heating systems

[David Mack]

If there are fewer LPG filling facilities, then there will be more customers for the remaining suppliers, so to some extent the situation will balance itself out. And with online resources listing where facilities are located, most users will not be inconvenienced that much, providing they plan ahead and top up when they can.  Which of course won't help those who find themselves in a facility-free area, or indeed boaters who want something close to the canal.

[IanD]

5 minutes ago, David Mack said:

If there are fewer LPG filling facilities, then there will be more customers for the remaining suppliers, so to some extent the situation will balance itself out. And with online resources listing where facilities are located, most users will not be inconvenienced that much, providing they plan ahead and top up when they can.  Which of course won't help those who find themselves in a facility-free area, or indeed boaters who want something close to the canal.

The problem is that I believe the supplier who is removing them provides most of the LPG refilling points in the UK, so there could be very few left -- and then suppliers will be even more reluctant to deliver LPG to the remaining ones... 😞

[MtB]

17 hours ago, magnetman said:

I didn't read it. 

 

The clairvoyance obviously works. 

 

Plus it is pretty obvious !

 

The article also says it is due to continuing falling demand for LPG means the fixed costs of maintaining and periodic testing of the plant for selling the stuff at all are now uneconomic. Hence the decision to stop selling it. 

 

The falling demand is, I'd imagine, due to the impracticality of persuading modern electronically controlled petrol engines to run on LPG., and the higher proportion of diesels sold in the last decade or two which cannot ever be converted. But that's just a guess. 

 

 

[David Mack]

1 hour ago, MtB said:

The falling demand is, I'd imagine, due to the impracticality of persuading modern electronically controlled petrol engines to run on LPG., and the higher proportion of diesels sold in the last decade or two which cannot ever be converted. But that's just a guess. 

To that I would suggest that finding space at petrol stations to locate EV chargers is also an issue.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, David Mack said:

To that I would suggest that finding space at petrol stations to locate EV chargers is also an issue.

 

They can't be a straight swap for sure. Leaving a car blocking the lane while it charges just ain't ever going to be workable.

[IanD]

2 minutes ago, David Mack said:

To that I would suggest that finding space at petrol stations to locate EV chargers is also an issue.

Some of them will use the space freed up by removing LPG pumps. Some will use the space freed up by reducing the number of petrol/diesel pumps s the percentage of EVs on the road increases, but this will take some time. Some will be in spaces freed up by petrol stations which closed because they were uneconomic. Some will be in entirely new locations.

 

The problem is not really the space for chargers, it's the cost of installing them (several hundred thousand for an ultrafast charger IIRC) and the cost/logistics of getting a megawatt-level connection to the grid -- especially given the limited resources of the grid companies to install this... 😞

 

Most chargers are unlikely to be ultrafast ones anyway, they'll be lower-power ones at homes or in streets or car-parks or shopping centres or supermarkets -- for most people most of the time the charging model for EVs is smaller slower top-ups more often, not the ICE model of a major tank fillup once a week or so.

 

But there also aren't enough of these public charging points, and IIRC the number is growing more slowly than the number of EVs in the UK so the situation isn't getting any better... 😞

 

What's really needed is a properly-funded scheme to put the infrastructure needed for EVs in place as part of the UK CO2 reduction strategy, but no sign of that from the current government who as usual seem to think that the private sector will solve the UKs infrastructure problems at no cost to the public purse -- see also railways, canals, water and sewage... 😞

[Guest]

 

Interesting that the new Dacia Duster is still going to be offered in a dual fuel option. Seems a bit of a waste given the increasing difficulty in getting the stuff.

2 minutes ago, IanD said:

Some of them will use the space freed up by removing LPG pumps... 

😞

 

😞

 

😞

 

Nonsense. LPG pumps are located in the exact same position as petrol/diesel pumps in most installations. A straight swap when an EV takes way longer to top up is simply not feasible.

 

The EV charge points at forecourts near to us are completely separate and away from the pumps, and only because they have the space to do so. There must be safety implications also.

[David Mack]

48 minutes ago, M_JG said:

 

They can't be a straight swap for sure. Leaving a car blocking the lane while it charges just ain't ever going to be workable.

Agreed in those cases where the LPG pump is located with the petrol and diesel pumps. But when sites are remodelled (and the site layout changes) the space currently dedicated to LPG is going to get reallocated to EV charging, whereas in the short term at least, space used for petrol and diesel pumps is going to be retained.

The increasing demand for EV charging is just another factor that will discourage the retention of LPG pumps.

Edited December 4, 2023 by David Mack

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, David Mack said:

Agreed in those cases where the LPG pump is located with the petrol and diesel pumps. But when sites are remodelled (and the site layout changes) the space currently dedicated to LPG is going to get reallocated to EV charging, whereas in the short term at least, space used for petrol and diesel pumps is going to be retained.

The increasing demand for EV charging is just another factor that will discourage the retention of LPG pumps.

