FabSwingers.com forum: UK Taxation How would you make it more ballanced

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

Across society from poor to rich and the rest in-between.

Be as drastic as you like.

And can we all respect others points.

Thanks

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *eroy1000Man
over a year ago

milton keynes

"Across society from poor to rich and the rest in-between.

Be as drastic as you like.

And can we all respect others points.

Thanks"

To me our current income tax bands seem fair as the more you earn the more you pay. Somehow the very rich have loopholes which they use to reduce their tax payments. I don't blame them for doing it if it's within the law. I blame those that created the loopholes and still not closed them. The dividend tax you mention in another thread is a bit foreign to me so can't comment

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *I TwoCouple
over a year ago

PDI 12-26th Nov 24

Be as drastic as you like.

Thanks"

Remove an "L"

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"Across society from poor to rich and the rest in-between.

Be as drastic as you like.

And can we all respect others points.

Thanks

The loopholes are created by politicians for politicians they would be shooting them self's in the foot if they close them..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

Now you are Dreming but at least that is free right !!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan
over a year ago

golden fields

"Across society from poor to rich and the rest in-between.

Be as drastic as you like.

And can we all respect others points.

Thanks

Problem is, these are largely the same people. Those using the loopholes, and those responsible for not closing them.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *eavenNhellCouple
over a year ago

carrbrook stalybridge

Everybody pays 10% tax on anything and everything they earn over £12 k no matter where its from no loopholes no tax breaks no tax havens no exceptions you earn you pay .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

We all pay too much tax for what we get in return. We need far more people working to reduce the overall tax burden.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"Everybody pays 10% tax on anything and everything they earn over £12 k no matter where its from no loopholes no tax breaks no tax havens no exceptions you earn you pay ."

So how would you make up the short fall.

I my self pay my self £1047 a month the take dividens at 7.5% so I'm OK with 10%

I the company owner pay tax on profit at 19%

But at £50,270 tax on profit jumps to 33.75% so would be very happy at 10%

And what about the cash economy.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"We all pay too much tax for what we get in return. We need far more people working to reduce the overall tax burden."

So like me decrease benifit increase PIP and increas benift if in training. Education has got to be a key to unlock the people not working

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago

Manchester

Tax profits of companies generated in the U.K. before they move said funds abroad.

Close tax avoidance schemes for companies and individuals.

Ban and close U.K. offshore tax havens.

No punitive rates only the top rate of 45%

Tax breaks for research and green energy projects.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *atssleepanywhereTV/TS
over a year ago

Wolverhampton

Force all banks to offer borrowing facilities to any business that's been open more than a year. Currently too many small businesses find it hard to raise funds and pay taxes. Big business gets away with far more.

Legalise and tax the production of UK grown . Taxation at a flat rate lower than that applied to imports to encourage UK farming. Home gardening would be legal but only for plants grown outside under direct natural sunlight. This would discourage struggling HMO landlords that might consider evicting tenants in favour of grow rooms.

Money raised from extra taxation should be ringfenced to pay for free public transport

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Maybe don't tax overtime? The main reason for someone doing overtime is the basic is not enough. Especially in a cost of living crisis. Although I could use the OT, the tax whack makes it less worthwhile to do.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ne Pass drillingMan
over a year ago

Northampton

1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan
over a year ago

golden fields

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

10. Kill the poor"

Added the one you know you wanted to.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *uddy laneMan
over a year ago

dudley

"Across society from poor to rich and the rest in-between.

Be as drastic as you like.

And can we all respect others points.

Thanks"

Do what the bosses of big companies do, do not pay tax.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Across society from poor to rich and the rest in-between.

Be as drastic as you like.

And can we all respect others points.

Thanks

Do what the bosses of big companies do, do not pay tax.

"
nothing to do with bosses or owners try the accountant

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Across society from poor to rich and the rest in-between.

Be as drastic as you like.

And can we all respect others points.

Thanks

Do what the bosses of big companies do, do not pay tax.

nothing to do with bosses or owners try the accountant "

Bollocks, they hire the the accountant to do just that for them.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost . "
Liz, is that you ?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *exy_HornyCouple
over a year ago

Leigh

Make tax free allowance equivalent to 40 hours at minimum wage.

Make 100% of the tax free allowance transferrable between married couples.

Everything above that (wherever the money comes from) taxed at 33%, no loopholes or rebates. This is the combined tax and NI rate so is not far from balancing the books.

Get rid of cash, so all transactions are logged and there is no way of avoiding tax.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"Make tax free allowance equivalent to 40 hours at minimum wage.

Make 100% of the tax free allowance transferrable between married couples.

Everything above that (wherever the money comes from) taxed at 33%, no loopholes or rebates. This is the combined tax and NI rate so is not far from balancing the books.

Get rid of cash, so all transactions are logged and there is no way of avoiding tax."

Now this I do like but if 37.5 hours tax free at living wage say £18,500 per person you would not need to transfer it.

And for me I'd add 3% to all the tax above so the 20% is 23% and 43%

Would also like to see dutie on suger in the same sort of way as alcohole may be 5%

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *illowendMan
over a year ago

Southwold

It’s good that people expose what they are publicly

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost . "

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

In the UK we've raised public spending from 39.6% of GDP in 2019/20 to 47.3% of GDP this year. Since records began in the late 1940s the only time anything remotely like that's ever happened over a three year period was 1972/3 to 1975/6. Suffice it to say, that did not end well.

The govt is spending over 47% of GDP yet the headlines are all about how we ought to be bailing out a steel firm, spending even more, not about how we're cutting spending - cos of course we're planning to spend just as much next year as we are this year.

And somehow the public discourse continues to be about how this is "the most right wing government ever"

We need to tackle public spending urgently and then cut taxes otherwise disaster awaits.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

The other thing that is odd - highlighted in this thread - is that so much of the discourse is over taxation. We have the highest tax burden since the 1950s - and that completely ignores that tax doesn’t cover the bloody spending bill by a long way!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The other thing that is odd - highlighted in this thread - is that so much of the discourse is over taxation. We have the highest tax burden since the 1950s - and that completely ignores that tax doesn’t cover the bloody spending bill by a long way!

Which is why I’m almost looking forward to seeing how a new Labour Government squirms trying to square the circle of its’ activists demands and the realities of having bugger all money to spend. Almost."
I agree we are in a pickle... Up until the 80s we have government income of about 5pc + of GDP coming from non tax sources. That's halver at least meaning taxes need to fill the gap in a usual year. Add in covid and we see these numbers.

Plus, I suspect there has been a I've inflationary increases in health care and state pension, as this increases with age, and we have age inflation in the UK.

And as GDP has largely been driven by population growth, this is an extra inflationary source.

Whoever is in power has a huge nettle to grasp and need to plan for the next fifty years. And this may need some spending today on education (to plug the productivity and skills gap). Or push back harder on state pension age ....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

I agree with the above, we have 2 other massive problems, zero productivity growth and a shrinking labour force which = minimal economic growth = rising share of govt spending as % of GDP… we have to try somehow to solve the this and then spending/GDP will decline…

However Public sector productivity is still 6%+ below pre-pandemic levels, in spite of 18.6% increase in resources ... this gives me very little confidence going forward

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I agree with the above, we have 2 other massive problems, zero productivity growth and a shrinking labour force which = minimal economic growth = rising share of govt spending as % of GDP… we have to try somehow to solve the this and then spending/GDP will decline…

However Public sector productivity is still 6%+ below pre-pandemic levels, in spite of 18.6% increase in resources ... this gives me very little confidence going forward "
public sector growth is always a challenge to measure. It often doesnt produce stuff. Or a service that can be billed.

I'd bet a chunk of the "unproductive" new spend is Brexit tho. How do you measure that ?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

Or working from home...

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

There is a high tax burden on lots paying tax but there are lots not paying tax as they should that in my opinion is why it is so hight against GDP. Lots of people in small limited companies to reduce tax, or partners in a company to reduce tax, that's before you look at non dom etc.

And as before cash is still strong so not paying tax.

If I sell something on e Bay I only get charger 2.5% selling fee.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

Think you are looking at it the wrong way. The only way out of this is to cut spending, especially areas which are a drag on the economy. The drive towards Net zero for example should be totally abandoned as it will bankrupt us for no discernable gain

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan
over a year ago

golden fields

"Think you are looking at it the wrong way. The only way out of this is to cut spending, especially areas which are a drag on the economy. The drive towards Net zero for example should be totally abandoned as it will bankrupt us for no discernable gain"

There is no drive to net zero. There should be, it would have saved us billions if we'd have done it when we should have.

But I agree better taxation, closing loopholes for billionaires and big corporations should go hand in hand with better spending. We've spunked how many 100s of billions down the brexit toilet by now. Not doing stupid shit like that would help.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

Net zero will cost trillions, the earlier it is implemented the more expensive it will be as so called green technology is simply not feasible or realiable and can't replace fossil fuels.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan
over a year ago

golden fields

"Net zero will cost trillions, the earlier it is implemented the more expensive it will be as so called green technology is simply not feasible or realiable and can't replace fossil fuels. "

Honestly, wherever you're getting this information from it's completely false.

And even if it wasn't and even if climate change was the biggest conspiracy of all time. Fossil fuels will steadily become more and more expensive to extract and run out.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

What have I said that is false? Governments own reports and ex chancellor Philip Hammond said it would cost trillions back in 2017, that report is an under estimate given the shortage of lithium, copper , cobalt and other precious metals required for batteries to replace internal combustion engines.

Then every gas boiler in the land needs replacing with heat pumps or similar which are vastly more expensive, provide less heat and aren't suitable for much of Britain's housing stock.

Every gas power station will have to come off line leaving us reliant of intermittent supply from wind and solar which will not nearly cope with demand even when it's windy and sunny.

You state there is no drive to net zero but the government have put into law that we should be at net zero by 2050 a step virtually no other country has done as its completely unrealistic.

I read widely, don't rely on drivel written by the bbc or guardian, I listen to engineers that have warned for many years that this project is heading for disaster and all it will do is force all our remaining industries to move abroad where power is cheaper and they are less regulated. Green ideology sounds lovely until it meets reality and will lead to deprivation not seen in this country for many years.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan
over a year ago

golden fields

"What have I said that is false? Governments own reports and ex chancellor Philip Hammond said it would cost trillions back in 2017, that report is an under estimate given the shortage of lithium, copper , cobalt and other precious metals required for batteries to replace internal combustion engines.

Then every gas boiler in the land needs replacing with heat pumps or similar which are vastly more expensive, provide less heat and aren't suitable for much of Britain's housing stock.

