Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Team Trump tries to fight the result using the the old “piles of paper” wheeze – politicalbetting.co

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited November 14 in General
Team Trump tries to fight the result using the the old “piles of paper” wheeze – politicalbetting.com

As WH2020 sore loser Trump desperately seeks to carry on as President after the official inauguration on January 20th CNN has produced the above sequence on how Trump and his team use the “piles of paper” ruse to get out of tricky PR situations.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • First like Biden.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 19,566
    edited November 14
    Second like Trump

    2020 not all bad...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 86,761
    edited November 14
    Honestly the only way Trump's legal strategy could have been worse was if he had hired Lionel Hutz.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 28,194
    Third, like the rate of vote-counting.
  • O/T - Big Sur looks and operates very well, but I'm annoyed by it, they've got rid of the battery remaining percentage view.
  • kle4 said:

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    When people make moves which probably will not see them politically rewarded I tend to assume they genuinely think it is the right thing to do. It would be hard to think Boris thinks about anything genuinely, but given you're probably right most people would not care that much about bringing it forward, and the XR crowd will never be satisfied, perhaps he really does.
    If there is one thing that does guide Boris.....skirt....
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 14

    O/T - Big Sur looks and operates very well, but I'm annoyed by it, they've got rid of the battery remaining percentage view.

    LOL....what a shit OS.

    I also read that the new fancy dan laptops with the apple chip won't run Adobe products properly for at least another 18 months....which is one of the main drivers of why people pick an macbook.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 49,740

    O/T - Big Sur looks and operates very well, but I'm annoyed by it, they've got rid of the battery remaining percentage view.

    iStat menus is pretty good for that. I'm most annoyed by this relentless drive to make everything look less cluttered (and therefore take up more room).
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 58,286

    Honestly the only way Trump's legal strategy could have been worse was if he had hired Lionel Hutz.

    It was certainly about as comical. 'Your Honour, someone who came to us claims they were told by someone that something happened' and 'We are in the process of looking for evidence' and 'This minor potential issue for some reason means an election with hundreds of thousands with winning margin in the tens of thousands is not sound' seems to sum up several of their cases.

    Hard to believe the paper trick works, but it really does in a lot of things.
  • Politico.com - Giuliani wrecks Trump campaign's well-laid legal plans
    The campaign spent months building a legal apparatus to contest close elections. Then along came the former New York City mayor.

    Any PBers in need a a good laugh should enjoy this story!

    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/14/giuliani-trump-legal-plans-436475
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 28,194

    O/T - Big Sur looks and operates very well, but I'm annoyed by it, they've got rid of the battery remaining percentage view.

    They moved the setting. It’s now in System Preferences > Dock > Battery.

    I’m holding off Big Sur for a few weeks. It’s a major update with a lot of changes.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,886
    edited November 14
    FPT

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    I do hope he’s planning to make big investment in domestic power generation and distribution as well. We’re going to need it, given transport uses four times as much power as our entire grid currently produces.

    Tidal lagoons might be a smart place to start...
    Fortunately for Johnson he will be earning squillions on the California after-dinner circuit when the lights go out over here.

    E- vehcles is laudible, if the idea had been thought through.
    In fairness, he has generally liked and supported big infrastructure projects even if they’re not universally popular (HS2) or indeed batshit crazy (Boris Island).

    And that is what we do need. Electric vehicles powered by domestic energy, which we could have, would be excellent. No more imports of millions of barrels of oil. No more pollution from transport in our cities.

    But it will take massive investment and we need to start right now on generation and distribution. Ten years isn’t long to get this right.
    It is a great idea, but inside 9 years seems a tall order, particularly when it has taken us four and a half years and counting to furnish ourselves with something as simple a Brexit trade deal.
    Possibly. However, I would ask you one question - how would you have responded if nine years ago somebody had told you coal would account for less than 1% of electricity generation all the way from March to November 2020? Including two spells of over sixty days with no coal generation at all.

    I’m guessing you’d have wanted to know what they were smoking. I certainly would have.

    Progress can be made very fast if there’s the will, the money and the tech available to do it.

    We could do this with resolution, good planning and the right spending structure.

    Unfortunately, Boris Johnson is in charge so we’re not likely to get any of them.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 14
    kle4 said:

    Honestly the only way Trump's legal strategy could have been worse was if he had hired Lionel Hutz.

    It was certainly about as comical. 'Your Honour, someone who came to us claims they were told by someone that something happened' and 'We are in the process of looking for evidence' and 'This minor potential issue for some reason means an election with hundreds of thousands with winning margin in the tens of thousands is not sound' seems to sum up several of their cases.

    Hard to believe the paper trick works, but it really does in a lot of things.
    Trump has used it on so many occasions,

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4118578/Were-Trump-s-stacks-legal-documents-just-piles-blank-paper-Questions-mount-folders-press-conference-contents-kept-secret.html

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?next_url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/12/14/that-giant-stack-of-paper-trump-stood-next-to-a-little-too-giant/

    And if it isn't blank paper, it is product placement for branded goods he doesn't own...

    https://www.npr.org/2016/03/09/469775355/trump-doesnt-own-most-of-the-products-he-pitched-last-night?t=1605370843815
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 58,286

    kle4 said:

    Honestly the only way Trump's legal strategy could have been worse was if he had hired Lionel Hutz.

    It was certainly about as comical. 'Your Honour, someone who came to us claims they were told by someone that something happened' and 'We are in the process of looking for evidence' and 'This minor potential issue for some reason means an election with hundreds of thousands with winning margin in the tens of thousands is not sound' seems to sum up several of their cases.

    Hard to believe the paper trick works, but it really does in a lot of things.
    Trump has used it on so many occasions,

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4118578/Were-Trump-s-stacks-legal-documents-just-piles-blank-paper-Questions-mount-folders-press-conference-contents-kept-secret.html

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?next_url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/12/14/that-giant-stack-of-paper-trump-stood-next-to-a-little-too-giant/


    Maybe he's in the pocket of the companies who make printer toner?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,886

    Honestly the only way Trump's legal strategy could have been worse was if he had hired Lionel Hutz.

    That would be better, surely? At least Lionel Hutz was funny.
  • FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
  • Sandpit said:

    O/T - Big Sur looks and operates very well, but I'm annoyed by it, they've got rid of the battery remaining percentage view.

    They moved the setting. It’s now in System Preferences > Dock > Battery.

    I’m holding off Big Sur for a few weeks. It’s a major update with a lot of changes.
    Thank you.

