The "death" of the car, (as we know it)

[flecc]

Just need to add in the HS2 journey

I'm all for HS2 and wish it was more ambitious, rather than the limited extent planned. I've previously posted in here that we should have long ago had HS2, HS3, HS4 and HS5 aded to the existing HS1 to cover this country in the way most mainland European railways have advanced their systems to meet most needs.

But HS2 has been endlessly delayed by huge and continuing opposition. Many members in here vehemently oppose it being built and it's sadly still a long way off.
,

 

[PeterL]

Given TfL's determination and the problems involved, theres a fair chance the appeal will be lost. However there are all sorts of possibilities, including the fact that when the USA wants its way in this country, it gets it.
.

Surely, given your previous stance on transport you can accept that Uber offer a big reduction in miles travelled by vehicles. They certainly need to clean up their act and the signs are that they will.

 

[PeterL]

I'm all for HS2 and wish it was more ambitious, rather than the limited extent planned. I've previously posted in here that we should have long ago had HS2, HS3, HS4 and HS5 aded to the existing HS1 to cover this country in the way most mainland European railways have advanced their systems to meet most needs.

But HS2 has been endlessly delayed by huge and continuing opposition. Many members in here vehemently oppose it being built and it's sadly still a long way off.
,

Agreed and the earlier reference I gave to the issues surrounding the population exodus from Liverpool and reference to the 'Northern Powerhouse' serve to amplify the problem. There are some things in life that do need a Top Down approach, this is one of them.

 

[flecc]

Surely, given your previous stance on transport you can accept that Uber offer a big reduction in miles travelled by vehicles. They certainly need to clean up their act and the signs are that they will.

That may be true elsewhere but in London UBER has accidentally done the opposite. They've hugely increased London's vehicle mileages and added considerably more congestion to our already overstressed infrastructure. Although UBER is cheaper than the alternatives, no-one could claim they are necessary when the coverage of taxis, minicabs and TfL's transport options are so so comprehensive.
.

 

[PeterL]

Autonomous motorbike takes on Valentino Rossi at California’s Thunderhill raceway

 

[PeterL]

That may be true elsewhere but in London UBER has accidentally done the opposite. They've hugely increased London's vehicle mileages and added considerably more congestion to our already overstressed infrastructure. Although UBER is cheaper than the alternatives, no-one could claim they are necessary when the coverage of taxis, minicabs and TfL's transport options are so so comprehensive.
.

On that basis there is no room for new technology - protectionism even?

 

[Ruadh495]

I think the argument has already been made for the success of the Uber business model? It reduces the number of journeys and the need for as many cars significantly.

Reduced number of cars certainly. But number/duration of car journeys? The Uber must have run empty to reach the pick up point, unless it dropped one fare and picked up another at the same point which is likely to be unusual. Anyone know what percentage of an Uber car's mileage is done empty?

This is a problem with all taxis. They are very useful, but can't be considered a more environmentally friendly alternative to the private car.

I have the same reservation about the hire-as-required autonomous car model. Parked cars will be replaced by cars running empty, a considerably greater environmental burden.

The hire-as-require / Uber system also imposes a one size fits all model on car ownership (as do car clubs), while real people have very different requirements from their cars. Rental helps here (hire a bigger car when you need it), but you have to travel to the rental site (or the car has to come to you), another inefficiency.

 

[flecc]

On that basis there is no room for new technology - protectionism even?

I don't think so, the problems are very real and our past record shows us to be very receptive of the new. A short while ago there was a post about the existence of the Docklands Light Railway, it might have been your post, and that shows our receptivity.

In another example, in the early 1970s the Victoria Line of the underground system started operation. Few nationally realise that it's always been an entirely remote system, driven by controllers from the St James HQ in SW1. However at that time there were many who were frightened at having no driver, so drivers were installed as well and have been there ever since, doing very little other than occupying a seat. Londoners would no doubt have accepted their removal long ago but since they are established in place there's a potential union problem, their union being very powerful and willing to bring the system to a standstill at any time.
.

 

[flecc]

Reduced number of cars certainly. But number/duration of car journeys? The Uber must have run empty to reach the pick up point, unless it dropped one fare and picked up another at the same point which is likely to be unusual. Anyone know what percentage of an Uber car's mileage is done empty?

I don't know but it is immense in London where it is a particular problem Most of the work relates to Central London, but UBER drivers don't live in Mayfair or Chelsea of course, they mostly live quite far out.

