Diesel and VW Group

[lol-lol]

5 hours ago, SWBoy said:

The latest data I've seen published (in IET News) showed that the average generated power from wind turbines as a ratio of their installed capacity in 2016 was 0.1%. This low figure is partly due to days when there is no wind or too much wind, and partly due to the current pricing structure meaning that generators actually get paid at least as much (some commentators say more) when they are not generating.   Yesterday I saw a quote that in the USA they will need to increase generating capacity by 50% if/when all cars are EVs.  Taking those together suggests that relying on wind turbines is not a viable solution to non-fossil electricity generation. My personal opinion is that far more money needs to be invested into tidal flow generation research as that is far more predictable than either solar or wind, and if sited around the coast of the UK to take advantage of different tide times would need far less power storage schemes too.

 

If it was 0.1% you would only see a thin line.  As we speak wind is producing over 10% of the power used to power this laptop........

 

http://electricinsights.co.uk/#/reports/report-2016-q4/detail/2016-the-year-in-review?_k=2miupf    (part of Drax)

 

" 2016 was a dramatic year for Britain, not least for its electricity system. Generation from coal fell 61% from the previous year. Gas was up by 51% and low-carbon generation reached its highest ever share. This was the largest annual swing in fuel shares since the miners’ strike of 1984, and the largest ever in percentage terms.  Coal’s share of output fell to just 9%, with 28 TWh produced – the lowest amount since the start of World War II. This placed coal behind wind for the first time ever, which provided 10% (31 TWh) of electricity: a symbolic shift in the transition to low carbon sources.   Over the last five years 75 TWh of generation from coal has disappeared. Replacing it are 25 TWh from wind and solar, 15 TWh from biomass and 15 TWh that were imported. The remaining 20 TWh did not need to be generated due to efficiency improvements. While gas generation has shot up in the last year, it now stands at the same level as five years ago."

 

 

Edited 17 February, 2017 by lol-lol

[Xavier]

I've moved from the dirty end of the spectrum (highly modified 1.9 TDI) to the clean end (Tesla Model S).

I admit I'm at the luxury end of EVs, but there's no way I could consider getting a diesel car again. Maybe a small petrol for a cheap runabout town (the Tesla is just frikkin wide!).

Having got used to the Tesla, I'm amazed at how sensitive I've become to diesel fumes. I get a headache straight away. My car has a HEPA filter so pretty much wipes every particulate and bacteria out - the cabin is such a zen feeling. It does mean though I can't open the sunroof when in the city centre - I immediately feel the fumes...

 

lol-lol, please check the units you use when talking about charging and power As much as I'm a supporter for EVs driving one myself, I do see the proliferation of independent charging networks a pain. It sounds like this should soon start sorting itself out with the government's new pressures. I looked into using Source London, but just can't justify the pricing model for my usage...

 

Talking about pollution. I think the T tax for London is a good thing with one MASSIVE failure: black cabs are excluded. That's a real shocker. You just need to walk past a taxi rank in winter with them all with their engines on, you suffocate!

[lol-lol]

3 hours ago, Xavier said:

I've moved from the dirty end of the spectrum (highly modified 1.9 TDI) to the clean end (Tesla Model S).  I admit I'm at the luxury end of EVs, but there's no way I could consider getting a diesel car again. Maybe a small petrol for a cheap runabout town (the Tesla is just frikkin wide!).  Having got used to the Tesla, I'm amazed at how sensitive I've become to diesel fumes. I get a headache straight away. My car has a HEPA filter so pretty much wipes every particulate and bacteria out - the cabin is such a zen feeling. It does mean though I can't open the sunroof when in the city centre - I immediately feel the fumes...  

 

lol-lol, please check the units you use when talking about charging and power As much as I'm a supporter for EVs driving one myself, I do see the proliferation of independent charging networks a pain. It sounds like this should soon start sorting itself out with the government's new pressures. I looked into using Source London, but just can't justify the pricing model for my usage...

 

Talking about pollution. I think the T tax for London is a good thing with one MASSIVE failure: black cabs are excluded. That's a real shocker. You just need to walk past a taxi rank in winter with them all with their engines on, you suffocate!

 

Do let me know, either by PM or on the thread where I have used wrong units/suffixes as it is important to get right.   I cannot comment on Source London pricing as I work for the Group.   I would prefer to see batteries quoted in Joules or Mega-Joules, so 360 MJ for the Tesla 100, 147 MJ for the Zoe R90 etc.  with conversations I am having it is worth noting i feel that some of the charge points which should be 7 Kw are in fact only half or so of this as the electricity network cannot cope with the power or the three phase link up.

