Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Electric cars?

Would you buy an electric car?

  • Already own one

    Votes: 10 5.1%

  • Yes - would definitely buy

    Votes: 43 21.9%

  • Yes - preferred over petrol car if price/power/convenience similar

    Votes: 78 39.8%

  • Maybe - preference for neither, only concerned with costs etc

    Votes: 37 18.9%

  • No - prefer petrol car even if electric car has same price, power and convenience

    Votes: 24 12.2%

  • No - would never buy one

    Votes: 14 7.1%
  • Total voters
    196
Jump to new
qldfrog said:
And we are buying fighter jets and billions of submarines..so sad
Click to expand...
Our of this slightly out of subject outburst, an interesting point
If we have no more fuel: blocus, strikes etc,
How long will we get the grid on..and so EVs charged
Remove coal and diesel from the grid supply, then slowly maintenance and gas out for the trucks and utes of the supply line.
I would guess in 2 months, power is out at least 50% of the time..we might get power thanks to solar during daytime?
Let 's not pretend that having an EV remove the need for oil supply in the next 2 decades at least.
And not forgetting boats, lithium mining to carry imports etc
EVs or hydrogen/Syngas is at least a multi decades transition if not more for australia
 
qldfrog said:
My dear VC,
Stealing cable and break down of society to the point of being unable to charging cars in public spaces or in the street does not require a Mad Max world.
It is now in South Africa, Paris suburbs and half of inner city, main cities in France, most parts of UK key cities ,most of Africa and I would dare say a lot of US cities. Gas lighting?
Just need to travel outside of cruises and DisneyWorld
Yesterday a 70y old grannie got stabbed to death in a Redbank car park by a new import..it is coming ..I do not see why in 20y, Australia will be different from the EU as a society: same causes, same results
Until you can match the speed of fuel refill for EV, it will remain a major issue which will become more and more critical
And I would think if we have no more petrols at the pumps, you will certainly not be cruising around with your EV for long, recharged or not😂
PS but I agree on the abysmal state of Australian fuel reserves....
Click to expand...
I think you are vastly over stating the risk to public charging, if fuel stations can survive your vandals there is no reason public chargers can’t.

Its sad a granny was a victim of crime, but can name a decade where violent crime hasn’t Existed?

I do travel a lot firstly I was in the Army for years and have carried a rifle through some rough neighborhoods that you probably wouldn’t dare go. And secondly I drove right across the USA last year, and did basically a full lap of Britain. If I want to travel to fun places these days rather than places I need a rifle I think that’s ok, saying that I spend a bit of time in LA which is probably one of the places that the scared talking heads like is collapsing.

——————
 
Last edited:
qldfrog said:
In the meantime in the Real World

www.abc.net.au

Long queues, broken chargers are causing headaches for road-tripping EV drivers

Charger anxiety replaces range anxiety for the growing number of electric vehicle users relying on slow infrastructure.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
Click to expand...
That’s not an argument against EV’s, that’s an argument for Tesla, their super charging network is the best.

but back in the real world, you don’t even need that charging network much, the last time I used a public charger was 10months ago, and took like 9 mins, just a quick top up with enough juice to get home where the real charging happens.

IMG_0473.jpeg
 
Value Collector said:
Electric Cars may not be the peak of technology, but they are certainly better than petrol cars.
Click to expand...
Granted and putting the environment aside for a sec, how an EV can be realistically used by the end user surely plays into the better or not equation.
Value Collector said:
Watch this short video, all the links to the science mentioned in the video is in the description.

Yes, getting the battery materials has an impact, but it is less than the life time impact of a petrol car, and those battery materials can be reused and recycled, so it is a moot point.
Click to expand...

Not so such a moot point because as I understand it, the current technology for recycling lithium, due to its reactive nature, is complex and costs more that actually mining the stuff.

No doubt in the decades to come the point will be moot but for me in the here and now, owing an EV is not a viable option.

From a broader view, EV is but a very small part of the world's reaction to tackling climate change, global warming or whatever woke word is touted as the newest buzz word. This rush into the EV Green Transistion appears to me to be just that, a rush, headlong into appeasing who and what?

