phasing out of fossil fuels - programme

[IanD]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

I would suggest that the majority of 'lumpy water' (coastal) boats will be moored at night in a marina, (marina hopping) this marina already has electricity supplied to every mooring, if there is 'enough' is another question but the infrastructure is there to support electric boat charging.

 

I would further postulate that on the canals, the vast majority of boats do not 'marina hop' and moor up 'alongside' the towpath in the 'wilds' where there is absolutely no infrastructure for charging.

 

Coastal boats simply need a thicker bit of wire, Canal boats need a completely new bit of string laying out and all the bollards, transformers etc etc.

I'd love to see data for where boats are moored on the canals, there are an awful lot in marinas and long-term/short-term moorings from what I've seen. Do you have numbers?

 

Where do boats on canals who moor "in the wilds" with no infrastructure get their water from?

 

If they can cruise to a water point to fill up, they can do the same to recharge.

 

As I said, points will have to be installed but the number isn't huge and the means to pay for them is there. If all boats move to electric power then a marina -- coastal or on the canals -- with a lot of boats moored is also going to need more than "a thicker bit of wire", unless you think a megawatt or so is easily come by -- of course this is no different to supplying an estate of houses, but it needs doing.

 

In my view all these objections are making mountains out of molehills; compared to the installation and grid costs of house heating and BEV going electric, boats in general and canals in particular are a minute problem, maybe 1000x smaller or more.

[peterboat]

23 minutes ago, IanD said:

I guess we'll just have to agree to differ then ?

 

Just bear in mind that if the government bans diesel on the canals and doesn't provide an alternative, they're likely to face a class action suit for damages from all the people whose boats / residences are now not only unable to be used but have no viable replacement and are potentially made homeless. This shouldn't cost them much more than 10x the cost of installing charging points, so since it's all about the money the obvious conclusion is... ?

How can they when their are people like me still cruising, the class action would fail at the first hurdle, I am not the only person doing the solar charging thing

[IanD]

Just now, peterboat said:

How can they when their are people like me still cruising, the class action would fail at the first hurdle, I am not the only person doing the solar charging thing

Because people like you are a tiny minority, I'd guess that at least 99% of the >30000 canal boats still rely on diesel -- are there even 300 hybrids? Even for new build boats today the vast majority (95%?) are still diesel, hybrids are still a tiny fraction of the market.

 

So at the point where diesel would be banned, at least 90% of the boats on canals would still rely on it and be screwed. There's your class action...

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

I'd love to see data for where boats are moored on the canals, there are an awful lot in marinas and long-term/short-term moorings from what I've seen. Do you have numbers?

C'mon, think about it.

 

Canal boats will not require charging when they are in the marina / home mooring - if not moving then they are not discharging their batteries.

On our NB we would travel 5-8 hours per day (pretty much every day) and be 'out' for weeks, we would not go into a marina every night, we would moor up in the wilds.

Our 1000 litre water tank would last ~10 days.

What size of battery bank would we need to be able to cruise for 80 hours (10 days at 8hrs per day) so we could recharge when we fill up the water tank.

 

It is (in the majority) the norm for coastal boats to 'coastal hop' and use a marina every night so they do not need anything 'new' in the term of electricity supply, simply plug in overnight as normal.

 

18 minutes ago, IanD said:

Where do boats on canals who moor "in the wilds" with no infrastructure get their water from?

 

If they can cruise to a water point to fill up, they can do the same to recharge.

Are you simply thinking of permanent moorers rather than people who cruise and pass a water-point every couple of days (or so)

[IanD]

Just now, Alan de Enfield said:

C'mon, think about it.

 

Canal boats will not require charging when they are in the marina / home mooring - if not moving then they are not discharging their batteries.

On our NB we would travel 5-8 hours per day (pretty much every day) and be 'out' for weeks, we would not go into a marina every night, we would moor up in the wilds.

Our 1000 litre water tank would last ~10 days.

