Can’t believe we still have no results. American democracy is a poor joke.
No, the Republican caucus went fine.
The Democratic party is the joke.
The Republican Primary system has scrapped half of their primaries so the Dear Leader can win unopposed.
This often happens in the re-election of a sitting president, the local party can decide they'd rather use the money on campaigning. I don't remember anyone complaining when the Dems did the same for that awful tyrant demogogue Obama.
Not quite, at least not for the republicans, n 2004 when GW Bush was reelected. the republicans did cancel some primarys, but only after only one candidate had got on the ballot, (normally by collecting lots of signituers in the stare. in jab 2004 all of the primorys where still being planed, This time half have been canceled before the start of January.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
A big problem at the moment with EV is there is no equivalent of the petrol can. Battery packs for recharging phones / laptops are now commonplace, but there is not such thing for EV.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
Major cities IS one of the problems, apparently. People driving into cities as commuters, having to find a charging point before they can get home again. And charging is twice as expensive as they can do at home.
Less of a problem if the batteries can reliably get them home to recharge.
How's range on electric vehicles? The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure. Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
Not yet good enough for everyone, but probably good enough for 80-90% of drivers. Prices, of course, are another matter, and that is going to take a few years - particularly in the second hand market.
Can’t believe we still have no results. American democracy is a poor joke.
No, the Republican caucus went fine.
The Democratic party is the joke.
The Republican Primary system has scrapped half of their primaries so the Dear Leader can win unopposed.
This often happens in the re-election of a sitting president, the local party can decide they'd rather use the money on campaigning. I don't remember anyone complaining when the Dems did the same for that awful tyrant demogogue Obama.
I thought in 2012 every state ran a Dem primary plus overseas territories?
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
Major cities IS one of the problems, apparently. People driving into cities as commuters, having to find a charging point before they can get home again. And charging is twice as expensive as they can do at home.
Less of a problem if the batteries can reliably get them home to recharge.
Modern Teslas have ranges in excess of 300 miles of real world driving. So long as you charge at home every night, you're not going to be desperate for a charger in town.
I think you underestimate the rate of battery development. What's your car budget, and what range do you need ?
The Tesla pickup coming out at the end of this year will be available with a 500 mile range - and that is now; fifteen years is quite a long time.
The Tesla pickup is far too large for British roads. It dwarves the F Series.
Still sleepy, I see. I was merely pointing out that the EV performance our grumpy interlocutors require is almost here already. And the regulations they are so concerned about impose a ban on ICE vehicles in fifteen years' time.
(Incidentally, there is a silicon anode battery in the works, which should be ready in around five years time for mass production, capable of being recharged in five minutes, and offering energy densities well in excess of the current state of the art.)
I apologise. I was in the back of an Uber, and rushed to comment.
And you are correct. You can now - in most parts of the world - treat an EV as your only car, so long as you are reasonably well off. (By which I mean, that you have the cash to buy a long range version of a Tesla. Or perhaps the Porsche Taycan, which appears to get 270-280 miles in real world use.)
If you charge every night at home (no big deal), then you'll maybe use public charging infrastructure 2-3 times a year. And then it's remarkable how good it's gotten. I drove LA to Vegas, and there was a Tesla supercharger in the middle of the desert with 20 or so slots. People were chatting away for 10-15 minutes while they took their tank from 20 to 80%, and then drove off. Sure, it was a longer wait than at a petrol station... but it wasn't much longer.
No problem. The other thing happening is that large battery factories are planned and/or starting to be built in the EU to support the production of millions of cars (see most recently the PSA/Saft announcement). It's not enough yet to replace existing ICE production, but it won't take much more of a nudge for that to happen very rapidly.
And on the affordability side, battery costs have dropped very rapidly over the last decade, and will continue to do so. As they represent the largest cost in manufacturing EVs, overall prices will come down, too. And remember electric vehicles have a fraction of the parts required for ICEs.
The transition is undoubtedly going to be painful for some - manufacturers and consumers alike. But the faster it happens, the better for all of us.
My Toyota hybrid petrol car has a range of 575 on a full tank and I get range anxiety when it drops below 200.
Mr. B, that's still not good enough if the alternative becomes banned (that may not be the case, if there remains a grandfathering in of old vehicles). I do think going electric only is over the top. But there we are.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
The chances Trump wins again is probably just over 55%, because he's suffering from anti-2016 disease. His ratings are worst in states he just won last time around, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. (And two of those three, as well as neighboring Minnesota and Iowa, are suffering from rising unemployment right now.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
Which is one of the reasons for the ban - that will create the demand for the infrastructure.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Unless you have a Tesla the charging infrastructure in the UK is just fucked. It's too fragmented with variety of horrible service offerings and apps that don't fucking work. The government needs to fix this now.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
Major cities IS one of the problems, apparently. People driving into cities as commuters, having to find a charging point before they can get home again. And charging is twice as expensive as they can do at home.
Less of a problem if the batteries can reliably get them home to recharge.
Modern Teslas have ranges in excess of 300 miles of real world driving. So long as you charge at home every night, you're not going to be desperate for a charger in town.
Charging at home will be a problem for a lot of people without offstreet parking, with cables slung across the pavement, or even in car parks for blocks of flats.
Can’t believe we still have no results. American democracy is a poor joke.
No, the Republican caucus went fine.
The Democratic party is the joke.
The Republican Primary system has scrapped half of their primaries so the Dear Leader can win unopposed.
This often happens in the re-election of a sitting president, the local party can decide they'd rather use the money on campaigning. I don't remember anyone complaining when the Dems did the same for that awful tyrant demogogue Obama.
I thought in 2012 every state ran a Dem primary plus overseas territories?
Yes, 4 states cancelled their primaries after Obama was the only candidate. That's not the same as cancelling the primary because there are other candidates.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
Major cities IS one of the problems, apparently. People driving into cities as commuters, having to find a charging point before they can get home again. And charging is twice as expensive as they can do at home.
Less of a problem if the batteries can reliably get them home to recharge.
Modern Teslas have ranges in excess of 300 miles of real world driving. So long as you charge at home every night, you're not going to be desperate for a charger in town.
Charging at home will be a problem for a lot of people without offstreet parking, with cables slung across the pavement, or even in car parks for blocks of flats.
Yes - it's not just that the existing infrastructure is mildly fucked, as Dura_Ace says, but there just isn't very much of it.
The chances Trump wins again is probably just over 55%, because he's suffering from anti-2016 disease. His ratings are worst in states he just won last time around, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. (And two of those three, as well as neighboring Minnesota and Iowa, are suffering from rising unemployment right now.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
In the month of January the polling average has Trump at 212 E.V, Democrats at 240 E.V., with 86 E.V. within 2%.
Trump's lead over the Top 3 Democrats is among the swing states is:
Texas +8 (I think it shouldn't be counted anymore as a swing state) Iowa +5 Georgia +5 Florida +3 Arizona +1 N.Carolina 0 Wisconsin -1 Michigan -2 Virginia -2 Nevada -4 Pennsylvania -5 N.Hampshire -6
No polls from Ohio, but given Pennsylvania I think he should be leading by 2.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
And Musk is claiming a million mile lifetime for Tesla's next iteration of batteries (which might well be true).