 

It will indeed. 

 

We very nearly swapped to Safefil for our LPG for the caravan but around the time we were considering it a couple of very local retailers dropped selling LPG from their forecourts so we dropped the idea.

[Peanut]

You won't make much money from a few EV charging points, due to the time it takes to charge a car and the space used. A small top up maybe, but not for the time taken for a full charge.

A solution might be to use a multi-story car park, which could be fitted out for this, but you are going to have to charge a proper rate for the service, to make a return and recoup your setup costs. Charge while you shop, or go to work.

No, don't tell me, the rest of us will be forced to pay to subsidise the wealthy EV owners. Inevitable.

[ditchcrawler]

5 hours ago, Peanut said:

You won't make much money from a few EV charging points, due to the time it takes to charge a car and the space used. A small top up maybe, but not for the time taken for a full charge.

A solution might be to use a multi-story car park, which could be fitted out for this, but you are going to have to charge a proper rate for the service, to make a return and recoup your setup costs. Charge while you shop, or go to work.

No, don't tell me, the rest of us will be forced to pay to subsidise the wealthy EV owners. Inevitable.

Our local Shell station has just had a full revamp with charging points 

[Peanut]

So, the car driver pays for the electricity usage, how much does Shell receive from the driver after all costs are paid. With fuel, the car turns up, and in four or five minutes is on its way. Another customer can then be served, Shell makes some money. With the EV charging, the car hangs arround for maybe twenty or thirty minutes, for a quick charge.  Fewer customers can be serviced, how much would Shell need to charge for the electricity, to make the same return?

This only works if they receive a subsidy, for the setup, and the supply. That is from you and me.

There might be a break point, where the scale of the instalation is large enough to make a decent return, but I think most station forecourt seem a

little on the small side for that.

It could be self service, with no staff cost, only the ongoing maintenance, cleaning and repair. It still has to make a profit, and that should be paid by the user, polluter pays.

I know, the government will subsidise the set up, thats you and me. The electricity is subsidised for being green, again, from you and me.

Then the government says how good they are at meeting net zero.

And no, I am not a climate change denyer, Individual transport, should pay for itself.

[manxmike]

Sadly the power for EV cars comes from horrible dirty gas or diesel or atomic powered generating stations. So how green are EV cars?

Then we have the knotty problem of cyclists, they're green all right, but the sight of grown men wearing black lycra is horrible. Some women wearing black lycra look OK, but they're in the minority.

They also tend not to have insurance, pay no road tax and are the most vociferous about the condition of roads. They are also the most vociferous when haranguing other road users about the fact that after six miles of 10mph someone eventually just goes for the overtake and doesn't leave the obligatory 200 yards between the car and the bike.

They also have an annoying habit of riding in the dusk either with no lights or one of those 1 million watt led headlights set to shine directly into the eyes of oncoming motorists - they then get upset when you go back to full beam at them (DAMHIK)

OK, rant over - phew, glad to get that off my chest . . . . .

[IanD]

16 minutes ago, manxmike said:

Sadly the power for EV cars comes from horrible dirty gas or diesel or atomic powered generating stations. So how green are EV cars?

Then we have the knotty problem of cyclists, they're green all right, but the sight of grown men wearing black lycra is horrible. Some women wearing black lycra look OK, but they're in the minority.

They also tend not to have insurance, pay no road tax and are the most vociferous about the condition of roads. They are also the most vociferous when haranguing other road users about the fact that after six miles of 10mph someone eventually just goes for the overtake and doesn't leave the obligatory 200 yards between the car and the bike.

They also have an annoying habit of riding in the dusk either with no lights or one of those 1 million watt led headlights set to shine directly into the eyes of oncoming motorists - they then get upset when you go back to full beam at them (DAMHIK)

OK, rant over - phew, glad to get that off my chest . . . . .

 

Actually the percentage of annual UK electricity coming from renewables passed 40% some time ago and is heading towards 50%:

 

https://energyadvicehub.org/record-high-of-uk-electricity-is-generated-by-renewables-says-energy-trends-report/

 

With the typical energy mix (UK/EU) from about a year ago, the lifetime CO2 burden of EVs (including materials, mining, manufacture, energy used during lifetime, and disposal) is about a third of ICE. As the grid renewable percentage goes up, this difference will get even bigger.

 

Does that answer your question?

 

As far as cyclists are concerned, yes they can be a PITA for you sitting in your car, but then they're much *much* greener than you are so maybe you should cut them a bit of slack... 😉

Edited December 5, 2023 by IanD

[magnetman]

14 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

 

As far as cyclists are concerned, ... they're much *much* greener than you are so maybe you should cut them a bit of slack... 😉

.Are you saying cyclists don't have cars or go on furrin holidays? 

 

How can you possibly say a cyclist is more 'green' than someone in a car? 