What size of battery bank would we need to be able to cruise for 80 hours (10 days at 8hrs per day) so we could recharge when we fill up the water tank.

 

It is (in the majority) the norm for coastal boats to 'coastal hop' and use a marina every night so they do not need anything 'new' in the term of electricity supply, simply plug in overnight as normal.

 

Are you simply thinking of permanent moorers rather than people who cruise and pass a water-point every couple of days (or so)

I'm not thinking of anyone in particular, I'm trying to think about all the use cases.

 

If you pick your case (huge water tank, low water usage, small battery bank) then charging points are difficult for you. A hybrid is likely to need something like a 30kWh battery bank to sustain propulsion, that with solar can keep people going for quite a few days. But as I keep saying, you can't cruise on electric power for 10 days at 8 hours per day, you'd need to recharge at least every other day. If you want to go 10 days without recharging you need an onboard diesel generator, which is a problem if diesels have been banned.

 

Electric coastal boats do need something new -- when they plug in they not only have to recharge the domestic battery bank like today, but also a propulsion bank which is maybe 5x the size, which means the coastal marina needs a much beefier incoming supply.

 

None of this can't be solved (but not a zero cost) -- however what's the alternative if diesel engines (and generators) are banned? Not just for canals but also coastal boats...

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

If you want to go 10 days without recharging you need an onboard diesel generator, which is a problem if diesels have been banned.

There is no mention of diesel being banned, or generators being banned in the '2050 marine Plan'

 

What is said is that propulsion should be "zero emission"

 

Now, define how far backwards is propulsion 'zero emission' ?

Electricity generator company using gas power stations ?

Wind farms using zero emission steel and concrete to build the wind turbines?

The diesel generators currently used on each wind turbine ?

The material used in the extraction of Lithium etc etc.

 

Is zero emission from well / mine to propellor, or, can we swap some emissions if we plant some trees ?

[IanD]

4 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

There is no mention of diesel being banned, or generators being banned in the '2050 marine Plan'

 

What is said is that propulsion should be "zero emission"

 

Now, define how far backwards is propulsion 'zero emission' ?

Electricity generator company using gas power stations ?

Wind farms using zero emission steel and concrete to build the wind turbines?

The diesel generators currently used on each wind turbine ?

The material used in the extraction of Lithium etc etc.

 

Is zero emission from well / mine to propellor, or, can we swap some emissions if we plant some trees ?

Stop dancing on the head of a pin. "Zero emission" means "no diesel engines or generators". Mains power by then will be mainly from renewables, probably with some nuclear for baseload, maybe still some gas for peak loads and renewable gap filling. Lithium powered BEV have far lower emissions over lifetime than any ICE, including mining/extraction/manufacture/recycling/disposal.

 

I'm sure you know all this ?

Edited December 15, 2020 by IanD

[Momac]

10 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

There is no mention of diesel being banned, or generators being banned in the '2050 marine Plan'

 

What is said is that propulsion should be "zero emission"

 

Now, define how far backwards is propulsion 'zero emission' ?

Electricity generator company using gas power stations ?

Wind farms using zero emission steel and concrete to build the wind turbines?

The diesel generators currently used on each wind turbine ?

The material used in the extraction of Lithium etc etc.

 

Is zero emission from well / mine to propellor, or, can we swap some emissions if we plant some trees ?

There is  no such thing as a zero emission boat , ship, car , bicycle, pedestrian, horse  or anything else.

This where the EV promoters have made a mistake. If they claimed low emission then people might believe them. 

 

 

 

 

 

[IanD]

3 hours ago, MartynG said:

There is  no such thing as a zero emission boat , ship, car , bicycle, pedestrian, horse  or anything else.

This where the EV promoters have made a mistake. If they claimed low emission then people might believe them. 

 

You know precisely what they mean, which is zero CO2 emission at the point of use. If in addition all the energy comes from renewable sources then they're zero emission overall as far as fuel is concerned.