    Normally I wait a few weeks but had to do it for switching iPhones yesterday.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,886

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
  • Politico.com - Giuliani wrecks Trump campaign's well-laid legal plans
    The campaign spent months building a legal apparatus to contest close elections. Then along came the former New York City mayor.

    Any PBers in need a a good laugh should enjoy this story!

    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/14/giuliani-trump-legal-plans-436475

    Interesting observation from an attorney that worked for George W. Bush on the Florida 2000 case.

    “There’s zero, zero basis” for overturning the election, said Richard, the ex-Bush attorney. “They’re not going to win this. All these cases, I think, will be dismissed by the end of next week.”

    If so, kerching time for Betfair?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 14

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    We can't organize a Brexit deal in 4 years, we haven't managed to build a 3rd runway at Heathrow in 15 years, they f##ked about for years over the Swansea lagoon project then ditched it, Hinckley point is a disaster, HS2 won't be done basically forever, and you expect the UK to massively expand capacity in just 9 years while for at least another 1 of those we will all be under COVID restrictions...and up against basically every lobby group going anytime you try to build something.

    15 years is pushing it, when the government will be faced with planning challenge after planning challenge from everybody from the NIMBYs to the newt botherers.
  • Re: the stacks and stacks of bumpf ploy, Richard Nixon tried it during Watergate, when he had IIRC volumes of his "redacted" version of the White House tapes displayed before the media.

    They were NOT amused, impressed OR persuaded. And neither was the federal judiciary including SCOTUS.
  • O/T - Big Sur looks and operates very well, but I'm annoyed by it, they've got rid of the battery remaining percentage view.

    LOL....what a shit OS.

    I also read that the new fancy dan laptops with the apple chip won't run Adobe products properly for at least another 18 months....which is one of the main drivers of why people pick an macbook.
    I like it, no blue screen of death unlike Windows.

    Have to admit Apple are annoying me in little ways.

    With the new 5G iPhones if you have two sims in it (one physical and one eSim) then it won't connect to 5G where 5G is available, it will only stick with 4G.

    If you want 5G then you need just one sim, and one sim only, in the phone.

    Apparently there's a software update to fix this, and this is a problem Android have as well.

    But for me for the last couple of years I've had eSims/physical sims from EE and o2 in my phone which has meant I've had decent coverage everywhere in Britain (except the remote part of the Celtic fringes.)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 28,194

    Sandpit said:

    O/T - Big Sur looks and operates very well, but I'm annoyed by it, they've got rid of the battery remaining percentage view.

    They moved the setting. It’s now in System Preferences > Dock > Battery.

    I’m holding off Big Sur for a few weeks. It’s a major update with a lot of changes.
    Thank you.

    Normally I wait a few weeks but had to do it for switching iPhones yesterday.
    I’ve spent most of the last few days researching all the crap they changed. It’s like going from W7 to W10.

    But, said like a lawyer, that’s life and there’s fees in it. ;)
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 14
    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
  • FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    We can't organize a Brexit deal in 4 years, we haven't managed to build a 3rd runway at Heathrow in 15 years, they f##ked about for years over the Swansea lagoon project then ditched it, Hinckley point is a disaster, HS2 won't be done basically forever, and you expect the UK to massively expand capacity in just 9 years while for at least another 1 of those we will all be under COVID restrictions...and up against basically every lobby group going anytime you try to build something.

    15 years is pushing it, when the government will be faced with planning challenge after planning challenge from everybody from the NIMBYs to the newt botherers.
    Yes.

    Look at the transformation that has already occured in the energy market. We have seen coal go from 60% of our energy to <1%. We have seen renewables go from negligible to a the plurality of energy generation. All in a decade.

    This is already happening before our eyes today. It needs to continue but it isn't science fiction.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 11,317
    I've been running the Big Sur beta for months. It's good.
  • O/T - Big Sur looks and operates very well, but I'm annoyed by it, they've got rid of the battery remaining percentage view.

    LOL....what a shit OS.

    I also read that the new fancy dan laptops with the apple chip won't run Adobe products properly for at least another 18 months....which is one of the main drivers of why people pick an macbook.
    I like it, no blue screen of death unlike Windows.

    Have to admit Apple are annoying me in little ways.

    With the new 5G iPhones if you have two sims in it (one physical and one eSim) then it won't connect to 5G where 5G is available, it will only stick with 4G.

    If you want 5G then you need just one sim, and one sim only, in the phone.

    Apparently there's a software update to fix this, and this is a problem Android have as well.

    But for me for the last couple of years I've had eSims/physical sims from EE and o2 in my phone which has meant I've had decent coverage everywhere in Britain (except the remote part of the Celtic fringes.)
    I haven't had a windows crash in 5+ years and of course I can run Adobe software with CUDA acceleration.....
  • ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    I do not own a car, I reply on public transport almost all of the time.

    Each summer I drive from Manchester to the Alps, 440km to the tunnel and then another 1,000km to Switzerland in a hire car.

    For that to continue I need not only those issues to be addressed, but equally the rest of Europe to have followed suit.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,886

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    It can be. The tech is there.

    Whether it *will* be is a rather different question.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 28,194

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    We can't organize a Brexit deal in 4 years, we haven't managed to build a 3rd runway at Heathrow in 15 years, they f##ked about for years over the Swansea lagoon project then ditched it, Hinckley point is a disaster, HS2 won't be done basically forever, and you expect the UK to massively expand capacity in just 9 years while for at least another 1 of those we will all be under COVID restrictions...and up against basically every lobby group going anytime you try to build something.

    15 years is pushing it, when the government will be faced with planning challenge after planning challenge from everybody from the NIMBYs to the newt botherers.
    Can’t wait to see the planning process for these:
    https://www.enr.com/articles/50704-rolls-royce-leads-consortium-pushing-small-nuclear-reactors-in-uk
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 32,886

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    I do not own a car, I reply on public transport almost all of the time.

    Each summer I drive from Manchester to the Alps, 440km to the tunnel and then another 1,000km to Switzerland in a hire car.

    For that to continue I need not only those issues to be addressed, but equally the rest of Europe to have followed suit.
    You could catch a train and hire a car at the other end, although I appreciate it’s less convenient.
  • ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    I do not own a car, I reply on public transport almost all of the time.

    Each summer I drive from Manchester to the Alps, 440km to the tunnel and then another 1,000km to Switzerland in a hire car.

    For that to continue I need not only those issues to be addressed, but equally the rest of Europe to have followed suit.
    You could catch a train and hire a car at the other end, although I appreciate it’s less convenient.
    The advantage is the boot is full of German lager on the way home, not viable on the train.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,988

    O/T - Big Sur looks and operates very well, but I'm annoyed by it, they've got rid of the battery remaining percentage view.

