I think it is reasonable to assume that "up to 235 miles" means that under ideal conditions 235 miles is achievable, otherwise they might just as well put "up to 1million miles". However I agree with your conclusion, I cannot see how 235 miles could be achieved unless it was downhill with a following hurricane all the way.
Good point Just for the record Prius in particular are the spawn of the devil and I despise the fact they have nothing related to driving enjoyment about them. I'm holding out faith that Porsche/BMW/some other manufacturer will make something thats actually fun.
I suspect its a bit like a new bike available "from" £9999. You could buy one for that price but it'll be so basic it'll feel like you've bought little more than a frame and a seat and in fact you'll end up buying the 12 grand one like everyone else. Similarly, I expect claimed ranges for electric bikes will be like claimed power figures for petrol ones: achievable under a very precise set of effectively laboratory conditions but in the real world it will always fall short.
Good point. Under present day policies, fuels like petrol and diesel have enormously high levels of tax and duty levied on them which contribute significantly to the public revenues, whereas electric vehicles have various tax breaks and subsidies (so they contribute virtually nothing) and electricity has a special low rate of VAT as the only tax. So long as the electrics are only 1% of the market, that's fine. But if the time ever comes when electrics form a significant proportion of vehicle sales in the UK that would obviously have to change. The lost revenues would have to be made up somehow. Guess how?
Indeed. In the case of cars drivers expect heaters, aircon, windscreen wipers, stereos, and a host of other conveniences all of which suck up energy and thus shorten the range to an extent which manufacturers of electric cars carefully avoid mentioning. Bikes however have very little of that stuff, so nearly all the energy would be available for traction. Racing bikes don't even need headlamps or heated grips, and only have to complete a predetermined race distance; this means that paradoxically the battery electric concept is better suited to bike racing than to other purposes.
its simple, government need 'X' from motorists per year. They will get it from all of us in differing proportions based on what you drive, penalising the gas guzzlers. but, once we all have electric vehicles, they will still have to charge us motorists to get 'X' So, elec cars are nill tax and cheap charges for now. One day, the tax is likely to be £500 - £1000 a year, as there will be no fuel to tax anymore. A bit like smokers being taxed on cigs, if they all stop smoking, the government still need 'X' per year, so the costs are passed on to everyone once again. Debates are interesting, but the government still need 'x' did I mention the government need 'X'? now, wheres them mags.............
I would rather have compared it to a diesel car with a 20 gallon tank costing £104 to fill. But sadly there is no electric car in existence which is capable of storing even one-tenth as much energy, so that comparison is not available. Since the latest Leaf can store only energy equivalent to one gallon, I have had to compare it to a hypothetical car with only a one gallon tank. Why would that "make no sense"?
I'd point out that batteries do have life-spans, just as with off-grid homes. The banks can last 10-15years before requiring to be totally replaced. I'm sure I was discussing electric cars some time back & their was a stipulation in the small print you did not own the battery-bank. A guesstimate from me is that electric car's batteries will be required to be replaced sooner than 10years. If this cost has been took into affect in the discussion already I apologize.
Interesting that this thread has appeared today, as I spent lunchtime starting to research electric bikes. Why? I agree the environmental arguments are overrated (displacement not reduction in air pollution, high cradle to grave environmental costs, especially for batteries) never mind the woeful failure to invest in UK power generation infrastructure (another debate for another thread/day). I love my Monster and it's a keeper (the 100,000 mile ambition still stands – currently on around 67,000 in 8 years). However, I'm getting fed up with the long term running costs. The year round daily commute is starting to take its toll. I don't have such a thing as a minor service bill anymore. Every service something else needs replacing (yesterday it was chain & sprockets, yet another speedo sensor, along with the routine oil & filter etc; earlier this year it was belt tensioning bearings, yet more wheel bearings, brake pads & disc etc). True, in theory I could do my own servicing like many owners of older bikes, but frankly I hate the oily bits, the seized bolts, skinned knuckles etc. I don't take pleasure in tinkering and fettling (though respect those who do). My bike is to ride, not to take apart and put back together like some big girl's Meccano set (nor to spend hours cleaning). So I'd started to think about finding a cheaper to run commuter bike. One alternative would to be a cheap snotter, a 125, that would sip petrol, and not being a Ducati would have lower parts & service costs. However, my commute is around 34 miles return trip – the sort of distance most non-EAPC electric bikes could manage, without “range anxiety”. (I recognise that everyday mileage is likely to be worse than manufacturers' claims, and worse again on cold days). I have a garage in which a bike could be plugged in to charge overnight so the lack of availability of public bike charging points would not be an issue. Most of my commute is through towns & villages, some filtering (although admittedly there are some more slightly open sections where something capable of doing 50mph would be good). A bike that doesn't need valve services, belt checks, oil & filter changes (on the basis of not having an engine), that doesn't eat wheel-bearings at the rate of my 696 has a certain appeal. Some electric bikes, like the Zero, are belt drive so don't even need chain & sprockets. Around £14 of petrol gives me 4 days return commutes plus a single leg. £14 of electricity would give me at least twice as many return commutes. (By contrast a single day's return train fare is £13.60). I plan to do some proper number crunching at the weekend, looking at what proportion of the Monster service & other running costs would still have been incurred (as based on years as opposed to mileage) if I'd done half the mileage I have. It may be that by the time I factor in leasing/purchase costs/depreciation for any second bike (electric or petrol) it still works out cheaper to carry on using my Monster every day year round. I wouldn't expect any electric bike I could buy to have character or desirable looks (I don't have £27k for an Energica Evo or Ego). I'd keep my Monster for that (and for touring holidays, long distance and fun rides). I agree electric bikes available today cannot replace/displace petrol bikes for most riders & uses. But I have a sneaky suspicion that right now (i.e. before electric vehicles become too popular and thus taxed as speculated above, rather than attracting government subsidies) and for my commute, one could do the job acceptably, and if available on a lease or PCP deal could be more cash-flow friendly.
So people who haven't got cars (the old and the poor) will get hammered when their electricity bills are sent through the roof by taxes set for motorists.
quite possibly, we pay taxes for fat lazy folk draining the nhs dont we? but more likely, and I quote my quote; ' So, elec cars are nill tax and cheap charges for now. One day, the tax is likely to be £500 - £1000 a year, as there will be no fuel to tax anymore' Tax will be applied to each car, as it is now, in fact, its probably why tax will never be placed solely on fuel, because one day we wont need fuel. So the tax applied on each car will be needed. Its simple. They need 'X' from motorists every year, and they WILL get it. By hook or crook (probably crook).
The leccy vehicles will probably have GPS, so charging by mile(tax) will be a dodle! The cities will be cleaner as all the vehicles will be zorst free. Air pollution will not fall however as all the leccy vehicle commuters will be huddling round their on street chargers, smoking/vaping furiously stressing over 'range anxiety'. Therefore inner city pollution will remain the same! I shall name my pink unicorn Jeremy.
electricity will be cheap in the future.. The oil/ gas producing nations will burn their resorces to make it, convert it to infrared radiation, beem it into space, bounce it off a mirror on a satellite and down to a filling station near you, where it will be turned back into leccy.. you heard it here first...