 

With the current power generation mix in the UK, the total CO2 burden of BEV over lifetime is about a third of ICE. This includes all the costs of manufacturing and disposing of or recycling the batteries. If the energy is 100% from renewables the difference increases to around 5x. Facts, not conjecture.

 

Before you bring it up, yes there are environmental costs with mining lithium as was blazoned in the press recently -- but the environmental costs of extracting and refining oil are higher.

 

It doesn't matter how you try and twist things, lithium BEV are far better for the planet than ICE, and also than other proposals like hydrogen/fuel-cell or aluminium-air batteries which have 2x to 3x the CO2 burden. They're not perfect because nothing is, but they're the best option we have today.

 

Waiting until something better/perfect comes along is just kicking the can down the road and playing into the hands of the fossil fuel lobby.

Edited December 15, 2020 by IanD

[magpie patrick]

12 hours ago, MartynG said:

There is  no such thing as a zero emission boat , ship, car , bicycle, pedestrian, horse  or anything else.

This where the EV promoters have made a mistake. If they claimed low emission then people might believe them. 

The term used in most of the documentation I read is Ultra Low Emission - ULE for short

[Mike Todd]

14 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

There is no mention of diesel being banned, or generators being banned in the '2050 marine Plan'

 

What is said is that propulsion should be "zero emission"

 

Now, define how far backwards is propulsion 'zero emission' ?

Electricity generator company using gas power stations ?

Wind farms using zero emission steel and concrete to build the wind turbines?

The diesel generators currently used on each wind turbine ?

The material used in the extraction of Lithium etc etc.

 

Is zero emission from well / mine to propellor, or, can we swap some emissions if we plant some trees ?

That is why many organisations commit only to net zero carbon (ie neither actually zero not emissions)

14 hours ago, IanD said:

Stop dancing on the head of a pin. "Zero emission" means "no diesel engines or generators". Mains power by then will be mainly from renewables, probably with some nuclear for baseload, maybe still some gas for peak loads and renewable gap filling. Lithium powered BEV have far lower emissions over lifetime than any ICE, including mining/extraction/manufacture/recycling/disposal.

 

I'm sure you know all this ?

You conflate zero emissions and zero carbon. With sufficient filtering, diesel could be zero emissions whilst still being non zero carbon.

1 hour ago, magpie patrick said:

The term used in most of the documentation I read is Ultra Low Emission - ULE for short

And another aim is zero particulates. As I understand it, a large part of current particulate generation by petrol/diesel vehicles is from tyre wear, something which as it stands is not addressed by EVs.

[peterboat]

14 hours ago, IanD said:

Because people like you are a tiny minority, I'd guess that at least 99% of the >30000 canal boats still rely on diesel -- are there even 300 hybrids? Even for new build boats today the vast majority (95%?) are still diesel, hybrids are still a tiny fraction of the market.

 

So at the point where diesel would be banned, at least 90% of the boats on canals would still rely on it and be screwed. There's your class action...

Wouldnt happen, CRT would point to the electric boats and say everybody had choice, plus anybody that ordered a diesel boat now would be discounted as they have had fair warning and boat makers are making electric boats. A class action would require their to be no alternatives and their is, and diesel boats can be converted to electric at a cost but it can be done, Finally BW/CRT in my boating time have never supplied the fuel to move a boat.

 

On a different point altogether I have just purchased a diesel genny to replace the Whispergen, it a 6 kw Vetus unit out of a dutch barge,

I have had the pump and injectors overhauled to make it suitable for full biodiesel, its 20 years old and has done 3 hours!! thats if the hours meter is to be believed, this will still heat water but will provide 240V and charge both banks when the sun doesnt shine, constant cruising here I come

The whispergen is going on the bathtub so it can be sold as I wont need the garage /shed anymore

[Mike Todd]

2 hours ago, peterboat said:

Wouldnt happen, CRT would point to the electric boats and say everybody had choice, plus anybody that ordered a diesel boat now would be discounted as they have had fair warning and boat makers are making electric boats. A class action would require their to be no alternatives and their is, and diesel boats can be converted to electric at a cost but it can be done, Finally BW/CRT in my boating time have never supplied the fuel to move a boat.