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
Coal is barely used in UK electricity generation anymore. (Or indeed in US generation either)
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
And Musk is claiming a million mile lifetime for Tesla's next iteration of batteries (which might well be true).
Electric car batteries have held up far better than the manufacturers were predicting. Everyone was expecting steep drop offs in range as they aged but the drop off has been far more modest.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
Major cities IS one of the problems, apparently. People driving into cities as commuters, having to find a charging point before they can get home again. And charging is twice as expensive as they can do at home.
Less of a problem if the batteries can reliably get them home to recharge.
Modern Teslas have ranges in excess of 300 miles of real world driving. So long as you charge at home every night, you're not going to be desperate for a charger in town.
Charging at home will be a problem for a lot of people without offstreet parking, with cables slung across the pavement, or even in car parks for blocks of flats.
The only problem with electric cars is that you can't store more energy inside a battery than inside fuel of similar volume. Physics prohibits it.
Quotes you wish you hadn't uttered... https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/02/iowa-caucus-results-failure-debacle-democrats.html Last week, ahead of Monday’s critical first-in-the-nation Iowa Democratic Caucus, I was discussing the reliability of the party’s new caucus-night results-reporting app with Iowa Democratic Party chairman Troy Price. “We have backups on backups on backups,” Price told me. “So, if something does go wrong, we do have systems in place to back that up, to make sure we get the accurate results recorded quickly. So, this just allows us to get the results quicker from the precinct caucus.”...
The chances Trump wins again is probably just over 55%, because he's suffering from anti-2016 disease. His ratings are worst in states he just won last time around, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. (And two of those three, as well as neighboring Minnesota and Iowa, are suffering from rising unemployment right now.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
In the month of January the polling average has Trump at 212 E.V, Democrats at 240 E.V., with 86 E.V. within 2%.
Trump's lead over the Top 3 Democrats is among the swing states is:
Texas +8 (I think it shouldn't be counted anymore as a swing state) Iowa +5 Georgia +5 Florida +3 Arizona +1 N.Carolina 0 Wisconsin -1 Michigan -2 Virginia -2 Nevada -4 Pennsylvania -5 N.Hampshire -6
No polls from Ohio, but given Pennsylvania I think he should be leading by 2.
I use the favorable numbers, because they're (a) much more regular and (b) avoid naming Democratic candidates.
Ohio is doing much, much better economically than Pennsylvania, which is why Trump has generally good favorables there, while his Pennsylvania numbers are much weaker.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
Major cities IS one of the problems, apparently. People driving into cities as commuters, having to find a charging point before they can get home again. And charging is twice as expensive as they can do at home.
Less of a problem if the batteries can reliably get them home to recharge.
Modern Teslas have ranges in excess of 300 miles of real world driving. So long as you charge at home every night, you're not going to be desperate for a charger in town.
Charging at home will be a problem for a lot of people without offstreet parking, with cables slung across the pavement, or even in car parks for blocks of flats.
The only problem with electric cars is that you can't store more energy inside a battery than inside fuel of similar volume. Physics prohibits it.
Which isn't too much of a problem when you can dispense with the engine and exhaust system. Now airplanes...
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
And Musk is claiming a million mile lifetime for Tesla's next iteration of batteries (which might well be true).
Electric car batteries have held up far better than the manufacturers were predicting. Everyone was expecting steep drop offs in range as they aged but the drop off has been far more modest.
I'm involved with a business that takes old Nissan leaf batteries and turns them into something like Tesla PowerWalls. It's amazing how little potential charge modern lithium ion batteries lose, even when being heavily cycled in a car.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
Impressive wind energy... and then remembered the reason I haven’t been out for a run today is cos it’s blowing a gale!
Interestingly, not ten minutes ago, I've been doing some back of a fag packet calculations on this subject - by my calculations, if the entire fleet went electric tonight, assuming that the vast bulk of chargin was done overnight, the electricity needed to power the fleet would almost exactly equal the difference between the peak and the off peak demand. That is, based on existing generation, we could power the fleet. Now all we haveto do is shift the remaining 30-40% of power generated through fossil fuels to sustainable sources - which should haooen in the next decade or two, on current trends.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
Major cities IS one of the problems, apparently. People driving into cities as commuters, having to find a charging point before they can get home again. And charging is twice as expensive as they can do at home.
Less of a problem if the batteries can reliably get them home to recharge.
Modern Teslas have ranges in excess of 300 miles of real world driving. So long as you charge at home every night, you're not going to be desperate for a charger in town.
Charging at home will be a problem for a lot of people without offstreet parking, with cables slung across the pavement, or even in car parks for blocks of flats.
Yes - it's not just that the existing infrastructure is mildly fucked, as Dura_Ace says, but there just isn't very much of it.
A mass conversion of lampposts, perhaps... ?
Could they do wireless charging? Put a big pad beneath each parking space on, say, a terraced street?
The chances Trump wins again is probably just over 55%, because he's suffering from anti-2016 disease. His ratings are worst in states he just won last time around, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. (And two of those three, as well as neighboring Minnesota and Iowa, are suffering from rising unemployment right now.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
In the month of January the polling average has Trump at 212 E.V, Democrats at 240 E.V., with 86 E.V. within 2%.
Trump's lead over the Top 3 Democrats is among the swing states is:
Texas +8 (I think it shouldn't be counted anymore as a swing state) Iowa +5 Georgia +5 Florida +3 Arizona +1 N.Carolina 0 Wisconsin -1 Michigan -2 Virginia -2 Nevada -4 Pennsylvania -5 N.Hampshire -6
No polls from Ohio, but given Pennsylvania I think he should be leading by 2.
I use the favorable numbers, because they're (a) much more regular and (b) avoid naming Democratic candidates.
Ohio is doing much, much better economically than Pennsylvania, which is why Trump has generally good favorables there, while his Pennsylvania numbers are much weaker.
Worth noting it is not just Trump's approval numbers that are edging up, so is Americans' view on how things are going generally
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
What maintenance expense? My current ICE car requires 3L of engine oil, an air filter and an oil filter, every £10k miles*. Takes around 10 mins to do. Total cost sub £20, or 0.2p/mile. I spend more on the tires, they work out as about 1p/mile. Granted if I took it to dealer they would charge me over £100 for the same service, but I'm sure that dealerships will cheerfully take to ripping off EV owners in the same way for whatever they can be persuaded they need.
*Also meant to do the cabin air pollen filter, but I usually can't be bothered.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
It's interesting how France demands 57% more energy than the UK despite having roughly the same population. Having said that the last time I was in a Mercure hotel in London it was like walking into a sauna the heating was on so high.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
What maintenance expense? My current ICE car requires 3L of engine oil, an air filter and an oil filter, every £10k miles*. Takes around 10 mins to do. Total cost sub £20, or 0.2p/mile. I spend more on the tires, they work out as about 1p/mile. Granted if I took it to dealer they would charge me over £100 for the same service, but I'm sure that dealerships will cheerfully take to ripping off EV owners in the same way for whatever they can be persuaded they need.