Every gas power station will have to come off line leaving us reliant of intermittent supply from wind and solar which will not nearly cope with demand even when it's windy and sunny.

You state there is no drive to net zero but the government have put into law that we should be at net zero by 2050 a step virtually no other country has done as its completely unrealistic.

There are two points here. Firstly, if we have to transition off fossil fuels or not. Clearly we do because A. They're going to run out and become more expensive, and B. Because we'll make the planet too warm to sustain our civilisation.

Then there is the question of cost. Globally the fossil fuels industry receives trillions in subsidies ($5.9 trillion in 2020).

We have to move to renewables, and the sooner we do it, and the sooner we invest in it, the cheaper and better it will be.

The technology is already fantastic, imagine what it could be with the kind of investment the oil and gas industries receive.

Not sure what the BBC or Guardian have to do with anything.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

A. We have enough gas in British waters to last us for over 200 years, the Dutch have an untapped field off Groningen which is reputed one of the largest in the world but the government have refused licences to operate as it goes against their green agenda. The US is self sufficient in gas for over 200 years as is Canada.

Again I mention the precious metals that are dug up in dreadful conditions in dangerous countries controlled by the Chinese. These metals cannot be mined fast enough to meet global supply and will become ridiculously more expensive.

B. Disagree but the UK accounts for 1% of emissions so anything we do is pissing in the wind.

Then there is the question of cost. Globally the fossil fuels industry receives trillions in subsidies ($5.9 trillion in 2020).

Would seriously question this figure. Worldwide in the last 5 years there has been a witch-hunt against fossil fuel companies led by government, banks and esg groups leading to less and less exploration of gas and oil fields , the main reason why prices are so high , not Ukraine as governments would like you to think. Renewables on the other hand enjoy vast subsidies for unreliable supply.

We have to move to renewables, and the sooner we do it, and the sooner we invest in it, the cheaper and better it will be.

That statement is utter drivel there is no evidence anywhere that it is true .

The technology is already fantastic, imagine what it could be with the kind of investment the oil and gas industries receive.

The technology isn't fantastic, the reason we gave up on wind power was the industrial revolution that dragged society out of crippling poverty. Wind isn't reliable and batteries are so far away from being vaguely useful as a backup its laughable.

Not sure what the BBC or Guardian have to do with anything.

They both promote a green biased agenda with no criticism or questioning allowed and totally misinform the public on this issue

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton

Let’s recover all the £billions the Johnson-Truss-Sunak governments have given to the companies of Tory party donors, friends, family, and cronies under the cover of the pandemic. Let’s see how much of the “black hole” that fills.

Then let’s try and salvage the disaster that is brexit and see if it is possible to reverse the permanent hit to GDP and see how that helps plug the “black hole”

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost . "

Sorry Pat but you are not being radical enough. Clearly what we need to do is have a return to feudalism. All these poor people swanning around like they bloody own the country, insisting on being able to vote, strike, protest, have access to universal healthcare. Bloody cheek!

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

They need to know their place and realise we are simply not created equal and “accident of birth” is anything but if you are rich.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ne Pass drillingMan
over a year ago

Northampton

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

They need to know their place and realise we are simply not created equal and “accident of birth” is anything but if you are rich."
. At least these policies would help every single member of society by stimulating the economy and making everyone better off. You appear to bitterly resent anything designed to help ordinary working people. Champagne socialists tend to have policies that are a long way from helping anyone and are simply control freaks who consider their opinions superior to others . I rely on election results to validate my opinions and check that they are reasonable and acceptable. The results of the last few elections are self explanatory.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

They need to know their place and realise we are simply not created equal and “accident of birth” is anything but if you are rich.. At least these policies would help every single member of society by stimulating the economy and making everyone better off. You appear to bitterly resent anything designed to help ordinary working people. Champagne socialists tend to have policies that are a long way from helping anyone and are simply control freaks who consider their opinions superior to others . I rely on election results to validate my opinions and check that they are reasonable and acceptable. The results of the last few elections are self explanatory. "

The British people rejected your ‘ideas’ in the 2019 general election

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

I realise you are trolling but...

Your Trussonmics approach that you claim will help “ordinary working people” actually won’t. Everything you listed will reduce the tax burden on the better paid asset rich people in society but will reduce the overall tax take for the UK to such an extent that all public services (inc benefits of all types) would have to be scaled right back.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ne Pass drillingMan
over a year ago

Northampton

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

I realise you are trolling but...

That disproportionately impacts the poorer in society, including “ordinary working people” who are on the lower end of the wage spectrum. I note that while you advocated a cut in the higher tax bracket there was no corresponding increase in the tax free allowance or reduction in basic rate of tax! "
History suggests that lowering tax rates means more is collected so ultimately everyone benefits . With low tax rates the necessity to take actions to reduce tax paid becomes less attractive.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

I realise you are trolling but...

That disproportionately impacts the poorer in society, including “ordinary working people” who are on the lower end of the wage spectrum. I note that while you advocated a cut in the higher tax bracket there was no corresponding increase in the tax free allowance or reduction in basic rate of tax! History suggests that lowering tax rates means more is collected so ultimately everyone benefits . With low tax rates the necessity to take actions to reduce tax paid becomes less attractive. "

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

When has it been tried in this country? The tax burden has never been as high and is rising, and it still no way covers soaring expenditure!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ne Pass drillingMan
over a year ago

Northampton

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

I realise you are trolling but...

That disproportionately impacts the poorer in society, including “ordinary working people” who are on the lower end of the wage spectrum. I note that while you advocated a cut in the higher tax bracket there was no corresponding increase in the tax free allowance or reduction in basic rate of tax! History suggests that lowering tax rates means more is collected so ultimately everyone benefits . With low tax rates the necessity to take actions to reduce tax paid becomes less attractive.

Actually that is a trope trotted out by free market neo-liberalism, the type promoted by the Tufton St mafia...er I mean think tanks. It hasn’t worked. The UK is on its knees. A small number of people are doing very well of course so feel free to kneel down under their tables awaiting a few crumbs."
If you think that the UK is on its knees maybe you need to get out a little more and see what is happening. Loads of new cars and lots of coffee shops.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

I realise you are trolling but...

That disproportionately impacts the poorer in society, including “ordinary working people” who are on the lower end of the wage spectrum. I note that while you advocated a cut in the higher tax bracket there was no corresponding increase in the tax free allowance or reduction in basic rate of tax! History suggests that lowering tax rates means more is collected so ultimately everyone benefits . With low tax rates the necessity to take actions to reduce tax paid becomes less attractive.

Actually that is a trope trotted out by free market neo-liberalism, the type promoted by the Tufton St mafia...er I mean think tanks. It hasn’t worked. The UK is on its knees. A small number of people are doing very well of course so feel free to kneel down under their tables awaiting a few crumbs. If you think that the UK is on its knees maybe you need to get out a little more and see what is happening. Loads of new cars and lots of coffee shops. "

You need to get better at gaslighting Pat...

“Car registrations for 2022 are on track to see its worst year in four decades, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said.”

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

I realise you are trolling but...

That disproportionately impacts the poorer in society, including “ordinary working people” who are on the lower end of the wage spectrum. I note that while you advocated a cut in the higher tax bracket there was no corresponding increase in the tax free allowance or reduction in basic rate of tax! History suggests that lowering tax rates means more is collected so ultimately everyone benefits . With low tax rates the necessity to take actions to reduce tax paid becomes less attractive.

Actually that is a trope trotted out by free market neo-liberalism, the type promoted by the Tufton St mafia...er I mean think tanks. It hasn’t worked. The UK is on its knees. A small number of people are doing very well of course so feel free to kneel down under their tables awaiting a few crumbs. If you think that the UK is on its knees maybe you need to get out a little more and see what is happening. Loads of new cars and lots of coffee shops. "

Worst performing economy in the G7

Worst living standards in over 40 years

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

I realise you are trolling but...

That disproportionately impacts the poorer in society, including “ordinary working people” who are on the lower end of the wage spectrum. I note that while you advocated a cut in the higher tax bracket there was no corresponding increase in the tax free allowance or reduction in basic rate of tax! History suggests that lowering tax rates means more is collected so ultimately everyone benefits . With low tax rates the necessity to take actions to reduce tax paid becomes less attractive. "

Hello there, you need to look out of the window, Liz Truss tried to lower taxes and crashed the economy, was sacked by the Tory party and became the UKs worst ever PM

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ne Pass drillingMan
over a year ago

Northampton

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

I realise you are trolling but...

That disproportionately impacts the poorer in society, including “ordinary working people” who are on the lower end of the wage spectrum. I note that while you advocated a cut in the higher tax bracket there was no corresponding increase in the tax free allowance or reduction in basic rate of tax! History suggests that lowering tax rates means more is collected so ultimately everyone benefits . With low tax rates the necessity to take actions to reduce tax paid becomes less attractive.

Actually that is a trope trotted out by free market neo-liberalism, the type promoted by the Tufton St mafia...er I mean think tanks. It hasn’t worked. The UK is on its knees. A small number of people are doing very well of course so feel free to kneel down under their tables awaiting a few crumbs. If you think that the UK is on its knees maybe you need to get out a little more and see what is happening. Loads of new cars and lots of coffee shops.

You need to get better at gaslighting Pat...

“Car registrations for 2022 are on track to see its worst year in four decades, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said.”

Just wait until retail sales figures are published for the xmas period. Sales are down. Do I really need to remind you about Sunak’s £50bn black hole? Cost of living crisis? Strikes across the country? Nah, all fine and dandy."
. You forgot to mention that there is a world wide chip shortage for cars. It simply means that margins have increased on some sales. .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

Truss's mistake was that she thought she was running the country.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton

"1. Scrap IHT .

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

6. Abolish capital gains tax

7. Scrap legal aid.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

It’s time they returned to be serfs. They need to work for the nobility in return for food and lodging. And be grateful!

I realise you are trolling but...

That disproportionately impacts the poorer in society, including “ordinary working people” who are on the lower end of the wage spectrum. I note that while you advocated a cut in the higher tax bracket there was no corresponding increase in the tax free allowance or reduction in basic rate of tax! History suggests that lowering tax rates means more is collected so ultimately everyone benefits . With low tax rates the necessity to take actions to reduce tax paid becomes less attractive.

Actually that is a trope trotted out by free market neo-liberalism, the type promoted by the Tufton St mafia...er I mean think tanks. It hasn’t worked. The UK is on its knees. A small number of people are doing very well of course so feel free to kneel down under their tables awaiting a few crumbs. If you think that the UK is on its knees maybe you need to get out a little more and see what is happening. Loads of new cars and lots of coffee shops.

