RE: 2024 Polestar 4 | PH Review
Discussion
Wickedbad said:
I love how mine rides, it’s really comfortable.
Maybe that’s because we came into it from a ‘sport’ suspension A6 Avant that was WAY more harsh, and my personal car was a lowered B7 RS4 Avant ??
My current ‘weekend’ car is 40 years old and also lowered on hard coilovers.
So we feel spoilt wafting along in the Polestar every day. It’s all relative
Hah yes- i guess all relative! Our other daily is an Alpine A110, and the '2 replaced a big comfy V90 - both feel like a 1960s Citroen DS relative to that Polestar Maybe that’s because we came into it from a ‘sport’ suspension A6 Avant that was WAY more harsh, and my personal car was a lowered B7 RS4 Avant ??
My current ‘weekend’ car is 40 years old and also lowered on hard coilovers.
So we feel spoilt wafting along in the Polestar every day. It’s all relative
GT9 said:
The question is whether the Polstar 4 single motor would be any different a car if the dual motor didn't exist.
Presumably you've read my previous post using Polestar's own footprint numbers.
Adding the second motor increases lifetime footprint by 5% if the car is renewably powered, that's it, just 5%.
And it makes no difference at all who is driving, and how it is driven.
That's the absolute killer hold that EVs will always have over any other form of propulsion, the carbon/resource footprint is entirely controlled by the production of the car and the production of the energy to power it.
From a legislative and policy making perspective, that's Christmas Day 365 days a year.
Th extreme power version is a total irrelevance environmentally.
What confuses the hell out of me is why enthusiasts and people who like to 'make progress' are so unwilling to even acknowledge or, god forbid, embrace that.
Confused? You've read enough on here to know - one trick pony and no soul. Add in to the mix catastrophic depreciation whilst saving a few Quid a week on fuel.Presumably you've read my previous post using Polestar's own footprint numbers.
Adding the second motor increases lifetime footprint by 5% if the car is renewably powered, that's it, just 5%.
And it makes no difference at all who is driving, and how it is driven.
That's the absolute killer hold that EVs will always have over any other form of propulsion, the carbon/resource footprint is entirely controlled by the production of the car and the production of the energy to power it.
From a legislative and policy making perspective, that's Christmas Day 365 days a year.
Th extreme power version is a total irrelevance environmentally.
What confuses the hell out of me is why enthusiasts and people who like to 'make progress' are so unwilling to even acknowledge or, god forbid, embrace that.
TX.
cidered77 said:
But -on the '2 there is a pretty material 10% difference in WLTP with the single vs. dual motor car, and I've seen that in practice with extended test drives and ownership experiences as well.
I appreciate I'm labouring a point that is not entirely overlapped.As for WLTP numbers, offshore wind has a lifetime carbon footprint of around 1-2 g/km when powering an EV.
It's so ridiculously low that it's actually really difficult to get anyone to believe that renewably-powered EVs don't increase their lifetime footprints after leaving the factory.
Sure, WLTP affects running costs, but 'resource-wise', the trajectory is heading quite quickly to 'irrelevant'.
Terminator X said:
Confused? You've read enough on here to know - one trick pony and no soul. Add in to the mix catastrophic depreciation whilst saving a few Quid a week on fuel.
TX.
Ok, fair point.TX.
How about I stop going on about carbon footprint comparisons and fuel burdens if we stop using kerb mass as a stick to beat EVs with because 'resources.'
Deal?
cidered77 said:
Wickedbad said:
I love how mine rides, it’s really comfortable.
Maybe that’s because we came into it from a ‘sport’ suspension A6 Avant that was WAY more harsh, and my personal car was a lowered B7 RS4 Avant ??
My current ‘weekend’ car is 40 years old and also lowered on hard coilovers.
So we feel spoilt wafting along in the Polestar every day. It’s all relative
Hah yes- i guess all relative! Our other daily is an Alpine A110, and the '2 replaced a big comfy V90 - both feel like a 1960s Citroen DS relative to that Polestar Maybe that’s because we came into it from a ‘sport’ suspension A6 Avant that was WAY more harsh, and my personal car was a lowered B7 RS4 Avant ??
My current ‘weekend’ car is 40 years old and also lowered on hard coilovers.
So we feel spoilt wafting along in the Polestar every day. It’s all relative
I’m really loving the look of the new Alpine Renault 5. Could be a contender just cos it looks so much fun.
Wickedbad said:
cidered77 said:
Wickedbad said:
cidered77 said:
Yeah choice is important - but (shifting topic a bit.) i don't think my preferences and choices for a family wagon are being met by the market.
I want an EV estate or an SUV-ish shape with a big boot, that has a decent range through efficiency not massive batteries and more mass and size (so, not the i5 then); comfortable, can get me to 60 in less than 8 seconds so i can keep up with most stuff, and rides well.... the market isn't engineering cars like that. It's getting range through larger batteries, and enormous cars you can't park at Sainsbury's. That shake your teeth out.