*Also meant to do the cabin air pollen filter, but I usually can't be bothered.
Will that be the case when it has a couple of hundred thousand miles on the odometer ?
The chances Trump wins again is probably just over 55%, because he's suffering from anti-2016 disease. His ratings are worst in states he just won last time around, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. (And two of those three, as well as neighboring Minnesota and Iowa, are suffering from rising unemployment right now.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
In the month of January the polling average has Trump at 212 E.V, Democrats at 240 E.V., with 86 E.V. within 2%.
Trump's lead over the Top 3 Democrats is among the swing states is:
Texas +8 (I think it shouldn't be counted anymore as a swing state) Iowa +5 Georgia +5 Florida +3 Arizona +1 N.Carolina 0 Wisconsin -1 Michigan -2 Virginia -2 Nevada -4 Pennsylvania -5 N.Hampshire -6
No polls from Ohio, but given Pennsylvania I think he should be leading by 2.
I use the favorable numbers, because they're (a) much more regular and (b) avoid naming Democratic candidates.
Ohio is doing much, much better economically than Pennsylvania, which is why Trump has generally good favorables there, while his Pennsylvania numbers are much weaker.
Worth noting it is not just Trump's approval numbers that are edging up, so is Americans' view on how things are going generally
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
It's interesting how France demands 57% more energy than the UK despite having roughly the same population. Having said that the last time I was in a Mercure hotel in London it was like walking into a sauna the heating was on so high.
Can’t believe we still have no results. American democracy is a poor joke.
No, the Republican caucus went fine.
The Democratic party is the joke.
The Republican Primary system has scrapped half of their primaries so the Dear Leader can win unopposed.
This often happens in the re-election of a sitting president, the local party can decide they'd rather use the money on campaigning. I don't remember anyone complaining when the Dems did the same for that awful tyrant demogogue Obama.
I thought in 2012 every state ran a Dem primary plus overseas territories?
Yes, 4 states cancelled their primaries after Obama was the only candidate. That's not the same as cancelling the primary because there are other candidates.
He was the only candidate not because there were no others to run against him, just the state party decided they didn't 'qualify'.
Which candidates qualify for the Republican primaries that have been cancelled?
It wasn't only those four states e.g. Arizona cancelled their primary and ran a causus with only Obama as a candidate.
Just by using the numbers of China's share of world industrial production and consumption of materials and construction output without seeing it's official GDP I would have said that China is around 1/3 of the world economy.
Unless you have a Tesla the charging infrastructure in the UK is just fucked. It's too fragmented with variety of horrible service offerings and apps that don't fucking work. The government needs to fix this now.
Are you serious? This govt? The one that operates purely on sound bites and vapourware promises?
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
It's interesting how France demands 57% more energy than the UK despite having roughly the same population. Having said that the last time I was in a Mercure hotel in London it was like walking into a sauna the heating was on so high.
(Click top left for the French data).
Is that to do with how they heat houses in France (ie Electricity) vs the amost ubiquitous Gas Fired Central Heating in the UK which doesn't get included in the Gridwatch numbers.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
It's interesting how France demands 57% more energy than the UK despite having roughly the same population. Having said that the last time I was in a Mercure hotel in London it was like walking into a sauna the heating was on so high.
(Click top left for the French data).
France still got heavy industry?
A lot more, France has being very protective of it's industry, the French are proud of their Industrial brands.
Interestingly, not ten minutes ago, I've been doing some back of a fag packet calculations on this subject - by my calculations, if the entire fleet went electric tonight, assuming that the vast bulk of chargin was done overnight, the electricity needed to power the fleet would almost exactly equal the difference between the peak and the off peak demand. That is, based on existing generation, we could power the fleet. Now all we haveto do is shift the remaining 30-40% of power generated through fossil fuels to sustainable sources - which should haooen in the next decade or two, on current trends.
But get high pressure sitting over the country, nobody is moving tomorrow....
If you want a sensbile portfolio of power from zero-carbon, you ideally want
1. Wind power - cheap and quick to install, but not reliable. Can only power a country in conjunction with other sources
2. Solar - cheap and more reliable, but built in idleness - much more than 50% in dark, bitterly cold winter nights
3. Tidal - each lagoon produces for 14 hours a day (slack water and a while for tide/turbine level to have sufficient drop to generate power). A series of them can get baseload cover because of the later tide in say Solway Firth or the Wash. Utterly reliable. Price of electricity from the Cardiff Lagoon (powering 1.6m homes) would be about half that of Hinckly C - the Swansea pathfinder project still considerably cheaper. And 125 year minimum life. It is now needed to plug the domestic fuel gap that shale gas was supposed to provide, but seismic issues have now canned.
4. Nuclear - expensive, but 24/7. However, current generation require import of nuclear materials from dodgy regimes. Limited life of each nuclear plant. Waste management and decommissioning issues. And if it goes wrong.... terrorism/malfunction - bye-bye Britain. Tide on the other hand delivers itself, twice a day.... reliable as long as the Moon is up there. And if it isn't, we have bigger worries.
5. Something to plug the gap. Natural gas - but now supply issues. If Putin turns off the tops into Europe.... Needs expensive LNG kit as back-up back-up.
Can’t believe we still have no results. American democracy is a poor joke.
No, the Republican caucus went fine.
The Democratic party is the joke.
The Republican Primary system has scrapped half of their primaries so the Dear Leader can win unopposed.
This often happens in the re-election of a sitting president, the local party can decide they'd rather use the money on campaigning. I don't remember anyone complaining when the Dems did the same for that awful tyrant demogogue Obama.
I thought in 2012 every state ran a Dem primary plus overseas territories?
Yes, 4 states cancelled their primaries after Obama was the only candidate. That's not the same as cancelling the primary because there are other candidates.
He was the only candidate not because there were no others to run against him, just the state party decided they didn't 'qualify'.
Which candidates qualify for the Republican primaries that have been cancelled?
It wasn't only those four states e.g. Arizona cancelled their primary and ran a causus with only Obama as a candidate.
Bill weld, who i have a lot of respect for, was in the prosese of getting on the ballot in a lot of states, then then canceled their primorys, before the official deadline to gather and submit the signituers. I'm on his email list, so get updates all the time, and frankly, he is not being treated fairly. I don't think he would win even if he was on every states primary ballot, but its still not right.
The chances Trump wins again is probably just over 55%, because he's suffering from anti-2016 disease. His ratings are worst in states he just won last time around, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. (And two of those three, as well as neighboring Minnesota and Iowa, are suffering from rising unemployment right now.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
In the month of January the polling average has Trump at 212 E.V, Democrats at 240 E.V., with 86 E.V. within 2%.
