So, we have another Government initiative on the way

NIMAN

Was listening to the Minister for the Environment, Denis Naughten I think it is, on the radio tonight, going on about how they are going to have a major initiative starting soon to increase the sales of EVs, as they have now accepted how dangerous to health diesel is!:rolleyes:

Apparently air pollution kills or contributes to the death of 4 people daily, and they now reckon we need to stop driving diesels. Pity they drove 80% of the population into buying them in the 1st place.

So do we think this initiative will have any effect?
Will they provide good incentives to buyers?
Will they improve the charger network?

Time will tell. I'll not hold my breath.

BoatMad

NIMAN wrote: »

Was listening to the Minister for the Environment, Denis Naughten I think it is, on the radio tonight, going on about how they are going to have a major initiative starting soon to increase the sales of EVs, as they have now accepted how dangerous to health diesel is!:rolleyes:

Apparently air pollution kills or contributes to the death of 4 people daily, and they now reckon we need to stop driving diesels. Pity they drove 80% of the population into buying them in the 1st place.

So do we think this initiative will have any effect?
Will they provide good incentives to buyers?
Will they improve the charger network?

Time will tell. I'll not hold my breath.

They are forming an interdepartmental working group ,........:roll eyes:

well I suppose something is better then nothing , I heard his speech on rte. it was one of the better informed I must say

KCross

Was it on radio 1 or 2fm?
What show?
I'd like to listen if there was a podcast of it.

n97 mini

The 2008 co2 based vrt/motor tax change was one of the most ill thought out taxation changes in the history of the state.

NIMAN

KCross wrote: »

Was it on radio 1 or 2fm?
What show?
I'd like to listen if there was a podcast of it.

It was RTE 1 (DriveTime) - hosted by John Murray, think it would have been about 6:15pm, so will be about 45mins from end of the podcast.

The minister has bought a Prius too, doing his bit;)

As for the 2008 Co2 thing, wasn't that the idea of the Greens? They said they hoped to have 50,000 EVs on the road by around now, minister was pushed for a figure and he said about 1000.

KCross

NIMAN wrote: »

It was RTE 1 (DriveTime) - hosted by John Murray, think it would have been about 6:15pm, so will be about 45mins from end of the podcast.

The minister has bought a Prius too, doing his bit.

Thanks, found it.
He didn't seem to know how many EV's were on the road. If he was serious about encouraging more of them I would have expected him to know that figure!

He mentioned some other incentives like use of bus lanes and free parking and an inter departmental working group to be setup later in the year.

Sounded like all talk, no action to me.

Certainly nothing indicated for budget timeframe.

I suppose we can give him some benefit of the doubt since he isn't in the brief that long.

NIMAN

The thing is, incentives like bus lanes, free parking is of no use to me, who doesn't live in a city or go into a city regularly.

cros13

BoatMad wrote: »

They are forming an interdepartmental working group ,........:roll eyes:

well I suppose something is better then nothing , I heard his speech on rte. it was one of the better informed I must say

That was in the program for government. And they are also going to "investigate" fuel cells *groan* and CNG (with strong indications of CNG being considered the preferred option).

macnab

I think it will be more Stick than Carrot, ie they will increase duty on Diesel, I dont think they have the education/appetite/imagination to do much more.

NIMAN

macnab wrote: »

I think it will be more Stick than Carrot, ie they will increase duty on Diesel, I dont think they have the education/appetite/imagination to do much more.

To be honest listening to the report, it sounded like a hint to listeners that duty on diesel was above to get a big increase.

I think there has been a few articles in the media recently, prepping all the diesel buyers for the big increase.

Lets hope they can reduce the crazy tax for the bigger petrols while they are at it.

pwurple

NIMAN wrote: »

The thing is, incentives like bus lanes, free parking is of no use to me, who doesn't live in a city or go into a city regularly.

Yes, but there are more people in cities than not. Makes perfect sense to target the big populations.

n97 mini

pwurple wrote: »

Yes, but there are more people in cities than not. Makes perfect sense to target the big populations.

And cars like the Leaf are perfect for cities. Zero emissions as well as being suited to stop/start moderate speed driving. In other countries the authorities are even going about setting up EV car sharing schemes along the lines of GoCar.

After having lived in the US for a while, where diesel has very little traction (a lot of city buses are either electric (overhead cables) or run on CNG), it's hard to come back here to dirty air.

KCross

macnab wrote: »

I think it will be more Stick than Carrot, ie they will increase duty on Diesel, I dont think they have the education/appetite/imagination to do much more.

