsche, I don`t reckon the price of the fuel is high up on your list of worries.
It is if youâre not rich and like driving proper cars on long road trips.
Itâs unaffordable whether itâs e fuels, or electric at 26p per kwh + taxes, whether on the road or domestic fuel bills.
While the rule doesnât apply to anything registered before 2030, let alone in the 20th century, anyway so why the big issue regarding the âclassic Porscheâ among other surviving classics.They are still allowed to run on petrol as before.Or is something being hidden in the detail.
Franglais:
Carryfast:
lancpudn:
Hot of the press looks like synthetic e-fuels is no better than ordinary petrol or diesel after tests were carried out transportenvironment.org/di ⌠as-petrol/
So now itâs not CO2 after all.
What was the point of fitting those expensive catalytic converters.
Also what facts show that hydrogen produces any or all of those emissions even in measurable amounts let alone the same amounts as diesel.
.
CO2 hasnt gone away as a problem. Just because other problems are being talked about as well doesnt mean CO2 doesn`t matter.
Catalytic converters are for cleaning up carbon monoxide, nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide and hydrocarbons.
It may be necessary to consider more than one narrow aspect when thinking of these things!
It depends how the hydrogen is produced. If it from hydrocarbons then it is producing CO2.
If from electrolysis, from green electricity, it is much nearer zero emissions.
If we want reduced emissions we need to make hydrogen by electrolysis. It is an intermediary between the solar/wind/water energy and the vehicle to be moved.
So if hydrogen is to be used as a âgreen fuelâ it is effectively a means of storing and moving electric energy.
So is hydrogen a good way of storing/moving energy? How does it compare with batteries?
Problems with both, but batteries seem the choice, for now anyway.
Catalytic converters actually clean up the supposed emissions that they are moaning about.As youâve said yourself.
Batteries are dependent on Lithium supply and therefore cost.Hydrogen isnât.Lithium is also toxic.
Batteries carry a weight penalty which outweighs their energy content and storage capacity.
Any form of electric dependency means nuclear dependency which is even more toxic than Lithium and way more toxic than any fossil fuel emissions when it inevitably all goes wrong.
Although many people will freeze let alone be able to travel far anyway in a 26p per kwh + economic environment.
Probably before a nuclear plant inevitably goes bang.Then they also wonât need to worry about living in the freezing house because it will be an uninsurable loss.So they are homeless and cold.
Thereâll also be no food because the fields will all be too irradiated to grow anything which will match the treeless landscape and fields turned to dustbowls starved of light under solar panels.
Green indeed.
Iâll keep the petrol engine and the gas boiler thanks.
Carryfast:
It is if youâre not rich and like driving proper cars on long road trips.
That`s me on both counts.
No money in the bank, but I like spending it.
What will you do to help me out?
Been looking at getting a Merc a class and looked at a Plug in hybrid but the solo electric range is only 44 miles before it needs plugging in. Problem as I live in a first floor flat.
Itâs a new development but the builder did not think it necessary to put charging points in the car park and it was not even considered in the plans submitted for local authority approval. Perhaps it was time it became compulsory to include charging points in new housing developments.
On the subject of home charging, would you have to inform your insurance company if regularly charging your car at home? If there is a fire when charging the car could the ins co say the house wiring was not up to scratch for the load. If it was put down to faulty wiring in the car would the car ins pay for damage to the home? Not sure if this has been tested yet.
Tyneside
Franglais:
Carryfast:
It is if youâre not rich and like driving proper cars on long road trips.
That`s me on both counts.
No money in the bank, but I like spending it.
What will you do to help me out?
Can only point out if it looks, quacks and flies like a hidden agenda to remove the freedom to travel how, when and where we wish.
So pre 2030 reg cars nothing changes ( supposedly ).So why the need for âe fuelsâ or any other âissuesâ affecting the use of such vehicles.
While post 2030 reg can still use hydrogen fuelled ICE but, like EVâs, still dependent on nasty, anything but green nuclear electric generation and anything but green biomass and solar for electrolysis production.But at least not dependent on Lithium in addition.
Also ticks all the right boxes for those who prefer ICE powered vehicles in exchange for their cash.
Carryfast:
Franglais:
lancpudn:
Porsche is heavily invested in a e-fuels plant in Chile south America which will start producing synthetic fuels from next year to keep their classic 911âs etc & Porsche race series going. The big drawback is the price of the stuff, between $4.50-$6.00 per litre, Fuel for the wealthy.
evcentral.com.au/synthetic-petr ⌠ambitions/
If you can afford to race a Porsche, I don`t reckon the price of the fuel is high up on your list of worries.
It is if youâre not rich and like driving proper cars on long road trips.
Itâs unaffordable whether itâs e fuels, or electric at 26p per kwh + taxes, whether on the road or domestic fuel bills.
While the rule doesnât apply to anything registered before 2030, let alone in the 20th century, anyway so why the big issue regarding the âclassic Porscheâ among other surviving classics.They are still allowed to run on petrol as before.Or is something being hidden in the detail.