You need to get better at gaslighting Pat...

“Car registrations for 2022 are on track to see its worst year in four decades, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said.”

Just wait until retail sales figures are published for the xmas period. Sales are down. Do I really need to remind you about Sunak’s £50bn black hole? Cost of living crisis? Strikes across the country? Nah, all fine and dandy.. You forgot to mention that there is a world wide chip shortage for cars. It simply means that margins have increased on some sales. . "

It doesn’t mean that at all. Nice try. There is a chip shortage though, will give you that.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"1. Scrap IHT .

If you own property it all ready at 1 millions why scrap it?

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

Corporation Tax is 19%

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

Only a 5% cut to the very high earners pointless.

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

Not meany would want to pay in more then £40k a year

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

Vat is the only tax on the cash economy so would increase this.

6. Abolish capital gains tax.

This would again only realy benifit the very well off..posable reduce it but don't think it would make much difference.

7. Scrap legal aid.

Oh so if taken to court un fairly you can't afford defence.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

I could go with this but how are you going to stop them. About 75,000 now in accommodation paid for buy the tax payer. Let them in let them work give them 2 months support then there on there own.

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

Agree with that"

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"1. Scrap IHT .

If you own property it all ready at 1 millions why scrap it?

2. Reduce Corporation Tax to 19 %

Corporation Tax is 19%

3. Maximum personal tax rate 40 %

Only a 5% cut to the very high earners pointless.

4. Increase the tax free amount that you can pay into a pension fund.

Not meany would want to pay in more then £40k a year

5. Reduce VAT to 15 %

Vat is the only tax on the cash economy so would increase this.

6. Abolish capital gains tax.

This would again only realy benifit the very well off..posable reduce it but don't think it would make much difference.

7. Scrap legal aid.

Oh so if taken to court un fairly you can't afford defence.

8. Do not allow any non residents into the country unto we have addressed issues re the housing crisis .

I could go with this but how are you going to stop them. About 75,000 now in accommodation paid for buy the tax payer. Let them in let them work give them 2 months support then there on there own.

9. A complete overhaul of the benefits system in order to reduce the cost .

Agree with that"

Cut Taxes! Look what happened three months ago!?

You cut taxes, you lose funding for not just for the things you hate, but the things you like.

Cut taxes, you cut policing and prisons

Cut taxes, you cut the border force and immigration

Scrap legal aid? Yeah cut your access to legal counsel when you get shafted, less about reducing these promised rights when many voted to “take back control”. You scrap that and when the government come for you, you won’t be able to defend yourself.

A taxes are a necessary evil, true it would be great to cut everything, but it’s about the greater good.

I think it is utterly naive to believe you can maintain services and cut taxes. All it means is that you have to borrow more.

Put it this way Taxes are like using your savings so you don’t go into your overdraft.

if you pay upfront you reduce costs later on down the road.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

As I said in an earlier post 47 pence in every pound spent in this country is spent by the government. This is forecast to rise and tax receipts won't keep pace.

The magic money tree of borrowing is coming to end now it has caused widespread worldwide inflation. This position is totally unsustainable and can only lead to the collapse of western economies.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

Instead of repeating headlines and what we choose to believe about what we receive as the tax payer for what we spend and what is spent on what, how about looking at the figures?

Search: "Office of Budget Responsibility A brief guide to the public finances"

We demand high services and low taxes and are surprised when those we elect on those promises failing to deliver them.

"The UK government raises slightly less revenue relative to national income than the majority of other industrial countries – more than the US, Japan and Korea, but less than Scandinavian countries like Denmark and Norway.

Public spending as a share of national income in the UK is slightly above the average of other industrial countries – the UK spends much more than Japan and Korea, but much less than Finland or France.

Spending just above the international average, but raising less in revenue, leaves the UK running a budget deficit that’s far above the industrial world average.

Net debt in the UK is also higher than the average of other industrial countries."

You can see what a relatively high proportion of state revenue is from income tax and relatively little from corporation tax and capital taxes.

You will also see how much is paid on debt interest.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

B. Disagree but the UK accounts for 1% of emissions so anything we do is pissing in the wind.

Then there is the question of cost. Globally the fossil fuels industry receives trillions in subsidies ($5.9 trillion in 2020).

We have to move to renewables, and the sooner we do it, and the sooner we invest in it, the cheaper and better it will be.

That statement is utter drivel there is no evidence anywhere that it is true .

The technology is already fantastic, imagine what it could be with the kind of investment the oil and gas industries receive.

Not sure what the BBC or Guardian have to do with anything.

They both promote a green biased agenda with no criticism or questioning allowed and totally misinform the public on this issue "

It requires some very motivated thinking to assert this narrative.

They are assertions because you will only be able to find obscure, fossil fuel funded organisations making these claims.

You have to ignore a lot about science, economics and the social, political and environmental activities of the fossil fuel industries to reach these conclusions.

The cost of physical cost of extraction of fossil fuels will rise however big the reserves because they are progressively harder to extract and transport. They become uneconomical without prices rising to match the extraction costs. That's a long term cycle with production controlled and prices swt by a cartel. This cartel also exposes a security vulnerability that we are living through with the war in Ukraine and Russia using gas as a weapon as Saudi Arabia did in the 1970s. The main reason for prices suddenly spiking is exactly because of a sudden reduction in supply by Russia. If you don't understand this you do not understand basic economics.

The Netherlands moved away from large scale gas production due to"Tue Dutch disease" which the Middle East has long suffered from, where one economic lucrative industry displaces all others.

Acting horrified at the consequences of extracting resources for the renewables industry compared to the military conflicts, corruption, civil repression and environmental damage caused by foss fuel extraction is laughable.

There is also significant work in tracking the source of these materials as they represent a direct investment risk as they are a requirement for funding.

Funding is moving away from the fossil fuel industry and towards renewables at such a fast pace because the insurance industry wants it. They are paying the price for the environment change that you deny. They see the problem and want it minimised and fixed.

There is no "witch hunt" against the fossil fuel industry. They are just bad business now that their external costs are being accounted for.

That's purely the economics, without the health cost in pollution, the social costs of mass migration and the cost in life of conflict over water and food resources.

The Pentagon and Chinese governments both view climate change amongst the most significant global military concerns. Why do you think otherwise?

China is continuing to build coal fired power, because they are trying to drive economic growth and have coal in abundance. However, they are shifting towards renewables very quickly because of demand from their own population. They generate the most power from renewable energy globally and Nd see it as a strategic industry for the future receiving massive investment.

Both India and China are also investing heavily in Thorium salt nuclear power generation which is both cleaner and safer than current fission as they are not intended to create weapons grade nuclear material.

On top of this the cost of installing renewable energy and it's generating price per unit is far below that of the cheapest fossil fuels. This is without renewable subsidy but with fossil fuel subsidy.

This does require massive investment, but certainly no more than the centuries of investment on fossil fuels. The outcome reduces the larger cost of environmental damage and creates new industries and considerable economic activity. Why would you not want that? Why would you not want to invest the same money in more efficient technologies (that's the physics of burning stuff being poor) that create far fewer negative consequences and cost less to the consumer and provide greater security?

Deloitte projects the cost of climate change at US$178 trillion over the next 50 years with business as usul. That's a 7.6% cut to global GDP.

The same study sees a net gain of US$43 trillion (a 3.8% boost to global GDP) with a net zero transition as there is so much new opportunity nd so much disaster averted.

However, please do provide a few of the sources which feed your world view, because they are baffling.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *rDiscretionXXXMan
over a year ago

Gilfach

"They are assertions because you will only be able to find obscure, fossil fuel funded organisations making these claims."

So you're saying that only a very small number of people think that fossil fuels are a good idea.

"The cost of physical cost of extraction of fossil fuels will rise however big the reserves because they are progressively harder to extract and transport. They become uneconomical without prices rising to match the extraction costs."

So fossil fuel prices are going to increase, until no one can afford to produce them?

"Funding is moving away from the fossil fuel industry and towards renewables at such a fast pace because the insurance industry wants it."

So the fossil fuel industry will soon be dead, because it's simply uneconomic to run.

"China is continuing to build coal fired power, because they are trying to drive economic growth and have coal in abundance. However, they are shifting towards renewables very quickly because of demand from their own population."

And it's not just the western world, even the Chinese can see it's a problem.

"On top of this the cost of installing renewable energy and it's generating price per unit is far below that of the cheapest fossil fuels. This is without renewable subsidy but with fossil fuel subsidy."

Well this is all wonderful news. The fossil fuel industry is doomed, almost no one wants it to continue, 'renewables' are cheaper and more effective, so everyone is moving to them.

It sounds like all of the problems have been solved, and that we no longer need to worry. The "Just Stop Oil" people are wasting their time protesting, because the issue is already solved.

Great news!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"They are assertions because you will only be able to find obscure, fossil fuel funded organisations making these claims.

So you're saying that only a very small number of people think that fossil fuels are a good idea.

So fossil fuel prices are going to increase, until no one can afford to produce them?

Funding is moving away from the fossil fuel industry and towards renewables at such a fast pace because the insurance industry wants it.

So the fossil fuel industry will soon be dead, because it's simply uneconomic to run.

And it's not just the western world, even the Chinese can see it's a problem.

Well this is all wonderful news. The fossil fuel industry is doomed, almost no one wants it to continue, 'renewables' are cheaper and more effective, so everyone is moving to them.

It sounds like all of the problems have been solved, and that we no longer need to worry. The "Just Stop Oil" people are wasting their time protesting, because the issue is already solved.

Great news!"

Sigh. What point are you actually making other than to just argue with me because I posted something?

As ever I notice that you only respond to the points which are convenient for you to from whatever "argument" you are attempting to make.

I said that the "published" information supporting "business as usual" fossil fuel use and climate change denial is of poor quality and dubiously funded.

However,feel free to dig some up that you think is credible.

I do not know what number of people believe that fossil fuels are the only solution that we need or that there is no climate change or even have an opinion n it. Most people on the planet are too busy trying to survive from dy to say and cope with the increasing rate of climate related disasters. Day to day survival does not allow for the luxury of long-term strategic thinking. That is what Governments re supposed to do.

Fossil fuel prices will increase until nobody can afford to purchase them. That is how the cost/price function works. It is rational to think ahead and invest in alternatives long before it becomes a crisis. However, if you do nothing you have to keep paying, as the current energy situation demonstrates.