NIMAN wrote: »

To be honest listening to the report, it sounded like a hint to listeners that duty on diesel was above to get a big increase.

I think there has been a few articles in the media recently, prepping all the diesel buyers for the big increase.

Lets hope they can reduce the crazy tax for the bigger petrols while they are at it.

Unless the minister knows something that Michael Noonan doesnt, it doesnt look like diesel tax is on the up...
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/noonan-dashes-hopes-of-significant-usc-cuts-we-dont-have-the-money-35066145.html

See the Fuel section of that article.

Snippet....

Mr Noonan says he has no plan to equalise excise duty on petrol and diesel.

Different excise rates mean petrol is currently 11 cent more expensive than diesel. Changing that now would give "a fair shock to the system", Mr Noonan said, adding: "So many people have bought diesel cars."

zilog_jones

Noonan must have a diesel

n97 mini wrote: »

The 2008 co2 based vrt/motor tax change was one of the most ill thought out taxation changes in the history of the state.

Wasn't this focus on CO2 emissions an EU-led initiative? I've heard a lot of regret at that level in light of the VW scandal.

Dardania

zilog_jones wrote: »

Noonan must have a diesel

n97 mini wrote: »

The 2008 co2 based vrt/motor tax change was one of the most ill thought out taxation changes in the history of the state.

Wasn't this focus on CO2 emissions an EU-led initiative? I've heard a lot of regret at that level in light of the VW scandal.

It was well intentioned, but not fully understanding of combustion.

n97 mini

Dardania wrote: »

It was well intentioned, but not fully understanding of combustion.

If only they'd read past the first line of the wikipedia page...

n97 mini

KCross wrote: »

Changing that now would give "a fair shock to the system", Mr Noonan said, adding: "So many people have bought diesel cars."[/I]

Populism in other words. The WHO puts diesel fumes in the same category as passive tobacco smoke, I wonder does the minister know that, as he has no problem in hammering smokers.

Dardania

n97 mini wrote: »

KCross wrote: »

Changing that now would give "a fair shock to the system", Mr Noonan said, adding: "So many people have bought diesel cars."[/I]

Populism in other words. The WHO puts diesel fumes in the same category as passive tobacco smoke, I wonder does the minister know that, as he has know problem in hammering smokers.

whislt what you say is true, politics is the art of the possible. It would be extremely unfair to just whack extra charges on diesel vehicles instantly...many many people would be disgruntled, and wouldn't trust the government in future, when they set well intentioned policy.

My suggestion would be that the government should:

slow the adoption of diesel cars
- increase VRT perhaps?
- encourage alternates

then if necessary, discourage people using any remaining diesel cars, with greater excise...

cruizer101

n97 mini wrote: »

If only they'd read past the first line of the wikipedia page...

This is it its not like it wasn't well known that diesels are far more pollutant that petrols at the time, but no the feckin idiots just jumped on the CO2 bandwagon

Can someone link to the podcast please ?

I would say they will debate it and it could be a couple of years before anything is implemented.

I would say we're looking at 2020 before they will do anything to encourage the uptake of electrics. Firstly they need to ramp up diesel tax and Diesel Motor Tax. Make diesels as unattractive as possible.

A good start would be to offer big incentives to take 10+ year old diesels completely off the road, with a guarantee that the cars are completely destroyed also ban 10+ year old diesels form larger town and city "centers".

And a serious plan to tackle the amount of old filthy commercial diesels on our roads. Older commercials are a huge problem on our roads.

The Government would love if we all converted to Hydrogen because it's too easy to tax than electricity.

ectoraige

KCross wrote: »

Unless the minister knows something that Michael Noonan doesnt, it doesnt look like diesel tax is on the up...
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/noonan-dashes-hopes-of-significant-usc-cuts-we-dont-have-the-money-35066145.html

See the Fuel section of that article.

Snippet....

Mr Noonan says he has no plan to equalise excise duty on petrol and diesel.

Different excise rates mean petrol is currently 11 cent more expensive than diesel. Changing that now would give "a fair shock to the system", Mr Noonan said, adding: "So many people have bought diesel cars."

The opening gambit could be an adjustment to the motor tax rates again to discourage future purchase coupled with incentives to scrap older diesels. The biggest problem is the second hand market is saturated with relatively new diesels. We bought a 2010 diesel MPV this year, there just weren't the options out there. That's one segment which hasn't been tackled yet by the electrics.