I love my current Polestar 2 but like you, really I want a wagon (rather than an SUV)I want an EV estate or an SUV-ish shape with a big boot, that has a decent range through efficiency not massive batteries and more mass and size (so, not the i5 then); comfortable, can get me to 60 in less than 8 seconds so i can keep up with most stuff, and rides well.... the market isn't engineering cars like that. It's getting range through larger batteries, and enormous cars you can't park at Sainsbury's. That shake your teeth out.
I get to choose next company car soon and I’m hoping the new EV Audi A4 and A6 Avant meet my needs. Prior to the Polestar I was a big fan of fast Audi estates and have had several, company cars and personal.
Maybe that’s because we came into it from a ‘sport’ suspension A6 Avant that was WAY more harsh, and my personal car was a lowered B7 RS4 Avant ??
My current ‘weekend’ car is 40 years old and also lowered on hard coilovers.
So we feel spoilt wafting along in the Polestar every day. It’s all relative
I like the 4 in general as it seems a step up from the 2 in a lot of ways. The lack of rear window isn't an issue as you can barely see out the back of many new cars anyway so the camera is actually showing more than otherwise.
My main concern is that it is just too big for UK roads and car parks. The 2 is already tight on some of the roads around me and touches both sides lines of the parking spaces at my work but the 4 is 6 inches wider.
John87 said:
Wickedbad said:
cidered77 said:
Wickedbad said:
cidered77 said:
Yeah choice is important - but (shifting topic a bit.) i don't think my preferences and choices for a family wagon are being met by the market.
I want an EV estate or an SUV-ish shape with a big boot, that has a decent range through efficiency not massive batteries and more mass and size (so, not the i5 then); comfortable, can get me to 60 in less than 8 seconds so i can keep up with most stuff, and rides well.... the market isn't engineering cars like that. It's getting range through larger batteries, and enormous cars you can't park at Sainsbury's. That shake your teeth out.
I love my current Polestar 2 but like you, really I want a wagon (rather than an SUV)I want an EV estate or an SUV-ish shape with a big boot, that has a decent range through efficiency not massive batteries and more mass and size (so, not the i5 then); comfortable, can get me to 60 in less than 8 seconds so i can keep up with most stuff, and rides well.... the market isn't engineering cars like that. It's getting range through larger batteries, and enormous cars you can't park at Sainsbury's. That shake your teeth out.
I get to choose next company car soon and I’m hoping the new EV Audi A4 and A6 Avant meet my needs. Prior to the Polestar I was a big fan of fast Audi estates and have had several, company cars and personal.
Maybe that’s because we came into it from a ‘sport’ suspension A6 Avant that was WAY more harsh, and my personal car was a lowered B7 RS4 Avant ??
My current ‘weekend’ car is 40 years old and also lowered on hard coilovers.
So we feel spoilt wafting along in the Polestar every day. It’s all relative
I like the 4 in general as it seems a step up from the 2 in a lot of ways. The lack of rear window isn't an issue as you can barely see out the back of many new cars anyway so the camera is actually showing more than otherwise.
My main concern is that it is just too big for UK roads and car parks. The 2 is already tight on some of the roads around me and touches both sides lines of the parking spaces at my work but the 4 is 6 inches wider.
cars used to cosset where they now properly shake.. but , appreciate i'm increasingly on my own here!Do agree this is too big, have had a good look at one, and concluded if i need to pre-think where i'm taking the car and whether it can be parked easily, it's probably not the right family car.
jenkosrugby said:
Quickmoose said:
And don't tell me it's 'progress'.
It's not
It's simply 'development' in a chosen direction aided and abetted by legislation, technology and profit.
It's a bit high end but Bugatti and Aston are starting to (or have) shown in their interiors that you can roll back on some of these developments and re-instate a method of operation that works and doesn't need buggering about with....
"And don't tell me it's 'progress'."It's not
It's simply 'development' in a chosen direction aided and abetted by legislation, technology and profit.
It's a bit high end but Bugatti and Aston are starting to (or have) shown in their interiors that you can roll back on some of these developments and re-instate a method of operation that works and doesn't need buggering about with....
Edited by Quickmoose on Tuesday 2nd July 09:08
The problem is......it is......... You can of course have opinions, and many people don't like the idea of heavy battery cars with iPads stuck to the dashboard. BUT.......when electric windows came out I suspect many thought what's the point of the extra electronics and weight when I can just wind a window down with my hand....It is absolutely progress....I find it utterly amazing that I can plug my car in over night and drive my car to work at a cost of almost nothing. At the same time, in the real world of normal roads and not race tracks its quicker than my old fossil fuel.
Its most certainly not for everyone though...if you cant charge at home, then I most certainly would not own an EV, and that I will agree is one of the main issues with this technology.....But, being heavy, and having too many screens is just not an issue unless you really want it to be.
How is a slow electric window, with parts and looms and stuff ready to go wrong and be inefficient to fix any better than a simple and quick winder?
The ability to fuel a car from home is progress.
The current way in which it's packaged and controlled isn't.
Adding kilo after kilo after kilo to transport a thing that hasn't changed.... using predominantly a touchscreen that absorbs the attention and concentration required to control it. Madness imo....admitting its just my opinion obvs.
