European Union bans sale of petrol and diesel cars from 2035

[Ferry]

It also has a tiny population (5.4 m) and a land area half as much again as UK.

According to Wikipedia Great Britain 209 331 km². Norway 385 207 km². To travel Norway from the south west to the north east is 2800 km, taking 38 hours. We also have the second longes coastline of any countries, only Canada beats it. Lots of fjords, valleys and mountains. Building roads and other infrastructure is complicated and expensive. Lots of tunnels, bridges. Hard granite rock to blast away.

the EU expects to have decarbonised (renewabled) by 2030 38-40% of its electrical energy

so the EV will then still be at least 60% fossil-fueled

Yup, the energy system needs a lot of effort. Wind, solar, nuclear, etc. Even in Norway with close to 100% hydro power, the "official numbers" for electricity says only 15% renewable. 23% nuclear, 62% fossil thermal. Source: https://www.nve.no/energy-supply/electr ... isclosure/ The reason is sale of sertificates of renewable electricity to other countries, like Germany.
So my BEV uses 62% of 2 kWh/10 km fossil energy; 1.24 kWh/10 km. A diesel uses about 5 kWh/10 km fossil energy. (0,5 liter/10 km @ 10 kWh/litre).

I'm getting rooftop solar installed in a couple of months. There's a rush for solar power in Norway now. Electricity prices getting higher, partly due to transfer cables to UK, Germany, Netherlands, Denmark etc. Data from the power system here: https://www.statnett.no/en/for-stakehol ... er-system/ 1100 MW going to Blyth at the moment.

[hollus]

and of course people going EV will still buy five or ten times the power that they need

Well, my Renault Captur ICE can do about 200 Km/h. To which the law has only one thing to say: No.

[Tommy Cookers]

the EU expects to have decarbonised (renewabled) by 2030 38-40% of its electrical energy
so the EV will then still be at least 60% fossil-fueled

Yup, the energy system needs a lot of effort. Wind, solar, nuclear, etc. Even in Norway with close to 100% hydro power, the "official numbers" for electricity says only 15% renewable. 23% nuclear, 62% fossil thermal. Source: https://www.nve.no/energy-supply/electr ... isclosure/ The reason is sale of sertificates of renewable electricity to other countries, like Germany.
So my BEV uses 62% of 2 kWh/10 km fossil energy; 1.24 kWh/10 km. A diesel uses about 5 kWh/10 km fossil energy. (0,5 liter/10 km @ 10 kWh/litre).

well ....
it's not really 62% of 2 kWh/10 km
the 62% of 2 kWh was obtained at about 40% efficiency fossil fuel-to-battery
so roughly 4 kWh total energy (compares with 5 kWh for the diesel)

right now Norway's ICEV users shouldn't feel guilty
in 2030 the EU's ICEV users shouldn't feel guilty
2035 ?

[MadMax]

How can an EV user buy more power than they need?

Power as in kW? Or BHP. BEVs got high power and acceleration. Instant torque makes it feel even more powerful. To get long range you need a big battery. And a big motor to get high efficiency. And large power electronics to get high efficiency. High power comes "free of charge". You can't have long range and high efficiency without high power available. It can of course be be limited in software, but who wants that?

Ah, I see. In which case the same argument can be levelled at ICE buyers. Who needs 200bhp, 300bhp, 500bhp? Or a top speed that exceeds, often by a factor of 2 or more, the legal speed limit? A 50bhp car that does no more than 130km/h is all that is necessary.

Of course, we wouldn't like that argument as we like the acceleration that 200, 300, 500bhp gives a car.

[maxxer]

I live in the Netherlands and there is a huge amount of income for the government on fuel.
So where will they compensate this from i am wondering.
Its like forbidding alcohol and tobacco even the government knows its bad they still allow it and it brings in alot of money.
If we all go electrict and people charge using solar panels or whatever tech is now showing up.
Maybe even using your solar panels to creat hydrogen during the day.
The governments are losing alot of income

Did you notice electricity price recently?