IMHO, the world should be focusing more on biodiversity because this old gal of ours called Mother Earth has been around for 4.5 billion years or so and thus, she knows a thing or two about dealing with greenhouse gases.

From the UN Org:

Biodiversity - our strongest natural defense against climate change​

Article reads in part. (my bolds)

Why is biodiversity essential for limiting climate change?​

When human activities produce greenhouse gases, around half of the emissions remain in the atmosphere, while the other half is absorbed by the land and ocean. These ecosystems – and the biodiversity they contain – are natural carbon sinks, providing so-called nature-based solutions to climate change.

Protecting, managing, and restoring forests, for example, offers roughly two-thirds of the total mitigation potential of all nature-based solutions. Despite massive and ongoing losses, forests still cover more than 30 per cent of the planet’s land.

Peatlands – wetlands such as marshes and swamps – cover only 3 per cent of the world’s land, but they store twice as much carbon as all the forests. Preserving and restoring peatlands means keeping them wet so the carbon doesn’t oxidize and float off into the atmosphere.

Ocean habitats such as seagrasses and mangroves can also sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere at rates up to four times higher than terrestrial forests can. Their ability to capture and store carbon make mangroves highly valuable in the fight against climate change.

Conserving and restoring natural spaces, both on land and in the water, is essential for limiting carbon emissions and adapting to an already changing climate. About one-third of the greenhouse gas emissions reductions needed in the next decade could be achieved by improving nature’s ability to absorb emissions.
Click to expand...
 
Craton said:
EV is but a very small part of the world's reaction to tackling climate change
Click to expand...
Putting aside arguments about climate change itself, it wasn't the only reason for EV's being seen as desirable however.

Ability to use energy resources other than oil and the elimination of exhaust fumes in urban areas where the original reasons half a century ago and which have remained at least somewhat relevant ever since. Mainstream concern about climate being somewhat more recent than those other issues as a reason to pursue electrified transport. :2twocents
 
@Smurf1976
Yep, the science knew a long time ago. From what I can tell that knowledge really gained traction probably back in the 50's and 60's. Certainly by then it was more than apparent that the human footprint on our ecology and environment was a many fronted issue and certainly on a destructive path.
Pity we didn't take a stance against plastics and their pollutive affect back then either!

From memory, pre-internet the norm was that social change (and associated legislation) took around 20~30yrs or so to filter through.
One can draw the conclusion that with the coupling of internet, mobile/cell phone, social media etc has enabled the almost instant interconnectedness of the human organism thus, that rate of change has now accelerated to "warp speed".
This connectedness also has a side effect, the desire for immediate results.

Back to EV.
EV battery passports and will this occur here?

From AutoCar UK and reads in part.

Electric vehicles will need 'battery passports' to enter EU from 2027​

Battery passports will be mandatory for electric vehicles sold in the European Union from February 2027 to provide greater visibility of what has gone into them and where it has come from.

The digital documents will be linked to the VIN and a QR code that, when scanned with a digital device, will reveal detailed information about the sources and nature of the raw materials prior to manufacturing, along with post-manufacturing details, such as capacity and condition.

The move is part of the new EU Battery Regulation, which requires the battery or vehicle manufacturer (depending on who produced the battery) to disclose the carbon emissions from production and gradually include greater proportions of recycled materials in the run-up to 2035, when the EU will ban sales of new ICE cars.
Click to expand...

From the EC Battery Pass Compliance site:

Battery Passport Content Guidance​

Achieving compliance with the EU Battery Regulation and increasing sustainability and circularity.​

Click to expand...
From that site and Position Paper blurb

Content requirements of the EU Battery Passport​

Recommendations to the European Commission by the Battery Pass Consortium​


This document addresses clarification needs and presents recommendations by the Battery Pass consortium on battery passport content requirements as laid out in the EU Battery Regulation. It builds on our insights in the Battery Passport Content Guidance and is directed towards the European Commission incl. related institutions such as the JRC.
Click to expand...
Who would've thought we'd need a passport for a car battery. With all the stipulations and requirements of said battery, I'd imagine there'd have to be an exception in wartime?
Hmm, on that note, will the militaries of the world be excempt from the ICE regulations post 2035? Not that far away folks.

