Electric vehicles

[Jaydee]

Just picked 2 of these up used for the grandkids

 

[Seeker]

3 hours ago, deicer said:

 

With regards to the e-bikes, I see them in the same light, however their riders need to understand that with the speeds they achieve they should not be on sidewalks or bike lanes.

They are a powered vehicle and should be driven as such.

I agree with restricting these bikes from sidewalks but that's the current rule for bikes anyways, isn't it?  As for restricting them from bike lanes - got to disagree with that.  These bikes are limited to 30 mph which is not out of line with any other bikes and they are slow to accelerate - they mix in with other bikes quite nicely.  If you put them out in the regular traffic lanes they would be a hazard to vehicles and to the riders.

[deicer]

1 hour ago, Seeker said:

I agree with restricting these bikes from sidewalks but that's the current rule for bikes anyways, isn't it?  As for restricting them from bike lanes - got to disagree with that.  These bikes are limited to 30 mph which is not out of line with any other bikes and they are slow to accelerate - they mix in with other bikes quite nicely.  If you put them out in the regular traffic lanes they would be a hazard to vehicles and to the riders.

I stand corrected on e-bikes using bike lanes.  I looked up the bylaws.

Having said that, like motor vehicle drivers, e-bike drivers should hone up on their driving skills and etiquette.  That's where I got the impression from.

 

[Seeker]

14 minutes ago, deicer said:

 

Having said that, like motor vehicle drivers, e-bike drivers should hone up on their driving skills and etiquette. 

 

There's only one thing that bikes do that regularly annoys me - passing me without ringing their bell.  They are so quiet that it's startling when they go past without making their presence known.  

I always ring my bell when approaching someone walking or riding from behind and I do it from far enough away that they have time to move over.

I must say however that people walking dogs are a bigger annoyance to me whether I'm walking or riding than people on bikes.

[mo32a]

3 hours ago, Seeker said:

There's only one thing that bikes do that regularly annoys me - passing me without ringing their bell.  They are so quiet that it's startling when they go past without making their presence known.  

I always ring my bell when approaching someone walking or riding from behind and I do it from far enough away that they have time to move over.

I must say however that people walking dogs are a bigger annoyance to me whether I'm walking or riding than people on bikes.

I agree, I always ring my bell and from a distance so you don't startle them, the only problem I find is people with ear buds in, and they don't hear a thing.

If dog walkers would put themselves between the path and their dogs, it would be a help.

We have a couple of cruiser type bikes with the bigger battery and even after riding 20 miles or more the battery is still about 80%.

We ride mainly on prepared multi use trails and the most etiquette disadvantaged group in my experience are the spandex warriors who like to ride fast and two or three abreast. I will always take up my space on my side of the path, forcing one or more of them to have to fall back behind the other riders.

[Seeker]

1 hour ago, mo32a said:

 

We have a couple of cruiser type bikes with the bigger battery and even after riding 20 miles or more the battery is still about 80%.

 

Radpower?

[Seeker]

1 hour ago, mo32a said:

 

If dog walkers would put themselves between the path and their dogs, it would be a help.

 

I like dogs but don't have one.  I always thought it would be good to train your dog to walk on your right side to have it outside the "interaction zone" with others you might pass.  Is this a thing?

On a related note dogs in Europe are completely different from dogs in North America.  In Europe dogs completely ignore anyone other than their owners - walking down a trail and meet someone with a dog - the dog will not approach or interact with anyone at all.  Walking along and meet someone sitting on a bench with a dog - the dog completely ignores you.  It's weird.  Good, but seems strange.  The reason, apparently, is that other people completely ignore the dogs and therefore there is no reason or payoff for the dog to interact with anyone - not going to get petted , etc.

[Seeker]

8 hours ago, Jaydee said:

Just picked 2 of these up used for the grandkids

 

Those look like good fun.  How old are the grandkids?

[Jaydee]

6 hours ago, Seeker said:

Those look like good fun.  How old are the grandkids?

13 grandkids in all, but the ones that will use these are between 8 - 12, and all are already proficient with normal bikes. 

[Malcolm]

Can an EV save you money? It depends on where you live and how much you drive

By Simon Little  Global News

Posted March 12, 2024 8:02 pm

Can you actually save money by buying an electric vehicle?