Marcusm

n97 mini wrote: »

Populism in other words. The WHO puts diesel fumes in the same category as passive tobacco smoke, I wonder does the minister know that, as he has no problem in hammering smokers.

Noonan as Minister for Health forced women infected with Hep C by an arm of the state to go through court while in end stage liver failure to get compensation. It is amazing that, politically, he survived that and even more amazing that it is not thrown in his face every day of the week. It's irrelevant that he might have been advised to fight it, politically it was stupid and it was inhumane.

Expecting to act rationally or even with foresight in the treatment of diesel cars is naive.

NIMAN

Deleted User wrote: »

Can someone link to the podcast please ?

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/drivetime/programmes/2016/0922/818536-drivetime-thursday-22-september-2016/?clipid=2290102#2290102

Go to 1hr 55min into the show.

proponent

http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/climate-change-and-you/minister-considers-free-parking-and-use-of-bus-lanes-by-electric-cars-35074920.html

ABC101

In fairness a rapid hike on diesel prices would be unfair, if the Govt wish to phase out diesel cars then it should be done on a gradual basis i.e. 5 years etc to reach parity with petrol.

While diesel cars can be more economic than petrol, they have a higher carbon density, so emit more Co2 / litre than petrol, 2.6 Kg Co2 / Lt diesel vrs 2.3 Kg Co2 / lt petrol.

EV's are most probably the future, but they too require carbon to be burnt to make electricity, Ireland's Co2 intensity in gm/ Kwhr is around 457 average / year. Sometimes lower / higher.

http://statistics.seai.ie/chart.php?ref=TRA04

Wind generation is producing about 31% atm...

http://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/

I think that eirgrid dashboard is really cool!!

cros13

ABC101 wrote: »

they too require carbon to be burnt to make electricity, Ireland's Co2 intensity in gm/ Kwhr is around 457 average / year. Sometimes lower / higher.

Well your numbers are accurate. But you're neglecting three points:

1. EVs are between three and five times more efficient than combustion vehicles. Thermal efficiency of the latest Prius for example is only 40% (advertised) and that's with heat recovery from the exhaust and regen braking and an electric motor helping, whereas you'd struggle to find an EV with an entire system efficiency (charger, battery, inverter, motor) of less than 80-90%.

2. The power station has room for multiple layers of heat recovery and isn't impacted by weight considerations either. So some combined-cycle plants can hit 60% thermal efficiency.

3. EVs don't inherently "require carbon to be burnt". They are neutral as to where the electricity that charges them comes from. Whether that's a gas combined cycle plant or an an ould lad on a exercise bike running a dynamo. While there is carbon in the grid fuel mix at the moment that's not necessarily always going to be the case. And as you reduce the carbon intensity of the grid every connected car is immediately impacted, no matter how old.

Another point is while ~450g/kWh is the correct average for the 24 hour grid mix, most EV charging is done during nightsaver hours when the average is around 100g/kWh lower.

It's also worth noting that you can't sue that figure to compare EVs to combustion vehicles because the g/100km advertised for the combustion vehicles don't include transport and refining emissions and losses for the fuel (and those can be several kilograms per liter in addition to the carbon content of the fuel), only the local emissions.

+ car makers don't provide accurate emissions data and as we know now, are far higher than advertised.

I'd be far more concerned with the other Emissions that come from burning fossil fuels.

BoatMad

Marcusm wrote: »

Noonan as Minister for Health forced women infected with Hep C by an arm of the state to go through court while in end stage liver failure to get compensation. It is amazing that, politically, he survived that and even more amazing that it is not thrown in his face every day of the week. It's irrelevant that he might have been advised to fight it, politically it was stupid and it was inhumane.

Expecting to act rationally or even with foresight in the treatment of diesel cars is naive.

It should be Pointed out that the HSE took the court initiative on their own and only informed noonan after the fact. It is true however that once informed he did nothing to curtail the excesses of the HSE. ( which has a history of very aggressive court actions )

He did state subsequently that the matter was incorrectly handled.

To suggest however that this is assiciatec with irrationality with diesel is nonsensical

I see no issue with current gov policy on diesel. It's consistent with the importance of the transport m

grogi

zilog_jones wrote: »

Noonan must have a diesel



Wasn't this focus on CO2 emissions an EU-led initiative? I've heard a lot of regret at that level in light of the VW scandal.

It was another fiasco of Irish government misunderstanding the directives. Somehow Dutch tax penalizes diesels, while still being eu compliant.

