Why are people buying electric cars?

[Denis99]

It’s a global thing.

Sea levels are rising globally

Temperatures are rising globally

Extreme weather events are increasing globally.

Switching to EV cars won’t solve this issue, but it would make for a cleaner local environment.

Doing the same things and expecting change is a sign of madness.

Ignoring science and trends is also crazy.

We have the ability to understand information and make changes which will affect future generations.

The way this is going, we are leaving a disastrous legacy for future generations

 

[Deleted member 68495]

I find it fascinating how folk can convince themselves that nothing bad is happening, that the human race can continue with its catastrophic population growth, that we can continue to chuck greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, that we can destroy rain forests and pollute the rivers and oceans with raw sewage and it's all fine, nothing is wrong, it's all sweetness and light. I should set up a business selling blinkers for people or sand boxes they can bury their heads in so as to make it easier to ignore the s***storm that is coming our way.

 

[ecoleman]

I find it fascinating how folk can convince themselves that nothing bad is happening, that the human race can continue with its catastrophic population growth, that we can continue to chuck greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, that we can destroy rain forests and pollute the rivers and oceans with raw sewage and it's all fine, nothing is wrong, it's all sweetness and light. I should set up a business selling blinkers for people or sand boxes they can bury their heads in so as to make it easier to ignore the s***storm that is coming our way.

Catastrophic Population Growth - I agree with
Destruction of Rain Forests - I agree with
Polluting Rivers and oceans - I agree with

We can do something about all of the above.

We CAN NOT change the climate no matter how much we are taxed.

 

[ecoleman]

Sea levels are rising globally

No, they're not.

Extreme weather events are increasing globally.

Are they, or are they just normal weather events turned into "EXTREME" weather events by the hysterical media?

Switching to EV cars won’t solve this issue, but it would make for a cleaner local environment.

"Local" - I guess you're not really interested in global after all.

Doing the same things and expecting change is a sign of madness.

Listening to the same lies decade after decade and expecting them to come true is a sign of madness.

Ignoring science and trends is also crazy.

As above

We have the ability to understand information and make changes which will affect future generations.

But we choose to listen to billionaires who jet around the world in their jets and super yachts telling us how bad it is or little 17 year old girls who have contributed sweet FA to the world.

 

[cambsno]

Other than an anonymously posted video on a brand new twitter account with a number plate that nobody else seems to be able to make out from the footage, there is no real evidence that it wasn't.

Even if it wasn't an EV, there is no doubt that the other EV's parked in the same car park exasperated the problem.

Well the fire service came out and said it was a Range Rover, but not an EV.

So too would the petrol cars, IIFC petrol has a tendency to make fires worse.

 

[ecoleman]

Well the fire service came out and said it was a Range Rover, but not an EV.

So too would the petrol cars, IIFC petrol has a tendency to make fires worse.

Sure, but even petrol fires can be doused cutting off it's oxygen supply. Petrol also burns out a lot quicker than Lithium.

Lithium fires generate it's own oxygen which makes if extremely difficult to extinguish and produces hydrogen gas when it comes into contact with water. This gas is highly flammable so fighting a lithium fire with water can be counter productive.

 

[Nod]

Sea levels are meant to be rising too and have supposedly been doing so for decades and yet no rise in sight.

No rise? NASA seem to disagree... https://sealevel.nasa.gov/understan... sea levels have been,(0.44 centimeters/year).

 

[Deleted member 68495]

Catastrophic Population Growth - I agree with
Destruction of Rain Forests - I agree with
Polluting Rivers and oceans - I agree with

We can do something about all of the above.

We CAN NOT change the climate no matter how much we are taxed.

We can do something, but we don't; and the things you agree with above are just a few of the very things that are changing the climate. Pop growth causes rises in emissions, rain forest destruction changes weather patterns, pollution of water courses causes algal growth which kills the fish which creates problems with the food chain, for all animals, across the world. The Earth's climate is a fine balancing act created over millions of years and humans have just stuck a friggin' great weight on one side of the scales.

I can't change your mind, you don't believe climate change is happening and that's that. Only if or when we cross the tipping point will you come to realise that perhaps you were mistaken. Perhaps you will be proved right, I truly hope you are.