The answer, according to a new University of British Columbia study, depends on how much you drive it and what province you are in.

“It actually turns out that the total cost of owning an electric vehicle can actually vary quite a bit across Canada depending on where you live and also how you live,” explained Bassam Javed, a UBC PhD candidate and study co-author.

The paper, published recently in the journal Environmental Research Infrastructure and Sustainability, looked at the total cost of owning an EV and a traditional gas-powered vehicle over seven years, the average period Canadians tend to own a vehicle.V owners likely to pay hgher insurance fees, here’s why

Researchers factored in price, provincial subsidies, maintenance costs, gasoline costs, electricity costs, charging stations, resale value and how far Canadians drive on average every day.

uying an electric vehicle off the lot is more expensive, but every kilometre driven in one is cheaper, Bassam explained. As a result, reaching the “break-even” point at which it becomes cheaper than a gas car requires either racking up mileage or owning it longer than average, he said.

To illustrate, Bassam made an “apples-to-apples” comparison between two of the same model car: a Hyundai Kona EV versus a Kona gasoline edition.

In B.C. the Kona EV owner would need to drive 64 kilometres a day over seven years to break even. But British Columbians only drive an average of 34 kilometres a day, meaning their cost of owning the same EV would be about $8,000 more than a gas version, Bassam explained.

The study found Canadians who logged the average mileage per day would not break even on EV ownership in every province and territory, over a seven-year lifespan.

Quebec came the closest to break-even for a typical daily driver, due largely to cheap electricity and generous provincial EV subsidies, with an owner spending about $2,400 more. Alternatively, a Quebec owner would need to drive 46 kilometres a day to hit the break-even point — about 18 per cent farther than the average driver does.

The distance Canadians would need to drive every day to break even on an EV, versus how far they actually drive on average. Javed Bassam

Residents of Nunavut face the most daunting costs of EV ownership, laying out an estimated $18,000 over the lifespan of a vehicle — or needing to drive a whopping 181 kilometres per day to break even.

In both Alberta and Ontario, owning an EV would cost $11,000 over a seven-year lifespan, or require a daily drive of 96 kilometres in the western province, or 88 kilometres in the eastern province, the study found.

[Malcolm]

Now this is the ride I would love to own.  Non electric though 

[Seeker]

3 hours ago, Malcolm said:

 

The paper, published recently in the journal Environmental Research Infrastructure and Sustainability, looked at the total cost of owning an EV and a traditional gas-powered vehicle over seven years, the average period Canadians tend to own a vehicle.V owners likely to pay hgher insurance fees, here’s why

 

I did this exact calculation 10 years to decide whether it was worth buying a diesel car (VW golf).  They cost significantly more to buy but were cheaper to run.  In the end I determined that I drove nowhere near enough to offset the initial cost.

I'm quite pleased with myself because I had calculated, back-of-an-envelop, that a person would need to drive 100kms/day for work to make an EV worthwhile - got it very close to what the article says.

[mo32a]

In Canada, I drive my ICE car about 300k a month. When I am in the US I drive about 800k per month but the cost of gas is much less. I will stick with ICE for now.

[Seeker]

 

[Jaydee]

[Airband]

It will be interesting to see what this does to the sales trajectory of EVs in Quebec when the bribes are removed and they have to sell on their own merits. Particularly when Justin's waffling as well.

Can EV sales still grow without subsidies?

Quebec, the province with the most electric vehicles on its roads, is cutting all its ZEV subsidies by 2027

Fri Mar 15, 2024 - National Post
by :David Booth

In what was possibly the biggest budget surprise in decades, Quebec announced earlier this week that it is rolling back its generous Roulez Vert EV-subsidy program. Starting on January 1, 2025, the current $7,000 incentive offered to those buying full battery-electrics (BEVs) will be reduced to $4,000. A year later, in 2026, it’ll be down to 2,000 bucks, and, by 2027, eliminated completely. The same pace of reduction will also apply to plug-in hybrids (PHEVs); PHEVs eligible for a $5,000 subsidy now will only kick back $2,000 next year, a grand in 2026, and, again, nothing in 2027.

Cont.

[Jaydee]

[Airband]

Not the only CEO of a large American organization who has displayed questionable judgment about going all in on EVs. The board will meet on Nov 5th to discuss and determine appropriate action.