Trump's lead over the Top 3 Democrats is among the swing states is:
Texas +8 (I think it shouldn't be counted anymore as a swing state) Iowa +5 Georgia +5 Florida +3 Arizona +1 N.Carolina 0 Wisconsin -1 Michigan -2 Virginia -2 Nevada -4 Pennsylvania -5 N.Hampshire -6
No polls from Ohio, but given Pennsylvania I think he should be leading by 2.
I use the favorable numbers, because they're (a) much more regular and (b) avoid naming Democratic candidates.
Ohio is doing much, much better economically than Pennsylvania, which is why Trump has generally good favorables there, while his Pennsylvania numbers are much weaker.
Worth noting it is not just Trump's approval numbers that are edging up, so is Americans' view on how things are going generally
The chances Trump wins again is probably just over 55%, because he's suffering from anti-2016 disease. His ratings are worst in states he just won last time around, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. (And two of those three, as well as neighboring Minnesota and Iowa, are suffering from rising unemployment right now.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
In the month of January the polling average has Trump at 212 E.V, Democrats at 240 E.V., with 86 E.V. within 2%.
Trump's lead over the Top 3 Democrats is among the swing states is:
Texas +8 (I think it shouldn't be counted anymore as a swing state) Iowa +5 Georgia +5 Florida +3 Arizona +1 N.Carolina 0 Wisconsin -1 Michigan -2 Virginia -2 Nevada -4 Pennsylvania -5 N.Hampshire -6
No polls from Ohio, but given Pennsylvania I think he should be leading by 2.
I use the favorable numbers, because they're (a) much more regular and (b) avoid naming Democratic candidates.
Ohio is doing much, much better economically than Pennsylvania, which is why Trump has generally good favorables there, while his Pennsylvania numbers are much weaker.
Worth noting it is not just Trump's approval numbers that are edging up, so is Americans' view on how things are going generally
State party officials said Tuesday morning they are certain "the underlying data" collected at caucus sites is sound but that an issue arose in reporting that data.
Interestingly, not ten minutes ago, I've been doing some back of a fag packet calculations on this subject - by my calculations, if the entire fleet went electric tonight, assuming that the vast bulk of chargin was done overnight, the electricity needed to power the fleet would almost exactly equal the difference between the peak and the off peak demand. That is, based on existing generation, we could power the fleet. Now all we haveto do is shift the remaining 30-40% of power generated through fossil fuels to sustainable sources - which should haooen in the next decade or two, on current trends.
But get high pressure sitting over the country, nobody is moving tomorrow....
If you want a sensbile portfolio of power from zero-carbon, you ideally want
1. Wind power - cheap and quick to install, but not reliable. Can only power a country in conjunction with other sources
2. Solar - cheap and more reliable, but built in idleness - much more than 50% in dark, bitterly cold winter nights
3. Tidal - each lagoon produces for 14 hours a day (slack water and a while for tide/turbine level to have sufficient drop to generate power). A series of them can get baseload cover because of the later tide in say Solway Firth or the Wash. Utterly reliable. Price of electricity from the Cardiff Lagoon (powering 1.6m homes) would be about half that of Hinckly C - the Swansea pathfinder project still considerably cheaper. And 125 year minimum life. It is now needed to plug the domestic fuel gap that shale gas was supposed to provide, but seismic issues have now canned.
4. Nuclear - expensive, but 24/7. However, current generation require import of nuclear materials from dodgy regimes. Limited life of each nuclear plant. Waste management and decommissioning issues. And if it goes wrong.... terrorism/malfunction - bye-bye Britain. Tide on the other hand delivers itself, twice a day.... reliable as long as the Moon is up there. And if it isn't, we have bigger worries.
5. Something to plug the gap. Natural gas - but now supply issues. If Putin turns off the tops into Europe.... Needs expensive LNG kit as back-up back-up.
Let's get down on our knees and pray somebody cracks fusion.
Interestingly, not ten minutes ago, I've been doing some back of a fag packet calculations on this subject - by my calculations, if the entire fleet went electric tonight, assuming that the vast bulk of chargin was done overnight, the electricity needed to power the fleet would almost exactly equal the difference between the peak and the off peak demand. That is, based on existing generation, we could power the fleet. Now all we haveto do is shift the remaining 30-40% of power generated through fossil fuels to sustainable sources - which should haooen in the next decade or two, on current trends.
But get high pressure sitting over the country, nobody is moving tomorrow....
If you want a sensbile portfolio of power from zero-carbon, you ideally want
1. Wind power - cheap and quick to install, but not reliable. Can only power a country in conjunction with other sources
2. Solar - cheap and more reliable, but built in idleness - much more than 50% in dark, bitterly cold winter nights
3. Tidal - each lagoon produces for 14 hours a day (slack water and a while for tide/turbine level to have sufficient drop to generate power). A series of them can get baseload cover because of the later tide in say Solway Firth or the Wash. Utterly reliable. Price of electricity from the Cardiff Lagoon (powering 1.6m homes) would be about half that of Hinckly C - the Swansea pathfinder project still considerably cheaper. And 125 year minimum life. It is now needed to plug the domestic fuel gap that shale gas was supposed to provide, but seismic issues have now canned.
4. Nuclear - expensive, but 24/7. However, current generation require import of nuclear materials from dodgy regimes. Limited life of each nuclear plant. Waste management and decommissioning issues. And if it goes wrong.... terrorism/malfunction - bye-bye Britain. Tide on the other hand delivers itself, twice a day.... reliable as long as the Moon is up there. And if it isn't, we have bigger worries.
5. Something to plug the gap. Natural gas - but now supply issues. If Putin turns off the tops into Europe.... Needs expensive LNG kit as back-up back-up.
Let's get down on our knees and pray somebody cracks fusion.
The chances Trump wins again is probably just over 55%, because he's suffering from anti-2016 disease. His ratings are worst in states he just won last time around, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. (And two of those three, as well as neighboring Minnesota and Iowa, are suffering from rising unemployment right now.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
In the month of January the polling average has Trump at 212 E.V, Democrats at 240 E.V., with 86 E.V. within 2%.
Trump's lead over the Top 3 Democrats is among the swing states is:
Texas +8 (I think it shouldn't be counted anymore as a swing state) Iowa +5 Georgia +5 Florida +3 Arizona +1 N.Carolina 0 Wisconsin -1 Michigan -2 Virginia -2 Nevada -4 Pennsylvania -5 N.Hampshire -6
No polls from Ohio, but given Pennsylvania I think he should be leading by 2.
I use the favorable numbers, because they're (a) much more regular and (b) avoid naming Democratic candidates.
Ohio is doing much, much better economically than Pennsylvania, which is why Trump has generally good favorables there, while his Pennsylvania numbers are much weaker.
Worth noting it is not just Trump's approval numbers that are edging up, so is Americans' view on how things are going generally
I am in more of Speedy's case than RCS on this one - yes Pennsylvania doesn't look good but, conversely, Virginia may be a possible gain this time
I doubt it about Virginia, Washington D.C is just too big to be overturned by the rest of the state.