    It's because it's so efficient on Apple's new M1 silicon, it never runs out of battery, so it doesn't need a display.
  • Donald Trump was cheered by crowds as his motorcade passed by the ‘Million MAGA March’ in Washington, DC.

    Supporters for the president swarmed around the convoy of cars as he travelled from the White House to his golf club in Virginia.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/trump-million-maga-march-rally-dc-b1722996.html

    So they all come out to support him and he buggers off for a round of golf.
  • A million, more like a few 1000....but still good for a COVID super spreading event.

  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 784
    2030 is an age away in AI development terms. I’d say better odds than not that drivers won’t be needed for cars by then. And if that happens, the economic forcing factors will mean it becomes quite rare for individuals to purchase, service and charge cars in large parts of the country.

    As for the choice of drivetrain, it blows my mind with incentives and depreciation curves as they are, that anyone apart from apartment dwelllers or enthusiasts are still buying petrol or diesel new. Money down the toilet even today. No doubt the refuseniks will come crying for a taxpayer funded scrappage scheme when they realise what a poor decision they made buying petrol/diesel anytime after about 2024.

    The government giving clear signals on the direction of the market (dressed up as a future ban) is great news because it lessens the scale of dissent when we get there.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,988

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    In California the fast charging infrastructure is getting really rather good. I drove 500 miles from Monterey to Los Angeles with just a single 30 minutes charging break (which we needed anyway to eat food and use the bathroom).
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 14
    moonshine said:

    2030 is an age away in AI development terms. I’d say better odds than not that drivers won’t be needed for cars by then. And if that happens, the economic forcing factors will mean it becomes quite rare for individuals to purchase, service and charge cars in large parts of the country.

    As for the choice of drivetrain, it blows my mind with incentives and depreciation curves as they are, that anyone apart from apartment dwelllers or enthusiasts are still buying petrol or diesel new. Money down the toilet even today. No doubt the refuseniks will come crying for a taxpayer funded scrappage scheme when they realise what a poor decision they made buying petrol/diesel anytime after about 2024.

    The government giving clear signals on the direction of the market (dressed up as a future ban) is great news because it lessens the scale of dissent when we get there.

    "2030 is an age away in AI development terms. I’d say better odds than not that drivers won’t be needed for cars by then."

    We are nowhere near fully autonomous cars, despite $10bns spent on it over the past 5 years. Progress towards this ultimate goal has stalled. Highly advanced driver assistance, absolutely. Fleets of cars driving themselves around with no drivers in them, not happening in next 10 years.

    Self-driving cars are actually solving the wrong problem. They are trying to create a solution to driving on our roads as they are today. What we actually want is roads of the future, which you then design car systems for.

    So much effort goes into trying to identify other manual road users, road furniture etc etc etc and ultimately it fails as soon as you aren't talking about highways or incredibly accurately mapped ring fenced areas.
  • moonshine said:

    2030 is an age away in AI development terms. I’d say better odds than not that drivers won’t be needed for cars by then. And if that happens, the economic forcing factors will mean it becomes quite rare for individuals to purchase, service and charge cars in large parts of the country.

    As for the choice of drivetrain, it blows my mind with incentives and depreciation curves as they are, that anyone apart from apartment dwelllers or enthusiasts are still buying petrol or diesel new. Money down the toilet even today. No doubt the refuseniks will come crying for a taxpayer funded scrappage scheme when they realise what a poor decision they made buying petrol/diesel anytime after about 2024.

    The government giving clear signals on the direction of the market (dressed up as a future ban) is great news because it lessens the scale of dissent when we get there.

    I agree strongly. However there does need to be a massive increase in the efficiency and availability of the outside charging network, as there are a helluva lot of people (like me) who don't have a driveway.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 4,396

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    You mean the genie is out of the bottle probably.

    Conservative bedrock principle: let market forces do the work. Libertarian bedrock principle: don't ban stuff. So "its happening anyway so let's stick in a ban as a gesture" does not seem the kind of approach you should be instinctively supporting. Is it good because it's Boris?

    The problems won't be sorted in 10 years time and will differentially affect those who live in the country and used to vote tory. This is as intelligent and helpful as the self imposed brexit deadlines.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 54,298
    F1: Stroll retains pole. Sainz has a penalty for impeding Perez.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,988
    moonshine said:

    2030 is an age away in AI development terms. I’d say better odds than not that drivers won’t be needed for cars by then. And if that happens, the economic forcing factors will mean it becomes quite rare for individuals to purchase, service and charge cars in large parts of the country.

    As for the choice of drivetrain, it blows my mind with incentives and depreciation curves as they are, that anyone apart from apartment dwelllers or enthusiasts are still buying petrol or diesel new. Money down the toilet even today. No doubt the refuseniks will come crying for a taxpayer funded scrappage scheme when they realise what a poor decision they made buying petrol/diesel anytime after about 2024.

    The government giving clear signals on the direction of the market (dressed up as a future ban) is great news because it lessens the scale of dissent when we get there.

    Self driving cars are like speech recognition. It's easy to get to 99.9% (we got there with Dragon Dictate and IBM Naturally Speaking in 1999), but getting the last 0.1% that takes it from convenience feature on the highway, to actually be able to take full control of the car is not easy.

    I'm in Phoenix next week and will try and travel in the Google self driving taxis while I'm there. It will be very interesting to experience.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 4,396
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    It can be. The tech is there.

    Whether it *will* be is a rather different question.
    I so strongly doubt that. 500 miles range added in 2 minutes is the (petrol) target to beat. You think electric will meet that?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,988
    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    It can be. The tech is there.

    Whether it *will* be is a rather different question.
    I so strongly doubt that. 500 miles range added in 2 minutes is the (petrol) target to beat. You think electric will meet that?
    It doesn't need to. People will accept 250 miles in 20 minutes if it cuts the cost of driving by 30%.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 28,194
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    In California the fast charging infrastructure is getting really rather good. I drove 500 miles from Monterey to Los Angeles with just a single 30 minutes charging break (which we needed anyway to eat food and use the bathroom).
    Will there be enough chargers to allow that trip, when half the cars on the road are electric?
  • rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    2030 is an age away in AI development terms. I’d say better odds than not that drivers won’t be needed for cars by then. And if that happens, the economic forcing factors will mean it becomes quite rare for individuals to purchase, service and charge cars in large parts of the country.