[Malcolm]

And the bill is coming due..

Heavier electric cars are blamed for the £16 billion cost of Britain's pothole plague as crumbling roads reach 'breaking point'

• Heavier electric cars are blamed for the £16 billion cost of Britain's pothole plague as crumbling roads reach 'breaking point'
• Over 107,000 miles of local roads risk crumbling if not re-built within 15 years

Heavier electric vehicles and larger cars are helping push Britain's crumbling roads to 'breaking point'.

The pothole backlog repair bill now stands at a record £16 billion, as compensation claims soar.

 

The warning comes in a report which highlights how changing driving habits are putting increased pressure on local roads across England and Wales.

It found the pothole repair bill has surged by £2 billion (16 per cent) on last year, with one in every ten miles of local roads now having surfaces in a 'poor' condition. This equates to around 22,300 miles.

But even more worrying, over 107,000 miles of local roads – 53 per cent – have deeper structural problems and risk crumbling completely if not re-built within 15 years.

 

Heavier electric vehicles and larger cars are helping push Britain's crumbling roads to 'breaking point' a report has revealed (Stock image)© Provided by Daily Mail

 

The pothole backlog repair bill now stands at a record £16 billion, as compensation claims soar (Stock image)© Provided by Daily Mail

The crisis has sparked an 80 per cent surge in compensation claims lodged with town halls by cyclists and drivers, with nine in ten relating specifically to pothole damage.

The bill for payouts has soared by nearly a third, from £11.6 million to £15.2 million, according to the report by trade body the Asphalt Industry Alliance (AIA). 

It said the growing crisis was being fuelled by 'increased average vehicle weights on a deteriorating network'.

This includes more than 1 million electric vehicles (EVs) — three times the number in 2019 — now on the roads. EVs cause twice as much stress on tarmac because they greatly outweigh their petrol or diesel equivalents. 

 

Heavy batteries in large models can weigh more than a ton.

New cars have been growing at an annual average of 10kg heavier and half a centimetre wider in recent years, also driven by growing demand for SUVs.

The AIA said the shift towards online shopping, which took off during the pandemic, means more heavier vans and delivery trucks, many of them EVs, are on the roads, too.

Other factors fuelling the crisis, according to its report, are the increased frequency of extreme weather, more traffic and the impact of rampant inflation. 

This has caused the average cost of filling a pothole to rise to £72.26, up from

Over 107,000 miles of local roads – 53 per cent – have deeper structural problems and risk crumbling completely if not re-built within 15 years (Stock image)© Provided by Daily Mail

Although cash budgets for fixing local roads have increased, in real terms they have either fallen or stayed level for most councils.

The annual AIA report, based on data supplied by local authorities, said it would take ten years and £16.3 billion to clear the current pothole backlog.

It is the third year in a row that the estimated cost has increased.

The Daily Mail has been campaigning for an end to the nation's pothole plague, which is costing drivers millions in repair bills and putting cyclists' lives at risk. 

Tory MP for Buckinghamshire, Greg Smith, who sits on the Commons transport committee, said: 'This does need to be acknowledged and addressed.'

Simon Williams, roads policy chief for the RAC, said: 'the scale of the problem now facing councils is truly gargantuan.'

AIA chairman Rick Green said: 'Couple this with the effects of the extreme weather we are increasingly facing, and the result is that the rate at which local roads are suffering is accelerating towards breaking point.'

The survey found that an estimated 2 million potholes will have been filled in by councils by the end of this financial year (2022/3).

But the rate at which local roads are falling into disrepair means they are still playing catch-up.

 

In October last year, the Government announced it would provide £8.3 billion of extra funding over 11 years to fix potholes in England.

This is money saved by scrapping the planned Birmingham-Manchester leg of HS2. But Mr Green added: 'There's still a mountain to climb... it's clearly not going to be enough to halt the decline.'

[Jaydee]

Guilbeault's EV fantasy crashes into reality

Late last year, when Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault announced the Liberals’ plan to eliminate the sale of cars with internal combustion engines by 2035, a number of people, myself included, rolled their eyes at the government’s interference in the free market. Little did we know how fast the free market would slap the electric vehicle mandate back to reality, while Canadian taxpayers continue to subsidize green fantasies.

