EV opposition in the media is ramping up

[tsedge]

It's a shame Porsche haven't disabled his YouTube channel as well!

 

[Rolfe]

I'm not sure why they grovel and scrape to him every time he goes into a dealership. Maybe there's no such thing as bad publicity? Or they have sussed that he really loves that car and if you listen between the lines it's obviously his only actual gripes are about the charging network and the occasional moan about depreciation.

 

[jackois]

I'm not sure why they grovel and scrape to him every time he goes into a dealership. Maybe there's no such thing as bad publicity? Or they have sussed that he really loves that car and if you listen between the lines it's obviously his only actual gripes are about the charging network and the occasional moan about depreciation.

I had a classic 944 for a while and whenever I went to the dealer for spares and so on, the were unfailingly polite... I also watched part of his video and felt he's as big a knob as that scruffy car delivery driver that whines and moans and makes YT videos about 'the trials' of delivering ev's.

 

[tsedge]

I'm not sure why they grovel and scrape to him every time he goes into a dealership. Maybe there's no such thing as bad publicity? Or they have sussed that he really loves that car and if you listen between the lines it's obviously his only actual gripes are about the charging network and the occasional moan about depreciation.

I think it is part of the Porsche ownership proposition - yes you are paying ridiculous prices for the car and service and depreciation, but they make you feel loved.

 

[Rolfe]

I had a classic 944 for a while and whenever I went to the dealer for spares and so on, the were unfailingly polite... I also watched part of his video and felt he's as big a knob as that scruffy car delivery driver that whines and moans and makes YT videos about 'the trials' of delivering ev's.

Haven't watched that one. I can imagine. Lee lost his graphic designer business during the pandemic, or so he says. There's a whole thread on Tattle dedicated to calling him out as an absolute tosser and a liar. Would any graphic designer produce these awful designs on his channel? He was making a living reviewing fish and chip shops when he bought that car (I still don't know what with, he claims a legacy, but then he talks about all the previous Porsches and other high-end cars he's had, and nobody in their right mind buys something with a legacy that will depreciate like a stone. I don't know where his money comes from.)

Anyway he bought the car, and hadn't had a charger installed, and bumbled around using DC chargers and not knowing what to do at first, and then he realised from the comments that anti-EV content would attract clicks and likes, and that's all there is to it.

 

[GaryMG4]

I've blocked his channel because he's an irritating little tw*t.

yep I turned him off for EVer too.

 

[tsedge]

I sympathise with anyone who lost a business over Covid, I did too and had to reinvent my career.

I also understand the pressure to sensationalise bad news on YouTube with clickbait titles in a desperate bid for views.

But you reap what you sow and anyone who puts out false or misleading content is setting themselves up for ridicule and a big fall.

 

[Gadget Geek]

This moron is at it again.



And the comments are by petulant children who think the government want to take away their right to poison the air they breathe.

 

[siteguru]

I saw that in my YT feed - and promptly ignored it.

 

[fnegroni]

It’s an interesting subject. To me especially as I work for an integrated energy company (i.e. reduce oil and gas, increase renewables and other low carbon solutions).

TL;DR Banning asbestos wasn’t a bad thing. But took way too long. Let’s not keep making the same mistakes.

I am not qualified to make any proper analysis, but to me, as someone who is witnessing this shift to electric, the fundamental element ignored by all who oppose the government mandates (whether 2030 or 2035) is the need for a catalyst for change which in this case wasn’t going to organically emerge from the market.

Rory Sutherland whom I follow with interest and who is an advocate for electric locomotion is also of the opinion that the government intervention wasn’t needed.

Yet I personally disagree. The market failed to converge on a number of technologies over the last few decades with regards to BEVs in particular, and has been incapable of overruling the lobbying against EVs that was taking place internationally and was essentially stifling its growth.

Tesla’s sales could be seen as proof that a good product that solves a problem cleverly can succeed.

What the market can’t do however is replicate the close coupling of charging network and vehicle, unique to Tesla, due to government obstacles. The land ownership process, the DNO process, the pricing strategy, the misinformation spread through (badly) self-regulated social media.

The charging network will eventually reach market saturation. There is now an opportunity to install home charging products at a massive scale, but only if there is a push towards the electric locomotion solutions.
That’s where the government plays a key role and despite people not liking it, without it, I doubt things were going to change fast enough.

And here’s the other element to consider: we aren’t just trying to promote a better technology, we are trying to ensure research and development efforts pivot rapidly towards more sustainable solutions.

 

[Rolfe]

I just handed that YouTube page an enthusiastic description of my experience with my car, we'll see if anyone reads it.

 

[salty]

I just handed that YouTube page an enthusiastic description of my experience with my car, we'll see if anyone reads it.

Probably not, because it's a good experience, they aren't interested in them.
??

 

[Rolfe]

True. But there are a few people trying.

 

[tsedge]

What evidence is there that people don't want EVs? The latest figures I have seen are that the proportion of new sales that are electric has increased this year yet again.

Relying on personal anecdotes about people switching back to ICE is extremely weak.