In Pennsylvania Trump's problems since 2017 is in the Pittsburgh side not Philadelphia, and if Biden is the nominee Scranton.
When did Washington DC become a part of Virginia?
its not but the urban spillover is massive, as in lots of people live in Vigina and commute in, and numerase organisations have build HQs or other offices in Virginia to be close to DC.
would have thought that a big enough swing in the rest of the state could 'tip' Virginia to Trump, but its not gong to be easy, but could be easyer than holding on to say Wisconsin.
State party officials said Tuesday morning they are certain "the underlying data" collected at caucus sites is sound but that an issue arose in reporting that data.
Interestingly, not ten minutes ago, I've been doing some back of a fag packet calculations on this subject - by my calculations, if the entire fleet went electric tonight, assuming that the vast bulk of chargin was done overnight, the electricity needed to power the fleet would almost exactly equal the difference between the peak and the off peak demand. That is, based on existing generation, we could power the fleet. Now all we haveto do is shift the remaining 30-40% of power generated through fossil fuels to sustainable sources - which should haooen in the next decade or two, on current trends.
But get high pressure sitting over the country, nobody is moving tomorrow....
If you want a sensbile portfolio of power from zero-carbon, you ideally want
1. Wind power - cheap and quick to install, but not reliable. Can only power a country in conjunction with other sources
2. Solar - cheap and more reliable, but built in idleness - much more than 50% in dark, bitterly cold winter nights
3. Tidal - each lagoon produces for 14 hours a day (slack water and a while for tide/turbine level to have sufficient drop to generate power). A series of them can get baseload cover because of the later tide in say Solway Firth or the Wash. Utterly reliable. Price of electricity from the Cardiff Lagoon (powering 1.6m homes) would be about half that of Hinckly C - the Swansea pathfinder project still considerably cheaper. And 125 year minimum life. It is now needed to plug the domestic fuel gap that shale gas was supposed to provide, but seismic issues have now canned.
4. Nuclear - expensive, but 24/7. However, current generation require import of nuclear materials from dodgy regimes. Limited life of each nuclear plant. Waste management and decommissioning issues. And if it goes wrong.... terrorism/malfunction - bye-bye Britain. Tide on the other hand delivers itself, twice a day.... reliable as long as the Moon is up there. And if it isn't, we have bigger worries.
5. Something to plug the gap. Natural gas - but now supply issues. If Putin turns off the tops into Europe.... Needs expensive LNG kit as back-up back-up.
Let's get down on our knees and pray somebody cracks fusion.
I’ve actually been trying to get my firm into that.
Trouble is Arup already have their paws all over it, and won’t let anyone else into the party.
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
What maintenance expense? My current ICE car requires 3L of engine oil, an air filter and an oil filter, every £10k miles*. Takes around 10 mins to do. Total cost sub £20, or 0.2p/mile. I spend more on the tires, they work out as about 1p/mile. Granted if I took it to dealer they would charge me over £100 for the same service, but I'm sure that dealerships will cheerfully take to ripping off EV owners in the same way for whatever they can be persuaded they need.
*Also meant to do the cabin air pollen filter, but I usually can't be bothered.
Will that be the case when it has a couple of hundred thousand miles on the odometer ?
Probably. Or the shell will have rotted away. So far it's some way over the 100k mark, and the non-routine maintainable to date has been both rear wheel bearings (£70 ea, and an hour a side to change. Just as vulnerable on a EV). Modern cars mostly die either of generic mechanical stuff (suspension bushes, body rot) or electrical problems, all of which will apply just as badly to EVs.
Unless you have a Tesla the charging infrastructure in the UK is just fucked. It's too fragmented with variety of horrible service offerings and apps that don't fucking work. The government needs to fix this now.
Are you serious? This govt? The one that operates purely on sound bites and vapourware promises?
Sound bites and vapourware... That sounds more like everyones favourite electric car company!
The chances Trump wins again is probably just over 55%, because he's suffering from anti-2016 disease. His ratings are worst in states he just won last time around, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. (And two of those three, as well as neighboring Minnesota and Iowa, are suffering from rising unemployment right now.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
In the month of January the polling average has Trump at 212 E.V, Democrats at 240 E.V., with 86 E.V. within 2%.
Trump's lead over the Top 3 Democrats is among the swing states is:
Texas +8 (I think it shouldn't be counted anymore as a swing state) Iowa +5 Georgia +5 Florida +3 Arizona +1 N.Carolina 0 Wisconsin -1 Michigan -2 Virginia -2 Nevada -4 Pennsylvania -5 N.Hampshire -6
No polls from Ohio, but given Pennsylvania I think he should be leading by 2.
I use the favorable numbers, because they're (a) much more regular and (b) avoid naming Democratic candidates.
Ohio is doing much, much better economically than Pennsylvania, which is why Trump has generally good favorables there, while his Pennsylvania numbers are much weaker.
Worth noting it is not just Trump's approval numbers that are edging up, so is Americans' view on how things are going generally
I am in more of Speedy's case than RCS on this one - yes Pennsylvania doesn't look good but, conversely, Virginia may be a possible gain this time
Virginia is about the only potential Republican pickup I see. It's economy has been booming, and Trump's net approval is only about -3/-4, against -10 or worse in Penn/Michigan/Wisconsin.
Whilst we're waiting for the Iowans to add up a few numbers, have we covered the latest Irish poll showing Sinn Féin in the lead?
How on earth has that happened?
There seems to be a trend in major Western nations worldwide (and some minor ones, like Ireland) for the young to vote for the nuttiest anti-establishment parties or candidates they can.
Corbyn, Sanders, SNP, Sinn Fein, and perhaps the Greens en-mass in Germany too.
Part of it is simply the unpopularity of the alternatives:
- FF are still tainted by the unholy mess they made of the economy leading up to the financial crisis, which hit Ireland so badly; - FG have been hit partly by the normal strains of being in government, and partly by some unforced errors of their own, with housing and healthcare both bad issues for them; - Labour are still tainted by their coalition with FG in the post-crash government which had to impose swingeing austerity; - The Greens were badly tainted by the coalition with FF before the financial crash but are the only party (apart from SF) who are now on the up.
You missed out the Tories are a bunch of lying toerags
Interestingly, not ten minutes ago, I've been doing some back of a fag packet calculations on this subject - by my calculations, if the entire fleet went electric tonight, assuming that the vast bulk of chargin was done overnight, the electricity needed to power the fleet would almost exactly equal the difference between the peak and the off peak demand. That is, based on existing generation, we could power the fleet. Now all we haveto do is shift the remaining 30-40% of power generated through fossil fuels to sustainable sources - which should haooen in the next decade or two, on current trends.
But get high pressure sitting over the country, nobody is moving tomorrow....
