interestrateripoff Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/8355762/Ford-warns-electric-cars-may-be-only-for-the-rich.html Lewis Booth, a Briton, raised concerns about their viability without state subsidies. Most leading car makers have unveiled new electric or hybrid models in Geneva, while BMW and Peugeot have confirmed a €100m (£85m) joint venture to develop electric technologies.However, Mr Booth said: "Electric vehicles at the moment are still very expensive and have limitations. There is a question mark about how long governments can subsidise vehicles when they are under so much pressure from other funding issues. "Some of the sales projections... for electric vehicles are very ambitious because I am not sure how customers are going to be able to afford to pay. "Our philosophy is that we have a suite of technologies, from continuing to improve conventional vehicles, right through to plug-ins, hybrids and electric vehicles. The customer is going to decide and we want to satisfy all customers, not just rich customers." Philippe Varin, chief executive of Peugeot, warned Europe is in danger of being left behind by Asia and America if it does not improve investment in infrastructure for low-carbon vehicles. "We have to standardise infrastructure. We are late compared to Asia," he said. At least in part he's honest enough to admit that govts are under pressure, but I can see the car manufacturers claiming it will cost jobs unless govts cough up the cash. I guess the Peugeot cheif is also looking for some govt cash in the guise of investment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Monk Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Why would anybody rich want to drive the smallest and slowest vehicle on the road and be unable to drive from one end of the county to the other without having to stop for several hours to refuel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim123 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 of course they are only for the rich, they are CFU as a first car, so they are only going to be bought by people sho can afford two cars. tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim123 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Why would anybody rich want to drive the smallest vehicle on the road You didn't see the electric Roller released this week then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt Barlow Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/8355762/Ford-warns-electric-cars-may-be-only-for-the-rich.html At least in part he's honest enough to admit that govts are under pressure, but I can see the car manufacturers claiming it will cost jobs unless govts cough up the cash. I guess the Peugeot cheif is also looking for some govt cash in the guise of investment? At $500 a barrel the nature of the fuel is irrelevant. Cars will be the preserve of the rich only Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rxe Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 They're touting for cash. It is interesting to compare offerings from the likes of Tesla and Ford. Tesla seem to be able to make a car that you would buy on its merits for £87K, whereas Ford et al make something that you would only drive at gunpoint for £35K. If the Tesla-S (proper sensible 5 seat car) comes to market at £57K in a few years time, I'll give it very serious consideration. No subsidy required: it is bloody quick and cheap to run. Now Teslas are luxury high end cars - but the same tech is possible in a much cheaper car. It is just electrics and computers, which decline in cost quite nicely as production scales up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_ichikawa Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 At $500 a barrel the nature of the fuel is irrelevant. Cars will be the preserve of the rich only Woot and today half the parts for my prototype 285mpg beastie arrived in the post too I've changed tactic though and will use an even lighter material, wonder if 350mpg is possible Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt Barlow Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 They're touting for cash. It is interesting to compare offerings from the likes of Tesla and Ford. Tesla seem to be able to make a car that you would buy on its merits for £87K, whereas Ford et al make something that you would only drive at gunpoint for £35K. If the Tesla-S (proper sensible 5 seat car) comes to market at £57K in a few years time, I'll give it very serious consideration. No subsidy required: it is bloody quick and cheap to run. Now Teslas are luxury high end cars - but the same tech is possible in a much cheaper car. It is just electrics and computers, which decline in cost quite nicely as production scales up. Still the issue of battery packs. Also electricity in an energy constrained world will be pricey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest UK Debt Slave Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 (edited) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/8355762/Ford-warns-electric-cars-may-be-only-for-the-rich.html At least in part he's honest enough to admit that govts are under pressure, but I can see the car manufacturers claiming it will cost jobs unless govts cough up the cash. I guess the Peugeot cheif is also looking for some govt cash in the guise of investment? I work for a company developing products that use fuel cell technology They too will try this on because very often, the technology doesn't perform as intended, it isn't the "green" technology it is touted as and