I commuted by car into central London for the last 26 years of my employments since I had to have the car available during the day. My 14 mile trip (despite living in London) in the rush hours would routinely take up to one and half hours and my record time for that 14 miles was just over two and a half hours. Clearly UBER drivers can't operate from where most of them live, so they drive into the central area in anticipation of bookings. That creates two problems. First the prohibitive cost of parking in the central area means they cruise most of the time like the London taxis, making the congestion very much worse and vehicle miles much greater. Secondly they are liable to the £11.50 congestion charge on each occasion of entry to the zone if they haven't got a booking, but they don't pay that by dishonestly using the fact that it's not payable by registered UBER drivers if they have a booking.
.

 

[anotherkiwi]

If you look at what is happening in the UK without looking at the overall picture in the EU you could possibly think the guy is nuts. From where I am sitting there are thousands of square meters of PV panels being installed each year within my pedelec riding range! There is even a factory making panels not too far away.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy_in_the_European_Union

If you study this page carefully there are a number of strange things going on. The most notable is Spain which receives the most sun and should be a world leader in PV energy. It isn't because the PP (governing party) has put a tax on the sun! Yes that is right, there is a tax on domestic installed PV panels. I consider that to be a crime against humanity but I do have a tendency to exaggerate from time to time as you have remarked flecc...

The numbers on this page confirme the gentlemans thesis in the video linked above. We are at the beginning of the curve which can only accelerate sharply upwards over the next two years.

The disruption is individuals installing PV capacity and the key is the home lithium ion battery storage which you can buy for less than 5000€ now in 8-10 kWh capacity. How much will that be in 12 years when the cells need swapping out? Over its life span (12 or so years) it would already divide my own electricity bill by 2...

 

[PeterL]

Reduced number of cars certainly. But number/duration of car journeys? The Uber must have run empty to reach the pick up point, unless it dropped one fare and picked up another at the same point which is likely to be unusual. Anyone know what percentage of an Uber car's mileage is done empty?

This is a problem with all taxis. They are very useful, but can't be considered a more environmentally friendly alternative to the private car.

I have the same reservation about the hire-as-required autonomous car model. Parked cars will be replaced by cars running empty, a considerably greater environmental burden.

The hire-as-require / Uber system also imposes a one size fits all model on car ownership (as do car clubs), while real people have very different requirements from their cars. Rental helps here (hire a bigger car when you need it), but you have to travel to the rental site (or the car has to come to you), another inefficiency.

This is seriously flawed logic. The whole point about the Uber App is that they have ten's of thousands of potential customers directly linked to thousands of drivers, all done totally automatically, no human telephone controllers. That is why it is so much cheaper and more efficient.

This might help albeit not London but still, very big cities

The next step will be driverless EV's, but we have done that one to death, at the moment.

 

[PeterL]

[QUOTE="flecc, post: 406477, member: 3"Thank goodness for that remote control, a short while ago the remote controllers were skilfully able to prevent an otherwise inevitable terrible accident involving a poorly parked empty runaway train. Had the line been a normal driver operated system that accident would have happened with appalling consequences
.[/QUOTE]

Surely, much the same argument for autonomous cars? They will be much safer than your average driver.

 

[flecc]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy_in_the_European_Union
The numbers on this page confirme the gentlemans thesis in the video linked above. We are at the beginning of the curve which can only accelerate sharply upwards over the next two years.

That's a web page, the facts say otherwise if examined. Remember he claimed 100% of the world's energy from solar in 12 years time.

If there was very good chance of that, or anything like it happening, why would so many countries be building and planning power stations with at least 60 years lifespan. That includes the UK, the huge 3200 mW Hinckley Point starting construction for commissioning sometime in the 2020s, and a number of Chinese nuclear stations planned to follow.

And why would the world scrap all their hydro power stations, many new built, in favour of spending a fortune on solar, merely to achieve his silly prediction of 100% solar. Or scrap all the wind power fields just commissioned and still being erected, for the same reason.

With the greatest respect AK, I believe you should allow more time for your critical faculties to make deductions from the facts.
.

 

[flecc]

Surely, much the same argument for autonomous cars? They will be much safer than your average driver.

Definitely, once they've been achieved and more importantly permitted. It will be a very time time before that happens in cities like London.
.

 

[PeterL]

That's a web page, the facts say otherwise if examined. Remember he claimed 100% of the world's energy from solar in 12 years time.

If there was very good chance of that, or anything like it happening, why would so many countries be building and planning power stations with at least 60 years lifespan. That includes the UK, the huge 3200 mW Hinckley Point starting construction for commissioning sometime in the 2020s, and a number of Chinese nuclear stations planned to follow.

And why would the world scrap all their hydro power stations, many new built, in favour of spending a fortune on solar, merely to achieve his silly prediction of 100% solar. Or scrap all the wind power fields just commissioned and still being erected, for the same reason.
.