 

In Birmingham we are looking to compel the taxes to go electric and I would hope Sadiq Khan would do the same.

 

 

 

Edited 18 February, 2017 by lol-lol

[Ootohere]

At least something is happening and not just sound bites, so we will see if it begins when he says it will.

http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39001734 

So no 'ban' on vehicles just the registered keeper, maybe the driver or maybe the passengers paying more for them to be in the area in the vehicle.

Edited 18 February, 2017 by Offski

[Xavier]

On 15/02/2017 at 13:33, lol-lol said:

There are charges which can charge at 2 Kwh per minute ie 7 MJ per second.  Typically, and the model of Zoe I am going for, charges at 22 KwH (there is a penalty actually going fro the 43 KwH fast charger version ie you get 20 miles less NEDC range ie 250 miles for non fast charge and only 230 for fast charge version which you pay £1K extra for.  But with a 41 KwH battery you generally would only be looking at adding what you need and charging at home on the even cheaper Economy 7/10 electricity.

 

At home, from the wall box, it charges at 7 KwH so overnight it charges even the much larger capacity 41 KwH Zoe battery in the 7 hours (charging is about 90% efficient).  It will get me to Heathrow and then I can charge from one of the 10 chargers at the office.  These are currently only 3.6 Kw ones but due to be upgraded to a mixture of 7 and 22 KwH ones.  

Putting aside the pedant in me which says it's kWh (small k for kilo, capital W for Watt, small h for hours), 2kWh per minute is effectively 120kW power - I guess you're referring to the Tesla Superchargers - what a great invention they are too .

The Zoe charges at 22kW. The 22kW here is the power. kWh is a quantity of energy, so the result of a continuous accumulated power over a period of time.

I also don't understand how the speed at which you charge effects the range. A charge is a charge, and a given amount of energy will always give you the same range with all else being equal. I'm yet to see how charging at different rates means the energy in the tank subesquently is used up at a different rate.

 

Chargers quote their speed in power, i.e. kW, not energy (kWh). There are 7kW chargers, 11kW chargers, 22kW chargers, 44kW chargers, all of those deliverying their stated power by AC. 50kW (CHAdeMO) and 120kW (Tesla Supercharger) are DC and will be more efficient because there's no conversion loss between the power coming out of the cable and the resulting energy charge given to the battery.

 

Standards dictate that for 40kW and above (so rapid AC charging at 44kW, rapid DC charging via CHAdeMO and Supercharger), the cables are tethered and attached to the charge post. This is what you see on Ecotricity chargers at motorway services. For other lower speed charging networks like Source London, Pod Point, Chargemaster, Polar, etc, they often provide just the socket and the customer provides the cable. This is a better solution because it allows you to have a socket type change via the cable. For example, some cars come with Type 1 sockets (Outlander, Leaf, Ampera, etc). Others come with Type 2 sockets (Tesla, Merc, BMW and VW PHEVs). You can get the right cable for your car and charge your Nissan Leaf with a Type 2 to Type 1 cable.

 

Type 1 is single-phase only so most new cars and certainly BEVs should offer type 2 or CCS (combo system comprising of Type 2 socket and two pins for rapid DC charging).

 

As for which standard should be used, I'm with you on that one, people are making it confusing! Most quote battery capacity in kWh, but some chose Ah instead. Whilst Ah probably makes more sense scientifically, I do think using kWh is easier for people to understand as you can relate charge power (in kW) to time required to fill a given capacity battery (in kWh).

 

Taking the Zoe as an example, the 41 kWh battery will take around 7 hours to fill using a 7kW charger. It would be 41 / 7 = 5.8 but as you said, you loose around 10% in the efficiency and as the battery nears full capacity, the charge speed will slow down as it finishes topping off the cells. But of course, you never arrive fully empty...

Edited 18 February, 2017 by Xavier

[lol-lol]

24 minutes ago, Xavier said:

I also don't understand how the speed at which you charge effects the range. A charge is a charge, and a given amount of energy will always give you the same range with all else being equal. I'm yet to see how charging at different rates means the energy in the tank subesquently is used up at a different rate.........

As for which standard should be used, I'm with you on that one, people are making it confusing! Most quote battery capacity in kWh, but some chose Ah instead. Whilst Ah probably makes more sense scientifically, I do think using kWh is easier for people to understand as you can relate charge power (in kW) to time required to fill a given capacity battery (in kWh).