 

On a different point altogether I have just purchased a diesel genny to replace the Whispergen, it a 6 kw Vetus unit out of a dutch barge,

I have had the pump and injectors overhauled to make it suitable for full biodiesel, its 20 years old and has done 3 hours!! thats if the hours meter is to be believed, this will still heat water but will provide 240V and charge both banks when the sun doesnt shine, constant cruising here I come

The whispergen is going on the bathtub so it can be sold as I wont need the garage /shed anymore

CaRT do have an interest though as their licence income (still non-trivial) would be decimated if the number of boats were reduced to the level of electric boats. Of course, the conspiracy theorists may possible argue that CaRT wants to get rid of boats/boaters anyway!

[Alan de Enfield]

44 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

CaRT do have an interest though as their licence income (still non-trivial) would be decimated if the number of boats were reduced to the level of electric boats. Of course, the conspiracy theorists may possible argue that CaRT wants to get rid of boats/boaters anyway!

Presumably by that time the new proposed car-tax will have been implemented (allegedly being set between 75p and 150p per mile) to replace the £40 billion being lost by VED and fuel duty due to electric vehicles) will have become 'the new norm' and the system will transfer over to the waterways quite easily and with no argument.

[peterboat]

57 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

CaRT do have an interest though as their licence income (still non-trivial) would be decimated if the number of boats were reduced to the level of electric boats. Of course, the conspiracy theorists may possible argue that CaRT wants to get rid of boats/boaters anyway!

 

9 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Presumably by that time the new proposed car-tax will have been implemented (allegedly being set between 75p and 150p per mile) to replace the £40 billion being lost by VED and fuel duty due to electric vehicles) will have become 'the new norm' and the system will transfer over to the waterways quite easily and with no argument.

Better by water and we all know that doesnt mean by boat! They would be very happy for the boats to leave their lives, nasty, noisy, smelly, polluting and belching out horrible fumes along will leaving oil stains and chopping up the fishes

I think it will be less than the figures quoted by car companies! They are intent on scaring us off EVs and will do anything to achieve that

Edited December 16, 2020 by peterboat

[phantom_iv]

23 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Presumably by that time the new proposed car-tax will have been implemented (allegedly being set between 75p and 150p per mile)

 

Surely there's a decimal point missing there? 7.5 p per mile would be in line with current fuel tax receipts I'd have thought? I reckoned on my old diesel car doing about 10 miles / litre of fuel, so 75p/mile is equivalent to diesel at £7.50 per litre in tax alone

[IanD]

4 hours ago, peterboat said:

Wouldnt happen, CRT would point to the electric boats and say everybody had choice, plus anybody that ordered a diesel boat now would be discounted as they have had fair warning and boat makers are making electric boats. A class action would require their to be no alternatives and their is, and diesel boats can be converted to electric at a cost but it can be done, Finally BW/CRT in my boating time have never supplied the fuel to move a boat.

Let's be realistic for once -- for the government (whose policy this is, not CARTs) to get agreement to doing something drastic like banning diesel and forcing people to use electric there has to be a usable alternative, it doesn't matter this comes from the government or CART or private companies or aliens from Alpha Centauri. This applies equally to cars, trucks, and boats, otherwise peoples lives and businesses are destroyed, and the government sees a fall in revenue and increase in unemployment which they have to pay for.

 

So realistically their options are either to ignore boats on the principle that the total emissions are tiny compared to cars (difficult politically), allow long-term legacy exceptions which means most boats will stay diesel (makes the rule essentially pointless), allow onboard diesel generators (also makes the rules pointless), or find a way to make electric boats work for boats (including the canals) -- which means installing charging points, replaceable batteries are a non-starter for all the obvious reasons.

 

I think that by far the most likely outcome is installation of charging points for electric boats, as is already being done in France. Others may disagree, though I'd love to hear their explanation as to why the French seem capable of doing today what they claim is impossible here even given more than five years to do it in... ?

