Hi Jaymack. I’ve been led to believe that optimism remains high within the EV industry as ongoing advancements are being made. Key areas of their focus include prolonging battery life, diversifying charging infrastructure, and lowering overall expenses. Additionally, In my opinion it’s imperative to strategically address emissions throughout the EV’s lifecycle—from manufacturing to end-of-life disposal—to minimize ecological impact.

There will be a place for EV's going forward, but certainly not as the "Only" solution to vehicles on the road as central Gov would think.

Yes, battery technology will improve and consolodate eventually, same applies to the charging infrastructure nationwide.

There are however lots of other things going on large advances on Hydrogen technology, so a number of HGV companies and fleet operators and also large smaller vehicle fleets going to Hydrogen already. That way the Hydrogen storage or generation plant can supply Hydrogen dispensers operated by competant persons to fill up the HGV or van within a controlled environment. Personally I do not see Hydrogen vehicles and refuelling happeneing at all for the public.

Lots happening with synthetic fuels globally, basically its Methanol with additives, so just search on e-fuel and you will find plenty info. To me that will when they can scale up a real game changer as transport, delivery, storage and dispensing of those e-fuels can in most cases use the existing hydrocarbon petrol systems we have at the moment, also cars with a euro 4 engine or better I believe can just start running on e-fuel without any adjustments.

Everyone speaks about EV's but look at all the other items that use combustion engines, i.e boats, outboard motors, small generators etc for plant machinery, would they all just suddenly go electric?

Cheers GTB

would they all just suddenly go electric?

I think that is the dream of the less gifted political types, but I agree with you that the answer is no. There may be a mixture of battery swaps, much like the current refueling o changing of gas bottles that currently occurs, in those places well enough connected that it makes sense,  Some things probably won't happen at all and others will get really novel solutions- computer controlled sail boats perhaps,

Hydrogen is not a source of energy as such, but it is a jolly handy way to store it and pipe it about. Not perhaps risk free, but then neither are petrochemicals (Buncefield fire anyone?.). You do have to be able to make the hydrogen however, and maybe that can be from wind energy at times of over production, but a quick beer mat level sum shows that is not likely to be enough for more than a very small fraction of the current vehicle fleet. so perhaps more needs to go by train.

Making hydrogen as we do now, from natural gas, is not a long term solution, as we may as well burn the gas direct, but it does allow the technology for burning it and storing it to be optimized now.

I think folk who expect a simple 1:1 substitution and magically everything can carry on as we are now, have not really grasped the full magnitude of the problem.

Mike

IMHO, the energy density of batteries is insufficient, but what will follow Li-ion? The physics may be a limiting step.

F1 has announced its global intent. If you believe them, they will go 100% sustainable by 2030. It's not so much the competition cars' fuel, but the whole business of flying and trucking around the world. They can afford it!

Even then, there is a limit to the amount of food waste and general waste that can be composted.

Human beings have been pretty good at solving problems for a few millenia.

I foresee (but probable beyond my lifetime) an era when liquid fuels are reserved for aviation and the military.

Traditional lithium ion is rapidly being displaced by lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO, or LFP).  The capacity is still slightly lower, but that's improving.  They have a longer life, are less flammable, and don't require any cobalt.

Solid state batteries exist, but I don't think they are ready for volume production yet.

Here is a link to just one group of well known industry players already producing e-fuel.

There are many others already constructing large plants to produce the same.

https://www.siemens-energy.com/global/en/home/stories/haru-oni.html

Also aware lots of research going on for producing Hydrogen without electrolysis by use of polymer membranes where Hydrogen produced just being in contact with a special membrane.

Anyway as always no silver bullet!

There will be a mix of fuels depending on vehicle or application.