 

Taking the Zoe as an example, the 41 kWh battery will take around 7 hours to fill using a 7kW charger. It would be 41 / 7 = 5.8 but as you said, you loose around 10% in the efficiency and as the battery nears full capacity, the charge speed will slow down as it finishes topping off the cells. But of course, you never arrive fully empty...

 

I am trying to find out (though presumably it is true as Renault state it in their figures), that the 41 kWh R90 has an NEDC range of 250 miles but the Q90, quick charge version ie uses the 43 Kw charger rather than limited to 22 Kw chargers, has an NEDC range of only 230 miles, ehh, how come when the are suppose to be both 41 kWh ??

 

Our cars, the Auto-Lib ones in Paris, which there are heading towards 5,000 of them now and the first 500 RHDs are starting to come over to London, run quite different tech as although Lithium batteries they are Lithium Metal Polymer batteries rather than ion which have a few different characteristics.  I just learned that we actually keep the batteries at between 60 and 80 C when linked to the chargers !   Also, another interesting fact apparently, one of the hire cars had 40 hires in one day (minimum hire is 6 minutes I gather).

 

On one of the Norwegian videos of charging an EV I found one comment interesting in that the driver drove deliberately quickly to warm the battery pack so it would take the charge faster when he did get to the charger.

 

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/the-first-10-electric-cars-of-3000-strong-hire-fleet-are-rolled-out-in-london-10316382.html     

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 18 February, 2017 by lol-lol

[drefaldwyn]

On 2/14/2017 at 05:43, lol-lol said:

 

Edited:-

 

It is clear the direction is only EVs and to the exclusion of hybrids etc as well.  The choice of EVs will extend further with the battery etc going into other models.  As more car users realise they can run a EV car for less than 20p a mile all in but cannot run an internal combustion engine cars for less than 25p a mile, and the charging becomes easier than filling a car with fuel then EVs will become the default choice and IC engined cars is becoming the non-standard choice because the driver needs to drive more than 200 miles in one go and has little practical opportunity to charge up for whatever reason ie route/schedule which outweigh the extra cost.

 

 

A very significant proportion of the motoring population lives on urban streets where there is no off-street parking. A quick look around the residential areas of most cities and towns would show the streets lined with parked cars in front of terraced properties where it is not possible to park on a private driveway. Imagine a future where the footway on these streets is crossed with possibly hundreds of charging cables leading from the house to the car - people would be tripping over them left, right and centre. The injury claims lawyers would have a field day!!!

 

The alternative might be to have dedicated car parks with dozens of charge points but these would have to be some distance from the houses - clearly not practicable if you have to walk a mile or two just to get to your car with kids etc. I would foresee lots of arguments arising from people waiting to charge and finding the chargepoint occupied by a fully charged vehicle whose owner was miles away. Another consideration would be that these "charging centres" would be a magnet to vandals and thieves etc. unless securely protected.

 

Hybrids will probably be the way forward but BEV's and PHEV's will not be the answer. ICE's will be here for some time yet!!! 

 

Dave (an EV fan!)

[lol-lol]

17 minutes ago, drefaldwyn said:

 

A very significant proportion of the motoring population lives on urban streets where there is no off-street parking. A quick look around the residential areas of most cities and towns would show the streets lined with parked cars in front of terraced properties where it is not possible to park on a private driveway. Imagine a future where the footway on these streets is crossed with possibly hundreds of charging cables leading from the house to the car - people would be tripping over them left, right and centre. The injury claims lawyers would have a field day!!!

 

The alternative might be to have dedicated car parks with dozens of charge points but these would have to be some distance from the houses - clearly not practicable if you have to walk a mile or two just to get to your car with kids etc. I would foresee lots of arguments arising from people waiting to charge and finding the chargepoint occupied by a fully charged vehicle whose owner was miles away. Another consideration would be that these "charging centres" would be a magnet to vandals and thieves etc. unless securely protected.

 

Hybrids will probably be the way forward but BEV's and PHEV's will not be the answer. ICE's will be here for some time yet!!! 

 

Dave (an EV fan!)