Marcusm

BoatMad wrote: »

It should be Pointed out that the HSE took the court initiative on their own and only informed noonan after the fact. It is true however that once informed he did nothing to curtail the excesses of the HSE. ( which has a history of very aggressive court actions )

He did state subsequently that the matter was incorrectly handled.

To suggest however that this is assiciatec with irrationality with diesel is nonsensical

I see no issue with current gov policy on diesel. It's consistent with the importance of the transport m

The HSE wasn't established until 10 years later!

You mean the Dept of Health of which he was the minister.

The current policy encourages consumer use of diesel; it's a short sighted position. Transport diesel could have duty rebated if necessary. I'm simply pointing other that even 20 years ago he was far from infallible and frankly cloth eared. You can see it as group think of the minister becoming a prisoner of the civil service and losing the ability to sit back and challenge orthodoxy.

ABC101

cros13 wrote: »

Well your numbers are accurate. But you're neglecting three points:

1. EVs are between three and five times more efficient than combustion vehicles. Thermal efficiency of the latest Prius for example is only 40% (advertised) and that's with heat recovery from the exhaust and regen braking and an electric motor helping, whereas you'd struggle to find an EV with an entire system efficiency (charger, battery, inverter, motor) of less than 80-90%.

2. The power station has room for multiple layers of heat recovery and isn't impacted by weight considerations either. So some combined-cycle plants can hit 60% thermal efficiency.

3. EVs don't inherently "require carbon to be burnt". They are neutral as to where the electricity that charges them comes from. Whether that's a gas combined cycle plant or an an ould lad on a exercise bike running a dynamo. While there is carbon in the grid fuel mix at the moment that's not necessarily always going to be the case. And as you reduce the carbon intensity of the grid every connected car is immediately impacted, no matter how old.

Another point is while ~450g/kWh is the correct average for the 24 hour grid mix, most EV charging is done during nightsaver hours when the average is around 100g/kWh lower.

It's also worth noting that you can't sue that figure to compare EVs to combustion vehicles because the g/100km advertised for the combustion vehicles don't include transport and refining emissions and losses for the fuel (and those can be several kilograms per liter in addition to the carbon content of the fuel), only the local emissions.

I'm sure I left out many points, but it's not possible to cover all points in a simple blog here just using text etc.


No system is 100% efficient, whether it be mechanical or electrical, there will always be losses.

However I'm a bit surprised over your figures for efficiency of EV's. The US Dept of Energy are stating around 59 to 62% efficiency.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/evtech.shtml

Another chap here stating Well to Wheel efficiency of 30% for a EV.

http://https://matter2energy.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/wells-to-wheels-electric-car-efficiency/

There is a matter of efficiency in getting a barrel of oil out of the ground and refining it to a litre of fuel at the forecourt station. That's why VLCC's are used to ship crude oil efficiently.

But so too is there efficiency losses in a electrical transmission grid, corona, iron, hysteresis losses, heat losses, joule losses, then add on distribution losses which increase at lower voltages.

Still better than a ICE I agree, but there are efficiency losses in all systems.

If you want a Zero Co2 intensity for Ireland, that could very easily be achieved by building one large power station (5 or 6 GW) outside Ireland ( Wales or France) and importing the electricity via a electrical link.

TBi

ABC101 wrote: »

There is a matter of efficiency in getting a barrel of oil out of the ground and refining it to a litre of fuel at the forecourt station. That's why VLCC's are used to ship crude oil efficiently.

But so too is there efficiency losses in a electrical transmission grid, corona, iron, hysteresis losses, heat losses, joule losses, then add on distribution losses which increase at lower voltages.

It takes a lot of energy/electricity to refine crude oil into petrol. So all the efficiency losses you mention regarding electricity apply to ICE cars too.

n97 mini

I had a look at this the other day while charging my car and 51% was coming from renewables, i.e. wind mostly (not sure if hydro is part of renewables). That's something that ICE cars can't compete with!

http://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/

ABC101

ABC101 wrote: »

In fairness a rapid hike on diesel prices would be unfair, if the Govt wish to phase out diesel cars then it should be done on a gradual basis i.e. 5 years etc to reach parity with petrol.

While diesel cars can be more economic than petrol, they have a higher carbon density, so emit more Co2 / litre than petrol, 2.6 Kg Co2 / Lt diesel vrs 2.3 Kg Co2 / lt petrol.