Yes, the fossil fuel industry will soon be dead because it is uneconomical and destroying the planet on which its customers live. However it has huge financial resource and influence. It will, rationally, delay any change to its well established business model for s long as possible to maximise return on sunk cost investments especially if there is no cost associated with the environmental and health costs associated with its activities.

The fossil fuel industry is ultimately doomed on the perspective of cost and efficiency or by destroying the planet if it succeeds in further delay.

The economic reality is why they are themselves investing heavily in renewable energy as the outcome is inevitable.

The pace of change is far too slow due to the decades of delay that the fossil fuel industry has already successfully instigated. What would have been a relatively slow pace of change now requires more urgency and higher cost to put in place in a shorter period. So rasing awareness of the matter is not wasted time even if some methods of doing so my be questionable.

Your sarcasm is wasted unless you are able to actually state your position on the matter. Is climate change n urgent issue and is the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources an advantageous opportunity.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *rDiscretionXXXMan
over a year ago

Gilfach

"What point are you actually making other than to just argue with me because I posted something?"

My point (which I was clearly too subtle about) is that your posts are so misleading that they actually make the opposite point of the one you intended.

Firstly you disparage the fossil fuel industry, saying that prices are high and will only get higher, it's a security vulnerability, it ruins whole country's economies (like the Dutch), and that the insurance companies are moving away from it making it unviable. Any sensible person reading that and taking it at face value will look out of the window and wonder why most of the cars he sees are fossil fuel powered, why there are still petrol stations everywhere, and why the fossil fuel companies' shares are still selling at high prices.

Then you big up the 'renewables' industry, saying that it's cleaner, cheaper, and it's what the people want. So much so that even China and India are moving rapidly towards 'renewables'. "So", thinks our sensible person, "why on earth are we still using fossil fuels when there are all these renewables ready to use"?

The fact is that you are mentioning all the bad points of fossil fuels, and you are ignoring all the bad points of 'renewables', in an attempt to sway your audience.

The biggest flaw in your argument is that you are comparing 2 different things. 'Renewables' are an energy generation method, but fossil fuels are stored energy.

Fossil fuels are so useful because they pack a large amount of energy into a small volume. They can be easily handled, pumped or transported wherever they are needed, and easily stored to provide energy wherever and whenever we want it. They can even be stockpiled to give us a guaranteed energy supply for weeks or even months.

'Renewables' on the other hand are fickle, producing energy only when the conditions are right. They sometimes produce too much energy and have to be shut down, but more often they produce too little, and have to be replaced. And there is no scalable method of storing 'renewable' energy, so we have to use it when it's there, and then use something else when it isn't.

Are fossil fuels a good idea? No.

Would more 'renewables' be a good thing? Yes.

But where we are today is that fossil fuels have many many advantages, and not enough disadvantages to stop using them.

But you keep writing the sort of posts you have above, where you present fossil fuels as having no advantages, and 'renewables' as being obviously better. That sort of post will just make people feel that the work is already done, and that we don't need to push any harder.

"Your sarcasm is wasted unless you are able to actually state your position on the matter. Is climate change n urgent issue and is the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources an advantageous opportunity."

It's obvious that my sarcasm was wasted. My point wasn't about climate change, or energy transition, it was about your rhetoric being unconvincing if you don't present the whole picture.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan
over a year ago

golden fields

"What point are you actually making other than to just argue with me because I posted something?

My point (which I was clearly too subtle about) is that your posts are so misleading that they actually make the opposite point of the one you intended.

The fact is that you are mentioning all the bad points of fossil fuels, and you are ignoring all the bad points of 'renewables', in an attempt to sway your audience.

The biggest flaw in your argument is that you are comparing 2 different things. 'Renewables' are an energy generation method, but fossil fuels are stored energy.

Are fossil fuels a good idea? No.

Would more 'renewables' be a good thing? Yes.

But where we are today is that fossil fuels have many many advantages, and not enough disadvantages to stop using them.

It's obvious that my sarcasm was wasted. My point wasn't about climate change, or energy transition, it was about your rhetoric being unconvincing if you don't present the whole picture."

"not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

"What point are you actually making other than to just argue with me because I posted something?

My point (which I was clearly too subtle about) is that your posts are so misleading that they actually make the opposite point of the one you intended.

The fact is that you are mentioning all the bad points of fossil fuels, and you are ignoring all the bad points of 'renewables', in an attempt to sway your audience.

The biggest flaw in your argument is that you are comparing 2 different things. 'Renewables' are an energy generation method, but fossil fuels are stored energy.

Are fossil fuels a good idea? No.

Would more 'renewables' be a good thing? Yes.

But where we are today is that fossil fuels have many many advantages, and not enough disadvantages to stop using them.

It's obvious that my sarcasm was wasted. My point wasn't about climate change, or energy transition, it was about your rhetoric being unconvincing if you don't present the whole picture.

"not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies. "

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *rDiscretionXXXMan
over a year ago

Gilfach

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies. "

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ohnnyTwoNotesMan
over a year ago

golden fields

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars."

Not sure why you've gone off on one about electric cars.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"What point are you actually making other than to just argue with me because I posted something?

My point (which I was clearly too subtle about) is that your posts are so misleading that they actually make the opposite point of the one you intended.

The fact is that you are mentioning all the bad points of fossil fuels, and you are ignoring all the bad points of 'renewables', in an attempt to sway your audience.

The biggest flaw in your argument is that you are comparing 2 different things. 'Renewables' are an energy generation method, but fossil fuels are stored energy.

Are fossil fuels a good idea? No.

Would more 'renewables' be a good thing? Yes.

But where we are today is that fossil fuels have many many advantages, and not enough disadvantages to stop using them.

It's obvious that my sarcasm was wasted. My point wasn't about climate change, or energy transition, it was about your rhetoric being unconvincing if you don't present the whole picture."

So I was correct. You were just trying to score points against me because you just cannot help yourself

"Any sensible person"? You're sounding like Pat

Any sensible person knows that the move to electricals, delayed for decades by misinformation and lobbying, has only begun in earnest over the last 5-10 years, if even that long.

Any sensible person sees significantly more electric cars and vans and chargers.

Any sensible person sees more wind turbines and solar farms and discussions about small modular nuclear reactors.

The process has only just begun though. That is why there are still petrol stations and high fossil fuel share prices are due to a cartels and individual states limiting supplies.

Any sensible person sees the huge profits being made by fossil fuel companies and can link the spike in energy costs with a foreign power, Russia, withholding supplies.

Grid storage certainly is under developed, because, as I stated, the transition to renewables was deliberately delayed such that the scale or subsidies needed grow it was not there. You have demonstrated previously that you don't understand the various options available, but there are many. You also demonstrated that you do not believe that the fossil fuel industry has benefitted from years of subsidies compared to barely a decade for renewables which have now been withdrawn because they are so price competitive.

The point is that the transition started too late and is still happening too slowly if it is going to be able to significantly limit the effects of climate change.

Your sarcasm and the purpose of your comments were lost because they were more about using the topic to criticise me personally than the subject itself.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars."

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *rDiscretionXXXMan
over a year ago

Gilfach

Oh well. Some people just won't listen.

Good luck with your current viewpoint. I hope you manage to achieve your aims with it.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"Oh well. Some people just won't listen.

Good luck with your current viewpoint. I hope you manage to achieve your aims with it."

What a well considered answer

Do you have any aims?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits."

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

This is the most laughably naive comment on this thread (of which there are many)

Why would governments ban the sale of petrol and diesel cars

Why would they bring in windfall taxes on oil companies profits ? In addition to a 60% tax on any profits which is far higher than any other industry ?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

There are well over 8 billion people on the planet. Under 1 billion live in a country where the government gives a shit about climate change.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ustABaldBeardedVikingMan
over a year ago

Hinckley

All of these plus a system where the longer you've worked in public services then the more you qualify for income tax discount or rebate each year.

Let's get this country valuing public services and repay those that give so much.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"All of these plus a system where the longer you've worked in public services then the more you qualify for income tax discount or rebate each year.

Let's get this country valuing public services and repay those that give so much.

But that tax cut would apply to MP's as well good I hope they don't do it.

And how would this benefit some one working part time and not earning enough to pay TAX to begin with.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

An interesting point is the top 1% pay 28% of all income tax.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced."

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"An interesting point is the top 1% pay 28% of all income tax. "

How much do the top 1% earn compared to the other 99% and what proportion of their income do they pay in tax compared to the other 99%?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ob198XaMan
over a year ago

teleford

"Everybody pays 10% tax on anything and everything they earn over £12 k no matter where its from no loopholes no tax breaks no tax havens no exceptions you earn you pay ."

Only 10%?

. and where will the other 70% of government spending be raised?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"An interesting point is the top 1% pay 28% of all income tax.

How much do the top 1% earn compared to the other 99% and what proportion of their income do they pay in tax compared to the other 99%?"
13pc

And it's the top 1pc of people who pay tax. Guardian has 42pc of all adults not paying income tax.

I'm not sure what anyone is trying to prove here. I was just curious at the answer to what was a necessary question to get the context.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?"

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you."

It's possible. 2035 is the target. We could have made that decision 10 years ago. The same technology was available.

If we had started then it would have happened by now.

What has happened in Norway?

Why does a van have to travel 1000 miles?

Do you think Amazon and all of the other delivery companies are transitioning to electric vans for publicity or for sound business reasons?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *otMe66Man
over a year ago

Terra Firma

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you."

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting "

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

It's possible. 2035 is the target. We could have made that decision 10 years ago. The same technology was available.

If we had started then it would have happened by now.

What has happened in Norway?

Why does a van have to travel 1000 miles?

Do you think Amazon and all of the other delivery companies are transitioning to electric vans for publicity or for sound business reasons?"

No but I do some days hastings to Cornwall do a 20 minute Job and drive back.

Think they need to rebuild UKPN first when I first asked for 3phase I was told there is only 2 phase in my lane.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *otMe66Man
over a year ago

Terra Firma

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick "

If you are travelling long distances, could you charge on a lunch break? If you are not travelling long distances, can you adapt to charging overnight or in a way that actually works for you, so you can realise the gains?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

I have a 60amp supply so 14kw at night I'd need to charge at least my work van and the wife's car 7kw each charger then the hot tub has a 3kw Heater with out the pumps with its 8kw not got the house on it yet.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

It's possible. 2035 is the target. We could have made that decision 10 years ago. The same technology was available.

If we had started then it would have happened by now.

What has happened in Norway?

Why does a van have to travel 1000 miles?

Do you think Amazon and all of the other delivery companies are transitioning to electric vans for publicity or for sound business reasons?

