Bishop Hill Electric vehicles = crony capitalism
Jun 13, 2012 Climate: WG3 Economics Steve Baker is one of the small number of free-thinking members of the UK parliament. His latest post, on the House of Commons Transport Committee's hearing on electric vehicles is a must-read.
The Transport Committee met today for an evidence session on low carbon vehicles. It illustrated that crony capitalism is now not merely entrenched and passed over, but borne out of the good intentions of a global regulatory elite.
In the first session, we learned that “consumer demand is lagging policy”, which I translated as “people don’t want to buy these expensive vehicles” (I’ll link to the transcript later). We learned that electric vehicles are expensive and impractical: £30,000 for a subsidised car with a £15,000 battery and a short range. Of course the electricity comes mostly from carbon sources, although in the end we were asked to believe that combustion-kinetic energy-electricity-transmission-charging-discharging-kinetic energy is a more efficient process than combustion-kinetic energy. Perhaps.
Reader Comments (64)
Talk of electric vehicles is cheap but the economics aren't. We use internal combustion powered vehicles because they offer something like ten times the utility per pound in your pocket than a battery powered car does. And hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are far worse because the capital cost resides in the stratosphere and the stuff cannot be carried safely in a car. No hydrogen infrastructure exists of course. That's all apart from the fact that hydrogen cannot be stored for any length of time because with its low molecular weight it diffuses through the walls of the containment vessel with the result much is lost before it even gets to a car. It's ridiculous to even to judge electric cars on the basis of an ideal range of 100 miles when as soon as practicalities intervene such as cold weather, the operation of ancillary systems and less than ideal operating cycle the reliable range becomes little more than 50 miles. On top of that the lower fuel cost isn't due to superior efficiency but rather the oppressive burden of taxation heaped on petrol and diesel and not on electricity. As for improving battery performance - the basic limitations come down to the physical properties of the elements in the periodic table rather than what technology can achieve. There is no reason to believe any improvement on technology in the pipeline will make EVs comparable with existing cars within this century.
The only good reason for adopting EVs is the strategic advantage that in an economy fuelled by nuclear reactors (preferably thorium reactors) reliance on imported hydrocarbons could be greatly reduced and the country could thumb its nose so to speak at the dangerous lunatics abroad who are able currently to shut down our entire economy if we fail to bow and scrape to them in suitably grovelling fashion. For that to be possible our entire lifestyle and infrastructure would have to radically change in order for us to adapt to driving cars (and commercial vehicles) which are greatly inferior to existing ones.
BitBucket @8:43 PM
"HMG has to get money from somewhere to pay for all the things the electorate demands"
well, yes - but - and it's a monumental but - when was the last time the electorate was consulted on what it wants? (or any common sense applied?) It strikes me that the interests of the electorate are a considerable distance down the food chain when it comes to divvying out the revenue take.
As per the title of the post - this about misappropriation and misdirection of public funds - I love the dismissive Solyndra wave...
More power to Steve Baker for trying to highlight the real issues rather than chanting the in-bubble group think mantras.
I still can't get my head around mobility scooters being allowed and Segways banned...
As BitBucket is so wise & astute in matters financial, I recommend he place all his funds with Banca Network Investimenti, whom I understand are a sound & efficient investment; according to their website.
http://www.bancanetwork.it/
H/T http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=82785
"150 kWh = 540 MJ"
That's the snag, isn't it?A more energy-dense, portable, cheap and convenient method of providing energy than liquid hydrocarbon fuel has yet to be devised.
Hi cerberus: GM is building the mass market fuel cell car. 700 Bar compressed hydrogen.
A UK start up is using nano-engineered polymers as a liquid like fuel with the fibres a carrier.
I did this analysis of the Chevy Volt costs. You would need to run it for 440000 miles to break even.
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2012/06/04/the-chevy-voltthe-car-for-people-with-more-money-than-sense/
Foxgoose - my old V reg Volvo V70 diesel does 35mpg. Am at 170,000 miles. I hope it will get to the 500,000 mark before it and I die. Can't afford to change it, but I love it, the dog loves it and the leather seats are easy to clean. The diesel is a bit costly though.
“700 Bar compressed hydrogen”
Hmm - I hope the container is suitably rugged. Crash testing should be fun, or will it somehow be exempt..?
Paul Homewood, thanks for the link and the analysis. I thought the 51mpg you use could not possibly be correct, but a search shows me that it is even a little conservative; recent models claim even better on combined cycle. I am truly surprised. I don't have a car and don't follow developments but I had no idea that largish petrol cars could manage such mpg. Perhaps the 'Start Stop' system is responsible.
Maybe a comparison against the Renault ZOE would be more favourable to the EV. I guess driving the ZEO will be a lot more fun :-)
James P: at 700 Bar the volume is so low that the container and the pipes are incredibly rugged.
Remember, with batteries they are having to design a fireproof container to contain the energy. this is why the Chevy Volt is a failure technically.
Also, compared with petrol, a hydrogen flame is quite benign - many people survived the Hindenburg disaster because there wasn't any glowing carbon.
Scotland (re the free Nissan Leafs/Leaves) - oh, and other daft ideas involving 'renewables' - seems to be going the way of Greece..
To quote that famous pools winner of bygone days: 'I'm going to spend, spend, SPEND..!'
Shortly afterwards she was, of course, declared bankrupt...
It was great to read such an informative article on the web; I was looking for detailed information in this area but couldn’t find it on most of the blogs. Thanks for the post!
Electric vehicles typically have less noise pollution than an internal combustion engine vehicle, whether it is at rest or in motion. It is great for the environment.
Electric cars do run well and people getting more into it day by day with more awareness.