Cheers GTB

Yes it is interesting, and the air and H2 to methanol step is very attractive to those without a rain forest... - Methanol and ethanol are a lot safer to store and ship by tanker than gaseous hydrogen and there are many countries (Brazil is the biggy) where cars already run on alcohol blends (up to E100 grade in Brazil, i.e. 100% alcohol ), currently almost as a waste product from fermenting sugar cane.

Mike

This will turn into an interesting debate.  There are many things to consider.

The EV (how is the energy made?). Nuclear generates a lot of it but coal/gas still top up the peak demand in the UK.  There is renewable energy on the grid and also Pro-sumers doing micro-generation.  Now consider Germany.  People there decided to start a program to shut down their nuclear reactors, that energy now needs to be generated by other means.

Enough of the EV bashing.  Lets consider others things.
How many vehicles on the road that only have one person/occupant?
Should the UK consider something equivalent to the USA Diamond Lane system/car pooling?
dot.ca.gov/.../hov

Again another idea from our cousins over the pond Yellow School buses.  The chaos around my son's school during the pick up / drop off can be quite comical.  Parents become a different person when faced with the traffic and parking during these times.  Schools need to encourage parents and children to cycle/walk or school bus to school.

Dedicated cycle lanes to be retro installed across towns and cities.  Any new towns to have them factored in at design stage.  This is to help make cycle schemes safe.  Push bikes on the public roads is unsafe.  There is a network of dedicated cycle lane across central London.

The government needs to encourage hybrid working from home and office to reduce the amount of people that travel/commute into work.  This will not cover 100% of the UK.   As an example remote working for the service industry can not be achieved.


Now let's get on to big business.
Amazon and other companies need to make their system group deliveries together if they are for the same address.  I recently had 4 different Amazon drivers turn up to my home in 4 different vehicles with a total of 4 small to medium sized parcels.  There was absolutely no need to a have 4 deliveries when 1 would suffice.

Should the UK consider something equivalent to the USA Diamond Lane system/car pooling?

Well, we've had "2+" lanes for a while around here ... although quite a few have been turned into bus lanes or just removed - seemingly enforcement is difficult (cameras can't tell if there's a short person in the back seat for example) - whereas automatic number plate recognition can tell the difference between a bus and a private car with ease.

Again another idea from our cousins over the pond Yellow School buses. 

Again we all ready have them - just not yellow (usually). I suspect they're only laid on for those living beyond what the local authority considers walking distance from the school ... unfortunately a lot of parents seem to have a much shorter idea of what a reasonable walking distance is (which seem to be measured in inches for some). Possibly partly driven by fears of road safety for child pedestrians ... which of course is compounded by the vehicular chaos around schools.

Push bikes on the public roads is unsafe.

Well, not necessarily. A lot depends on the attitude of other road users. Look at the Netherlands for example - while they do have cycle lanes, they're only on busier roads - and the attitude seems to be that they're there to provide convenience for motor vehicle drivers rather than the safety of cyclists - as with the cyclists removed motor vehicles may then drive faster. On other roads there's no segregation (indeed often no segregation of pedestrians either) - and if there's a collision between a motor vehicle and a cyclist or pedestrian, it's deemed to be the driver's fault (unless proven otherwise).

   - Andy.

In the UK one of the things that pushes away from minbus use is the requirement since '97 for a special licence to drive one. Chatting to friends in education, many schools now have no-one among the younger staff who could drive the thing even if they had one - so once the thing reaches beyond economic repair given that only a few folk approaching retirement can drive it,  it is scrapped off, and then they don't have one at all. Then for things like away game football matches, where  fee paying schools might hire a bus with driver, the school  says get your own youngsters there, and then a team of parents drive cars with one or two kids in each! I'm sure when the rules changed, someone expected folk like teachers to get the extra licence, but it seems that has  not happened all that much.

Lots of cars is of course perfectly legal but scarcely an improvement either in safety, or germane to this debate, fuel use.

If there is enough demand for a full size bus, then one will be operated, but for small nos of youngsters from a given direction and short distances there probably isn't a compelling case.

Mike.