 

A think there will be EV charging points at all sorts of new sites and different ways to charge the vehicle ie not by a charge cable but from either an induction loop in a parking bay or reserved area in the road.   Cars like the electric Smart car, only taking 3-4 metre of parking space ie you can get 3 smart cars in the space for 2 normal car.  Also charging by cable at work, induction loop or auto-connecting prod, like we have on the EV buses in Paris, are all there as alternatives to trailing cables.  At some point I think there will be a suitcase style battery that one take out of the home charging unit and take out to the car to slot into the place like where the spare wheel use to be to give the car enough range to get the work super-charger.

 

Smart are going to only sell EVs in the States and no longer sell ICE cars.   With the technological advance in batteries currently ie increasing their capacity by about a quarter every year, EV will be the only type of power allowed in larger cities, with the exception of Hydrogen fuel cell which are also zero emission, the tax system points to this and it is only a question of when individuals will move across.  Public transport, forcing taxis to move over and corporate clients are looking to migrate ASAP.  Moving slowly on this is not an option for public health and the cost to the health service.      

[Ootohere]

Plenty Wind Turbines being erected but maybe not enough to save these jobs and maybe they are just not the ones that the turbines are being bought from.

Those required in Scotland were bound to be reducing considering just how many are up and running already and the Offshore Wind farms that were planned to be built are being opposed and shelved in some cases.

http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-39015004 

http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-36732855 

[Xavier]

In certain places, they've started offering charging from street lighting posts, integrating a charge point in the base of the post.

[KenONeill]

On 2/18/2017 at 11:24, Xavier said:

Having got used to the Tesla, I'm amazed at how sensitive I've become to diesel fumes. I get a headache straight away. My car has a HEPA filter so pretty much wipes every particulate and bacteria out - the cabin is such a zen feeling. It does mean though I can't open the sunroof when in the city centre - I immediately feel the fumes...

 

I live "in the country", drive a diesel and can still sometimes detect "diesel fumes", normally when I "go to town" and walk down a road that is effectively closed to all powered vehicles except PSVs and taxis!

[punyXpress]

How long ago was it that SAAB advertised that the exhaust gas from their cars was cleaner than the air going in ?

[Aspman]

23 hours ago, Xavier said:

In certain places, they've started offering charging from street lighting posts, integrating a charge point in the base of the post.

 

I think this is likely the way forward. When they change lighting they'll be integrated with charing points, or you'll be able to get works done to run a cable out under the path to a box on the road, a bit like the floor sockets you get in offices.

 

[pipsyp]

For me, as and when Tesla can build a nice spec, half quick electric car that I could realistically buy new for c. £25/30k, could easily cover say 350 miles on a charge and could be nigh on fully charged in several minutes........also keep its charge and offer up similar range in cold weather Id be all over it.

 

Right now, every Tesla is well out of my budget, and for the driving I do (where I regularly undertake a c. 560 round trip to my offices and have no charging capabilities there or at the hotel I stay at) I know it would frustrate the A out of me having to find superchargers, hope I can actually get access to one and then be forced to stop for 20/30 mins or so to get a decent charge.....then maybe similar on the way back.  They are gaining popularity now but Im still not sure battery powered cars are the future......I think fuel cell might well take the lead in years to come.

 

Diesel motors......VAG ones particularly are getting such a hard time but thats only been exascerbated by Dieselgate and all the press on diesel and the damage its doing to us all.....but of course never mind all the infrastructure services we rely on that use diesel and pollute our environment far more than a humble diesel car.....obvious but ignored by the press particularly.

 

Petrols still dish out very nasty carceogeneic chemicals.......also most petrols dont get anywhere near the consumption figures of a diesel......my old 2.0 TDI 150 Octavia used to average 52-56mpg easily on a run......my Polo GTI.....37/38 with the same sort of driving.   So I was seeing between 15 and 19 more miles to a gallon of diesel.....thats pretty significant.  With the mileage rates I get from work I was more or less getting 2 tanks of diesel back for the price of one.....my Polo by comparison its just covering the costs really with a little extra.

 

I understand why VAG are dropping the 1.5 variant from its smaller cars....theres just not the margin in these cars to help cover the development cost of the mill......I bet that 1.5 engine will still be developed and end up in cars like the Golf and Passat......if not be a big part of its fleet market it will be turning its back on as hybrid variants wont be an easy sell.

Edited 24 February, 2017 by pipsypreturnsagain

[pipsyp]

Sorry by the above I meant that VAG are likelu dropping development of a 1.5 EVO TDI motor in place of small capacity TSI Mild Hybrids running 48v electrics.  Going to be seen first in the Mk8 Golf by all accounts.

 

Not to say such an engine wont find its way into cars like the Passat, but I guess unlikely.

