2030 Doom...

[Dodgy69]

http://grid.iamkate.com/

[Dodgy69]

I'd take a pinch of salt with the 2030 date.

[Whysub]

My concern is, from seeing many videos about recharging vehicles away from the drivers home, is the time it takes. 40 minutes for a top up seems pretty much the average. So what happens when all new cars sold are electric? Will there be enough public charging points to ensure there are not queue at charging points? Will these be placed on large open sites where say 100 charging points can be accessed?

We all know how frustrating it is to be stuck waiting for a few minutes to refuel at a busy petrol station. How much more frustrating if you have to wait over an hour to plug in.

[Mr. Dazzle]

The usage patterns will change. I do think people are way too stuck in the mentality of a petrol vehicle though.

You can only fill a petrol vehicle up at a petrol station, give or take. That naturally makes people think they're gonna drive their electric car somewhere and fill it up, then drive somewhere else. Why limit yourself to doing that?

Most vehicles spend >95% of their time stationary and unoccupied. Plenty of time to charge them, if you just think about it a bit differently.

Most people drive <20 miles a day. That's not even a tenth of a charge on a modern electric vehicle.

[Yorick]

When the car was invented, I bet folk weren't moaning on the internet about a lack of petrol stations.

[Skub]

No one talking about the sounds?

No more thudding of V twins,screaming of inline fours,no crackling strokers,no howl of triples and that's before you get to V6 8 or 12 car donkeys?

Ever listened to Moto E?

I have.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Much as it pains me to say it, I think sounds are an old person thing now. None of the young people I work with care, they care about connectivity and being green.

As above though, I do work for an electric vehicle firm so my co-workers are probably somewhat biased

[Couchy]

I work in the EV industry and car range is doubling every 5 years, by 2030 500 miles will be common. That’s only one or two rapid charges a month for most folk. With vehicle to grid and micro generation and storage capacity is not the issue people outside the industry think. Problem is loads of luddites come up with problems they think no one has thought about or planned for. With regards renewables the UK had a fair few days last year that were 100%. The efficiency of an EV has already been explained but even if all electric produced was in a coal station it’s better to have all the pollution in one easier to control place rather than in the cars.
Us older folk will have to accept any also change habits, younger folk don’t care and it won’t be much of a change to them.
The only downside I see is folk who can’t have finance, there isn’t a cheap EV to buy and you really need to lease them. The poorer folk won’t be able to do that so will have to run their cheap cars as long as they can afford to, road tax and fuel costs will go up for them.

There is also the myth electric cars are cheaper to run, they are on fuel but overall cost is similar. Also have to assume govt will start charging per mile to use roads or add fuel duty to electric used to charge a car, all new charge points have a smart meter built in with open access that could be used for this and monitored very easily.

[Dodgy69]

It will be interesting to see what car choice each manufacturer will give us. I do still think commuting traffic should be the target audience initially, inner city/ town congestion is the problem area with pollution.

Progress doesn't always continue at the pace it starts, it does get harder, but if they give us decent range, quick charge, reliability at a good price, then all good.

I would imagine the 100% green days were in the summer months, but its better than nowt. Just need some bigger bits of the world to get on board.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Just need some bigger bits of the world to get on board.

Biden has his 2 trillion "green new deal" planned.

AFAIK China is the world's largest producer of renewable power.

[Potter]

There is also the myth electric cars are cheaper to run, they are on fuel but overall cost is similar.

And as already stated, with the current technology the capital investment to get one is much higher and the maintenance over it's lifecycle is probably more than a current petrol powered vehicle. The balance will swing the other way as ICE get phased out, but motoring is never going to be as cheap as it is now.

The other thing that hasn't been touched upon here is the resources required to build these things and the infrastructure to supply them with power. Until people can convince electrons to move under their own steam there will be a lot of natural resources plundered to make and power them.
These natural resources aren't renewable, they get dug out of the ground and there is only so much of it available. Your car might be powered by wind generated electricity, but it's made from stuff dug out of a mine somewhere and that stuff will run out one day.

Then there is the disposal of the things used in production and the end item once it's at the end of it's lifecycle.