The signs were already there in late 2023, before our environment minister proudly announced he would jettison capitalist principles and create a dirigiste Canadian automobile economy. First, in September 2023, Volkswagen announced it was cutting EV output due to low demand. Then, in November, Ford announced that it too would be scaling back EV battery production due to lacklustre demand.

The new year has not changed the story. If anything, the pace of automakers turning their backs on EVs has accelerated. General Motors is struggling with production woes, Mercedes Benz has delayed its EV goals and even Tesla has warned that EV sales could be significantly lower than predicted.

In response to sagging demand, automakers like Tesla have cut the price of their vehicles, which in turn has cratered the resale value of their cars. The CEO of Hertz stepped down last Friday, after his bets on EVs went awry when their resale value plummeted. Consumers everywhere have taken note.

While automakers are not totally abandoning their long-term electrification goals, they are all recognizing that the internal combustion engine will not be disappearing overnight. It will be around for a good long while.

This reality has always been a key sticking point in the energy transition. It was no doubt a dream of Guilbeault’s to stand at a podium and announce his green fantasy to the world. But his refusal to balance priorities and his reliance on government dictates rather than consumer choice to drive the market make his dreams unrealistic.

The inability to understand this has resulted in more waste from the government, which has proven time and again that it is utterly incompetent at picking winners and losers in business. Bad business ideas need money from somewhere, but if, like our government, you don’t particularly care about returns on your investment, the opportunities to throw money around never end.

Cue the Liberals opening the money spigot to help their ideology along. So far, Canada has committed to subsidize EV battery plants to the tune of more than $40 billion over the next decade. And this comes at almost the exact same time as automakers are pulling back from their EV production commitments, due to poor sales and low profitability. Well done, guys. Nice job.

At the time they were announced, the break-even points for the subsidy deals were estimated to be between 11 and 23 years. With the drop in EV production commitments, it would be interesting to see revised timelines for these already long payback periods.

While such deals and the transition to EVs is complex at the best of times, the government always finds ways to make the situation worse. This is mainly because, despite ample evidence to the contrary, it continues to think it knows better than the companies themselves and the market forces to which they are subjected.

Consumers are currently sending a very loud and very clear message to both companies and governments: “We don’t want EVs.” The companies have heard it and adjusted their strategies, because they are responsible to shareholders and care about catering to consumer desires.

They also are exceptionally well placed to respond to the real-time sales data they are receiving. Ford, GM, Mercedes, VW and Tesla all know consumers aren’t adopting EVs quickly and have reacted accordingly.

Yet the government refuses to budge in the face of verifiable consumer data. The result is continuous policy decisions that place politics over productivity, to our collective detriment.

Sadly, our government remains obstinate. Minister Guilbeault and company don’t seem to care. In response to EV reality, they have taken an approach that’s diametrically opposed to market efficiency: sticking their heads in the sand. Perhaps, though, we shouldn’t be surprised — a flightless bird that lays enormous eggs is a decent metaphor for Guilbeault and his party at the moment.

National Post

Edited March 19 by Jaydee

[Airband]

That was an excellent summary - thanks for posting.

2 hours ago, Jaydee said:

Consumers are currently sending a very loud and very clear message to both companies and governments: “We don’t want EVs.” The companies have heard it and adjusted their strategies, because they are responsible to shareholders and care about catering to consumer desires.

 

[Malcolm]

Joe Biden's administration is easing up on its push for a fast transition to EVs. Global Automotive Correspondent Joe White joins the Reuters World News podcast to explain how this is a win for Detroit but another challenge for Biden as he seeks a second term. (You can also sign up to White's newsletter.)

[Jaydee]

 

EPA issues landmark rules to curb auto emissions, bolster EVs

The EPA has finalized the rules limiting auto tailpipe emissions from cars, SUVs and pickups, as part of a push to accelerate the U.S. transition to electric vehicles. 

Why it matters: Transportation is the largest source of domestic greenhouse gas emissions, with light duty vehicles being the largest source within this category. 

Driving the news: The new rules follow a proposal issued in April, and come as challenges to Biden administration auto standards are already underway. They set emissions rules for light-duty vehicles including cars, SUVs and light trucks for model years 2027-2032

• In some ways, it is less stringent than the initial plan. 
• Biden administration officials told reporters the final rule provides more flexibility, including a slower ratcheting up of emissions limits, but gets to the same end goal as the proposal after feedback the EPA received to the proposed rule.