    As for the choice of drivetrain, it blows my mind with incentives and depreciation curves as they are, that anyone apart from apartment dwelllers or enthusiasts are still buying petrol or diesel new. Money down the toilet even today. No doubt the refuseniks will come crying for a taxpayer funded scrappage scheme when they realise what a poor decision they made buying petrol/diesel anytime after about 2024.

    The government giving clear signals on the direction of the market (dressed up as a future ban) is great news because it lessens the scale of dissent when we get there.

    Self driving cars are like speech recognition. It's easy to get to 99.9% (we got there with Dragon Dictate and IBM Naturally Speaking in 1999), but getting the last 0.1% that takes it from convenience feature on the highway, to actually be able to take full control of the car is not easy.

    I'm in Phoenix next week and will try and travel in the Google self driving taxis while I'm there. It will be very interesting to experience.
    And of course unlike speech recognition mis-translating say one word in a 1000, a self driving car making a mistake once in a 1000 miles = massive increase in road traffic accidents.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 5,777

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    I do not own a car, I reply on public transport almost all of the time.

    Each summer I drive from Manchester to the Alps, 440km to the tunnel and then another 1,000km to Switzerland in a hire car.

    For that to continue I need not only those issues to be addressed, but equally the rest of Europe to have followed suit.
    Tesla have a great promo video addressing this very question. It features a couple touring Europe, staying in hotels with chargers and stopping occasionally for coffee. I found it very convincing (although I drive a clean diesel Q7, I’m hoping to go electric in four years or so).
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 5,777
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    In California the fast charging infrastructure is getting really rather good. I drove 500 miles from Monterey to Los Angeles with just a single 30 minutes charging break (which we needed anyway to eat food and use the bathroom).
    Will there be enough chargers to allow that trip, when half the cars on the road are electric?
    Supply creates its own demand (and vice versa).

  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 14
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    In California the fast charging infrastructure is getting really rather good. I drove 500 miles from Monterey to Los Angeles with just a single 30 minutes charging break (which we needed anyway to eat food and use the bathroom).
    That's great, but what if every Californian had an electric car. How much bigger would the infrastructure need to be, where would all these cars be parked for the 30 mins. It is a huge challenge in comparison to the regular network of gas stations, where you pull in, 2-3 mins you are filled up and off you go.

    None of this is impossible, but just saying building this enormous increase in infrastructure is challenging, and in the UK, combination of strong legal system and lots of groups willing to use it, bog everything down for starters.
  • TresTres Posts: 196
    I remember attending presentations ten years ago saying we'd all have self driving cars by 2020....
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 28,194
    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    2030 is an age away in AI development terms. I’d say better odds than not that drivers won’t be needed for cars by then. And if that happens, the economic forcing factors will mean it becomes quite rare for individuals to purchase, service and charge cars in large parts of the country.

    As for the choice of drivetrain, it blows my mind with incentives and depreciation curves as they are, that anyone apart from apartment dwelllers or enthusiasts are still buying petrol or diesel new. Money down the toilet even today. No doubt the refuseniks will come crying for a taxpayer funded scrappage scheme when they realise what a poor decision they made buying petrol/diesel anytime after about 2024.

    The government giving clear signals on the direction of the market (dressed up as a future ban) is great news because it lessens the scale of dissent when we get there.

    Self driving cars are like speech recognition. It's easy to get to 99.9% (we got there with Dragon Dictate and IBM Naturally Speaking in 1999), but getting the last 0.1% that takes it from convenience feature on the highway, to actually be able to take full control of the car is not easy.

    I'm in Phoenix next week and will try and travel in the Google self driving taxis while I'm there. It will be very interesting to experience.
    Worse than that, the L2 and L3 cars are positively dangerous - humans just aren’t wired to be paying attention while doing nothing.

    Interesting to hear about the Phoenix trial, are they on their own road network?
  • BalrogBalrog Posts: 95

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    Currently a fast charger charges at 500 miles/hour. So about 170 miles in 20 minutes, which is the time taken to go to the loo and drink a coffee. And thats only if you drive over 250 miles round trip, otherwise its charge at home at about 3 to 4p per mile and nothing in the summer when I charge from solar.

    I think the majority of new car sales will be electric way before 2030 and any manufacturer of petrol cars will be screwed because of the vast number of 2nd hand petrol cars around / the drop in future resale prices for petrol cars.

    It will come faster than you think.

    And no gears, so manual / automatic isn't a thing.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 5,777

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    In California the fast charging infrastructure is getting really rather good. I drove 500 miles from Monterey to Los Angeles with just a single 30 minutes charging break (which we needed anyway to eat food and use the bathroom).
    That's great, but what if every Californian had an electric car. How much bigger would the infrastructure need to be, where would all these cars be parked for the 30 mins. It is a huge challenge in comparison to the regular network of gas stations, where you pull in, 2-3 mins you are filled up and off you go.

    None of this is impossible, but just saying building this enormous increase in infrastructure is challenging, and in the UK, combination of strong legal system and lots of groups willing to use it, bog everything down for starters.
    Fair point, but think I’m right in saying you can put charging points in a much smaller space than fuelling points?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,988

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    In California the fast charging infrastructure is getting really rather good. I drove 500 miles from Monterey to Los Angeles with just a single 30 minutes charging break (which we needed anyway to eat food and use the bathroom).
    That's great, but what if every Californian had an electric car. How much bigger would the infrastructure need to be, where would all these cars be parked for the 30 mins. It is a huge challenge in comparison to a gas station, where you pull in, 2-3 mins you are filled up and off you go.
    Sure: but in cities it's simply integrated into existing parking infrastructure. And on highways there's usually plenty of space available.

    And don't forget that none of this has to happen overnight. Only one twelfth of the vehicle fleet is replaced every year, so this is a multi decade challenge.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 54,298
    Mr. Sandpit, it does sound fantastically unhelpful.

    All the drawbacks of the current driving situation, with the added complications of systems that can go wrong and the need for a driver to be 100% attentive whilst actually doing nothing, and being able to intervene on a moment's notice.

    Anyway, I must be off. Pre-race tosh should be up tomorrow morning.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,988
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    2030 is an age away in AI development terms. I’d say better odds than not that drivers won’t be needed for cars by then. And if that happens, the economic forcing factors will mean it becomes quite rare for individuals to purchase, service and charge cars in large parts of the country.

    As for the choice of drivetrain, it blows my mind with incentives and depreciation curves as they are, that anyone apart from apartment dwelllers or enthusiasts are still buying petrol or diesel new. Money down the toilet even today. No doubt the refuseniks will come crying for a taxpayer funded scrappage scheme when they realise what a poor decision they made buying petrol/diesel anytime after about 2024.