From the USA, a real life story on a EV Rental and how it can go, oh so wrong.
 
"On the weekend the Federal Government announced it would consult with industry and the wider community on its proposed New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES).​
​
This consultation sets out the Federal Government's preferred model to calculate the Efficiency Standard for new motor vehicles sold in Australia (passenger and light commercial vehicles). Essentially manufacturers will need to meet an average emissions target over their entire fleet, and will earn credits for being below, and pay a penalty if above.​
​
It is clearly one of the most important decisions in Australia's automotive history.​
​
"With cost of living front of mind for all households, the Motor Trade Association has reminded decision makers that affordability will remain one of the top considerations for Australians when purchasing their next vehicle."​

This consultation Impact Analysis represents the second and final phase of consultation about the design of a new vehicle efficiency standard for Australia. As many readers will be familiar with, long standing Australian Government policy is that substantive regulatory decisions should be accompanied by an impact assessment (previously known as a Regulation Impact Statement, or RIS).

In this paper, we have set out the Government’s proposed policy position in relation to the design and introduction of an Australian New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES). Following this consultation, Government will decide on the design of the NVES and final Impact Analysis will be developed.

In this introduction we set out:
  • the structure of this document
  • the questions we want to ask you
  • background, the process to date and next steps
Click to expand...

 
Craton said:
1. Granted and putting the environment aside for a sec, how an EV can be realistically used by the end user surely plays into the better or not equation.


2. Not so such a moot point because as I understand it, the current technology for recycling lithium, due to its reactive nature, is complex and costs more that actually mining the stuff.

3. No doubt in the decades to come the point will be moot but for me in the here and now, owing an EV is not a viable option.

4. From a broader view, EV is but a very small part of the world's reaction to tackling climate change, global warming or whatever woke word is touted as the newest buzz word. This rush into the EV Green Transistion appears to me to be just that, a rush, headlong into appeasing who and what?

5. IMHO, the world should be focusing more on biodiversity because this old gal of ours called Mother Earth has been around for 4.5 billion years or so and thus, she knows a thing or two about dealing with greenhouse gases.

From the UN Org:

Biodiversity - our strongest natural defense against climate change​

Article reads in part. (my bolds)
Click to expand...
1. Well 5 years into Tesla ownership, and 50,000 km on clock This end user is very happy with the car and it’s suits my life perfectly.

2. well there isn’t very much lithium in a lithium battery, but like anything costs go down as scale rises, as the fleet of EV’s age we will get more batteries to process and costs will drop.

3. it probably is viable, you might just have a bunch of misconceptions, what about you life do you think makes an EV unviable for you?

4. even with out global warming we have to wean our selves off petrol at some point, may as well start the process now, especially because the cars are great cars, and don’t pollute the air in our cities.

5. the earth can definitely handle more carbon dioxide, it’s been much higher before, but it’s whether our human species and the economy we have built can handle it. I mean the earth doesn’t care if any one species survives, the Dino’s were taken out by a meteorite but the earth survived, but it wasn’t good for the Dino’s.

6. Bio diversity is t going to fix us releasing millions of years of carbon back into the atmosphere in 100 years.
 
Smurf1976 said:
Putting aside arguments about climate change itself, it wasn't the only reason for EV's being seen as desirable however.

Ability to use energy resources other than oil and the elimination of exhaust fumes in urban areas where the original reasons half a century ago and which have remained at least somewhat relevant ever since. Mainstream concern about climate being somewhat more recent than those other issues as a reason to pursue electrified transport. :2twocents
Click to expand...
Indeed so let's start with train and buses.
And taxi fleet etcs
CO2 itself is not really an issue in fumes
More nitrogen compound, and if you remember before the EV push, in modern cities, the most toxic air compounds is "ozone" which is also a byproduct of electric uses, for example in Paris metropolitan.
So now I am back to a very serious scientific question: what are the direct emission of an EV driving in a city.i have no doubt a shitty 30y old diesel bus is spewing a lot more nasties, but how good is actually an EV air quality wise?
And not looking at coal emissions to charge it..just charging and running
 