Edited December 16, 2020 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

13 minutes ago, phantom_iv said:

 

Surely there's a decimal point missing there? 7.5 p per mile would be in line with current fuel tax receipts I'd have thought? I reckoned on my old diesel car doing about 10 miles / litre of fuel, so 75p/mile is equivalent to diesel at £7.50 per litre in tax alone

Those were the figures being discussed in the press reports yesterday.

There are various proposals to support rural areas where no (or minimal) public transport is available and travel is a necessity, compared to cities where cars are not really needed.

One suggestion was to allow the 1st 3000 miles to be free of charging'.

One big obstacle is the 'human rights' brigade refusing to accept that they will be monitored and it can be seen where they have been etc etc.

 

My car does 25mpg and at 5000 miles per annum I am paying around £700 per annum in fuel duty (200 gallons at 70p per litre), in addition I pay £400 in VED so my 'donation' to the tax man is £1100 per annum

My 5000 miles is costing me  22p per mile.

 

 

Edit to add one of yesterday news reports :

 

 

Experts have predicted recently that the cost of the new system could be as much as £1.50 per mile, although a figure of around 75p may be more likely.

Now Mr Reid is proposing that the Government introduce measures to limit the impact the changes would have on groups that could be most badly hit by the new system.

The presenter has called for a national mileage allowance to be introduced to ensure drivers are not charged straight away.

He believes there should be a number of free miles on offer to ensure those who travel regularly do not face severe charges.

 

In addition, he thinks a blanket scheme for all drivers to pay the same amount would be a mistake.

Mr Reid said: “I think if you live in a city where public transport is a good option for you, there is a likelihood you can end up paying less.

“And also if you end up living in a rural area where you have to drive because there’s no choice, then suddenly owning a car might start to get quite expensive if we go down the route of having this pay per mile system.

“The smartest thing we should probably do is to have some sort of allowance for most people and also bear in mind the usage scenarios that different people in different parts of the country might follow.

“Maybe you're not paying for every single mile you do. Maybe the first 3,000 miles or so are free but then after that you have to pay.”

 

The Department for Transport (DfT) says it will need to make sure revenue from car taxes are maintained as more drivers switch to electric models.

Yet officials stress that any changes to the tax system will be considered by the Chancellor before announcements are made

 

Edited December 16, 2020 by Alan de Enfield

[IanD]

21 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Those were the figures being discussed in the press reports yesterday.

There are various proposals to support rural areas where no (or minimal) public transport is available and travel is a necessity, compared to cities where cars are not really needed.

One proposal was to allow the 1st 3000 miles to be free of charging'.

One big obstacle is the 'human rights' brigade refusing to accept that they will be monitored and it can be seen where they have been etc etc.

 

My car does 25mpg and at 5000 miles per annum I am paying around £700 per annum in fuel duty (200 gallons at 70p per litre), in addition I pay £400 in VED so my 'donation' to the tax man is £1100 per annum

My 5000 miles is costing me  22p per mile.

 

 

Lumping in your VED (which is way above the average) with cost per mile isn't relevant for the "tax per mile" argument unless the government is also going to get rid of VED and rely entirely on the tax per mile for revenue, which makes no sense -- why wouldn't they keep VED for BEV?

 

Also your mpg (and annual mileage) is way below average for cars out on the road (not even new ones), in the UK this is currently 36mpg for petrol and 43mpg for diesel.

 

https://www.nimblefins.co.uk/average-mpg

 

Fuel duty is currently 58p per litre or 263p per gallon, which is 7p per mile for petrol cars and 6p per mile for diesel. Any reports in the press (or elsewhere) giving projected future figures much higher than this are scaremongering bullsh*t. VED brings about 20% of fuel duty, so the average tax per mile for all cars including VED is currently about 8p.

 

So your 22p per mile (including VED, for a thirsty expensive-to-tax low-mileage car) is almost 3x the average tax per mile (including VED) for all UK cars.