    The government giving clear signals on the direction of the market (dressed up as a future ban) is great news because it lessens the scale of dissent when we get there.

    Self driving cars are like speech recognition. It's easy to get to 99.9% (we got there with Dragon Dictate and IBM Naturally Speaking in 1999), but getting the last 0.1% that takes it from convenience feature on the highway, to actually be able to take full control of the car is not easy.

    I'm in Phoenix next week and will try and travel in the Google self driving taxis while I'm there. It will be very interesting to experience.
    Worse than that, the L2 and L3 cars are positively dangerous - humans just aren’t wired to be paying attention while doing nothing.

    Interesting to hear about the Phoenix trial, are they on their own road network?
    No, they're on public roads - albeit in a small part of the city, and with a warehouse full of remote operators constantly watching them and stepping in from time to time.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 8,591
    IshmaelZ said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    You mean the genie is out of the bottle probably.

    Conservative bedrock principle: let market forces do the work. Libertarian bedrock principle: don't ban stuff. So "its happening anyway so let's stick in a ban as a gesture" does not seem the kind of approach you should be instinctively supporting. Is it good because it's Boris?

    The problems won't be sorted in 10 years time and will differentially affect those who live in the country and used to vote tory. This is as intelligent and helpful as the self imposed brexit deadlines.
    The ban is to focus minds and give a hard end date - bit like the ban on coal fired power stations. Which will shutdown all the remaining stations in 2024. There are 4 left, and they will probably be gone by then.

    The guesstimate of the crossover in cost - equivalent electric car vs ice - for regular cars, is somewhere in the next 5 years.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 49,740
    Tres said:

    I remember attending presentations ten years ago saying we'd all have self driving cars by 2020....

    Been to many talks on fusion recently? ;)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 28,194

    Mr. Sandpit, it does sound fantastically unhelpful.

    All the drawbacks of the current driving situation, with the added complications of systems that can go wrong and the need for a driver to be 100% attentive whilst actually doing nothing, and being able to intervene on a moment's notice.

    Anyway, I must be off. Pre-race tosh should be up tomorrow morning.

    I’m thinking of Bottas for either a podium or a DNF, given how much he needs to do well tomorrow.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 14
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    2030 is an age away in AI development terms. I’d say better odds than not that drivers won’t be needed for cars by then. And if that happens, the economic forcing factors will mean it becomes quite rare for individuals to purchase, service and charge cars in large parts of the country.

    As for the choice of drivetrain, it blows my mind with incentives and depreciation curves as they are, that anyone apart from apartment dwelllers or enthusiasts are still buying petrol or diesel new. Money down the toilet even today. No doubt the refuseniks will come crying for a taxpayer funded scrappage scheme when they realise what a poor decision they made buying petrol/diesel anytime after about 2024.

    The government giving clear signals on the direction of the market (dressed up as a future ban) is great news because it lessens the scale of dissent when we get there.

    Self driving cars are like speech recognition. It's easy to get to 99.9% (we got there with Dragon Dictate and IBM Naturally Speaking in 1999), but getting the last 0.1% that takes it from convenience feature on the highway, to actually be able to take full control of the car is not easy.

    I'm in Phoenix next week and will try and travel in the Google self driving taxis while I'm there. It will be very interesting to experience.
    Worse than that, the L2 and L3 cars are positively dangerous - humans just aren’t wired to be paying attention while doing nothing.

    Interesting to hear about the Phoenix trial, are they on their own road network?
    No, they're on public roads - albeit in a small part of the city, and with a warehouse full of remote operators constantly watching them and stepping in from time to time.
    Its is a tiny area of Phoenix. I think 50 sq miles is the ring fenced area that the fully driverless cars operate.

    I have huge issues with Waymo's approach.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 33,988

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    2030 is an age away in AI development terms. I’d say better odds than not that drivers won’t be needed for cars by then. And if that happens, the economic forcing factors will mean it becomes quite rare for individuals to purchase, service and charge cars in large parts of the country.

    As for the choice of drivetrain, it blows my mind with incentives and depreciation curves as they are, that anyone apart from apartment dwelllers or enthusiasts are still buying petrol or diesel new. Money down the toilet even today. No doubt the refuseniks will come crying for a taxpayer funded scrappage scheme when they realise what a poor decision they made buying petrol/diesel anytime after about 2024.

    The government giving clear signals on the direction of the market (dressed up as a future ban) is great news because it lessens the scale of dissent when we get there.

    Self driving cars are like speech recognition. It's easy to get to 99.9% (we got there with Dragon Dictate and IBM Naturally Speaking in 1999), but getting the last 0.1% that takes it from convenience feature on the highway, to actually be able to take full control of the car is not easy.

    I'm in Phoenix next week and will try and travel in the Google self driving taxis while I'm there. It will be very interesting to experience.
    And of course unlike speech recognition mis-translating say one word in a 1000, a self driving car making a mistake once in a 1000 miles = massive increase in road traffic accidents.
    Oh, it's even worse than that. Imagine that a self driving cars realises that an accident is inevitable. It has to make a choice between hitting a baby in a pram or swerving and taking out an old person.

    What should it do?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 5,777
    Arguably learning to drive on a manual now is pointless. Most new car sales are autos and as Robert says electric cars don’t have gears at all.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 4,396
    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    It can be. The tech is there.

    Whether it *will* be is a rather different question.
    I so strongly doubt that. 500 miles range added in 2 minutes is the (petrol) target to beat. You think electric will meet that?
    It doesn't need to. People will accept 250 miles in 20 minutes if it cuts the cost of driving by 30%.
    People like to be given the choice, a fact that tory governments are meant to recognise. And I won't accept it, I don't give a toss whether driving costs 30% more or less than it currently does. I want and will pay for my 2 minute fill ups. What next? I don't know about you, but I have central heating and mains water and a washing machine and electric light because I am prepared to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds on eliminating 20 minute waits from my life.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 8,591
    Balrog said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    Currently a fast charger charges at 500 miles/hour. So about 170 miles in 20 minutes, which is the time taken to go to the loo and drink a coffee. And thats only if you drive over 250 miles round trip, otherwise its charge at home at about 3 to 4p per mile and nothing in the summer when I charge from solar.

    I think the majority of new car sales will be electric way before 2030 and any manufacturer of petrol cars will be screwed because of the vast number of 2nd hand petrol cars around / the drop in future resale prices for petrol cars.

    It will come faster than you think.