JohnDe said:
"On the weekend the Federal Government announced it would consult with industry and the wider community on its proposed New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES).​
​
This consultation sets out the Federal Government's preferred model to calculate the Efficiency Standard for new motor vehicles sold in Australia (passenger and light commercial vehicles). Essentially manufacturers will need to meet an average emissions target over their entire fleet, and will earn credits for being below, and pay a penalty if above.​
​
It is clearly one of the most important decisions in Australia's automotive history.​
​
"With cost of living front of mind for all households, the Motor Trade Association has reminded decision makers that affordability will remain one of the top considerations for Australians when purchasing their next vehicle."​



Click to expand...
If it is for our own good 😂
 
Value Collector said:
1. Well 5 years into Tesla ownership, and 50,000 km on clock This end user is very happy with the car and it’s suits my life perfectly.

2. well there isn’t very much lithium in a lithium battery, but like anything costs go down as scale rises, as the fleet of EV’s age we will get more batteries to process and costs will drop.

3. it probably is viable, you might just have a bunch of misconceptions, what about you life do you think makes an EV unviable for you?

4. even with out global warming we have to wean our selves off petrol at some point, may as well start the process now, especially because the cars are great cars, and don’t pollute the air in our cities.

5. the earth can definitely handle more carbon dioxide, it’s been much higher before, but it’s whether our human species and the economy we have built can handle it. I mean the earth doesn’t care if any one species survives, the Dino’s were taken out by a meteorite but the earth survived, but it wasn’t good for the Dino’s.

6. Bio diversity is t going to fix us releasing millions of years of carbon back into the atmosphere in 100 years.
Click to expand...
Only think 3 and 6 are biased/wrong but agree on the others, just do not force the wrong solution to real issues while pretending to solve another non existent problem(CO2).
 
sptrawler said:
Well it will certainly make ICE cars deare.,
So in a way it is for our own good, E.V prices will look better. đŸ€Ł
Click to expand...
Indeed, that is the whole purpose so my comment .
When economy and value for money does not follow a narrative , force it via taxation, incentive and regulation ....
As old as civilisation
 
Well, value collector decided to respond then block me. Obviously he is too cowardly to have a discussion with someone who is willing to appraise his nonsense. Quite absurd to write a message to someone then prevent them from seeing it, but it says plenty about his character.
 
qldfrog said:
Only think 3 and 6 are biased/wrong but agree on the others, just do not force the wrong solution to real issues while pretending to solve another non existent problem(CO2).
Click to expand...
How can 3 be biased or wrong, it’s based on Cratons lifestyle and he hasn’t answered the question yet.

As for 6, I can’t see any way just increasing our biodiversity would allow us to continue reduce atmospheric carbon while we continue releasing carbon more than ever. if you look back at the graphs, you can see carbon had been increasing since the Industrial Age began, and there was a lot of biodiversity back then.
 
sptrawler said:
Well it will certainly make ICE cars deare.,
So in a way it is for our own good, E.V prices will look better. đŸ€Ł
Click to expand...
I agree with the boss of Airbus, when he said that the ultimate argument for green energy is that.

”The more we use fossil fuels, the more expensive they will get over time, however the more we use green technologies the cheap it will get over time”

Even if you don’t Believe in Climate Change, eventually We have to move away from fossil fule anyway, especially if we want to raise another couple of billion peoples standard of living.
 
@mullokintyre @SirRumpole @qldfrog

I was reading over some Tax rules yeaterday, and I came across an interesting point that relates to the question about why Utes are popular in Australia when it comes to business.

I realised that Utes are classified as “commercial vehicles” so they receive much better tax treatment than a Car or SUV.

if you own a car or SUV you are limited to claiming 5000 kms per year or filling out a log book , and you can’t claim personal use and you are subject to Fringe Benefits Tax.

So from a Tax perspective, if you own a business or have a salary package that includes vehicle you are much better of with a UTE, than a car If you plan on using it for a lot of personal things.


IMG_0488.jpeg


IMG_0489.jpeg
 
Top