From what Iâve read the fuel mix rules are changing from next year for some racing series including F1, Bio fuels will need 10% more bio-components in it in 2022 then going onto advanced synthetic fuels which would mean no alteration of the engines will be needed to run synthetic petrol.
lancpudn:
From what Iâve read the fuel mix rules are changing from next year for some racing series including F1, Bio fuels will need 10% more bio-components in it in 2022 then going onto advanced synthetic fuels which would mean no alteration of the engines will be needed to run synthetic petrol.
F1 long ago lost any relevance as a âmotor racingâ series.
Itâs just as overregulated circus and competition between drivers not machines.
Donât think there will be any such rules regarding production car club racing in which no one moans when their 4 litre 6 cylinder motor gets lapped by a 12 cylinder 6 litre one all running on normal E5 99 pump fuel.
At face value the rule is no petrol and diesel fuelled cars registered after 2030.Thatâs it other than that we can drive what ever we like running on E5 99.Everything else is a Trojan Horse of the anything but green zealots trying to expand on that ruling.
How to increase the residual value of a Tesla.
youtube.com/watch?v=x-6kHjF1U1E
Carryfast:
How to increase the residual value of a Tesla.
youtube.com/watch?v=x-6kHjF1U1E
LOL Richrebuilds, He did that out of frustration with Tesla. Iâve been subbed to his channel since the beginning when he first started buying salvage Tesla Model Sâs, Tesla wouldnât sell him the spare parts he needed & if he did get it back on the road again the car was banned from their super charger network because it was deemed a hazard. Even if he spent $thousands getting it recertified by Tesla engineers they still ended up not being able to charge at Teslaâs super charger network therefore rendering them useless if you did high mileage, It would take something like 24 hours to fully charge one from a type 1 charger Great entertainment though.
This here UK ânet zeroâ for road transport doesnât make for good reading! Just been looking through the Policy andâŚâThe plan explicitly states that âwe want less motor traffic in urban areasâ and says the aim is for 50% of all trips in towns and cities to be on foot or by bike by 2030.â
âHowever, it does note that in the future âadditional targeted actionâ â such as âsteps to reduce use of the most polluting cars and tackle urban congestionâ â may be required to meet climate targets. Another transport decarbonisation plan in five yearsâ time will assess progress.â
Even if all combustion engine car sales end, various modelling exercises have demonstrated that car traffic will need to drop 2-4% each year over the next decade to align with net-zero."
Public transport for the Hoi Polloi it is then. carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa ⌠-transport
lancpudn:
This here UK ânet zeroâ for road transport doesnât make for good reading! Just been looking through the Policy andâŚâThe plan explicitly states that âwe want less motor traffic in urban areasâ and says the aim is for 50% of all trips in towns and cities to be on foot or by bike by 2030.â
âHowever, it does note that in the future âadditional targeted actionâ â such as âsteps to reduce use of the most polluting cars and tackle urban congestionâ â may be required to meet climate targets. Another transport decarbonisation plan in five yearsâ time will assess progress.â
Even if all combustion engine car sales end, various modelling exercises have demonstrated that car traffic will need to drop 2-4% each year over the next decade to align with net-zero."
Public transport for the Hoi Polloi it is then. carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa ⌠-transport
The âplanâ is clear enough and doesnât seem to match just the stated no new registrations of fossil fuelled cars from 2030.Itâs clearly a hidden agenda of retsrospectively applied controls on use of all private cars.
Donât remember any such âplansâ being part of any Partyâs election manifesto and certainly not that of the present governmentâs manifesto.
The resulting loss of the automotive sector will crash the economy long before the public transport utopia kicks in.This agenda obviously isnât going to stop at just private car use.
Carryfast:
lancpudn:
This here UK ânet zeroâ for road transport doesnât make for good reading! Just been looking through the Policy andâŚâThe plan explicitly states that âwe want less motor traffic in urban areasâ and says the aim is for 50% of all trips in towns and cities to be on foot or by bike by 2030.â
âHowever, it does note that in the future âadditional targeted actionâ â such as âsteps to reduce use of the most polluting cars and tackle urban congestionâ â may be required to meet climate targets. Another transport decarbonisation plan in five yearsâ time will assess progress.â
Even if all combustion engine car sales end, various modelling exercises have demonstrated that car traffic will need to drop 2-4% each year over the next decade to align with net-zero."
Public transport for the Hoi Polloi it is then. carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa ⌠-transport
The âplanâ is clear enough and doesnât seem to match just the stated no new registrations of fossil fuelled cars from 2030.Itâs clearly a hidden agenda of retsrospectively applied controls on use of all private cars.
Donât remember any such âplansâ being part of any Partyâs election manifesto and certainly not that of the present governmentâs manifesto.
The resulting loss of the automotive sector will crash the economy long before the public transport utopia kicks in.This agenda obviously isnât going to stop at just private car use.