No but I do some days hastings to Cornwall do a 20 minute Job and drive back.

Think they need to rebuild UKPN first when I first asked for 3phase I was told there is only 2 phase in my lane.

Again, 5-10 years into a transition, why would you expect a complete solution immediately?

Was the car better than the horse after 5-20 years?

What point are you mai? That it is impossible for electric vehicles to replace every fossil fuel niche or that it might take a little while?

You have a 20 minute job that requires a 1000 mile trip?

Again, are the big delivery companies switching to electric vans for publicity or out of a desire to earn more profits, do you think?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

Am looking at hence I no know one makes a small van EV or Hybrid

Land Rover now do an evoque 15kw Hybrid. And Toyota do a 18kW Rav 4

Pod point have said on the supply we have they can only install 1 charging point.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick "

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

Back to the point I keep making. Why do you expect a technology that has been growing at scale for only 5-10 years to be able to immediately replace one that has been in place for a century? Who is expecting that to happen?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

It's possible. 2035 is the target. We could have made that decision 10 years ago. The same technology was available.

If we had started then it would have happened by now.

What has happened in Norway?

Why does a van have to travel 1000 miles?

Do you think Amazon and all of the other delivery companies are transitioning to electric vans for publicity or for sound business reasons?

No but I do some days hastings to Cornwall do a 20 minute Job and drive back.

Think they need to rebuild UKPN first when I first asked for 3phase I was told there is only 2 phase in my lane.

Again, 5-10 years into a transition, why would you expect a complete solution immediately?

Was the car better than the horse after 5-20 years?

What point are you mai? That it is impossible for electric vehicles to replace every fossil fuel niche or that it might take a little while?

You have a 20 minute job that requires a 1000 mile trip?

Again, are the big delivery companies switching to electric vans for publicity or out of a desire to earn more profits, do you think?"

It will take so long I won't be alive.

Even the trin from hastings to Asford is diesel.

Can you imagine a house of 5 or 6 vehicles all needing charging.

Round hear we have parks each unit has a 16amp supply yes 3.8kw so some cars would take 40 hours to charge if nothing was on in the unit.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"Am looking at hence I no know one makes a small van EV or Hybrid

Land Rover now do an evoque 15kw Hybrid. And Toyota do a 18kW Rav 4

Pod point have said on the supply we have they can only install 1 charging point.

Not the highest volume sector yet, but regardless:

Citroen e-Berlingo/Peugeot e-Partner/Toyota Proace City Electric/Vauxhall Combo-e

LEVC VN5

Renault Kangoo E-Tech / Mercedes-Benz eCitan / Nissan Townstar Electric

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

It's possible. 2035 is the target. We could have made that decision 10 years ago. The same technology was available.

If we had started then it would have happened by now.

What has happened in Norway?

Why does a van have to travel 1000 miles?

Do you think Amazon and all of the other delivery companies are transitioning to electric vans for publicity or for sound business reasons?

No but I do some days hastings to Cornwall do a 20 minute Job and drive back.

Think they need to rebuild UKPN first when I first asked for 3phase I was told there is only 2 phase in my lane.

Again, 5-10 years into a transition, why would you expect a complete solution immediately?

Was the car better than the horse after 5-20 years?

What point are you mai? That it is impossible for electric vehicles to replace every fossil fuel niche or that it might take a little while?

You have a 20 minute job that requires a 1000 mile trip?

Again, are the big delivery companies switching to electric vans for publicity or out of a desire to earn more profits, do you think?

It will take so long I won't be alive.

Even the trin from hastings to Asford is diesel.

Can you imagine a house of 5 or 6 vehicles all needing charging.

Round hear we have parks each unit has a 16amp supply yes 3.8kw so some cars would take 40 hours to charge if nothing was on in the unit."

Again, are the big delivery companies switching to electric vans for publicity or out of a desire to earn more profits, do you think?

How long did it take to roll out the petrol station network?

Why would you expect the charger network to instantly come into existence today?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *otMe66Man
over a year ago

Terra Firma

"Am looking at hence I no know one makes a small van EV or Hybrid

Land Rover now do an evoque 15kw Hybrid. And Toyota do a 18kW Rav 4

Pod point have said on the supply we have they can only install 1 charging point.

The future of EV will be very different than today, which is EasyUK's point.

If and when a battery technology is accepted as the standard, the landscape will change completely.

Batteries having a standard fitting, drive in, battery is removed and replaced with a fully charged battery and fully automated to replace in less than 30 seconds.

How would that sound?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment."

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *otMe66Man
over a year ago

Terra Firma

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?"

The same place as 1000 miles

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"Am looking at hence I no know one makes a small van EV or Hybrid

Land Rover now do an evoque 15kw Hybrid. And Toyota do a 18kW Rav 4

Pod point have said on the supply we have they can only install 1 charging point.

Not the highest volume sector yet, but regardless:

Citroen e-Berlingo/Peugeot e-Partner/Toyota Proace City Electric/Vauxhall Combo-e

LEVC VN5

Renault Kangoo E-Tech / Mercedes-Benz eCitan / Nissan Townstar Electric"

Only googled the fist 1 New Citroën ë-Berlingo electric with 100 kW Rapid Charging and 174 Mile Range (WLTP) Go Electric With Space For Up To Seven And Over 1,000 litres of Boot Space.

So at 7 kW would take 14 hours to charge and do 174 un loaded add tools and parts 100mile not even get a guy to site with his tools and materials most of the guys work 12 to 16 hours with travelling.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

I guess you 2 know some properties don't have main surge or gas yet?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *otMe66Man
over a year ago

Terra Firma

"Am looking at hence I no know one makes a small van EV or Hybrid

Land Rover now do an evoque 15kw Hybrid. And Toyota do a 18kW Rav 4

Pod point have said on the supply we have they can only install 1 charging point.

Not the highest volume sector yet, but regardless:

Citroen e-Berlingo/Peugeot e-Partner/Toyota Proace City Electric/Vauxhall Combo-e

LEVC VN5

Renault Kangoo E-Tech / Mercedes-Benz eCitan / Nissan Townstar Electric

Only googled the fist 1 New Citroën ë-Berlingo electric with 100 kW Rapid Charging and 174 Mile Range (WLTP) Go Electric With Space For Up To Seven And Over 1,000 litres of Boot Space.

So at 7 kW would take 14 hours to charge and do 174 un loaded add tools and parts 100mile not even get a guy to site with his tools and materials most of the guys work 12 to 16 hours with travelling.

So it could be fully charged while they're working?

You are also citing domestic single phase charging, you can charge quicker at commercial charging points

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"Am looking at hence I no know one makes a small van EV or Hybrid

Land Rover now do an evoque 15kw Hybrid. And Toyota do a 18kW Rav 4

Pod point have said on the supply we have they can only install 1 charging point.

Not the highest volume sector yet, but regardless:

Citroen e-Berlingo/Peugeot e-Partner/Toyota Proace City Electric/Vauxhall Combo-e

LEVC VN5

Renault Kangoo E-Tech / Mercedes-Benz eCitan / Nissan Townstar Electric

Only googled the fist 1 New Citroën ë-Berlingo electric with 100 kW Rapid Charging and 174 Mile Range (WLTP) Go Electric With Space For Up To Seven And Over 1,000 litres of Boot Space.

So at 7 kW would take 14 hours to charge and do 174 un loaded add tools and parts 100mile not even get a guy to site with his tools and materials most of the guys work 12 to 16 hours with travelling.

I am not here to solve your personal problems immediately.

I have no clue what you need but you are demanding immediate perfect answers from a technology that has only just started to scale up.

You understand how unreasonable this is?

Again, how long did it take for the car to replace the horse and cart? EVs are replacing and outperforming the internal combustion engine in a fraction of the time but it's never going to work because it does not provide the exact solution that you need immediately.

That's not even vaguely a sensible position to take.

Vehicle producers will focus on the most profitable markets first and develop from there.

What you have today is not what will be available tomorrow.

Cars didn't have radios or seatbelts as standard 20 years ago.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *otMe66Man
over a year ago

Terra Firma

"I guess you 2 know some properties don't have main surge or gas yet?"

outliers are inevitable

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane."

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?"

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years "
I wonder what people were saying about technology ten years ago.

You're asking for twice the charge in half the time as you can get today. But from home.

I have no idea if that is doable. But ten years ago I would not have imagined I could have a car that I could "fill" from home. Or at work.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *quirtyndirty!Couple
over a year ago

Nottingham

The UK seatbelt law came in in 1983 , 40 years ago not 20. Virtually all cars had them fitted as standard way before then. I can't remember being in any car that didn't have a radio. Highlights how wrong you are about the little things also

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"The UK seatbelt law came in in 1983 , 40 years ago not 20. Virtually all cars had them fitted as standard way before then. I can't remember being in any car that didn't have a radio. Highlights how wrong you are about the little things also"

Yer my second car was my oldest one a MK1 Ford esc rt and that had both 40 years ago lol

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

Yer my second car was my oldest one a MK1 Ford esc rt and that had both 40 years ago lol "

Yes, it is a "little" thing and it doesn't "highlight" anything.

"lol"

It was merely demonstrating that at some point these things were not normal to have in cars and then they were.

How long did it take from the introduction of the motor car to these things being introduced?

How long before the steering wheel was introduced after the first car was sold?

They did not exist, then they were optional extras, then they were standard fit.

Technology develops quickly.

Again, are you able to acknowledge that a practically brand new industry that is only just starting to scale up and receive equivalent research funding to the existing technology will change very rapidly in predictable and unpredictable ways?

Alternatively, can you just not envision anything different to what exists today?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *otMe66Man
over a year ago

Terra Firma

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years "

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *penbicoupleCouple
over a year ago

Northampton

"Across society from poor to rich and the rest in-between.

Be as drastic as you like.

And can we all respect others points.

Thanks"

I would MASSIVELY increase proportional income tax.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

Yer my second car was my oldest one a MK1 Ford esc rt and that had both 40 years ago lol

Yes, it is a "little" thing and it doesn't "highlight" anything.

"lol"

It was merely demonstrating that at some point these things were not normal to have in cars and then they were.

How long did it take from the introduction of the motor car to these things being introduced?

How long before the steering wheel was introduced after the first car was sold?

They did not exist, then they were optional extras, then they were standard fit.

Technology develops quickly.

Alternatively, can you just not envision anything different to what exists today?"

No I can see it but it's chicken and egg. What happens when the only option is EV / Hybrid but you don't have the power supply in a family home to charge them.