it will go market so expensive, nobody will be able to afford to buy it without government subsidy (by taxing us of course). The company I work for was pressing the flesh with Gordon Brown and various govt quangos in an attempt to lobby them for 'favours.' I don't know where they stand with Shameron's coalition. Edited March 2, 2011 by UK Debt Slave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Monk Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 You didn't see the electric Roller released this week then No, but I just Googled it and I see it cost a million pounds and takes 20 hours to charge the batteries up and you won't actually be able to buy one- it is a development prototype, not a production car. Some "back of the envelope" maths suggest its range would be around 100 miles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnlyMe Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 I work for a company developing products that use fuel cell technology They too will try this on because very often, the technology doesn't perform as intended, it isn't the "green" technology it is touted as and it will go market so expensive, nobody will be able to afford to buy it without government subsidy (by taxing us of course). The company I work for was pressing the flesh with Gordon Brown and various govt quangos in an attempt to lobby them for 'favours.' I don't know where they stand with Shameron's coalition. The closer you get to the dung heap the more it smells. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnlyMe Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 The biggest problem with electric cars for the car comapnies is that the things would be too damned reliable and their spare parts business which is a massive earner would be severely impacted. Most of the parts being electrical electronic could be made very much cheaper than now is car market volumes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_ichikawa Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 No, but I just Googled it and I see it cost a million pounds and takes 20 hours to charge the batteries up and you won't actually be able to buy one- it is a development prototype, not a production car. Some "back of the envelope" maths suggest its range would be around 100 miles. On a defunct forum called feet first a guy from Nottingham made an ultra bike. It was like a recumbent bicycle but lower. It had some pretty neet aerodynamic bodywork on it and it put out 3hp. He had a range of about 70 miles. He would 'ride' it to work and stick the batteries in the charger. It ran on two deep cycle batteries it was pretty neat until somebody ran over the smegging thing and drove off with him in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleepyHead Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Why would anybody rich want to drive the smallest and slowest vehicle on the road and be unable to drive from one end of the county to the other without having to stop for several hours to refuel? If you're going to dismiss the technology, at least have the decency to investigate it properly. I might point out, using oil is causing wars, climate destruction and economic catastrophe. I would suggest those drawbacks are a tiny bit more inconvenient than having to take the train to the other end of the country. Does the Tesla Model S match your ill informed view? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Monk Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 If you're going to dismiss the technology, at least have the decency to investigate it properly. I might point out, using oil is causing wars, climate destruction and economic catastrophe. I would suggest those drawbacks are a tiny bit more inconvenient than having to take the train to the other end of the country. Does the Tesla Model S match your ill informed view? Yea, thanks for the link, I remember the Sinclair C5 being marketed in a similar way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPin Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Yea, thanks for the link, I remember the Sinclair C5 being marketed in a similar way That was the 80s when we were all poor, and the C5 was only a few hundred quid. These new vehicles are a tad more expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sillybear2 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 They're touting for cash. It is interesting to compare offerings from the likes of Tesla and Ford. Tesla seem to be able to make a car that you would buy on its merits for £87K, whereas Ford et al make something that you would only drive at gunpoint for £35K. Tesla has recieved plenty public funding though :- http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01/doe-closes-tesla-loan/ Fisker Karma has also recieved $529m :- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12615160 People also get tax credits for buying them, so everyone is subsiding rich men's toys at the moment, obviously they've got to start somewhere in order to build up to mass production. VW have produced an interesting concept :- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/car-manufacturers/volkswagen/8293372/Volkswagen-XL1-review.html I'm sure the days of mass motoring will gradually come to an end regardless of fuel type, we'll probably become like Asia where everyone seems to have a scooter. They trade up to cars and we trade down, it's rebalancing, innit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarahBell Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 The UK govt is subsidising the factory in