If you want a sensbile portfolio of power from zero-carbon, you ideally want
1. Wind power - cheap and quick to install, but not reliable. Can only power a country in conjunction with other sources
2. Solar - cheap and more reliable, but built in idleness - much more than 50% in dark, bitterly cold winter nights
3. Tidal - each lagoon produces for 14 hours a day (slack water and a while for tide/turbine level to have sufficient drop to generate power). A series of them can get baseload cover because of the later tide in say Solway Firth or the Wash. Utterly reliable. Price of electricity from the Cardiff Lagoon (powering 1.6m homes) would be about half that of Hinckly C - the Swansea pathfinder project still considerably cheaper. And 125 year minimum life. It is now needed to plug the domestic fuel gap that shale gas was supposed to provide, but seismic issues have now canned.
4. Nuclear - expensive, but 24/7. However, current generation require import of nuclear materials from dodgy regimes. Limited life of each nuclear plant. Waste management and decommissioning issues. And if it goes wrong.... terrorism/malfunction - bye-bye Britain. Tide on the other hand delivers itself, twice a day.... reliable as long as the Moon is up there. And if it isn't, we have bigger worries.
5. Something to plug the gap. Natural gas - but now supply issues. If Putin turns off the tops into Europe.... Needs expensive LNG kit as back-up back-up.
LNG import terminals are pretty cheap these days. Allowing gas to warm up is a lot cheaper than cooling it down.
Unless you have a Tesla the charging infrastructure in the UK is just fucked. It's too fragmented with variety of horrible service offerings and apps that don't fucking work. The government needs to fix this now.
Are you serious? This govt? The one that operates purely on sound bites and vapourware promises?
Sound bites and vapourware... That sounds more like everyones favourite electric car company!
Maybe Boris has been taking lessons? Cripes! Blimey! Err...
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
Am I right to assume the coal burned to produce the electricity to charge the battery is negligible?
Coal is barely used in UK electricity generation anymore. (Or indeed in US generation either)
Biomass is, and the environmental impact in the short term is exactly the same. We even import it from the USA. Disastrous.
In some precincts they didn't record their results on any paper because they had failth on the technology or they were just too lasy.
That's why I heard the rumours last night that the Caucuses will have to be repeated due to inaccurate and incomplete records.
I'd be very surprised if that happens. If you go through the 2016 numbers, it's amazing how many precincts had results like "Clinton 60, Sanders 40", clearly rounded. (Even to the extent of 200:100 in one case.) The precinct captains may not remember exact numbers, but they'll remember pretty damn close (not least because there will be many people there). The reality is that - given the use of SDEs - there's really no need to be hyper-accurate.
The chances Trump wins again is probably just over 55%, because he's suffering from anti-2016 disease. His ratings are worst in states he just won last time around, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. (And two of those three, as well as neighboring Minnesota and Iowa, are suffering from rising unemployment right now.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
In the month of January the polling average has Trump at 212 E.V, Democrats at 240 E.V., with 86 E.V. within 2%.
Trump's lead over the Top 3 Democrats is among the swing states is:
Texas +8 (I think it shouldn't be counted anymore as a swing state) Iowa +5 Georgia +5 Florida +3 Arizona +1 N.Carolina 0 Wisconsin -1 Michigan -2 Virginia -2 Nevada -4 Pennsylvania -5 N.Hampshire -6
No polls from Ohio, but given Pennsylvania I think he should be leading by 2.
I use the favorable numbers, because they're (a) much more regular and (b) avoid naming Democratic candidates.
Ohio is doing much, much better economically than Pennsylvania, which is why Trump has generally good favorables there, while his Pennsylvania numbers are much weaker.
Worth noting it is not just Trump's approval numbers that are edging up, so is Americans' view on how things are going generally
I am in more of Speedy's case than RCS on this one - yes Pennsylvania doesn't look good but, conversely, Virginia may be a possible gain this time
Virginia is about the only potential Republican pickup I see. It's economy has been booming, and Trump's net approval is only about -3/-4, against -10 or worse in Penn/Michigan/Wisconsin.
I haven't been looking at the numbers, closely, but is new Hampshire in a simeler situation?
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
What maintenance expense? My current ICE car requires 3L of engine oil, an air filter and an oil filter, every £10k miles*. Takes around 10 mins to do. Total cost sub £20, or 0.2p/mile. I spend more on the tires, they work out as about 1p/mile. Granted if I took it to dealer they would charge me over £100 for the same service, but I'm sure that dealerships will cheerfully take to ripping off EV owners in the same way for whatever they can be persuaded they need.
*Also meant to do the cabin air pollen filter, but I usually can't be bothered.
Electric cars have much less brake wear, because regenerative. And their engines don't need any real servicing.
It's essentially tires, and tires alone.
My 11 year old Tesla Roadster costs almost nothing to maintain. A 11 year old similar performance ICE car would cost thousands per year.
The chances Trump wins again is probably just over 55%, because he's suffering from anti-2016 disease. His ratings are worst in states he just won last time around, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. (And two of those three, as well as neighboring Minnesota and Iowa, are suffering from rising unemployment right now.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
In the month of January the polling average has Trump at 212 E.V, Democrats at 240 E.V., with 86 E.V. within 2%.
Trump's lead over the Top 3 Democrats is among the swing states is:
Texas +8 (I think it shouldn't be counted anymore as a swing state) Iowa +5 Georgia +5 Florida +3 Arizona +1 N.Carolina 0 Wisconsin -1 Michigan -2 Virginia -2 Nevada -4 Pennsylvania -5 N.Hampshire -6
No polls from Ohio, but given Pennsylvania I think he should be leading by 2.
I use the favorable numbers, because they're (a) much more regular and (b) avoid naming Democratic candidates.
Ohio is doing much, much better economically than Pennsylvania, which is why Trump has generally good favorables there, while his Pennsylvania numbers are much weaker.
Worth noting it is not just Trump's approval numbers that are edging up, so is Americans' view on how things are going generally
I am in more of Speedy's case than RCS on this one - yes Pennsylvania doesn't look good but, conversely, Virginia may be a possible gain this time
Virginia is about the only potential Republican pickup I see. It's economy has been booming, and Trump's net approval is only about -3/-4, against -10 or worse in Penn/Michigan/Wisconsin.
I haven't been looking at the numbers, closely, but is new Hampshire in a simeler situation?
New Hampshire is -19 on the Morning Consult numbers, so no. (Virginia is -5, Ohio -3, and Michigan -15.)
My "back of the cuff" estimate has -5 as being the tipping point, so Virginia is a Trump gain, while Wisconsin and Michigan go Democrat. Pennsylvania, at -6, is wonderfully on a knife edge.
Interestingly, not ten minutes ago, I've been doing some back of a fag packet calculations on this subject - by my calculations, if the entire fleet went electric tonight, assuming that the vast bulk of chargin was done overnight, the electricity needed to power the fleet would almost exactly equal the difference between the peak and the off peak demand. That is, based on existing generation, we could power the fleet. Now all we haveto do is shift the remaining 30-40% of power generated through fossil fuels to sustainable sources - which should haooen in the next decade or two, on current trends.
But get high pressure sitting over the country, nobody is moving tomorrow....