It needs to happen because oil as a fuel will run out, but I'm not sure it's going to end up being any better for the planet in 100yrs time.
Apparently before petrol cars the streets were filled with rotting horse shit and people said the ICE will be the savour of the planet because it will stop horses polluting the streets with shit. The same sort of message is being used to push electric vehicles, but I'm fairly sure that our grandkids won't be singing their praises in the future because generating all that electricity and producing all those electric vehicles is going to make a mess of something.

[Couchy]

Yup agree, cars are cheap and convenient now and that will change. But looking at young folk a lot aren’t interested in cars and there is more of a push towards living in cities again or working from home, people are also getting used to having stuff delivered too. As for the batteries not much use can do about the raw materials but they are being recycled or repurposed after being used in cars.
I totally agree that in 100 years they aren’t the answer, I also think personal transport and the freedom we have with it will be all but gone in 100 years too. Car ownership is a small blip in time. It’ll be transport on demand that picks you up from home. The age we live in now has been good for us using fossil fuel powered bikes as and when we wanted too.
Also regarding batteries there is always the possibility of solid state ones that have been arriving for the past 40 years, maybe they actually will arrive

[A_morti]

Have a look at niu's rqi concept vehicle. It's not an all day tourer due to battery range, but it looks decent, should get 100mph on the clocks, and is likely to cost (by various commentator estimates only) in the ballpark of $8k.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/electrek.c ... ility/amp/

If it was out now, I wouldn't have just bought a cb300r.

[Yorick]

Have a look at niu's rqi concept vehicle. It's not an all day tourer due to battery range, but it looks decent, should get 100mph on the clocks, and is likely to cost (by various commentator estimates only) in the ballpark of $8k.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/electrek.c ... ility/amp/

If it was out now, I wouldn't have just bought a cb300r.

That looks bearable as a commuter.

[Whysub]

I tried a Zero and really liked it BUT I was one of those that rode more than 20 miles a day (120 miles a day). As most of that was motorway and dual carriageway, it would have drained the battery as there would be little or no regenerative braking on the commute. Would have to charge it twice a day, once at work and overnight at home. Otherwise I would have bought one.

Absolutely no doubt that in the next nine years will see huge leaps forward in battery technology, which will of course mean range increases. I remember the first Zero's had a 10 mile range.

I'm out in the sticks now, so when I do use my bikes and car, I do cover a decent mileage, so would always have range anxiety.

[Yorick]

Imagine if the car was invented today suddenly.

Would we want them powered by diesel or leccy?

[A_morti]

Imagine if the car was invented today suddenly.

Would we want them powered by diesel or leccy?

Very good angle.

If your starting point is that there is no existing petrol supply infrastructure, you'd have to be insane to suggest putting a huge vat of extremely flammable liquid on every street corner, and letting the general public have access to it.

[A_morti]

Would have to charge it twice a day, once at work and overnight at home.

As long as you know there is a socket at work, that should be fine? Let work pay for half your 'fuel'!

[Rockburner]

I tried a Zero and really liked it BUT I was one of those that rode more than 20 miles a day (120 miles a day). As most of that was motorway and dual carriageway, it would have drained the battery as there would be little or no regenerative braking on the commute. Would have to charge it twice a day, once at work and overnight at home. Otherwise I would have bought one.

Absolutely no doubt that in the next nine years will see huge leaps forward in battery technology, which will of course mean range increases. I remember the first Zero's had a 10 mile range.

I'm out in the sticks now, so when I do use my bikes and car, I do cover a decent mileage, so would always have range anxiety.

What would have been the issue with charging at work? (I suppose it depends on what you do and where you are based)

[Rockburner]

Have a look at niu's rqi concept vehicle. It's not an all day tourer due to battery range, but it looks decent, should get 100mph on the clocks, and is likely to cost (by various commentator estimates only) in the ballpark of $8k.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/electrek.c ... ility/amp/

If it was out now, I wouldn't have just bought a cb300r.

Now that looks very promising (both of them).

I'd like to see a small bikini style fairing the RQi, just to tidy up and complete the headstock area. (Probably wouldn't be too hard to fit an aftermarket one admittedly).

Not sure about the chain drive - but it's a cheap and serviceable solution, albeit adding to the maintenance costs - given that the initial drive to the reduction gearbox is by belt, why not have a belt drive to the rear?