Yes exactly, Iâve been reading this stuff since 2015 (yeah I know sad git) & have seen most of what theyâve been proposing before in numerous reports but that part about âanother transport decarbonisation plan in 5 years timeâ set alarm bells ringing.
2024/25 is when a lot of new rules regulations tighter emission standards (Euro 7) & road transport carbon pricing on the ETS kick in. Theyâve neutered new cars now it seems theyâll be going after the older more polluting cars that will still be on the road, As Net Zero stretches out to 2050 I would have thought another transport transport decarbonisation would have been further down the road than in 5 years time. Thereâs going to be a run on Hi-Viz vests before much longer.
Blimey! Another one thatâs throwing the towel in early. Hyundai has just announced that theyâre closing down their engine development team to concentrate on EVâs. electrek.co/2021/12/28/hyundai- ⌠tric-cars/
lancpudn:
Blimey! Another one thatâs throwing the towel in early. Hyundai has just announced that theyâre closing down their engine development team to concentrate on EVâs. electrek.co/2021/12/28/hyundai- ⌠tric-cars/
Hopefully they will concentrate on where to find all the lithium for the batteries that wonât last 5 years!
bigstraight6:
lancpudn:
Blimey! Another one thatâs throwing the towel in early. Hyundai has just announced that theyâre closing down their engine development team to concentrate on EVâs. electrek.co/2021/12/28/hyundai- ⌠tric-cars/
Hopefully they will concentrate on where to find all the lithium for the batteries that wonât last 5 years!
Most of the European legacy auto makers are going to be screwed for years to come, None of them have a meaningful supply line of materials to build EVâs in the west to match their ICE manufacture numbers. China has got everything sewn up regards the rare earth elements to build EVâs in large numbers. Almost every western car manufacturer has had to go to China to build cars in numbers via a joint venture with Chinese car companies.
NIO, BYD & X-Peng to name but three have already set up bases in Europe & already shipping EVâs in numbers, Fabulous tech cars (if youâre into EVâs) which all have 5 star Euro NCAP ratings. Mercedes EQS quality at less than half the price.
lancpudn:
Blimey! Another one thatâs throwing the towel in early. Hyundai has just announced that theyâre closing down their engine development team to concentrate on EVâs. electrek.co/2021/12/28/hyundai- ⌠tric-cars/
Theyâve just suspended their hydrogen fuel cell projects indefinitely too.
lancpudn:
bigstraight6:
Hopefully they will concentrate on where to find all the lithium for the batteries that wonât last 5 years!
Most of the European legacy auto makers are going to be screwed for years to come, None of them have a meaningful supply line of materials to build EVâs in the west to match their ICE manufacture numbers. China has got everything sewn up regards the rare earth elements to build EVâs in large numbers. Almost every western car manufacturer has had to go to China to build cars in numbers via a joint venture with Chinese car companies.
NIO, BYD & X-Peng to name but three have already set up bases in Europe & already shipping EVâs in numbers, Fabulous tech cars (if youâre into EVâs) which all have 5 star Euro NCAP ratings. Mercedes EQS quality at less than half the price.
Less than half the price is moot in an economy in which the european automotive industry has been trashed let alone to the advantage of an enemy rogue state.
Limited Lithium resources v demand will obviously be the same regardless of where the Lithium is and whoâs got it.Way more limited than fossil fuel reserves.
In addition to turning the country into a nuked, treeless wasteland, at the cost of 26p per kwh + taxes, for the privilege.
Carryfast:
lancpudn:
bigstraight6:
Hopefully they will concentrate on where to find all the lithium for the batteries that wonât last 5 years!
Most of the European legacy auto makers are going to be screwed for years to come, None of them have a meaningful supply line of materials to build EVâs in the west to match their ICE manufacture numbers. China has got everything sewn up regards the rare earth elements to build EVâs in large numbers. Almost every western car manufacturer has had to go to China to build cars in numbers via a joint venture with Chinese car companies.
NIO, BYD & X-Peng to name but three have already set up bases in Europe & already shipping EVâs in numbers, Fabulous tech cars (if youâre into EVâs) which all have 5 star Euro NCAP ratings. Mercedes EQS quality at less than half the price.
Less than half the price is moot in an economy in which the european automotive industry has been trashed let alone to the advantage of an enemy rogue state.
Limited Lithium resources v demand will obviously be the same regardless of where the Lithium is and whoâs got it.Way more limited than fossil fuel reserves.
In addition to turning the country into a nuked, treeless wasteland, at the cost of 26p per kwh + taxes, for the privilege.
Theyâll need to find large deposits of Lithium soon because since ClientEarth won the human rights court case allowing every man & his dog can now sue companies & countries over climate liability. All the major oil companies/refineries are at present knee deep in climate lawsuits and now itâs not just Greenpeace or NGOâs but a group of kids in Portugal are suing 33 countries to force politicians to tackle climate change. Beginning of the end for the oil cartels? bbc.co.uk/news/av/science-e ⌠t-59776108