Pretty high as they closed all the coal ones and such.
Also the grid is not upto it sure people living in a home can add panels but what about a 12 story flat how they will get superchargers for 2 cars oer household?

[Andres125sx]

I live in the Netherlands and there is a huge amount of income for the government on fuel.
So where will they compensate this from i am wondering.
Its like forbidding alcohol and tobacco even the government knows its bad they still allow it and it brings in alot of money.
If we all go electrict and people charge using solar panels or whatever tech is now showing up.
Maybe even using your solar panels to creat hydrogen during the day.
The governments are losing alot of income

Did you notice electricity price recently?

Pretty high as they closed all the coal ones and such.
Also the grid is not upto it sure people living in a home can add panels but what about a 12 story flat how they will get superchargers for 2 cars oer household?

Coal plants produce cheap electricity? It´s the cost of gas what is rocketing prices, but I bet they will never return to previous price

About superchargers, they only are needed for long trips, none need a supercharger for daily use, at least not 95% of people. People living in flats use normal chargers wich do not even need to increase max electric power hired. Chargers know what is the actual demand and only use the remaining power, wich at night is almost the whole power hired wich is more than enough for the vast majority

People take it as if EV need a full charge from 0 to 100% everyday, when the average daily km per car is around 30-40km wich is around a 10% of EVs range. Even the Aptera can cover that only with its solar panels

[maxxer]

Did you notice electricity price recently?

Pretty high as they closed all the coal ones and such.
Also the grid is not upto it sure people living in a home can add panels but what about a 12 story flat how they will get superchargers for 2 cars oer household?

Coal plants produce cheap electricity? It´s the cost of gas what is rocketing prices, but I bet they will never return to previous price

About superchargers, they only are needed for long trips, none need a supercharger for daily use, at least not 95% of people. People living in flats use normal chargers wich do not even need to increase max electric power hired. Chargers know what is the actual demand and only use the remaining power, wich at night is almost the whole power hired wich is more than enough for the vast majority

People take it as if EV need a full charge from 0 to 100% everyday, when the average daily km per car is around 30-40km wich is around a 10% of EVs range. Even the Aptera can cover that only with its solar panels

True they will not be the main problem , but also switching from gas heating/cooking to fully electric.
Need the new nuclear powerplant

[Edax]

Pretty high as they closed all the coal ones and such.
Also the grid is not upto it sure people living in a home can add panels but what about a 12 story flat how they will get superchargers for 2 cars oer household?

Coal plants produce cheap electricity? It´s the cost of gas what is rocketing prices, but I bet they will never return to previous price

About superchargers, they only are needed for long trips, none need a supercharger for daily use, at least not 95% of people. People living in flats use normal chargers wich do not even need to increase max electric power hired. Chargers know what is the actual demand and only use the remaining power, wich at night is almost the whole power hired wich is more than enough for the vast majority

People take it as if EV need a full charge from 0 to 100% everyday, when the average daily km per car is around 30-40km wich is around a 10% of EVs range. Even the Aptera can cover that only with its solar panels

True they will not be the main problem , but also switching from gas heating/cooking to fully electric.
Need the new nuclear powerplant

There are many challenges with the electrification. Basically we have rethink our whole energy net, production, distribution, storage and all business models associated with it.

If I look at my own situation. I am net electricity positive I produce more than I use. But I produce most during the day and in summer and use in the evening and winter. That is one of the issues with renewables.

Since my car is on the driveway during the day, I can store electricity there and power my house on my car battery during the evening. That offsets most of the difference between production and usage. But by doing that I marginalize the revenue for the provider who still has the same fixed cost on infrastructure, but not the sales.

Anyway I think it is all solvable and I think it id the right way forward, but I guess we will see some pretty big changes in the electricity business.

[johnny comelately]

Hydrogen powered Chev V8 ICE High RPM Test
Rough but effective, can we take up a collection and buy him a full bottle of hydrogen?