EV's are most probably the future, but they too require carbon to be burnt to make electricity, Ireland's Co2 intensity in gm/ Kwhr is around 457 average / year. Sometimes lower / higher.

http://statistics.seai.ie/chart.php?ref=TRA04

Wind generation is producing about 31% atm...

http://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/

I think that eirgrid dashboard is really cool!!

Leaf at indicated 100 km/h uses around 17 kWh/100 km. With the charger inefficiency, say 19 kWh/100 km. That's:

19 kWh x 457 g/kWh / 100 km = ~87 g/km

..which is alright but not great compared to a small diesel car which would need to archive 3.8 l/100km to reach the same.

It just goes to show that for the BEVs to really be environmentally friendly the grid needs massive investments in clean energy.

Alf Veedersane

There's going to need to be an investment in RE anyway because even with the increased contribution from renewables in 2015, the overall electricity consumption was even greater so the carbon intensity of electricity increased by 2.5% to 467.5 g CO2/kWh.

That said, there is certainly a large benefit in terms of local air quality.

TBi

TBi wrote: »

It takes a lot of energy/electricity to refine crude oil into petrol. So all the efficiency losses you mention regarding electricity apply to ICE cars too.

No to mention the extraction of oil from the ground and the transportation to the refinery and from refinery to pump.

This doesn't even include the energy consumed in the exploration of oil wells.

Alf Veedersane

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

There's going to need to be an investment in RE anyway because even with the increased contribution from renewables in 2015, the overall electricity consumption was even greater so the carbon intensity of electricity increased by 2.5% to 467.5 g CO2/kWh.

That said, there is certainly a large benefit in terms of local air quality.

Another great way to reduce air pollution is to completely ban the sale and burning of smokey fuels for heating, for instance, coal, turf, briquettes with the exception perhaps of wood, not that we have many trees in Ireland.....

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

No to mention the extraction of oil from the ground and the transportation to the refinery and from refinery to pump.

This doesn't even include the energy consumed in the exploration of oil wells.

I didn't mention that earlier as I'd like to know what's the energy efficiency of the fuel delivery to the power grid. Their fuel does not magically appear in the plants either (unless it's wind or non-pumped hydro).

samih

samih wrote: »

Leaf at indicated 100 km/h uses around 17 kWh/100 km. With the charger inefficiency, say 19 kWh/100 km. That's:

19 kWh x 457 g/kWh / 100 km = ~87 g/km

..which is alright but not great compared to a small diesel car which would need to archive 3.8 l/100km to reach the same.

It just goes to show that for the BEVs to really be environmentally friendly the grid needs massive investments in clean energy.

Don't forget most cars emissions are completely underrated..... Probably by 20-30% or more, but never mind the Co2, the stuff that causes cancer and actual damage to the environment which was the focus of the VW scandal is what worries me the most and the fact when we pay tax we pay tax which isn't based on pollution what so ever !

samih

samih wrote: »

I didn't mention that earlier as I'd like to know what's the energy efficiency of the fuel delivery to the power grid. Their fuel does not magically appear in the plants either (unless it's wind or non-pumped hydro).

Who knows ? but at least we're adding more wind power and soon hopefully solar PV. Unfortunately our energy consumption is also growing.

Imagine transport on the grid ? that's probably some TW hrs worth of electricity extra required to be added to the grid. Mind boggling really. I can;t see most of that come from renewable sources. Nuclear........

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Don't forget most cars emissions are completely underrated..... Probably by 20-30% or more, but never mind the Co2, the stuff that causes cancer and actual damage to the environment which was the focus of the VW scandal is what worries me the most and the fact when we pay tax we pay tax which isn't based on pollution what so ever !

True, the emissions are better managed at grid level where generation can be done outside cities than at individual car level. Unfortunately taxation is measured by g/km of CO2 at the moment and I'd say many/all of the current diesel cars could return 3.8 l/100 km at indicated 100 km/h on motorway. Costwise electric cars wins hands down but not by carbon dioxide emissions per kilometer.

grogi

samih wrote: »

True, the emissions are better managed at grid level where generation can be done outside cities than at individual car level. Unfortunately taxation is measured by g/km of CO2 at the moment and I'd say many/all of the current diesel cars could return 3.8 l/100 km at indicated 100 km/h on motorway. Costwise electric cars wins hands down but not by carbon dioxide emissions per kilometer.

I did a calculation a couple weeks ago - depending on the source of electricity the Leaf generates up to 200g/km of CO2. A modern diesel realistically generates around 120-140g/km at the pipe...

samih

samih wrote: »

True, the emissions are better managed at grid level where generation can be done outside cities than at individual car level. Unfortunately taxation is measured by g/km of CO2 at the moment and I'd say many/all of the current diesel cars could return 3.8 l/100 km at indicated 100 km/h on motorway. Costwise electric cars wins hands down but not by carbon dioxide emissions per kilometer.