 

at that time you don't know if the cyclist has a dirty great 4x4 they usually drive every day and the driver of the car is doing their weekly 2 mile ride to the Bingo, wearing a wooly jumper and has never been further than the next village let alone set foot in a plane.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[IanD]

2 minutes ago, magnetman said:

.Are you saying cyclists don't have cars or go on furrin holidays? 

 

How can you possibly say a cyclist is more 'green' than someone in a car? 

 

at that time you don't know if the cyclist has a dirty great 4x4 they usually drive every day and the driver of the car is doing their weekly 2 mile ride to the Bingo, wearing a wooly jumper and has never been further than the next village let alone set foot in a plane.

 

 

Don't be an idiot. The cyclist on a bike is greener than the driver in a car when they're travelling on the road. They could be the same person at different times... 😉

Edited December 5, 2023 by IanD

[magnetman]

Yes but that is too obvious. It doesn't need stating that a bicycle moving is using less energy than a car. Everybody knows this. 

 

You said that the cyclist, not the cycle, was 'much' greener than the motorist. 

 

An individual will have an overall 'carbon footprint' in how they choose to live.

This is what matters. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It would be like saying 'a fire which is burning is 'much' hotter than one which isn't burning. 

[IanD]

14 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Yes but that is too obvious. It doesn't need stating that a bicycle moving is using less energy than a car. Everybody knows this. 

 

You said that the cyclist, not the cycle, was 'much' greener than the motorist. 

 

An individual will have an overall 'carbon footprint' in how they choose to live.

This is what matters. 

 

It would be like saying 'a fire which is burning is 'much' hotter than one which isn't burning. 

 

"they can be a PITA for you sitting in your car, but then they're much *much* greener than you are"

 

Most people would understand this, you seem to be trying very hard not to... 😉

 

(translation : "a bike is a much greener way to travel than a car")

[manxmike]

Oh dear, a small amount of sarcasm goes a long way.

Lighten up people, my post was somewhat tongue in cheek.

[IanD]

3 minutes ago, manxmike said:

Oh dear, a small amount of sarcasm goes a long way.

Lighten up people, my post was somewhat tongue in cheek.

Obvious for the cyclist rant, hence my reply 😉

 

As for the first line about EV green-ness -- well, plenty of people who don't like EVs keep seriously repeating the same rubbish, so it's difficult to distinguish that from a joke 🙂

Edited December 5, 2023 by IanD

[manxmike]

Not sure, do you mean ev cars are only recharged by renewable energy?

[magnetman]

11 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

"they can be a PITA for you sitting in your car, but then they're much *much* greener than you are"

 

Most people would understand this, you seem to be trying very hard not to... 😉

 

(translation : "a bike is a much greener way to travel than a car")

Yes. I think everyone probably already knew that using a bike is greener than using a car. It doesn't really need saying. 

 

 

Its interesting to think about how long EV consumers keep their cars for. How green would they be if they bought a new one every couple of yars? 

 

 

[IanD]

3 minutes ago, manxmike said:

Not sure, do you mean ev cars are only recharged by renewable energy?

Well, according to some they can be if you use a supplier that says all their energy comes from renewable sources... 😉

 

Joking aside, I meant that the EV CO2 burden depends on where the energy feeding the grid came from, and the more of this that is renewable the lower the CO2 burden.

[magnetman]

What would happen if there was a bias and people tended to buy cars more often ? 

 

There is already the problem of perfectly good motor vehicles being worthless. This could get a whole lot more serious. 

[IanD]

9 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Yes. I think everyone probably already knew that using a bike is greener than using a car. It doesn't really need saying. 

 

Its interesting to think about how long EV consumers keep their cars for. How green would they be if they bought a new one every couple of yars? 

 

 

If the secondhand one is sold on to another driver who then passes an ICE down the chain, pretty green 🙂

 

Replacing stuff for the sake of it -- pure consumerism -- is bad if the new stuff is similar to the old stuff. If the new stuff is better for CO2 emissions than the old stuff (EV vs ICE) then what matters is getting as many EVs out there as fast as possible to push old polluting ICE into the scrapyard at the other end of the pipeline, because this reduces global CO2 emissions. Since EVs are expensive when new but cheaper secondhand, it's actually better for the planet if those with deep pockets buy new EVs and then pass them on more cheaply after a couple of years.

 

You can't look at just what one person does, you have to look at the whole food chain... 🙂

 

6 minutes ago, magnetman said:

What would happen if there was a bias and people tended to buy cars more often ? 

 

There is already the problem of perfectly good motor vehicles being worthless. This could get a whole lot more serious. 

 

If they're heavily polluting old ICE then they should generally be scrapped.

 

But for a given cash-strapped individual not driving many miles, they should keep driving them.

 

These are not contradictory, it all depends on the use the car is being put to. As in so many cases, there's no one simple answer to a complex problem 🙂

Edited December 5, 2023 by IanD