    And no gears, so manual / automatic isn't a thing.
    A couple of sports car makers are actually looking at putting gears in electric cars. Not for performance - you can get the same effect by tailoring multiple motors/windings for different roles in the acceleration/speed curves - but so that hard core shifter types have something to do as they come in/out of a corner.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 7,779
    IshmaelZ said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    You mean the genie is out of the bottle probably.

    Conservative bedrock principle: let market forces do the work. Libertarian bedrock principle: don't ban stuff. So "its happening anyway so let's stick in a ban as a gesture" does not seem the kind of approach you should be instinctively supporting. Is it good because it's Boris?

    The problems won't be sorted in 10 years time and will differentially affect those who live in the country and used to vote tory. This is as intelligent and helpful as the self imposed brexit deadlines.
    It won't do the rustic tory vote any good, is the instant reaction of someone familiar with the Scottish Borders. Low population density, fewer and later charging stations away from the main arterials passing through, longer distances between them, weather blocks on roads. Like mobile phone coverage, only worse (we're not talking about banning landlines). Perhaps biodiesel will be needed for those.

    (The Tories already have trains planned lugging the weight of two locomotives (effectively) on each - electric and diesel - as they have ****ed up railway electrification. Trouble is, their idea of out in the railway sticks is not very progressive - IIRC Swansea and Oxford are beyond the rails with the amps thanks to Mr Grayling. Which is nopt a happy precedent.)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 86,761
    edited November 14
    I've been made aware of this tweet from March.



    Has Elon Musk ever been seen in the same room as Alistair Hames?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 14
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    moonshine said:

    2030 is an age away in AI development terms. I’d say better odds than not that drivers won’t be needed for cars by then. And if that happens, the economic forcing factors will mean it becomes quite rare for individuals to purchase, service and charge cars in large parts of the country.

    As for the choice of drivetrain, it blows my mind with incentives and depreciation curves as they are, that anyone apart from apartment dwelllers or enthusiasts are still buying petrol or diesel new. Money down the toilet even today. No doubt the refuseniks will come crying for a taxpayer funded scrappage scheme when they realise what a poor decision they made buying petrol/diesel anytime after about 2024.

    The government giving clear signals on the direction of the market (dressed up as a future ban) is great news because it lessens the scale of dissent when we get there.

    Self driving cars are like speech recognition. It's easy to get to 99.9% (we got there with Dragon Dictate and IBM Naturally Speaking in 1999), but getting the last 0.1% that takes it from convenience feature on the highway, to actually be able to take full control of the car is not easy.

    I'm in Phoenix next week and will try and travel in the Google self driving taxis while I'm there. It will be very interesting to experience.
    And of course unlike speech recognition mis-translating say one word in a 1000, a self driving car making a mistake once in a 1000 miles = massive increase in road traffic accidents.
    Oh, it's even worse than that. Imagine that a self driving cars realises that an accident is inevitable. It has to make a choice between hitting a baby in a pram or swerving and taking out an old person.

    What should it do?
    The old trolley problem :-)

    My point was even without the ethics issues, we aren't close on the fully autonomous driving cars. Part of the problem is their reliance on deep neural networks, which are great at the low hanging fruit, but increasingly we are finding that they don't actually learn what people think they do and getting from great to perfect is basically impossible with the current paradigm even with the attitude of "just throw more labelled data at it".

    Increasingly leading lights in the AI / ML world are saying that deep neural nets aren't the solution, they aren't the future, and that there needs to be a lot of work on thinking about different ideas. Meanwhile, Waymo have gone full "throw every bit at data at the neural net will do the trick" approach.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 18,324
    Tres said:

    I remember attending presentations ten years ago saying we'd all have self driving cars by 2020....

    I remember a very excitable author suggesting that professional translators would be out of a job by now.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 12,494
    I come back from a walk to discover that Bozo has turned into an eco-authoritarian.

    Or has the new car deadline come from PM Carrie?

    BTW, while I was out I spotted a giant inflatable snowman in someone's garden. Its 14th November, ffs.
  • BalrogBalrog Posts: 95

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    In California the fast charging infrastructure is getting really rather good. I drove 500 miles from Monterey to Los Angeles with just a single 30 minutes charging break (which we needed anyway to eat food and use the bathroom).
    That's great, but what if every Californian had an electric car. How much bigger would the infrastructure need to be, where would all these cars be parked for the 30 mins. It is a huge challenge in comparison to the regular network of gas stations, where you pull in, 2-3 mins you are filled up and off you go.

    None of this is impossible, but just saying building this enormous increase in infrastructure is challenging, and in the UK, combination of strong legal system and lots of groups willing to use it, bog everything down for starters.
    Fair point, but think I’m right in saying you can put charging points in a much smaller space than fuelling points?
    In Battersea a lot of the lamp posts in some streets have charging points built in. I don't know who has introduced the system, but if you are only pootling around a city charging every few days would be fine so this would seem to be a way forward re people with no drive. As would fast charging in supermarket car parks if they moved to most parking spaces having a charging point. Since they charge twice the retail rate for power, if you paid £10 for 25kWh /100 miles it would still be cheaper than petrol, would happen while you were shopping and would be profitable for the operator.

    There do seem to be ways to make this work.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 4,641
    RobD said:

    Tres said:

    I remember attending presentations ten years ago saying we'd all have self driving cars by 2020....

    Been to many talks on fusion recently? ;)
    There are still plenty of people working on it.

    Here's an example.

    https://firstlightfusion.com/

    I have a modest investment in IP Group (a listed tech fund), and they have a modest investment in the above.

    It simply can't forever be beyond our ability to tap into the source of power that the universe uses for free, and so ostentatiously! (Might be 10,00 years though)

  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 12,494
    Foxy said:

    Second like Trump

    2020 not all bad...

    Laura Pidcock was also second, so still room for improvement!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 7,735
    Your graph may prove accurate than it was for GE 2017.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 4,396
    Balrog said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    In California the fast charging infrastructure is getting really rather good. I drove 500 miles from Monterey to Los Angeles with just a single 30 minutes charging break (which we needed anyway to eat food and use the bathroom).
    That's great, but what if every Californian had an electric car. How much bigger would the infrastructure need to be, where would all these cars be parked for the 30 mins. It is a huge challenge in comparison to the regular network of gas stations, where you pull in, 2-3 mins you are filled up and off you go.

    None of this is impossible, but just saying building this enormous increase in infrastructure is challenging, and in the UK, combination of strong legal system and lots of groups willing to use it, bog everything down for starters.
    Fair point, but think I’m right in saying you can put charging points in a much smaller space than fuelling points?
    In Battersea a lot of the lamp posts in some streets have charging points built in. I don't know who has introduced the system, but if you are only pootling around a city charging every few days would be fine so this would seem to be a way forward re people with no drive. As would fast charging in supermarket car parks if they moved to most parking spaces having a charging point. Since they charge twice the retail rate for power, if you paid £10 for 25kWh /100 miles it would still be cheaper than petrol, would happen while you were shopping and would be profitable for the operator.