It's not what diesel cars do on the motorway that counts, it's what they do combined per tank or the lifetime of the car.

Most cars consumption go up greatly in city and town driving, electrics are the complete opposite but they're still many times more efficient over all. Though the faster you drive in an ICE car the more energy you will consume also.

An ICE car probably would do no more than 12 Kms on the energy available to a Nissan Leaf 24 Kwh for instance.

TBi

samih wrote: »

Costwise electric cars wins hands down but not by carbon dioxide emissions per kilometer.

Again you haven't included the co2 emissions needed to get that 3.9l/100 km of fuel into the car.

TBi

TBi wrote: »

Again you haven't included the co2 emissions needed to get that 3.9l/100 km of fuel into the car.

True, and that is what I said earlier. I don't think Irish power grid has published their true emissions either.

What I said is that the Irish power grid (compared to Norway for example) needs some massive work going forward!

TBi

Bobby explains it better than I.

grogi

grogi wrote: »

I did a calculation a couple weeks ago - depending on the source of electricity the Leaf generates up to 200g/km of CO2. A modern diesel realistically generates around 120-140g/km at the pipe...

You could probably add about 30% to that for a modern diesel since the published figures are meaningless.

I'd like to know the actual pollution emissions emitted from vehicles and power stations not Co2.

IF people are worried about Co2, then they should lobby our Government and Farmers to re-plant our natural forest which is long gone, Farmers greatly over produce in this country and we are one of the if not "the" most de-forested lands in all of continental Europe but because we're so used to it most people don't notice or care and anything that is planted is pine rubbish for industry.

Most of our electricity comes from Gas, but it's still cool to watch some days where 20-55% comes from wind. This greatly reduces Particulate matter and Nox emissions.

Ireland has a lot of old diesels on the road and particularly commercial vehicles these should be taken off the road or converted to Gas.

ABC101

For the record I am not attempting to upset people's enthusiasm for EV's.
I don't rate Tesla motors, not because of the car or the idea, but the company is in a unsustainable position (IMO) and its share price defies gravity. A lot of investors are going to get burnt there. When other automobile makers shift their attention seriously to EV technology Tesla will have to compete on price grounds and that is when serious problems will crop up.
This is already happening with the Chevrolet Bolt, which has a CD of 0.34, but is still judged to be efficient as a EV with a CD of 0.21, why, because at city commuting speeds (50kph and less) air resistance is much less of an issue. In addition the Chevy Bolt has a Permanent Magnet motor as distinct from a normal induction motor. So the efficiency gain in the type of motor used helped offset the air resistance to the shape of the body. Serious competition is shaping up.
Now the Nissan Leaf..... in my opinion.... is probably one of the best cars ever produced. Not only does it look cool... it is cool and for city driving is almost perfect. Hopefully the technology will continue to get better and better, especially with respect to range. 200 mile range would be a game changer, 300 miles a TOTAL game changer.
Japan is an engineering nation, where Engineers are looked up to and in a sense honored. I'm not at all surprised that it was Japan who produced the Prius and the Leaf. I've said it before and I'll say it again... "You cannot beat the Japs", they really are very good at engineering, from motorbikes, to cars, cameras, walkmans, etc etc.
WRT Co2 intensity, our energy mix is what it is for various reasons. Yes I would like to see Moneypoint switching over to NG and keeping coal as a back up, but that is not going to happen.
Renewable energy can and does make up 50% (sometimes slightly more) of the mix, but again it is the Co2 intensity which is the end result which counts. That number is crunched by eirgrid and we have to trust that it is correct.
But we have to use the equipment / system we currently have, and we should not be deluding ourselves with how good electricity is and how bad ICE are. There are good and bad in both systems, efficiency losses in both etc.
Well done to those who have taken the plunge in running a Leaf / EV, that takes courage and conviction to put your money where your mouth is and of course it does in the end benefit humanity by reducing our Co2 emissions.

ABC101

TBi wrote: »

samih wrote: »

Costwise electric cars wins hands down but not by carbon dioxide emissions per kilometer.

Again you haven't included the co2 emissions needed to get that 3.9l/100 km of fuel into the car.

You have not included the Co2 emissions to get the lithium out of the ground and into the battery.
To what level are we going to take this argument to?