 

The 2.0 variant has been slated to have a long life ahead of it....probably because development and production costs of the improved motors can be covered by the margins made on the higher cost vehicles.  Maybe we'll see a return to the good old 1.9 capacity.....fond memories of early TDI's and the later PD's here.....the PD130 and 150's were particularly epic motors other than the tractor-like din they made.

 

I still hold the Ibiza 130 PD Sport we had years ago in high regard....TBF if it werent for the gradually ever more wonky electrics and cabin rattles probably still have it now.....likely written off or scrapped though as its showing as no tax or MOT since late 2015 :-(

[Ootohere]

Yet another Service Campaign or Recall Action..

http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/426322-recall-on-diesel-cooling-issue 

What is it with the VW Group, can they not get anything right for getting it wrong!

 

Decades of designing & building engines and so much experience and yet time after time the components are wrong, or the fluids / Coolant / Oil is blamed. Others components that they spec and source.

Yet another issue and these are 1.4TDI 3 Cylinder euro 6 engines.

No wonder VW say the Era of Downsizing is over, it seems for them it needs to be.

Edited 20 March, 2017 by Awayoffski

[Fab Estate]

On 2/13/2017 at 13:51, philpix said:

Of course diesel fumes are a problem they are killers,but I kinda guessed this sort of reaction. Enjoy your adblue.

Do you know anyone who has actually died of diesel fume poison?

[chimaera]

4 hours ago, Fab Estate said:

Do you know anyone who has actually died of diesel fume poison?

Vehicle pollution is not acutely toxic: in other words you're not going to suddenly drop dead from breathing in fumes. What it does do is cause problems for people with chronic respiratory conditions e.g. cystic fibrosis, COPD, emphysema, lung cancer. It can also be chronically toxic depending on the level of pollution present i.e. exposure to enough of it will do damage directly. Beijing is the poster child for this sort of problem but it's a problem in other cities too.

[KenONeill]

11 hours ago, chimaera said:

Vehicle pollution is not acutely toxic: in other words you're not going to suddenly drop dead from breathing in fumes. What it does do is cause problems for people with chronic respiratory conditions e.g. cystic fibrosis, COPD, emphysema, lung cancer. It can also be chronically toxic depending on the level of pollution present i.e. exposure to enough of it will do damage directly. Beijing is the poster child for this sort of problem but it's a problem in other cities too.

So what you're saying is that it can reduce the life expectancy of people who already have chronic (and I think hereditary or self-inflicted) lung conditions still further?

[chimaera]

10 minutes ago, KenONeill said:

So what you're saying is that it can reduce the life expectancy of people who already have chronic (and I think hereditary or self-inflicted) lung conditions still further?

That's what the medical literature reports on the matter. By how much depends on your exposure. The list of conditions are just what came to mind as I was writing a post late at night. I daresay there are more, not all of them hereditary or 'self-inflicted'. Not being an expert in respiratory illnesses, there's a limit to what I could say with certainty on the topic.

 

Mostly I wanted to counter Fab Estate's rather glib point on the health issues surrounding air pollution. The impact of air pollution is subtle and slow.

[Aspman]

Most environmental factors that cause ill health are cumulative. It takes years of exposure to affect you in a noticeable way.

 

You also (usually) have to be predisposed to being affected so the guy next to you might not be affected at all by the same exposure.

[lol-lol]

On 4/9/2017 at 23:43, chimaera said:

Vehicle pollution is not acutely toxic: in other words you're not going to suddenly drop dead from breathing in fumes. What it does do is cause problems for people with chronic respiratory conditions e.g. cystic fibrosis, COPD, emphysema, lung cancer. It can also be chronically toxic depending on the level of pollution present i.e. exposure to enough of it will do damage directly. Beijing is the poster child for this sort of problem but it's a problem in other cities too.

 

It is to common diseases like asthma that the pollution of NOX and PMs mainly from diesel cars that is the issue for big cities like Birmingham, Cork, Dublin, London, Manchester and a few dozen others, I think you are alright in Limerick getting most of your air straight off the Atlantic.   No country is doing more to combat air pollution than China and I think you will find it is Delhi that is the poster city for rampant air pollution largely caused by traffic and they have adopted the ban alternate registration ie even and odd days to reduce at peak times.  Ozone...

 

  

 

And for other pollutants such as PMs...

 

http://www.cseindia.org/content/who-says-india-ranks-among-world’s-worst-its-polluted-air-out-20-most-polluted-cities-world-