Between the lines: The rules do not mandate that automakers transition their fleets over to sell more EVs by a certain date.

But with tighter emissions curbs, manufacturers are likely to favor more EVs to comply with the rule. 

• The new rule allows manufacturers to include hybrid EVs and plug-in hybrids for meeting the requirements, in addition to battery powered EVs.
• A fact sheet given to reporters shows that during 2030-2032 manufacturing years, carmakers may choose to produce 30% to 56% of new light duty vehicle sales as battery electric vehicles, with the rest consisting of a mix of other clean vehicle technologies. 
• The rule would still allow for the production and sale of gasoline-powered vehicles. 

By the numbers: The original proposal did not include plug-in hybrids, and would have allowed carmakers to produce up to 67% of the light and medium-duty vehicle fleets during the 2030-2032 period as battery electric cars. 

• In finalizing the rule, EPA and the White House are touting the health and climate benefits.
• EPA calculates that over its lifetime, the rule would cut 7 billion tons of carbon emissions, and provide $100 billion of annual net benefits to society, including $13 billion in annual health benefits.
• Estimates show that consumers would save money by buying a new vehicle based on lower maintenance costs and avoided gas purchases.

Yes, but: The rule comes as EV sales growth appears to have slowed, with consumers opting for cheaper hybrids and plug-in models. 

Zoom out: It also lands in the midst of a presidential campaign in which EVs have become a contested issue, with former President Donald Trump's campaign criticizing a Biden EV "mandate."

• In general, opponents of the rule portray it as restricting consumer choice to vehicles the public does not want to buy.

• The rule, a centerpiece of the Biden administration's climate goals, is likely to be immediately challenged in Congress, and end up in litigation. 

What they're saying: "Moderating the pace of EV adoption in 2027, 2028, 2029 and 2030 was the right call because it prioritizes more reasonable electrification targets in the next few (very critical) years of the EV transition," said John Bozzella, President and CEO, Alliance for Automotive Innovation, in a statement.

• "These adjusted EV targets – still a stretch goal – should give the market and supply chains a chance to catch up," he said. 
• "It buys some time for more public charging to come online, and the industrial incentives and policies of the Inflation Reduction Act to do their thing."
• National climate advisor Ali Zaidi touted increasing customer choices when it comes to lower emissions vehicles. "From plug-in hybrids to fuel cells to fully electric, drivers have more choices today," he said in a statement.  
• "Since 2021, sales of these vehicles have quadrupled and prices continue to come down. This growth means jobs, and it means we are moving faster and faster to take on the climate crisis."

What's next: In the next few weeks, the Department of Transportation is expected to finalize new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles such as buses and freight-carrying trucks. 

https://www.axios.com/2024/03/20/epa-emissions-electric-vehicles?stream=top&utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alerts_all

 

[Malcolm]

 

UN says e-waste from trashed electric devices is piling up and recycling isn't keeping pace

 

 

UN says e-waste from trashed electric devices is piling up and recycling isn't keeping pace© Provided by The Canadian Press

NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — U.N. agencies have warned that waste from electronics is piling up worldwide while recycling rates remain low and are likely to fall even further.

The agencies were referring to “e-waste,” which is defined as discarded devices with a plug or battery, including cellphones, electronic toys, TVs, microwave ovens, e-cigarettes, laptop computers and solar panels. It does not include waste from electronic vehicles, which fall into a separate category.

In a report released Wednesday, the U.N.’s International Telecommunications Union and research arm UNITAR said some 62 million tons of “e-waste” was generated in 2022, enough to fill tractor-trailers that could be lined up bumper to bumper around the globe. It’s on track to reach 82 million tons by 2030.

Metals — including copper, gold and iron — made up half of the 62 million tons, worth a total of some $91 billion, the report said. Plastics accounted for 17 million tons and the remaining 14 million tons include substances like composite materials and glass.

The U.N. says 22% of the e-waste mass was properly collected and recycled in 2022. It is expected to fall to 20% by the end of the decade because of “staggering growth" of such waste due to higher consumption, limited repair options, shorter product life cycles, growing “electronification” of society, and inadequate e-waste management infrastructure, the agencies said.