[gruntguru]

How can an EV user buy more power than they need?

Power as in kW? Or BHP. BEVs got high power and acceleration. Instant torque makes it feel even more powerful. To get long range you need a big battery. And a big motor to get high efficiency. And large power electronics to get high efficiency. High power comes "free of charge". You can't have long range and high efficiency without high power available. It can of course be be limited in software, but who wants that?

Ah, I see. In which case the same argument can be levelled at ICE buyers. Who needs 200bhp, 300bhp, 500bhp? Or a top speed that exceeds, often by a factor of 2 or more, the legal speed limit? A 50bhp car that does no more than 130km/h is all that is necessary.

Add to that - the energy efficiency penalty of installing a far more powerful engine than needed, is much worse for ICV than EV. A 500 hp ICE running at 40 hp down the highway uses a lot more fuel than a 100 hp ICE in the same conditions. The same is not true (much less true) for EVs.

[gruntguru]

EV's are a scam and really should be banned.

There are a lot of suckers falling for this scam.

"Ban EVs" sounds just like "Ban coal", "Ban Bars" . . etc.

When there are problems arising from a human activity you should penalise the problem not the activity. If someone finds a way to generate electricity from coal with zero CO2 emissions - great. We don't ban bars just because the occasional drunk staggers out of a bar and does harm.

[NL_Fer]

I fail to see how a 600kg battery which can be repurposed or recycled is worse than burning 10000kg of fuel in a car life and blowing useless gas out of exhaust.

But honestly, when my current gas automatic is idling, before it turbolag’s and lumpy shifts into gear as it accelerates, I am really wishing for an EV soon. Don’t even really care about the environmental impact of it. It just drivers better.

[Tommy Cookers]

... I am really wishing for an EV soon ....

(I suspect that it's modern automatic's 'adaptive intelligence' that sometimes disrupts the response)

we in the UK may soon be able to buy an EV
at present our 'EVs' run on c.55% fossil-fueled electricity and c.45% non-fossil-fueled electricity
as do our internet, 'electric' trains etc etc

at present in the EU EVs run on c.75% fossil-fueled electricity
there is an intent to reduce this to 62% by 2030

handily 'bad old' generators are used spinning as unloaded 'motors' to stabilise the grid against renewable generation
at a running cost about 0.5%
when the renewables dip their voltage the spinners inertia generates 'fill' - like a capacitor bank but better

[TimW]

These % renewables vs % fossil fuel for produced electricity are a bit nonsensical to use when evaluating the benefit of EV. The elasticity of the electricity supply is 100% fossil fuel. If you would reduce, or increase, the electricity demand by 10% now, the amount of renewable energy produced would not change, only the amount from fossil fuel.

So policy makers should focus on increasing the amount of renewable energy produced. Transitioning cars to EV is good, but mostly because the transition cannot be made instantly. The direct benefit is small. If you buy an EV vehicle now, you should calculate the CO2 benefit based on 100% fossil electricity.

[Edax]

These % renewables vs % fossil fuel for produced electricity are a bit nonsensical to use when evaluating the benefit of EV. The elasticity of the electricity supply is 100% fossil fuel. If you would reduce, or increase, the electricity demand by 10% now, the amount of renewable energy produced would not change, only the amount from fossil fuel.

So policy makers should focus on increasing the amount of renewable energy produced. Transitioning cars to EV is good, but mostly because the transition cannot be made instantly. The direct benefit is small. If you buy an EV vehicle now, you should calculate the CO2 benefit based on 100% fossil electricity.

Yes and no. Here grid flexibility is provided by fast switching NG plants who take the load during peak electricity hours. For an EV you choose when you charge, and variable prices typically drive people to the off hours when prices are low. So I would argue that while it is an overall increase, EV’s actually receive a higher percentage of renewables.

But if you go by 100% fossils, which is fair. Hypothetically if you would trade in a petrol car for an electric car and an electric generator, and use that to charge your car, you would still be more efficient in most real world scenario’s.