Personly I have not seen any improvement in the electrical distribution to domestic properties most will need mush more then they did 20 years ago.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"Across society from poor to rich and the rest in-between.

Be as drastic as you like.

And can we all respect others points.

Thanks

I would MASSIVELY increase proportional income tax."

Funny how everyone seems to look at income tax not VAT

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *astandFeistyCouple
over a year ago

Bournemouth

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?"

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years "

Because the technology is so new there are not many vehicles models that have existed for ten years, but here is one comparison:

2010-2017:

UK domestic three-pin plug (3kW), Wallbox (7kW) Commercial charging point (50kW)

Nissan Leaf 24kWh 8-10 hours, 4 hours, 30 minutes (to 80% charge)

Nissan Leaf 30kWh 11-13 hours, 5 hours, 45 minutes (to 80% charge)

2018-:

UK domestic three-pin plug (3kW), Wallbox (7kW), Commercial charging point (50kW), Commercial charging point (100kW)

Nissan Leaf 40kWh 14-16 hours, 7.5 hours 60 minutes (20% to 80% charge) n/a

Nissan Leaf e+ 62kWh 21-23 hours, 11.5 hours, 90 minutes (20% to 80% charge), 35 minutes (10% to 80% charge)

Here's the Hyundai Ioniq 5 (72.6 kWh) using the latest technology:

UK domestic three-pin plug (3kW), Wallbox (7kW), Commercial charging point (50kW), Commercial charging point (100kW), (150kW), (350kW)

25 hours, 9 hours, 1 hour (10 to 80%), 20 minutes (20% to 80%),

18 minutes (10 to 80%)

Minimum charge times:

Nissan Leaf 2010-2017 for 30kWh battery: 45 minutes

2018 for 62kWh battery: 35 minutes

Hyundai Ioniq 5 2021 for 72.6kWh: 18 minutes

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

Yer my second car was my oldest one a MK1 Ford esc rt and that had both 40 years ago lol

Yes, it is a "little" thing and it doesn't "highlight" anything.

"lol"

It was merely demonstrating that at some point these things were not normal to have in cars and then they were.

How long did it take from the introduction of the motor car to these things being introduced?

How long before the steering wheel was introduced after the first car was sold?

They did not exist, then they were optional extras, then they were standard fit.

Technology develops quickly.

Alternatively, can you just not envision anything different to what exists today?

No I can see it but it's chicken and egg. What happens when the only option is EV / Hybrid but you don't have the power supply in a family home to charge them.

Personly I have not seen any improvement in the electrical distribution to domestic properties most will need mush more then they did 20 years ago."

You don't have a petrol pump in a family home.

Why do you feel that you need fast charging for a battery vehicle?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *otMe66Man
over a year ago

Terra Firma

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?"

It will happen, standardising the batteries will come first, then a proposed leasing type arrangement that allows you to drive in and the battery will be swapped.

JLR are already in the process of this, albeit on their own platform.

It is a model that also works well for electric mopeds today.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?"

Tell that to NIO who have already rolled it out.

Personally, I don't believe that it's a good idea as it requires complex swap stations and many more batteries and the charging technology has already made it practically obsolete.

However, it exists commercially and is in use.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"Across society from poor to rich and the rest in-between.

Be as drastic as you like.

And can we all respect others points.

Thanks

I would MASSIVELY increase proportional income tax.

Funny how everyone seems to look at income tax not VAT "

Because it drives the grey and black cash economy and consequently generating greater demand for large scale smuggling.

You were highlighting this as a problem now.

How long and how easy to transition from 47% national revenue (income tax and NIC) and 17% (VAT) to the opposite?

Especially when VAT is refunded to most companies for business costs.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *penbicoupleCouple
over a year ago

Northampton

"I would MASSIVELY increase proportional income tax.

Funny how everyone seems to look at income tax not VAT "

I'm not sure it's funny. It just seems easier.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Because the technology is so new there are not many vehicles models that have existed for ten years, but here is one comparison:

2010-2017:

UK domestic three-pin plug (3kW), Wallbox (7kW) Commercial charging point (50kW)

Nissan Leaf 24kWh 8-10 hours, 4 hours, 30 minutes (to 80% charge)

Nissan Leaf 30kWh 11-13 hours, 5 hours, 45 minutes (to 80% charge)

2018-:

UK domestic three-pin plug (3kW), Wallbox (7kW), Commercial charging point (50kW), Commercial charging point (100kW)

Nissan Leaf 40kWh 14-16 hours, 7.5 hours 60 minutes (20% to 80% charge) n/a

Nissan Leaf e+ 62kWh 21-23 hours, 11.5 hours, 90 minutes (20% to 80% charge), 35 minutes (10% to 80% charge)

Here's the Hyundai Ioniq 5 (72.6 kWh) using the latest technology:

UK domestic three-pin plug (3kW), Wallbox (7kW), Commercial charging point (50kW), Commercial charging point (100kW), (150kW), (350kW)

25 hours, 9 hours, 1 hour (10 to 80%), 20 minutes (20% to 80%),

18 minutes (10 to 80%)

Minimum charge times:

Nissan Leaf 2010-2017 for 30kWh battery: 45 minutes

2018 for 62kWh battery: 35 minutes

Hyundai Ioniq 5 2021 for 72.6kWh: 18 minutes"

Just looked at the Nissan Leef

LEAF e+ BATTERY FULL CHARGE – 31H (Up to 239 miles [1]) and that is up to 239 one person in the car.

No wonder they are not doing vans as yet. And 31 hours to charge 11 hours on a 7kw charger so almost half a day.

So let's say you you partner and 2 children all want to do a 10 hour charge you would need 28Kw to you house but of peek (economy 7) is just that 7 hours most old property have 14kw most new have 22kw but UKPN alow 7kw per property on new developments at the moment so every home would need more a bigger electric supply. The HV and transformer all will need to be up graded.

Or you would need to go much further on a battery half the size or smaller. So I love the idea but it is still in its infancy. There is a long way go.

As you seem nolagable on it what happens when it runs flat can the AA charge you or is it a tow to a charger.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"Across society from poor to rich and the rest in-between.

Be as drastic as you like.

And can we all respect others points.

Thanks

I would MASSIVELY increase proportional income tax.

Funny how everyone seems to look at income tax not VAT

Because it drives the grey and black cash economy and consequently generating greater demand for large scale smuggling.

You were highlighting this as a problem now.

How long and how easy to transition from 47% national revenue (income tax and NIC) and 17% (VAT) to the opposite?

Especially when VAT is refunded to most companies for business costs."

It would need to be stepped.

Start by rasing the lower rate threshold to £19k and add 5% above that then add 5% to VAT to make up the difference. 5% on the vat is a guess it might need to be more.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"I would MASSIVELY increase proportional income tax.

Funny how everyone seems to look at income tax not VAT

I'm not sure it's funny. It just seems easier. "

But lots like me don't even pay income tax That's the point.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

Yer my second car was my oldest one a MK1 Ford esc rt and that had both 40 years ago lol

Yes, it is a "little" thing and it doesn't "highlight" anything.

"lol"

It was merely demonstrating that at some point these things were not normal to have in cars and then they were.

How long did it take from the introduction of the motor car to these things being introduced?

How long before the steering wheel was introduced after the first car was sold?

They did not exist, then they were optional extras, then they were standard fit.

Technology develops quickly.

Alternatively, can you just not envision anything different to what exists today?

No I can see it but it's chicken and egg. What happens when the only option is EV / Hybrid but you don't have the power supply in a family home to charge them.

Personly I have not seen any improvement in the electrical distribution to domestic properties most will need mush more then they did 20 years ago.

You don't have a petrol pump in a family home.

Why do you feel that you need fast charging for a battery vehicle?"

Will need fast as it will get a max 10 hours down time to charge and then need at least 60 mile radius so 120 mile round trip loaded I check the van on Saturday morning as I do once a fortnight and it has 450kg of stock and tools in it.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Maybe make multinationals & the rich actually pay taxes? Crazy thought, I know.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *astandFeistyCouple
over a year ago

Bournemouth

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?

Tell that to NIO who have already rolled it out.

Personally, I don't believe that it's a good idea as it requires complex swap stations and many more batteries and the charging technology has already made it practically obsolete.

However, it exists commercially and is in use."

I wasn't aware of Nio's automation tbh. Just had a look at it and it looks good.

I see they plan to launch in the UK this year and open 20 stations in Europe too. Nowhere near enough to make it viable I wouldn't think. Even the 1000 in China doesn't sound like enough.

Great innovation though, I have to give them that.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *penbicoupleCouple
over a year ago

Northampton

"I would MASSIVELY increase proportional income tax.

Funny how everyone seems to look at income tax not VAT

I'm not sure it's funny. It just seems easier.

But lots like me don't even pay income tax That's the point. "

Then you wouldn't pay increased income tax. What's the problem?

I don't think those who are not earning should be paying extra tax than they currently are. I think the super-rich should be paying FAR more.

Used to make me laugh when May complained that there was no magic money tree. There are loads of them!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

"I would MASSIVELY increase proportional income tax.

Funny how everyone seems to look at income tax not VAT

I'm not sure it's funny. It just seems easier.

But lots like me don't even pay income tax That's the point.

Then you wouldn't pay increased income tax. What's the problem?

I don't think those who are not earning should be paying extra tax than they currently are. I think the super-rich should be paying FAR more.

Used to make me laugh when May complained that there was no magic money tree. There are loads of them! "

No I pay 20% on profit of the company then 7.5% dividend tax.

So I am with in the law but reduce my tax like so meny in the UK

But VAT is hard to avoid for all so would be more balanced. Small business directors like me do what they can to avoid tax.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"I would MASSIVELY increase proportional income tax.

Funny how everyone seems to look at income tax not VAT

I'm not sure it's funny. It just seems easier.

But lots like me don't even pay income tax That's the point.

Then you wouldn't pay increased income tax. What's the problem?

I don't think those who are not earning should be paying extra tax than they currently are. I think the super-rich should be paying FAR more.

Used to make me laugh when May complained that there was no magic money tree. There are loads of them!

No I pay 20% on profit of the company then 7.5% dividend tax.

So I am with in the law but reduce my tax like so meny in the UK

But VAT is hard to avoid for all so would be more balanced. Small business directors like me do what they can to avoid tax.

You shouldn't be able to pay 20% as dividend tax.

It should be charged as income tax with employee NIC.

Why should dividends be charged at a lower rate?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?

Tell that to NIO who have already rolled it out.

Personally, I don't believe that it's a good idea as it requires complex swap stations and many more batteries and the charging technology has already made it practically obsolete.