Related video: E.ON CEO says infrastructure bottlenecks are expensive, delay transition to clean energy (CNBC)

Well, first good morning from my side.

Loaded: 4.61%

 

 

Play

Current Time 0:00

/

Duration 4:19

 

Quality Settings

Captions

Fullscreen

 

CNBC

E.ON CEO says infrastructure bottlenecks are expensive, delay transition to clean energy

Unmute

0

 

View on Watch

 

They said some of the discarded electronic devices contained hazardous elements like mercury, as well as rare Earth metals coveted by tech industry manufacturers. Currently, only 1% of the demand for the 17 minerals that make up the rare metals is met through recycling.

About half of all e-waste is generated in Asia, where few countries have laws on e-waste or collection targets, according to the report. Recycling and collection rates top 40% in Europe, where per-capita waste generation is highest: nearly 18 kilograms (39 pounds).

In Africa, which generates the least of any of the five big global regions, recycling and collection rates hover at about 1%, it said.

“The latest research shows that the global challenge posed by e-waste is only going to grow,” said Cosmas Luckyson Zavazava, head of the ITU telecommunication development bureau. “With less than half of the world implementing and enforcing approaches to manage the problem, this raises the alarm for sound regulations to boost collection and recycling.”

For some, e-waste represents a way to earn cash by rummaging through trash in the developing world to find coveted commodities, despite the health risks.

At the Dandora dumpsite where garbage collected from the Kenyan capital of Nairobi ends up — even though a court declared it full over a generation ago — scavengers try to earn a living by picking through rubbish for e-waste that can be sold to businesses as recycled material.

Steve Okoth hopes the flow continues so he can eke out an income, but he knows the risks.

“When the e-waste comes here, it contains some powder which affects my health," he said, adding that when electronic devices heat up, they release gases and he “can’t come to work because of chest problems.”

However, Okoth said they don't have any other options: "We are now used to the smoke because if you don’t go to work you will not eat.”

Recycling plants, like Nairobi’s WEEE center, have collection points across Kenya, where people can safely get rid of old electric equipment.

“We take inventory of the items," said Catherine Wasolia, WEEE's chief operating officer, to check for data on submitted devices and wipe them clean. Then they test each to assess if "it can be reused or repurposed.”

E-waste expert George Masila worries about the impact of electronic waste on soil.

“When you have all this e-waste — either in the dumpsites or mercilessly deposited anywhere else — it could have major effects on the soil," Masila said. "Every year it rains and water flows and attracts all these elements that are deposited into the environment. You have water getting contaminated.”

He said greater recycling and re-use of such materials, "are some of the things we should be considering.”

Report authors acknowledged that many people in the developing world pay their bills through harvesting such e-waste, and called for them to be trained and equipped to make such work safer.

“We must try to support these people trying to find their niche,” said Ruediger Kuehr, senior manager of the sustainable cycles program at UNITAR.

__

Keaten reported from Geneva

[Airband]

Probably just idle speculation and rumour-mongering. Probably.

"The union representing 3,000 hourly workers at Ford Motor Co.’s assembly plant in Oakville, Ontario, wants answers from the company following reports the automaker is delaying electric vehicle production at the facility.

Unifor officials are “taking these reports seriously and have been seeking clarification from the company,” Marc Brennan, Local 707 plant chair, said in a March 20 update to members.

“Our members deserve better communication regarding their future,” he said.

With less than six weeks before retooling begins at the plant, the lack of dialogue “is extremely concerning,” Brennan said, adding the union hasn’t received “official” word from Ford regarding the $1.3 billion USD upgrade since November 2023.

At the time, Ford “indicated that the plant would start demolition, facility upgrades and equipment retooling, transforming our plant into a modern, high-efficiency and high-volume facility building Ford’s next-generation electric vehicles,” Brennan said.  

The three-row EVs, to be built at the planned Oakville Electric Vehicle Complex, were expected to go on sale in early 2025. Instead, Ford is shifting to launch an affordable EV on a small vehicle platform as early as late 2026, Automotive News reported this week.

The report cited sources saying the vehicle would be built at Ford’s plant in Louisville, Ky.

A Ford Canada spokesperson told Automotive News Canada the company “does not comment on speculation.”