    There do seem to be ways to make this work.
    If you live in Battersea why do you want a car anyway?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 51,201
    edited November 14
    isam said:
    Scotland's circuit breaker doesn't seem to have done the trick...Wales looks a bit more encouraging, but have to see in a couple of weeks when we will really know...and of now everybody has gone down the pub, had their organized activities in big groups, how will that effect things.
  • BalrogBalrog Posts: 95
    IshmaelZ said:

    Balrog said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    In California the fast charging infrastructure is getting really rather good. I drove 500 miles from Monterey to Los Angeles with just a single 30 minutes charging break (which we needed anyway to eat food and use the bathroom).
    That's great, but what if every Californian had an electric car. How much bigger would the infrastructure need to be, where would all these cars be parked for the 30 mins. It is a huge challenge in comparison to the regular network of gas stations, where you pull in, 2-3 mins you are filled up and off you go.

    None of this is impossible, but just saying building this enormous increase in infrastructure is challenging, and in the UK, combination of strong legal system and lots of groups willing to use it, bog everything down for starters.
    Fair point, but think I’m right in saying you can put charging points in a much smaller space than fuelling points?
    In Battersea a lot of the lamp posts in some streets have charging points built in. I don't know who has introduced the system, but if you are only pootling around a city charging every few days would be fine so this would seem to be a way forward re people with no drive. As would fast charging in supermarket car parks if they moved to most parking spaces having a charging point. Since they charge twice the retail rate for power, if you paid £10 for 25kWh /100 miles it would still be cheaper than petrol, would happen while you were shopping and would be profitable for the operator.

    There do seem to be ways to make this work.
    If you live in Battersea why do you want a car anyway?
    I don't live in Battsea, and I suspect many people do without cars. Though there are a surprisingly large number of Teslas on some of the side streets.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 4,396
    Balrog said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Balrog said:

    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    In California the fast charging infrastructure is getting really rather good. I drove 500 miles from Monterey to Los Angeles with just a single 30 minutes charging break (which we needed anyway to eat food and use the bathroom).
    That's great, but what if every Californian had an electric car. How much bigger would the infrastructure need to be, where would all these cars be parked for the 30 mins. It is a huge challenge in comparison to the regular network of gas stations, where you pull in, 2-3 mins you are filled up and off you go.

    None of this is impossible, but just saying building this enormous increase in infrastructure is challenging, and in the UK, combination of strong legal system and lots of groups willing to use it, bog everything down for starters.
    Fair point, but think I’m right in saying you can put charging points in a much smaller space than fuelling points?
    In Battersea a lot of the lamp posts in some streets have charging points built in. I don't know who has introduced the system, but if you are only pootling around a city charging every few days would be fine so this would seem to be a way forward re people with no drive. As would fast charging in supermarket car parks if they moved to most parking spaces having a charging point. Since they charge twice the retail rate for power, if you paid £10 for 25kWh /100 miles it would still be cheaper than petrol, would happen while you were shopping and would be profitable for the operator.

    There do seem to be ways to make this work.
    If you live in Battersea why do you want a car anyway?
    I don't live in Battsea, and I suspect many people do without cars. Though there are a surprisingly large number of Teslas on some of the side streets.
    Sorry, I meant "If one lives..."
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 8,591
    UK cases by specimen date

    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 8,591
    UK cases by specimen date and by 100k population

    image
  • BalrogBalrog Posts: 95
    Carnyx said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    You mean the genie is out of the bottle probably.

    Conservative bedrock principle: let market forces do the work. Libertarian bedrock principle: don't ban stuff. So "its happening anyway so let's stick in a ban as a gesture" does not seem the kind of approach you should be instinctively supporting. Is it good because it's Boris?

    The problems won't be sorted in 10 years time and will differentially affect those who live in the country and used to vote tory. This is as intelligent and helpful as the self imposed brexit deadlines.
    It won't do the rustic tory vote any good, is the instant reaction of someone familiar with the Scottish Borders. Low population density, fewer and later charging stations away from the main arterials passing through, longer distances between them, weather blocks on roads. Like mobile phone coverage, only worse (we're not talking about banning landlines). Perhaps biodiesel will be needed for those.

    (The Tories already have trains planned lugging the weight of two locomotives (effectively) on each - electric and diesel - as they have ****ed up railway electrification. Trouble is, their idea of out in the railway sticks is not very progressive - IIRC Swansea and Oxford are beyond the rails with the amps thanks to Mr Grayling. Which is nopt a happy precedent.)
    If you live in a rural area I would have thought more people would be able to charge at home. You only need charging points if you can't charge at home.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 8,591
    UK local R

    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 8,591
    UK case summary

    image
    image
    image
    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 8,591
    UK hospitals

    image
    image
    image
    image
  • IshmaelZ said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    You mean the genie is out of the bottle probably.

    Conservative bedrock principle: let market forces do the work. Libertarian bedrock principle: don't ban stuff. So "its happening anyway so let's stick in a ban as a gesture" does not seem the kind of approach you should be instinctively supporting. Is it good because it's Boris?

    The problems won't be sorted in 10 years time and will differentially affect those who live in the country and used to vote tory. This is as intelligent and helpful as the self imposed brexit deadlines.
    Yes genie out of bottle is better.

    And my point is the market is deciding. The government is riding the market for political gain.

    Far from suggesting something unrealistic they're setting a deadline the market will have already dealt with anyway.

    It's like a politician saying he's going to pass a law saying it will be summer in July. It will either way. Electric vehicles are the future either way.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 8,591
    UK deaths

    image
    image
    image
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 9,293

    isam said:
    Scotland's circuit breaker doesn't seem to have done the trick...Wales looks a bit more encouraging, but have to see in a couple of weeks when we will really know...and of now everybody has gone down the pub, had their organized activities in big groups, how will that effect things.
    NE seems to have taken off again. :(
    NW only region showing progress.
    Seems very linear. Don't know why?
  • BalrogBalrog Posts: 95
    Electric cars aren't the difficult bit of moving from fossil fuels.