However, it exists commercially and is in use.

I wasn't aware of Nio's automation tbh. Just had a look at it and it looks good.

I see they plan to launch in the UK this year and open 20 stations in Europe too. Nowhere near enough to make it viable I wouldn't think. Even the 1000 in China doesn't sound like enough.

Great innovation though, I have to give them that."

It has to start from zero, in exactly the same way that the petrol station network did.

How long and how much did that cost to develop?

Also, more sensible for battery swapping, there is the Gogoro system for scooters and potentially for microcars.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

Yer my second car was my oldest one a MK1 Ford esc rt and that had both 40 years ago lol

Yes, it is a "little" thing and it doesn't "highlight" anything.

"lol"

It was merely demonstrating that at some point these things were not normal to have in cars and then they were.

How long did it take from the introduction of the motor car to these things being introduced?

How long before the steering wheel was introduced after the first car was sold?

They did not exist, then they were optional extras, then they were standard fit.

Technology develops quickly.

Alternatively, can you just not envision anything different to what exists today?

No I can see it but it's chicken and egg. What happens when the only option is EV / Hybrid but you don't have the power supply in a family home to charge them.

Personly I have not seen any improvement in the electrical distribution to domestic properties most will need mush more then they did 20 years ago.

You don't have a petrol pump in a family home.

Why do you feel that you need fast charging for a battery vehicle?

Why do you believe that you must have fast charging at home when you cannot fill your tank up with petrol or diesel at home?

I already gave you the figures for the battery size and charge time improvement over a decade.

You can look up the rate of fast charging rollout and the money being spent on it.

Why can't you go to a charge station to charge up as you have to go to a petrol station now?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Because the technology is so new there are not many vehicles models that have existed for ten years, but here is one comparison:

2010-2017:

UK domestic three-pin plug (3kW), Wallbox (7kW) Commercial charging point (50kW)

Nissan Leaf 24kWh 8-10 hours, 4 hours, 30 minutes (to 80% charge)

Nissan Leaf 30kWh 11-13 hours, 5 hours, 45 minutes (to 80% charge)

2018-:

UK domestic three-pin plug (3kW), Wallbox (7kW), Commercial charging point (50kW), Commercial charging point (100kW)

Nissan Leaf 40kWh 14-16 hours, 7.5 hours 60 minutes (20% to 80% charge) n/a

Nissan Leaf e+ 62kWh 21-23 hours, 11.5 hours, 90 minutes (20% to 80% charge), 35 minutes (10% to 80% charge)

Here's the Hyundai Ioniq 5 (72.6 kWh) using the latest technology:

UK domestic three-pin plug (3kW), Wallbox (7kW), Commercial charging point (50kW), Commercial charging point (100kW), (150kW), (350kW)

25 hours, 9 hours, 1 hour (10 to 80%), 20 minutes (20% to 80%),

18 minutes (10 to 80%)

Minimum charge times:

Nissan Leaf 2010-2017 for 30kWh battery: 45 minutes

2018 for 62kWh battery: 35 minutes

Hyundai Ioniq 5 2021 for 72.6kWh: 18 minutes

Just looked at the Nissan Leef

LEAF e+ BATTERY FULL CHARGE – 31H (Up to 239 miles [1]) and that is up to 239 one person in the car.

No wonder they are not doing vans as yet. And 31 hours to charge 11 hours on a 7kw charger so almost half a day.

Or you would need to go much further on a battery half the size or smaller. So I love the idea but it is still in its infancy. There is a long way go.

As you seem nolagable on it what happens when it runs flat can the AA charge you or is it a tow to a charger.

Just look at the older technology but ignore the newest one?

That's very selective. What point does that prove? Why not "just look at" the Ioniq 5?

Why is it not acceptable to charge at a station in the same way that you fill your vehicle now? You are demanding something far superior to what you have available to you today, not equivalent to. Charging at home if you have that option is a low cost top-up opportunity that covers most people's daily driving needs that does not even exist for petrol or diesel.

The entire point that I am making is that electric vehicle technology is in its infancy but within a decade it is better than internal combustion engines in many respects and the rate of improvement is dizzying.

Recovery services currently tend to tow to a charger.

If you want to know more there are endless resources or start another thread. However, a more specific site will probably be more useful.

All I am trying to do is refute disinformation from the climate change deniers or incorrect information being left uncorrected.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *penbicoupleCouple
over a year ago

Northampton

"But VAT is hard to avoid for all so would be more balanced. Small business directors like me do what they can to avoid tax.

1. Yes, VAT is hard to avoid, but hits all the same. In answer to the original question, I would opt for tax that progressively increases.

2. Not all small business directors do that.

3. If someone has the sort of character where they are inclined to avoid paying taxes, they will always do that.

4. Again, in answer to the initial question, people should pay their damn taxes!

I actually know a self-employed person who complains about more money not going to the NHS. And they intentionally don't pay all of the tax they should.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *astandFeistyCouple
over a year ago

Bournemouth

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?

Tell that to NIO who have already rolled it out.

Personally, I don't believe that it's a good idea as it requires complex swap stations and many more batteries and the charging technology has already made it practically obsolete.

However, it exists commercially and is in use.

I wasn't aware of Nio's automation tbh. Just had a look at it and it looks good.

I see they plan to launch in the UK this year and open 20 stations in Europe too. Nowhere near enough to make it viable I wouldn't think. Even the 1000 in China doesn't sound like enough.

Great innovation though, I have to give them that.

It has to start from zero, in exactly the same way that the petrol station network did.

How long and how much did that cost to develop?

Also, more sensible for battery swapping, there is the Gogoro system for scooters and potentially for microcars."

Of course is has to start from zero, however, it makes no difference how long or how much it cost to develop the petrol station network. If we're trying to offer batteries as a replacement to that, it needs to be an accessible and convenient alternative.

Gogoro? It's not anywhere close to comparable, a scooter battery weighs less than 10kg.

I'm sure sometimes you just wanna argue for the sake of arguing.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *rDiscretionXXXMan
over a year ago

Gilfach

Sorry for mentioning electric cars, I seem to have triggered some people and accidentally derailed the thread.

Now that we're back to tax, I can chip in again.

"Why should dividends be charged at a lower rate?"

For those that aren't aware, the government takes the view that investment is a good thing, and should be rewarded.

Small companies often need money to grow, but are too risky for bank loans. They seek investors, who give them money in return for a share of the company. Those investors then get paid a share of the yearly profits (a dividend) as a reward for their investment. If the company does well, the dividends are high and the investor makes a lot of money. If the company does badly, it folds and the investor gets nothing and loses all his money.

Obviously, the risk of losing all your money discourages people from investing. There needs to be an incentive to make people take that risk. The government has decided that setting dividend tax lower than income tax is a good balance between gathering taxes, and not discouraging investors.

Yes, the rules mean that some people take advantage by setting up small companies and paying themselves through dividends. The government have decided that this avoidance is worth the benefits that encouraging investment brings.

Of course, the next government might take a different view on things, and it could change overnight. It would be interesting to see what effect charging dividends at income tax levels would have on the amount of investment in UK companies.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?

Tell that to NIO who have already rolled it out.

Personally, I don't believe that it's a good idea as it requires complex swap stations and many more batteries and the charging technology has already made it practically obsolete.

However, it exists commercially and is in use.

I wasn't aware of Nio's automation tbh. Just had a look at it and it looks good.

I see they plan to launch in the UK this year and open 20 stations in Europe too. Nowhere near enough to make it viable I wouldn't think. Even the 1000 in China doesn't sound like enough.

Great innovation though, I have to give them that.

It has to start from zero, in exactly the same way that the petrol station network did.

How long and how much did that cost to develop?

Also, more sensible for battery swapping, there is the Gogoro system for scooters and potentially for microcars.

Gogoro? It's not anywhere close to comparable, a scooter battery weighs less than 10kg.

I'm sure sometimes you just wanna argue for the sake of arguing. "

I think you missed the point.

Again, an unrealistic expectation that a new technology that's been around ten years or so should be able to immediately replace one that's been around for over a century.

How do you expect that to happen?

The Gogoro battery is perfectly suited to scooters, which is exactly what I said it should be used for. Perhaps have a look at how big a micro car like a Microlino or Silence S04 are before getting personal.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

"Sorry for mentioning electric cars, I seem to have triggered some people and accidentally derailed the thread.

Now that we're back to tax, I can chip in again.

Why should dividends be charged at a lower rate?

For those that aren't aware, the government takes the view that investment is a good thing, and should be rewarded.

"Investment" in shares?

Speculation for the benefit of the temporary shareholder. Very minimal benefit to the company itself.

Do explain how the share price benefits the company's activities.

It's purely to encourage share trading to drive profits for the city which is the epicenter of tax avoidance and money laundering.

Again, look at the proportion of how much Government revenue is made from what taxation. I posted the link.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *astandFeistyCouple
over a year ago

Bournemouth

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?

Tell that to NIO who have already rolled it out.

Personally, I don't believe that it's a good idea as it requires complex swap stations and many more batteries and the charging technology has already made it practically obsolete.

However, it exists commercially and is in use.

I wasn't aware of Nio's automation tbh. Just had a look at it and it looks good.

I see they plan to launch in the UK this year and open 20 stations in Europe too. Nowhere near enough to make it viable I wouldn't think. Even the 1000 in China doesn't sound like enough.

Great innovation though, I have to give them that.

It has to start from zero, in exactly the same way that the petrol station network did.

How long and how much did that cost to develop?

Also, more sensible for battery swapping, there is the Gogoro system for scooters and potentially for microcars.

Gogoro? It's not anywhere close to comparable, a scooter battery weighs less than 10kg.

I'm sure sometimes you just wanna argue for the sake of arguing.

I think you missed the point.

Again, an unrealistic expectation that a new technology that's been around ten years or so should be able to immediately replace one that's been around for over a century.

How do you expect that to happen?

Its not an unrealistic expectation at all, if you want us to change, there needs to be a viable alternative. It's really simple, myself and most others will not change until the alternative is viable.

I said Gogoro wasn't comparable because we were talking about cars. Furthermore, those cars you've mentioned are not family cars. Let's stop trying to divert.

Personal? I made an observation. Maybe quit with the gaslighting tactics.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?

Tell that to NIO who have already rolled it out.

Personally, I don't believe that it's a good idea as it requires complex swap stations and many more batteries and the charging technology has already made it practically obsolete.

However, it exists commercially and is in use.

I wasn't aware of Nio's automation tbh. Just had a look at it and it looks good.