If you want a sensbile portfolio of power from zero-carbon, you ideally want
1. Wind power - cheap and quick to install, but not reliable. Can only power a country in conjunction with other sources
2. Solar - cheap and more reliable, but built in idleness - much more than 50% in dark, bitterly cold winter nights
3. Tidal - each lagoon produces for 14 hours a day (slack water and a while for tide/turbine level to have sufficient drop to generate power). A series of them can get baseload cover because of the later tide in say Solway Firth or the Wash. Utterly reliable. Price of electricity from the Cardiff Lagoon (powering 1.6m homes) would be about half that of Hinckly C - the Swansea pathfinder project still considerably cheaper. And 125 year minimum life. It is now needed to plug the domestic fuel gap that shale gas was supposed to provide, but seismic issues have now canned.
4. Nuclear - expensive, but 24/7. However, current generation require import of nuclear materials from dodgy regimes. Limited life of each nuclear plant. Waste management and decommissioning issues. And if it goes wrong.... terrorism/malfunction - bye-bye Britain. Tide on the other hand delivers itself, twice a day.... reliable as long as the Moon is up there. And if it isn't, we have bigger worries.
5. Something to plug the gap. Natural gas - but now supply issues. If Putin turns off the tops into Europe.... Needs expensive LNG kit as back-up back-up.
Coupling wind and solar with Gravitricity is the near term solution. The government needs to back this technology with money and engineering resources. We should get this idea up and running and become a world leader in mass non-battery based power storage for electrical grids.
Interestingly, not ten minutes ago, I've been doing some back of a fag packet calculations on this subject - by my calculations, if the entire fleet went electric tonight, assuming that the vast bulk of chargin was done overnight, the electricity needed to power the fleet would almost exactly equal the difference between the peak and the off peak demand. That is, based on existing generation, we could power the fleet. Now all we haveto do is shift the remaining 30-40% of power generated through fossil fuels to sustainable sources - which should haooen in the next decade or two, on current trends.
But get high pressure sitting over the country, nobody is moving tomorrow....
If you want a sensbile portfolio of power from zero-carbon, you ideally want
1. Wind power - cheap and quick to install, but not reliable. Can only power a country in conjunction with other sources
2. Solar - cheap and more reliable, but built in idleness - much more than 50% in dark, bitterly cold winter nights
3. Tidal - each lagoon produces for 14 hours a day (slack water and a while for tide/turbine level to have sufficient drop to generate power). A series of them can get baseload cover because of the later tide in say Solway Firth or the Wash. Utterly reliable. Price of electricity from the Cardiff Lagoon (powering 1.6m homes) would be about half that of Hinckly C - the Swansea pathfinder project still considerably cheaper. And 125 year minimum life. It is now needed to plug the domestic fuel gap that shale gas was supposed to provide, but seismic issues have now canned.
4. Nuclear - expensive, but 24/7. However, current generation require import of nuclear materials from dodgy regimes. Limited life of each nuclear plant. Waste management and decommissioning issues. And if it goes wrong.... terrorism/malfunction - bye-bye Britain. Tide on the other hand delivers itself, twice a day.... reliable as long as the Moon is up there. And if it isn't, we have bigger worries.
5. Something to plug the gap. Natural gas - but now supply issues. If Putin turns off the tops into Europe.... Needs expensive LNG kit as back-up back-up.
Let's get down on our knees and pray somebody cracks fusion.
Electrical power generation is getting cheaper and cheaper, and fusion is not without its challenges.
There is a near inexhaustible supply of natural gas in the world, and solar and wind (and other renewables) continue to become cheaper, while some of the biggest energy hogs (like air conditioning) are getting much more efficient.
Unless you have a Tesla the charging infrastructure in the UK is just fucked. It's too fragmented with variety of horrible service offerings and apps that don't fucking work. The government needs to fix this now.
That's shifting already. There's a push towards requiring charge points to accept credit/debit cards rather than apps. Instavolt already do this, Polar are rolling it out, Ionity will accept it, and the other networks are having to do it - so that within a year or two, the network chosen will be no more of an issue than the petrol company providing the fuel.
The rollout of charging points is getting better and better, especially at the "super-rapid" level (above 50kW). At 50kW and higher, the country is studded with them already (see zap-map.com)
Electrical power generation is getting cheaper and cheaper, and fusion is not without its challenges.
There is a near inexhaustible supply of natural gas in the world, and solar and wind (and other renewables) continue to become cheaper, while some of the biggest energy hogs (like air conditioning) are getting much more efficient.
If electrical power generation is getting cheaper and cheaper, how come at UK domestic rates is it currently economically viable for one to generate one's own electricity from domestic gas? I ran the numbers recently - with my gas supply at 2.8p/kwh and electricity at 13.2p/kwh, I could run a 25% efficient gas engine to produce my own electric (11.2p/kwh), with free domestic heating/hot water from the engine cooling system.
I've a feeling I know the answer to this question, and it's related to the government's desire to impoverish us all in the name of greenery - just like the electric car thing (the only reason electric cars are halfway economically viable is the huge rate of duty on conventional road fuels - in actual net energy input terms a Tesla only does the equivalent of a petrol car at 40mpg, which is pretty shoddy in modern terms).
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
I’m waiting for delivery of a VW eGolf and that has a real world range of about 120 miles a charge for everyday use. I do about 160 miles a week so that’s two overnight charges, at a running cost of 5p a mile compared to 12p for my current car, with which I average about 45mpg.
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
It is worth remembering that electric vehicles have much lower maintenance expense, because they have far less wear and tear than internal combustion engines.
What maintenance expense? My current ICE car requires 3L of engine oil, an air filter and an oil filter, every £10k miles*. Takes around 10 mins to do. Total cost sub £20, or 0.2p/mile. I spend more on the tires, they work out as about 1p/mile. Granted if I took it to dealer they would charge me over £100 for the same service, but I'm sure that dealerships will cheerfully take to ripping off EV owners in the same way for whatever they can be persuaded they need.
*Also meant to do the cabin air pollen filter, but I usually can't be bothered.
Electric cars have much less brake wear, because regenerative. And their engines don't need any real servicing.
It's essentially tires, and tires alone.
My 11 year old Tesla Roadster costs almost nothing to maintain. A 11 year old similar performance ICE car would cost thousands per year.
I've used 3 sets of front pads and a set of front disks in 100k miles. Takes may be half an hour to change. This represents a total of about £100, or 0.1p a mile.
Good modern ICE cars really don't cost much to run (I'm on a 12 year old Toyota). Bad ones are bad news on the other hand (work had a 15 plate Renault van, it was on it's second engine and gearbox before it's second service was due. The cheaky swine at the dealership tried to charge us £300 for a service whilst swapping the engine under warranty - I pointed out that the only item they didn't have to change anyway was the air filter).
Unless you have a Tesla the charging infrastructure in the UK is just fucked. It's too fragmented with variety of horrible service offerings and apps that don't fucking work. The government needs to fix this now.
Comments
The problems may not come from the cars but from the refuelling/recharging infrastructure.