    Heating is a much bigger use of gas or oil. Heat pumps are great, though take a bit of time to get used too, but not everyone has the space for a ground source heat pump. I cant see how the transition from gas for heating is going to happen quickly.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 8,591
    UK R

    image
    image
    image
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 6,397
    The range on my Toyota hybrid is 575 miles. We get range anxiety when it drops below 300.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,029
    If memory serves, the Donald tried the piles of paper wheeze on his first "news briefing" by indicating a large pile of documents to "show" that his financial dealings were above board and proper. I don't recall anyone questioning that at the time.

    I guess loud talk from a blow-hard can intimidate.

    More importantly, I'm wondering how his loud nonsense may affect the critical Senate rerun in Georgia. Maybe it'll help Biden.

    In 1951 listened on the radio to General MacArthur, dismissed by Harry Truman for thinking to A-bomb the Chinese in the Korean war, say "Old soldiers don't die. They simply fade away." in his address to Congress.

    The "nasty" Mr. Trump will wither away for unleashing a bomb on America's frontal lobe.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 2,734
    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    Range will matter as well as price.

    But that becomes less important if you have a widespread reliable charging network.

    If I had decided to continue with two cars, rather than one, one would be electric for commuting to work. As it is, I’ve gone with a modern engined petrol.

    I will admit though I do like manual gearshift too. I’ve driven many automatics but never found one I really liked. Equally, an electric engine probably would work sufficiently differently to make that less of an issue.
    Range and charging times. Its all well and good saying we have a network of charging stations, but if you have to wait 2-3hrs to recharge your car, long journeys become very problematic.

    All of this will be solved, will they be solved in 9 years? And at a price that is affordable to the consumer? I don't know.
    It can be. The tech is there.

    Whether it *will* be is a rather different question.
    I so strongly doubt that. 500 miles range added in 2 minutes is the (petrol) target to beat. You think electric will meet that?
    It doesn't need to. People will accept 250 miles in 20 minutes if it cuts the cost of driving by 30%.
    And petrol can’t compete for 90%+ of recharge/refill situations.
    We went electric in December. I have spent far, far less time on recharge/refill than before.
    With a diesel, I had to make dedicated trips or detours to a petrol station, and then spend time filling up.
    Now, I plug it into the wall-mounted charger every few days, and even take advantage of 5.5p/kWh electricity overnight.
    I’ve had to recharge on the road a grand total of five times (three times at a supermarket while I took advantage of the shopping I needed to do, and twice on long-range trips to my family, using a 170kW charger which recharged it in the time it took me to go to the loo and grab a drink.

    Adding up the minutes spent versus the minutes spent driving to and from a petrol station as well as the filling time that I had to do every two weeks is no contest. Electric is far more convenient, as well as being a lot cheaper.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 4,641

    UK hospitals

    image
    image
    image
    image

    Well done with these tables and graphs.

    Is this data stored in a public db, or are you essentially scraping and storing it yourself?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 9,293
    Balrog said:

    Carnyx said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    UK to ban sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 - FT

    Britain had originally planned to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2040, as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and in February Johnson brought this forward to 2035.

    Citing unidentified industry and government figures, the FT said Johnson now intended to move the date forward again to 2030 in a speech on environmental policy he is expected to give next week.

    https://uk.reuters.com/article/britain-autos/uk-to-ban-sale-of-new-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-2030-ft-idUSL1N2I007X

    If that doesn't include hybrids then I expect the market will have killed off those sales by 2030 largely anyway. Already more than a quarter of all sales are either electric etc or hybrid anyway and it is fast increasing annually. By 2030 I doubt there'd be many such sales left even without a ban.
    This is a classic case of substitution activity. What a lot of people need to know right now is the terms and conditions of trade for cars on 1st January 2020. To be certain about 2030 when you have no idea about 7 weeks time is delusional.

    Boris is clearly making the mistake of believing that Eco issues are the top of people's priority list. Sure lots of people mention their concern for the environment, but when it comes to brass tax, the vast majority of the public, especially red wall voters, aren't XR lot that see everything through the lens of we must totally change our whole economy, regardless of potential economist impact, to save the planet, and anything slower than yesterday is a war crime.

    I doubt Boris will gain a single extra vote for making a big play out of moving forward this deadline another 5 years.
    No, he won't directly win any votes.

    However, if done properly the huge level of investment needed to achieve this could be directed at the poorer parts of the nation, often around the coast where power is plentiful, to create plenty of job opportunities in businesses that could genuinely grow to be world leading.
    Far too much of governing is done on the basis of will it win votes rather than will it be effective. The UK, as with most Western economies, is going to have replace large swathes of its economy with new industries over the next decade - green tech should absolutely be at the front of that effort, popular or not.
    But the point is, that it is neither a good policy nor a vote winner. We aren't going to have expanded capacity online and built the nationwide charging infrastructure in 9 years.
    Why not?

    As has already been said a quarter of all cars meet these conditions already and that quantity is growing exponentially year on year already.

    Unless you're going to ban electric car sales then they're going to displace petrol and diesel anyway. By 2025 it's forecast that new electric vehicles could be as cheap as new petrol at which point why would people choose petrol?

    Saying that the government needs to deal with the capacity issues and charging infrastructure and holding them to account for that is more necessary than simply wishing them away by wishing this transformation would be put off.

    The cat is already out of the bag. The infrastructure needs to be built now and it needs to be built within the decade. There aren't excuses to put it off or we will suffer the consequences.
    You mean the genie is out of the bottle probably.

    Conservative bedrock principle: let market forces do the work. Libertarian bedrock principle: don't ban stuff. So "its happening anyway so let's stick in a ban as a gesture" does not seem the kind of approach you should be instinctively supporting. Is it good because it's Boris?

    The problems won't be sorted in 10 years time and will differentially affect those who live in the country and used to vote tory. This is as intelligent and helpful as the self imposed brexit deadlines.
    It won't do the rustic tory vote any good, is the instant reaction of someone familiar with the Scottish Borders. Low population density, fewer and later charging stations away from the main arterials passing through, longer distances between them, weather blocks on roads. Like mobile phone coverage, only worse (we're not talking about banning landlines). Perhaps biodiesel will be needed for those.

    (The Tories already have trains planned lugging the weight of two locomotives (effectively) on each - electric and diesel - as they have ****ed up railway electrification. Trouble is, their idea of out in the railway sticks is not very progressive - IIRC Swansea and Oxford are beyond the rails with the amps thanks to Mr Grayling. Which is nopt a happy precedent.)
    If you live in a rural area I would have thought more people would be able to charge at home. You only need charging points if you can't charge at home.
    And, if you are rural you are often faced with tens of miles from the nearest petrol station anyways.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 13,311
    That interview is great! He's really good and she's not bad considering the hand she's been dealt
Sign In or Register to comment.