I see they plan to launch in the UK this year and open 20 stations in Europe too. Nowhere near enough to make it viable I wouldn't think. Even the 1000 in China doesn't sound like enough.

Great innovation though, I have to give them that.

It has to start from zero, in exactly the same way that the petrol station network did.

How long and how much did that cost to develop?

Also, more sensible for battery swapping, there is the Gogoro system for scooters and potentially for microcars.

Gogoro? It's not anywhere close to comparable, a scooter battery weighs less than 10kg.

I'm sure sometimes you just wanna argue for the sake of arguing.

I think you missed the point.

Again, an unrealistic expectation that a new technology that's been around ten years or so should be able to immediately replace one that's been around for over a century.

How do you expect that to happen?

I said Gogoro wasn't comparable because we were talking about cars. Furthermore, those cars you've mentioned are not family cars. Let's stop trying to divert.

Personal? I made an observation. Maybe quit with the gaslighting tactics."

Except millions of people have changed and are changing. The technology is also developing rapidly. I did not say that it was perfect for every case right now.

I did not say that Gogoro batteries were appropriate for family cars. I wrote what I meant.

You might want to look up gaslighting as you are the one telling me what I am doing.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?

Tell that to NIO who have already rolled it out.

Personally, I don't believe that it's a good idea as it requires complex swap stations and many more batteries and the charging technology has already made it practically obsolete.

However, it exists commercially and is in use.

I wasn't aware of Nio's automation tbh. Just had a look at it and it looks good.

I see they plan to launch in the UK this year and open 20 stations in Europe too. Nowhere near enough to make it viable I wouldn't think. Even the 1000 in China doesn't sound like enough.

Great innovation though, I have to give them that.

It has to start from zero, in exactly the same way that the petrol station network did.

How long and how much did that cost to develop?

Also, more sensible for battery swapping, there is the Gogoro system for scooters and potentially for microcars.

Gogoro? It's not anywhere close to comparable, a scooter battery weighs less than 10kg.

I'm sure sometimes you just wanna argue for the sake of arguing.

I think you missed the point.

Again, an unrealistic expectation that a new technology that's been around ten years or so should be able to immediately replace one that's been around for over a century.

How do you expect that to happen?

I said Gogoro wasn't comparable because we were talking about cars. Furthermore, those cars you've mentioned are not family cars. Let's stop trying to divert.

Personal? I made an observation. Maybe quit with the gaslighting tactics.

Except millions of people have changed and are changing. The technology is also developing rapidly. I did not say that it was perfect for every case right now.

I did not say that Gogoro batteries were appropriate for family cars. I wrote what I meant.

You might want to look up gaslighting as you are the one telling me what I am doing."

So do you realy think people in general will wate 20 minutes to charge a vehicle so thay can go to work. N is my opinion.

I not telling you anything I'm trying to explain my problems and concerns. You the one almost preaching I am looking in to it that's why I'm interested am in discussion with my fleet provider but even thay say not yet.

But I guess you all ready there. And good on you if it works for you and your company.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *astandFeistyCouple
over a year ago

Bournemouth

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?

Tell that to NIO who have already rolled it out.

Personally, I don't believe that it's a good idea as it requires complex swap stations and many more batteries and the charging technology has already made it practically obsolete.

However, it exists commercially and is in use.

I wasn't aware of Nio's automation tbh. Just had a look at it and it looks good.

I see they plan to launch in the UK this year and open 20 stations in Europe too. Nowhere near enough to make it viable I wouldn't think. Even the 1000 in China doesn't sound like enough.

Great innovation though, I have to give them that.

It has to start from zero, in exactly the same way that the petrol station network did.

How long and how much did that cost to develop?

Also, more sensible for battery swapping, there is the Gogoro system for scooters and potentially for microcars.

Gogoro? It's not anywhere close to comparable, a scooter battery weighs less than 10kg.

I'm sure sometimes you just wanna argue for the sake of arguing.

I think you missed the point.

Again, an unrealistic expectation that a new technology that's been around ten years or so should be able to immediately replace one that's been around for over a century.

How do you expect that to happen?

I said Gogoro wasn't comparable because we were talking about cars. Furthermore, those cars you've mentioned are not family cars. Let's stop trying to divert.

Personal? I made an observation. Maybe quit with the gaslighting tactics.

Except millions of people have changed and are changing. The technology is also developing rapidly. I did not say that it was perfect for every case right now.

I did not say that Gogoro batteries were appropriate for family cars. I wrote what I meant.

You might want to look up gaslighting as you are the one telling me what I am doing."

There are just over 1m EV or hybrid vehicles in use in the UK. Not millions, nice exaggeration though.

We were speaking about cars/vans, were we not? As I said, maybe stop trying to divert to prove your point when it's not pertinent to the point being discussed.

Speaking of exaggeration, you exaggerated me getting personal = gaslighting. I'm aware of what it means.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *asyukMan
over a year ago

West London

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?

Tell that to NIO who have already rolled it out.

Personally, I don't believe that it's a good idea as it requires complex swap stations and many more batteries and the charging technology has already made it practically obsolete.

However, it exists commercially and is in use.

I wasn't aware of Nio's automation tbh. Just had a look at it and it looks good.

I see they plan to launch in the UK this year and open 20 stations in Europe too. Nowhere near enough to make it viable I wouldn't think. Even the 1000 in China doesn't sound like enough.

Great innovation though, I have to give them that.

It has to start from zero, in exactly the same way that the petrol station network did.

How long and how much did that cost to develop?

Also, more sensible for battery swapping, there is the Gogoro system for scooters and potentially for microcars.

Gogoro? It's not anywhere close to comparable, a scooter battery weighs less than 10kg.

I'm sure sometimes you just wanna argue for the sake of arguing.

I think you missed the point.

Again, an unrealistic expectation that a new technology that's been around ten years or so should be able to immediately replace one that's been around for over a century.

How do you expect that to happen?

I said Gogoro wasn't comparable because we were talking about cars. Furthermore, those cars you've mentioned are not family cars. Let's stop trying to divert.

Personal? I made an observation. Maybe quit with the gaslighting tactics.

Except millions of people have changed and are changing. The technology is also developing rapidly. I did not say that it was perfect for every case right now.

I did not say that Gogoro batteries were appropriate for family cars. I wrote what I meant.

You might want to look up gaslighting as you are the one telling me what I am doing.

So do you realy think people in general will wate 20 minutes to charge a vehicle so thay can go to work. N is my opinion.

But I guess you all ready there. And good on you if it works for you and your company."

Why would you be waiting 20 minutes if you charged it overnight and why is 20 minutes charging a problem if you're having lunch?

Is 8 minutes charging too long during the day?

What if it's 5 minutes in a year or two?

How is Amazon managing?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ove2pleaseseuk OP Man
over a year ago

Hastings

""not enough disadvantages to stop using them."

This isn't true climate change is a big enough disadvantage of using fossil fuels.

The problem is entirely lack of political will, probably largely due to world governments being in the pockets of the oil companies.

Well I encourage you to go outside to a road, and count the number of vehicles that pass making a growly internal combustion engine noise. It'll be comfortably over 90%.

Why is this? It's because, despite the availability of electrically driven cars, people still choose to drive fossil fuel powered versions, because they are cheaper, and easier to run.

So climate change may be a big enough disadvantage in your eyes, but at least 90% of the population disagree with you.

I'd be interested to hear how you think that a lack of political will is preventing people from buying electric cars.

You had best do some reading then.

See what the relative sales are between electric vehicles and internal combustion engine cars have been, especially since the announcement of IC sales ending in 2035.

The SMMT is a good source.

You can then have a look to see what has happened in Norway with political will and consumers and, ironically, the investment of fossil fuel profits.

Electric cars are OK if you live in a city with a drive.

But living in the countryside I need a 4x4 to get out the lane.

Also have i limited power for charging have requested a quote from UKPN for an up grade.

S it could be £20k out lay before I start.

And for work drive a VW caddy there is not a hybrid of that size on the market as yet.

And lorrys and busses in s

City's are still all on fossil fule.

Fossil fuel is a long way off being completely replaced.

How long has the transition to electric vehicles been happening?

5-10 years in earnest. You expect complete replacement for an industry that has been in place for years to happen overnight?

No I'm just pointing out it's not possible any time soon for lots of reasons supply of vehicles for one let alone there not being the infrastructure to charge them.

I don't see an EV small ish van doing 1000 miles on one charge full loaded in my life time. Do you.

Do you know of a small van that can travel 1000 miles without refuelling?

Range anxiety is really interesting

No but refueling takes five minutes can I charge a van that quick

Why do you need to charge in 5 minutes if you have put 300 miles into your battery overnight?

Will a 5 minute change be impossible at the current rate of progress?

I'm not but UKPN have to agree to each charger installed and they do so NO.

It will take 50 years as said we will be dead by then I want to change over but the outlay out ways the benifit at the moment.

Where do you get you "50 years" from?

The same place as 1000 miles

I bace the time frame on changing ever cable transformer and service head in every home with a drive way and adding on street chargers for people how gont have drives.

We only got Broad band 12 years ago down the lane.

Do we have petrol stations in every home and on every street?

Er no so your saying you think I could charge a vehicle in 10 minutes and get 400 miles out of it.

In the next 10 years

Probably quicker, you are thinking charging times, what if the battery was simply replaced with a full one in an automated process that meant you didn't need to get out the car?

No chance. Have you seen the size and weight of an EV battery?

Tell that to NIO who have already rolled it out.

Personally, I don't believe that it's a good idea as it requires complex swap stations and many more batteries and the charging technology has already made it practically obsolete.

However, it exists commercially and is in use.

I wasn't aware of Nio's automation tbh. Just had a look at it and it looks good.

I see they plan to launch in the UK this year and open 20 stations in Europe too. Nowhere near enough to make it viable I wouldn't think. Even the 1000 in China doesn't sound like enough.

Great innovation though, I have to give them that.

It has to start from zero, in exactly the same way that the petrol station network did.

How long and how much did that cost to develop?

Also, more sensible for battery swapping, there is the Gogoro system for scooters and potentially for microcars.

Gogoro? It's not anywhere close to comparable, a scooter battery weighs less than 10kg.

I'm sure sometimes you just wanna argue for the sake of arguing.

I think you missed the point.

Again, an unrealistic expectation that a new technology that's been around ten years or so should be able to immediately replace one that's been around for over a century.

How do you expect that to happen?

Yes agree with the fact it's just not ready for me as yet I have order a Toyota Rav 4 Hybrid so will see how that goes. It will manly used as a spare or shorter trips.