 

[Denis99]

Just imagine that Elliot’s opinions are correct, for one moment.

Changing to a greener emphasis and renewable energy sources,if we just did that would the world be a worse place in terms of emissions ?

Would it be a terrible waste to have our own energy being produced by renewables, wind, solar, tidal etc.

It would create a whole new infrastructure and jobs, and would diminish our reliance on fossil fuels ( which will eventually be exhausted).

Not to mention buying energy from overseas regimes like Russia etc.

Elliot, I find it ironic that your username here is

ECOleman, meant in good faith, not to wind you up.

 

[ecoleman]

Changing to a greener emphasis and renewable energy sources,if we just did that would the world be a worse place in terms of emissions ?

No, lets go for it but in a sensible way. Taxing us to death and forcing us into vehicles that aren't suitable for everyone isn't going to work. Build the infrastructure first and prove it works.

Would it be a terrible waste to have our own energy being produced by renewables, wind, solar, tidal etc.

No, but the UK can not reply on wind and sun. Wales was working on a Tidal Lagoon and that was scrapped after millions wasted on it. Why?
And not to mention that all of the above require fossil fuels to manufacture.

It would create a whole new infrastructure and jobs, and would diminish our reliance on fossil fuels

We will always rely on fossil fuels in some form. Unless we go back to living in caves.

Not to mention buying energy from overseas regimes like Russia etc.

Just imagine if we could extract our own oil and gas.

 

[Marc]

forcing us into vehicles that aren't suitable for everyone

Who's doing that?

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Would it be a terrible waste to have our own energy being produced by renewables, wind, solar, tidal etc.

It would create a whole new infrastructure and jobs, and would diminish our reliance on fossil fuels ( which will eventually be exhausted).

All of that is sensible, in and of itself.

It makes good sense to use natural energy sources in place of the stored energy in oil and coal. However, as Elliot points out, the technology is not mature and only tidal energy, which is currently the least developed source, is constant.

I'm a fan of all concurrent energy sources but none are without their costs: financial, social and ecological.

 

[ecoleman]

Who's doing that?

Urm, the government bybanning the sale of Petrol and diesel cars, by taxing petrol and diesel making it prohibitively expensive for many people to get around. ULEZ and other silly schemes where it's okay to pollute the city as long as you pay.

If you don't see that as forcing people out of ICE cars then I can't help you.

 

[Marc]

Urm, the government bybanning the sale of Petrol and diesel cars, by taxing petrol and diesel making it prohibitively expensive for many people to get around. ULEZ and other silly schemes where it's okay to pollute the city as long as you pay.

If you don't see that as forcing people out of ICE cars then I can't help you.

The ban on the sale of petrol & diesel cars isn't (at the moment) until 2035 and then it will only be new cars. People will be able to drive around in ICE cars for many years after that. As for ULEZ, where do you have to drive an unsuitable care to be compliant. My wife's66 plate Skoda Yeti is compliant. I know there are older ICE vehicles which are also ULEZ compliant.

 

[LCPete]

Yes as Mark says most vehicles on the road are ULEZ compliant if I remember correctly all Toyota petrol cars since 2006 are ok
ULEZ was brought in for a different reason, to reduce pollution that affects people living in cities unfortunately our government are using it as way of scaremongering to gain votes when in fact it won’t affect the majority of drivers but will make a big impact on air quality and people’s health

 

[Denis99]

Yes, cost is a major obstacle.

I don’t know the actual figures on new EV car sales, bought outright vs PCP .

Those bought on some form of lease agreement generally see those cars turning up in the used market.

The used EV share is still relatively low compared to ICE.

Unless the used EV market grows, or prices fall, then I can see this being a major obstacle for a lot of people.

 

[yzfmike]

but will make a big impact on air quality and people’s health

In Havering, Essex?

I don’t think so!

 

[LCPete]

In Havering, Essex?

I don’t think so!