Newcastle area (can't remember where it is) and will be giving consumers a discount when they buy it too. Makes a mockery of it all really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PopGun Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Another reason why Electric cars just will not catch on in their current format. Never mind the initial outlay cost, replacing the batteries won't be cheap either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Bear Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Tesla has recieved plenty public funding though :- http://www.wired.com...ses-tesla-loan/ Fisker Karma has also recieved $529m :- http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-12615160 People also get tax credits for buying them, so everyone is subsiding rich men's toys at the moment, obviously they've got to start somewhere in order to build up to mass production. VW have produced an interesting concept :- http://www.telegraph...XL1-review.html I'm sure the days of mass motoring will gradually come to an end regardless of fuel type, we'll probably become like Asia where everyone seems to have a scooter. They trade up to cars and we trade down, it's rebalancing, innit. That VW sounds interesting. Need to loose the electric motors and batteries though to get the weight back down. You burn fuel to accelerate the weight, mass really, you burn fuel to overcome drag. Make it small, add lightness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rxe Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Yes, Tesla have got loans - I'm not saying that is a good thing, but I suppose if they are to compete against the established industry, then they need help. I think that loan was more of a "please put your factory in the US than China" loan, rather than for developing the base technology. At least Tesla have been able to make something that you would buy on its merits - the roadster does exist, it is real, and they are selling them. Again, that VW looks and feels like a hair-shirt Eco car - I certainly wouldn't choose one unless I absolutely had to. Today I'd choose an S over a 5 series - if the initial reports are true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ride_on Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Its true pure electric cars will be very expensive, but for the life of me I cannot understand why they are not going with a simple series hybrid. ie Using a small simple engine to charge cheap lead acid or maybe NiMH batteries, but instead car companies are using their super advanced petrol engines to charge these things with a 1.5L engine you have to carry around. Nevermind using inefficient parallel hybrids like Toyota. They must have a vested interest in selling their engine technology they spent alot of money developing to inefficiently drive the road wheels, when a battery and electric motor is embarrassingly more efficient. From a Co2 and general efficiency point of view the series hybrids make the most sense for now. Its just as usable as a pure petrol car but 2-3 times more efficient than a parallel hybrid. In fact when there are more of them out I think people will look down on pure petrol cars and their 2nd hand value will plummet as petrol becomes more expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sillybear2 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Yes, Tesla have got loans - I'm not saying that is a good thing, but I suppose if they are to compete against the established industry, then they need help. I think that loan was more of a "please put your factory in the US than China" loan, rather than for developing the base technology. At least Tesla have been able to make something that you would buy on its merits - the roadster does exist, it is real, and they are selling them. Again, that VW looks and feels like a hair-shirt Eco car - I certainly wouldn't choose one unless I absolutely had to. Today I'd choose an S over a 5 series - if the initial reports are true. If you can afford either then are you really worried about the cost of petrol or VED? It's basically a folly at the moment, an ideological purchase. Even so, you need to put out of your mind where the electricity really comes from :- Not to mention all the ugly mining where the raw materials for the batteries are extracted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowflux Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 If you can afford either then are you really worried about the cost of petrol or VED? It's basically a folly at the moment, an ideological purchase. Even so, you need to put out of your mind where the electricity really comes from :- Not to mention all the ugly mining where the raw materials for the batteries are extracted. Absolutely. While most of our electricity is generated from fossil fuels, there is nothing green whatsoever about driving electric vehicles, and it is very annoying that they are marketed as such. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikthe20 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Another reason why Electric cars just will not catch on in their current format. Never mind the initial outlay cost, replacing the batteries won't be cheap either. As if changing batteries quickly is difficult - my young son can change batteries on his elecric car in less than 60 seconds! Quite a simple design problem as long as manufacturers talk to eachother and agree a battery pack standard. Eg. http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/05/better-place/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.