People do want cheaper EVs: they are getting them now, both second hand and new, with many more cheaper EVs due to come on the market in the next year.

Is it right for the government to force a technology shift? That's a debate that could be had both ways, but it isn't new, particularly in the safety arena there have been government diktats for many decades. Cars do seem to be safer.

With the environment, there's a lot more than just CO2 to think about, EVs are quieter and make a tremendous difference to local particulate emissions and air quality. Many people in urban areas will likely want that.

 

[Gadget Geek]

I remember the protests against being forced to wear crash helmets on motorbikes, and seat belts in cars. Protestors complained the government was being oppressive by making these laws, completely ignoring the science that it would save thousands of lives.

And it's the same mentality against EVs. Because they are being told that ICE cars will be phased out, the Luddites have a knee jerk reaction against the new technology, completely ignoring the science that it would save thousands of lives by preventing vulnerable people from breathing polluted air.

 

[Archev]

I remember the protests against being forced to wear crash helmets on motorbikes, and seat belts in cars. Protestors complained the government was being oppressive by making these laws, completely ignoring the science that it would save thousands of lives.

And it's the same mentality against EVs. Because they are being told that ICE cars will be phased out, the Luddites have a knee jerk reaction against the new technology, completely ignoring the science that it would save thousands of lives by preventing vulnerable people from breathing polluted air.

Even before the helmets were made compulsory I wore one every time I was on the bike. Apart from feeling safer it also kept my ears warm ?

 

[tsedge]

Telegraph has released this piece (behind their paywall):

Running an electric car is twice as expensive as a petrol one

Return trip from London to Penzance costs £148 for electrics vehicles compared with £77 for petrol cars as prices at roadside chargers surge

www.telegraph.co.uk

To summarise:

• They compare a return journey from London to Penzance between a diesel and electric car.
• They claim £148 cost for the EV, assuming Rapid charging at 80p per kWh and 3.3mi/kWh efficiency, at 24.1p/mi.
• They claim £77 cost for diesel assuming 43mpg, with a 12.5p/mi cost.
• They conclude electric cars cost twice as much to run.

Obviously this analysis is flawed:

• I can't remember the last time I paid as much as 80p/kWh, normally a lot cheaper, especially with Tesla.
• Most people will easily beat 3.3mi/kWh on a long journey.
• Ignores the obvious opportunity to start at 100% and complete most of the outward journey for very low cost.
• Ignores all the other running costs of a car, which are not the same (EVs cheaper).

NB: They seem to be assuming 306 miles using an indirect route via M4 and M5, instead of A303 which is a lot shorter.

My own calculations give me a price of £48 for the EV assuming 250 miles at an off peak household rate and then a more typical 55p/kWh and 4.2mi/kWh, which makes the EV option considerably cheaper than the diesel.

NB2: Their diesel calculation appears to be wrong. 612 miles at 43mpg = 14.2 gallons, which is about 64 litres. At current prices of £1.50/litre this is £96.

It is just all wrong rubbish.

 

[JimD]

Don't worry about it. Trains succeeded despite media hysteria : -

Trains, terror, and technological change: 19th century hysteria about railways

In the early 19th century, the advent of steam-powered trains, or the "iron horses" as they were then known, marked a significant milestone in the era of the industrial revolution. With their enormous power and speed, these locomotives not only revolutionized transport and communication, but...

www.historyskills.com

 

[m4rmite]

I wish instavolt would drop their price just so the media can't use them in their calculations.

I may have already said this before.

 

[Archev]

Telegraph has released this piece (behind their paywall):

Running an electric car is twice as expensive as a petrol one

Return trip from London to Penzance costs £148 for electrics vehicles compared with £77 for petrol cars as prices at roadside chargers surge

www.telegraph.co.uk

To summarise:

• They compare a return journey from London to Penzance between a diesel and electric car.
• They claim £148 cost for the EV, assuming Rapid charging at 80p per kWh and 3.3mi/kWh efficiency, at 24.1p/mi.
• They claim £77 cost for diesel assuming 43mpg, with a 12.5p/mi cost.
• They conclude electric cars cost twice as much to run.

Obviously this analysis is flawed:

• I can't remember the last time I paid as much as 80p/kWh, normally a lot cheaper, especially with Tesla.
• Most people will easily beat 3.3mi/kWh on a long journey.
• Ignores the obvious opportunity to start at 100% and complete most of the outward journey for very low cost.
• Ignores all the other running costs of a car, which are not the same (EVs cheaper).

NB: They seem to be assuming 306 miles using an indirect route via M4 and M5, instead of A303 which is a lot shorter.

My own calculations give me a price of £48 for the EV assuming 250 miles at an off peak household rate and then a more typical 55p/kWh and 4.2mi/kWh, which makes the EV option considerably cheaper than the diesel.

NB2: Their diesel calculation appears to be wrong. 612 miles at 43mpg = 14.2 gallons, which is about 64 litres. At current prices of £1.50/litre this is £96.

It is just all wrong rubbish.

Aye - complete footwear repair operatives.