Overcoming that in major cities won't be too difficult, but in other places, especially very rural ones, it may be rather more challenging.
Less of a problem if the batteries can reliably get them home to recharge.
Prices, of course, are another matter, and that is going to take a few years - particularly in the second hand market.
https://twitter.com/GallupNews/status/1224699143408496640
The chances that Trump is going to win again is very high at the moment.
Edit: mi duck
If you’re urban, or not far from towns/cities, and can charge at home, they’re great. But you make a very good point about the charging infrastructure. And If you don’t have off street parking they’re a no-no currently, even in urban areas.
(Which is probably not soon enough, but better than nothing.)
I wouldn't be surprised to see a reverse 2016, where Trump wins the popular vote, but he goes backwards around the Great Lakes.
Of course, for those of us who work remotely it's a theoretical matter rather than a practical one.
A mass conversion of lampposts, perhaps... ?
Trump's lead over the Top 3 Democrats is among the swing states is:
Texas +8 (I think it shouldn't be counted anymore as a swing state)
Iowa +5
Georgia +5
Florida +3
Arizona +1
N.Carolina 0
Wisconsin -1
Michigan -2
Virginia -2
Nevada -4
Pennsylvania -5
N.Hampshire -6
No polls from Ohio, but given Pennsylvania I think he should be leading by 2.
https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk
Physics prohibits it.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/02/iowa-caucus-results-failure-debacle-democrats.html
Last week, ahead of Monday’s critical first-in-the-nation Iowa Democratic Caucus, I was discussing the reliability of the party’s new caucus-night results-reporting app with Iowa Democratic Party chairman Troy Price. “We have backups on backups on backups,” Price told me. “So, if something does go wrong, we do have systems in place to back that up, to make sure we get the accurate results recorded quickly. So, this just allows us to get the results quicker from the precinct caucus.”...
Ohio is doing much, much better economically than Pennsylvania, which is why Trump has generally good favorables there, while his Pennsylvania numbers are much weaker.
Now airplanes...
That is, based on existing generation, we could power the fleet.
Now all we haveto do is shift the remaining 30-40% of power generated through fossil fuels to sustainable sources - which should haooen in the next decade or two, on current trends.
That's why I heard the rumours last night that the Caucuses will have to be repeated due to inaccurate and incomplete records.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/283958/satisfaction-surpasses-first-time-2005.aspx
I am in more of Speedy's case than RCS on this one - yes Pennsylvania doesn't look good but, conversely, Virginia may be a possible gain this time
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200129174512.htm
(OK, not strictly a solar cell, but...)
*Also meant to do the cabin air pollen filter, but I usually can't be bothered.
For instance, I see Hundai has suspended production in Korea, as they can't get Chinese parts:
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Coronavirus-outbreak/Coronavirus-latest-Hyundai-Motor-suspends-production-in-South-Korea
(Click top left for the French data).
In Pennsylvania Trump's problems since 2017 is in the Pittsburgh side not Philadelphia, and if Biden is the nominee Scranton.
Which candidates qualify for the Republican primaries that have been cancelled?
It wasn't only those four states e.g. Arizona cancelled their primary and ran a causus with only Obama as a candidate.
Of course officially it's GDP is much smaller.
Globalization is going to take a hit.
If you want a sensbile portfolio of power from zero-carbon, you ideally want
1. Wind power - cheap and quick to install, but not reliable. Can only power a country in conjunction with other sources
2. Solar - cheap and more reliable, but built in idleness - much more than 50% in dark, bitterly cold winter nights
3. Tidal - each lagoon produces for 14 hours a day (slack water and a while for tide/turbine level to have sufficient drop to generate power). A series of them can get baseload cover because of the later tide in say Solway Firth or the Wash. Utterly reliable. Price of electricity from the Cardiff Lagoon (powering 1.6m homes) would be about half that of Hinckly C - the Swansea pathfinder project still considerably cheaper. And 125 year minimum life. It is now needed to plug the domestic fuel gap that shale gas was supposed to provide, but seismic issues have now canned.
4. Nuclear - expensive, but 24/7. However, current generation require import of nuclear materials from dodgy regimes. Limited life of each nuclear plant. Waste management and decommissioning issues. And if it goes wrong....
terrorism/malfunction - bye-bye Britain. Tide on the other hand delivers itself, twice a day.... reliable as long as the Moon is up there. And if it isn't, we have bigger worries.
5. Something to plug the gap. Natural gas - but now supply issues. If Putin turns off the tops into Europe.... Needs expensive LNG kit as back-up back-up.
https://www.npr.org/2020/02/04/802502709/iowa-dem-party-says-delay-due-to-reporting-issue-county-chairs-blame-malfunction
would have thought that a big enough swing in the rest of the state could 'tip' Virginia to Trump, but its not gong to be easy, but could be easyer than holding on to say Wisconsin.
Trouble is Arup already have their paws all over it, and won’t let anyone else into the party.
Such is collaboration amongst British SMEs.
Modern cars mostly die either of generic mechanical stuff (suspension bushes, body rot) or electrical problems, all of which will apply just as badly to EVs.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VpPjgfoH-n7Ie8OmIa2eHoP88IvIkBR9wwkUL7bO1Y4/htmlview?sle=true#gid=0
https://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/02/04/pete-buttigieg-speech-iowa-caucus-sot-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/democrats-2020-in-iowa/
It's essentially tires, and tires alone.
My 11 year old Tesla Roadster costs almost nothing to maintain. A 11 year old similar performance ICE car would cost thousands per year.
My "back of the cuff" estimate has -5 as being the tipping point, so Virginia is a Trump gain, while Wisconsin and Michigan go Democrat. Pennsylvania, at -6, is wonderfully on a knife edge.
There is a near inexhaustible supply of natural gas in the world, and solar and wind (and other renewables) continue to become cheaper, while some of the biggest energy hogs (like air conditioning) are getting much more efficient.
There's a push towards requiring charge points to accept credit/debit cards rather than apps. Instavolt already do this, Polar are rolling it out, Ionity will accept it, and the other networks are having to do it - so that within a year or two, the network chosen will be no more of an issue than the petrol company providing the fuel.
The rollout of charging points is getting better and better, especially at the "super-rapid" level (above 50kW). At 50kW and higher, the country is studded with them already (see zap-map.com)
I've a feeling I know the answer to this question, and it's related to the government's desire to impoverish us all in the name of greenery - just like the electric car thing (the only reason electric cars are halfway economically viable is the huge rate of duty on conventional road fuels - in actual net energy input terms a Tesla only does the equivalent of a petrol car at 40mpg, which is pretty shoddy in modern terms).
Good modern ICE cars really don't cost much to run (I'm on a 12 year old Toyota). Bad ones are bad news on the other hand (work had a 15 plate Renault van, it was on it's second engine and gearbox before it's second service was due. The cheaky swine at the dealership tried to charge us £300 for a service whilst swapping the engine under warranty - I pointed out that the only item they didn't have to change anyway was the air filter).