I’m not familiar with Havering so can’t answer your question but I am talking about in places like cities with heavy traffic

 

[yzfmike]

I’m not familiar with Havering so can’t answer your question but I am talking about in places like cities with heavy traffic

I’m talking about rural areas WITHOUT heavy traffic, where Khan is imposing ULEZ resulting in hardship for residents and businesses. It’s all about making money to offset his budget deficit.

 

[LCPete]

I’m talking about rural areas WITHOUT heavy traffic, where Khan is imposing ULEZ resulting in hardship for residents and businesses. It’s all about making money to offset his budget deficit.

Fair point didn’t know it also applies to rural areas thought it was just being brought in to towns and cities where I do believe that it’s a good thing

 

[ecoleman]

In the first month since the ULEZ expansion 1 in 10 vehicles entering the zone were not compliant. That was 77,000 vehicles per day.

Approx. 59% of those vehicles paid the charge resulting on TFL raking in £600,000/day. Some of these vehicle were larger HGV and busses who have to pay £100/day

Had the remaining 41% of drivers paid up this would have been nearly £1,000,000/day for TFL

Now fair enough, only 10% of vehicles are non compliant but that is still 77,000 vehicles being taxed to go to work. It hasn't reduced the pollution because those vehicles are still driving the roads in and around London. Has the £600,000 solved the pollution problem, of course not. It's just money that has been removed from the local economy and into the coffers or corrupt Khan for him to spend on more cameras to start charging drivers per mile, and that will be ALL drivers. Mark my words.

 

[Pound Coin]

Drivers of ICE cars are charged per mile. Fuel Tax.

 

[Denis99]

Yes, the fuel tax on petrol and diesel is something that a lot of people forget about.

There has been talk of imposing some form of tax on the electricity EV's use.

However, could only see this applied to the paid-for rapid chargers.

Most people with EV cars charge at home, generally overnight at lower cost.

With the inevitable shift to EV over time, I wonder what ingenious method of tax will be applied,

 

[Steep]

I’m talking about rural areas WITHOUT heavy traffic, where Khan is imposing ULEZ resulting in hardship for residents and businesses. It’s all about making money to offset his budget deficit.

Is Khan trying to offset the budget deficits in Madrid, Stockholm, Oslo, Mexico City, Beijing... Because they and others all have ulez.

 

[ecoleman]

With the inevitable shift to EV over time, I wonder what ingenious method of tax will be applied,

Ever wonder why energy companies are so intent on pushing a smart meter on you? It's certainly not for your benefit.

No reason why some sort of chip can't be installed that is read by a smart meter and fed to HMRC

 

[Deleted member 68495]

In Havering, Essex?

I don’t think so!

Same where my son lives in Bexley, it's practically rural and no more polluted than where I live here in the West Country. It's Khan trying to get more money so he can pay the tube drivers their exorbitant wages.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Most people with EV cars charge at home, generally overnight at lower cost.

Thus cheating every non-EV driver out of the EV-driver's taxes...

 

[JonathanRyan]

Ever wonder why energy companies are so intent on pushing a smart meter on you? It's certainly not for your benefit.

No reason why some sort of chip can't be installed that is read by a smart meter and fed to HMRC

Sorry, what?

What kind of data are you talking about? Energy companies wouldn't need a mysterious chip to feed days to HMRC. They could easily do it now. But......why?

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

They could easily do it now. But......why?

To find out when you're avoiding fuel duty by charging a vehicle from the domestic supply.

 

[ecoleman]

Sorry, what?

What kind of data are you talking about? Energy companies wouldn't need a mysterious chip to feed days to HMRC. They could easily do it now. But......why?

Haven't you been keeping up with the thread.

Data that says you are charing an EV, to tax you for EV electricity.
Unless they just plan on taxing all electricity usage which wouldn't surprise me either.

 

[cambsno]

Haven't you been keeping up with the thread.

Data that says you are charing an EV, to tax you for EV electricity.
Unless they just plan on taxing all electricity usage which wouldn't surprise me either.

There is no simple answer.

The only way I see it is to ditch all road tax and fuel duty and bring in a price per mile, that all cars would need to have. But that would be a huge challenge, retro fitting millions of devices, possibly to some very old cars. And if i was to drive around my local villages, what would stop me disconnecting it or not even having it installed.