Hurts somewhat but, I have to agree those figures don't inspire much confidence in Europe becoming self sufficient in solar energy anytime soon. Germany is way ahead and has more or less flat-lined from what I can see.

To go back to that presentation the Tucson AZ Utility Company example of a mixed basket was interesting and that did feature heavily on solar.

 

[anotherkiwi]

Driver-less cars make sense as taxis. Car ownership in a large city didn't make sense for me in 2007, rental was much more logical. I lived within walking distance of the rental company and they had a frequent user program. Also when you are a frequent user you get better service and are often upgraded for no extra cost as a commercial gesture.

That's a web page, the facts say otherwise if examined. Remember he claimed 100% of the world's energy from solar in 12 years time.

If there was very good chance of that, or anything like it happening, why would so many countries be building and planning power stations with at least 60 years lifespan. That includes the UK, the huge 3200 mW Hinckley Point starting construction for commissioning sometime in the 2020s, and a number of Chinese nuclear stations planned to follow.

And why would the world scrap all their hydro power stations, many new built, in favour of spending a fortune on solar, merely to achieve his silly prediction of 100% solar. Or scrap all the wind power fields just commissioned and still being erected, for the same reason.

With the greatest respect AK, I believe you should allow more time for your critical faculties to make deductions from the facts.
.

We know that the earth receives enough energy from the sun to go 100% solar, the math has been done countless times. I am reasonably sure he was talking about domestic and office electricity usage (and with a US bias), there was a reference to industrial use and other forms of power generation in his talk.

The UK is investing in nuclear because someone is making money from that option, the French and the Chinese IIRC. Countries are investing in old energy because they have no imagination, some politicians still deny climate change... They are also subject to corruption from existing energy companies, why does Spain have a tax on PV panels do you think? Even Madame Merckel has a very complicated relationship with coal! How much money is spent on lobbying and lies about the costs of alternative energy generation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_Portugal

NZ won't scrap hydroelectric, Iceland won't scrap hydrothermal. I don't think wind will resist everywhere because of cost. Yes it is cheaper than coal right now but with solar plummeting it won't hold out in Spain for example, it probably will in Scotland though.

My critical faculties tell me we as a species have a lot of problems to fix right now if we want to continue living on a planet with limited resources. I like thinking outside the box (proof - no car, electric bicycle) and this talk raises some very interesting points. The man is throwing a rock in the pond and hoping that a few ripples reach the banks. He got me thinking and even if he is only 50% correct then that 50% is a step in the right direction.

 

[PeterL]

NZ won't scrap hydroelectric, Iceland won't scrap hydrothermal. I don't think wind will resist everywhere because of cost. Yes it is cheaper than coal right now but with solar plummeting it won't hold out in Spain for example, it probably will in Scotland though.

Scotland has done away with coal and rejected fracking. Gone big and getting even bigger on wind turbines, lots of research into tethered wave power and there's always oil... No matter how much it costs! That's the political element and tool needed to bash UK Government whoever IndiRef2 comes along.

 

[flecc]

I am reasonably sure he was talking about domestic and office electricity usage (and with a US bias), there was a reference to industrial use and other forms of power generation in his talk.

No, that isn't remotely what he said. That was clearly that 100% of the World's energy generation will be solar in 12 years time.

The UK is investing in nuclear because someone is making money from that option, the French and the Chinese IIRC. Countries are investing in old energy because they have no imagination, some politicians still deny climate change... They are also subject to corruption from existing energy companies, why does Spain have a tax on PV panels do you think? Even Madame Merckel has a very complicated relationship with coal! How much money is spent on lobbying and lies about the costs of alternative energy generation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_Portugal

NZ won't scrap hydroelectric, Iceland won't scrap hydrothermal. I don't think wind will resist everywhere because of cost. Yes it is cheaper than coal right now but with solar plummeting it won't hold out in Spain for example, it probably will in Scotland though.

All confirming what I said, solar won't get remotely near what he said in 12 years time

He got me thinking and even if he is only 50% correct then that 50% is a step in the right direction.

I don't and haven't disagreed with that. It just illustrates that I was right in what I posted, which was:

if he believes what he says he is an idiot.

and confirms that those trying to prove I was wrong, in truth are merely acting as apologists for him and are the ones who are and will be proved wrong.
.

 

[flecc]

lots of research into tethered wave power

Which is silly since wave power is merely wind power with much of it's energy removed.
.

 

[PeterL]

Which is silly since wave power is merely wind power with much of it's energy removed.
.

Not sure that the people doing the research would see it that way but, no doubt they're wasting their time and getting paid for it.