Edited December 16, 2020 by IanD

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

Lumping in your VED with cost per mile isn't relevant for the "tax per mile" argument unless the government is also going to get rid of VED and rely entirely on the tax per mile for revenue, which makes no sense -- why wouldn't they keep VED for BEV?

 

Also your mpg is way below average, in the UK this is currently 37mpg for petrol and 43mpg for diesel. Tax is currently 58p per litre or 263p per gallon, which is 7p per mile for petrol cars and 6p per mile for diesel. Any reports in the press (or elsewhere) giving figures much higher than this are scaremongering bullsh*t.

 

Your 22p per mile is more than 3x the average tax per mile for UK cars.

The proposal is to drop VED because VED is based on emissions, BEV have no emissions and pay no VED.

 

My 25mpg may be below the UK average but it is my choice to have a big Mercedes 4WD that can tow a 3 tonne horse box, it is a 'dirty diesel' and the VED is £330pa.

 

As an aside, SWMBO's Renault Scenic (petrol) also has a VED of £330

Edited December 16, 2020 by Alan de Enfield

[phantom_iv]

5 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The proposal is to drop VED because VED is based on emissions, BEV have no emissions and pay no VED.

75p/mile is still a massive increase - back of the envelope calculations suggest that the government would break even on current annual VED by the end of January at that rate.

 

On my old diesel car VED was about £180 / year, plus ~10p/mile fuel tax (assuming £1/litre of diesel cost is tax), so the government would break even on annual tax take once you'd driven 280 miles.

 

So assuming average annual milage of 8000/year, at an extra 65p/mile, that's equivalent to VED being £5200 a year at current fuel tax rates.

[IanD]

14 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The proposal is to drop VED because VED is based on emissions, BEV have no emissions and pay no VED.

 

My 25mpg may be below the UK average but it is my choice to have a big Mercedes 4WD that can tow a 3 tonne horse box, it is a 'dirty diesel' and the VED is £330pa.

 

As an aside, SWMBO's Renault Scenic (petrol) also has a VED of £330

So as I said, your 22p per mile is in no way typical, it's high because of choices you've made ?

 

Typical fuel tax + VED in the UK is 8p per mile. The government might choose to push this up even for BEV in future but there'd be a massive backlash, especially for "zero-emissions" (see what I did there?) BEV ?

1 minute ago, phantom_iv said:

75p/mile is still a massive increase - back of the envelope calculations suggest that the government would break even on current annual VED by the end of January at that rate.

 

On my old diesel car VED was about £180 / year, plus ~10p/mile fuel tax (assuming £1/litre of diesel cost is tax), so the government would break even on annual tax take once you'd driven 280 miles.

 

So assuming average annual milage of 8000/year, at an extra 65p/mile, that's equivalent to VED being £5200 a year at current fuel tax rates.

Which is why the numbers quoted bear no relation to reality -- if quoted correctly, I wonder where they came from?

Edited December 16, 2020 by IanD

[phantom_iv]

3 minutes ago, IanD said:

Which is why the numbers quoted bear no relation to reality -- if quoted correctly, I wonder where they came from?

Probably some "independent think tank" staffed by people who have never left London.

[IanD]

3 minutes ago, phantom_iv said:

Probably some "independent think tank" staffed by people who have never left London.

...and who just happen to be funded by car companies heavily invested in ICE, like the recent reports in the press (well, Daily Mail and Express...) about ICE vs. BEV?

[TheBiscuits]

Just now, IanD said:

...and who just happen to be funded by car companies heavily invested in ICE, like the recent reports in the press (well, Daily Mail and Express...) about ICE vs. BEV?

 

Funny you should say that - it's an article in the Express, citing a Top Gear presenter ...

 

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1372709/car-tax-changes-pay-per-mile-rural-top-gear-rory-reid

 

Although it's been reused in a lot of "local" publications:

 

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/top-gear-car-tax-changes-19467858