Otherwise we run the risk of double taxation.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Otherwise we run the risk of double taxation.

That's OK.

We just blame all the EV owners who cheated on the single taxation...

 

[JonathanRyan]

To find out when you're avoiding fuel duty by charging a vehicle from the domestic supply.

I mean, I'm avoiding fuel duty by not using fuel, so......

That's a bit like getting angry with non smokers for not paying tobacco duty. But no less logical than many of the posts in this thread.

Haven't you been keeping up with the thread.

Data that says you are charing an EV, to tax you for EV electricity.
Unless they just plan on taxing all electricity usage which wouldn't surprise me either.

I'll be honest, I've skipped some of the more alarming posts.

That "data" would be reasonably easy to collect just as soon as all manufacturers agree to a standard API. And then all cars built before that standard age out. Otherwise, it's child's play to avoid it

And the problem with taxing ALL electricity at a punitive rate is that increasingly we're being encouraged to use it for things like heating and cooking. Even the current government probably don't want to be seen starving and freezing pensioners.

Maybe the best option is just to increase income tax so that people with more money pay more. That seems more logical than charging people for not using petrol.

 

[Nod]

How is obeying the rules cheating?

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

I mean, I'm avoiding fuel duty by not using fuel, so......

The point of fuel duty is to tax the users of all vehicles for the upkeep of the roads. Comparing it to the tax on tobacco products is a typical tax cheat style deflection.

 

[yzfmike]

didn’t know it also applies to rural areas thought it was just being brought in to towns and cities

Basically the recently extended London ULEZ is anywhere inside the M25

I'm willing to concede that enforcement that limits vehicle emissions in densely populated areas, with high levels of traffic, MAY be of some benefit to health. However, I believe there are NO such health benefits in the large rural areas encompassed by the blanket regulations.

Whether EVs are the long term answer to anything is still, IMO, debatable - but that's another topic!

 

[ecoleman]

I mean, I'm avoiding fuel duty by not using fuel, so......

That's a bit like getting angry with non smokers for not paying tobacco duty. But no less logical than many of the posts in this thread.

Nobody is angry. The discussion was along the lines of how the government would replace fuel taxes.

That "data" would be reasonably easy to collect just as soon as all manufacturers agree to a standard API. And then all cars built before that standard age out. Otherwise, it's child's play to avoid it

That's what I was saying, however a smart meter would be required to do this. I have a dumb meter and nobody knows what I use my electricity for, only how much.

Maybe the best option is just to increase income tax so that people with more money pay more. That seems more logical than charging people for not using petrol.

That's a great incentive to get people to work hard. People that earn more do pay more taxes than those that earn less. I'm not talking about the mega rich, that's a different story. They use legal loopholes that could be closed but probably never will as it suits those in power.

It's not just fuel tax though is it. Why should I pay a higher VED than another car? Why should a low emission or a EV pay zero VED. We all use the roads that need upkeep.

If EV drivers think they will be tax exempt forever more, I have news for you. Government will have to replace the lost fuel duty and there is where the discussion on taxing electricity started.

 

[ecoleman]

Wales has reduced many of our speed limits (not just 30-20mph) but pretty much all towns and villages are now 20mph. I wouldn't put it past Chairman Drakeford to have a guardhouse at the entrance to each village where they take a tenner off you every time you enter.

At 20mph you wouldn't even have to slow down.

 

[JonathanRyan]

If EV drivers think they will be tax exempt forever more, I have news for you. Government will have to replace the lost fuel duty and there is where the discussion on taxing electricity started.

I don't know anybody who thinks EVs will be "tax exempt" forever. Pretty sure I said as much earlier in this thread.

My bet is it will be replaced by a road usage charge. The pay per mile they have wanted for ages. We have enough tech to make that fairly doable, but it will take a while to implement and be pretty costly outside of London.

At the moment, hmg are in the recruiting phase - making EVs attractive so that they can let tax them.

 

[Pound Coin]

The point of fuel duty is to tax the users of all vehicles for the upkeep of the roads. Comparing it to the tax on tobacco products is a typical tax cheat style deflection.

It isn't.

Very few taxes are hypothecated.