Quickmoose said:
jenkosrugby said:
Quickmoose said:
And don't tell me it's 'progress'.
It's not
It's simply 'development' in a chosen direction aided and abetted by legislation, technology and profit.
It's a bit high end but Bugatti and Aston are starting to (or have) shown in their interiors that you can roll back on some of these developments and re-instate a method of operation that works and doesn't need buggering about with....
"And don't tell me it's 'progress'."It's not
It's simply 'development' in a chosen direction aided and abetted by legislation, technology and profit.
It's a bit high end but Bugatti and Aston are starting to (or have) shown in their interiors that you can roll back on some of these developments and re-instate a method of operation that works and doesn't need buggering about with....
Edited by Quickmoose on Tuesday 2nd July 09:08
The problem is......it is......... You can of course have opinions, and many people don't like the idea of heavy battery cars with iPads stuck to the dashboard. BUT.......when electric windows came out I suspect many thought what's the point of the extra electronics and weight when I can just wind a window down with my hand....It is absolutely progress....I find it utterly amazing that I can plug my car in over night and drive my car to work at a cost of almost nothing. At the same time, in the real world of normal roads and not race tracks its quicker than my old fossil fuel.
Its most certainly not for everyone though...if you cant charge at home, then I most certainly would not own an EV, and that I will agree is one of the main issues with this technology.....But, being heavy, and having too many screens is just not an issue unless you really want it to be.
How is a slow electric window, with parts and looms and stuff ready to go wrong and be inefficient to fix any better than a simple and quick winder?
The ability to fuel a car from home is progress.
The current way in which it's packaged and controlled isn't.
Adding kilo after kilo after kilo to transport a thing that hasn't changed.... using predominantly a touchscreen that absorbs the attention and concentration required to control it. Madness imo....admitting its just my opinion obvs.
GT9 said:
Quickmoose said:
And I also am obsessed with weight.
I don't care whether its ICE or EV. It's physics, it's the resources required.
Objecting to kerb mass on the principle of 'resources' is a crock, sorry.I don't care whether its ICE or EV. It's physics, it's the resources required.
Your physics is off.
The Polestar 4 has a lifetime carbon footprint of 22 tons for the single motor version when renewably powered.
And here's the killer, the dual motor version, the one with twice the power (how disgusting!) pushes that to an absolutely disgusting 23 tons.
No matter how it is driven.
1 measly ton over its life regardless of how far, or how fast, you drive it.
1 measly ton.
Disgusting.
For reference any comparable petrol or diesel car will be over 50 tons lifetime footprint, heading towards 100 tons for a hard driven 600 bhp variant.
You might not consider that as progress, the problem you've got is that anyone controlling the future direction of passenger cars in the UK or elsewhere comprehensively does.
It's all here:
https://www.polestar.com/dato-assets/11286/1699610...
Cue the backtracking on Volvo being the gospel truth on carbon footprint breakevens...
P.S.
You can check the ICE lifetime carbon footprint yourself by taking the real-world tailpipe CO2 value (in g/km) for your ICE of choice and multiplying by 200,000 km.
Then add another 25% to account for fuel production.
Then add about 10 tons for manufacturing the car.
Edited by GT9 on Tuesday 2nd July 09:43
GT9 said:
P.S.
You can check the ICE lifetime carbon footprint yourself by taking the real-world tailpipe CO2 value (in g/km) for your ICE of choice and multiplying by 200,000 km.
Then add another 25% to account for fuel production.
Then add about 10 tons for manufacturing the car.
If you'd like to converse about the point I made, happy to do so.You can check the ICE lifetime carbon footprint yourself by taking the real-world tailpipe CO2 value (in g/km) for your ICE of choice and multiplying by 200,000 km.
Then add another 25% to account for fuel production.
Then add about 10 tons for manufacturing the car.
At this point I have no interest discussing 'lifetime' energy/resource usage, accepting it's a very useful chat to have....with someone else perhaps.
Pereldh said:
Your math is all over the place sir. Considering the production footprint ALONE is 25tonne CO2 (before driven its first mile, official Volvo & Polestar figures) how then is its total lifetime footprint 22tonnes...?
The Polestar 2 CO2 footprint was 25 tons. The Polestar 4 CO2 footprint is 20 tons - this is called progress !FYI : The Life Cycle Assessment reports are here :
-> Polestar 2 : https://www.polestar.com/dato-assets/11286/1630409...
-> Polestar 4 : https://media.polestar.com/global/en/media/pressre...
Edited by SDK on Tuesday 2nd July 14:38
Largely ambivalent about this car, but I still cant get my head round how petrolheads suddenly start rattling on about CO2, resources and matters of an ecological natures after decades of not really giving a s
t.
"EV's are terrible for the environment", same person then extolls the benefits of their 12 mpg V8 car or how they can blast cyclists with diesel fumes from their DPF deleted oil burner.
Then moans about mines, for the rare earth minerals having never, ever mentioned the oil sands production, or the fact that Cobalt is used in fuel production as well as EV batteries.
ICE vehicle bursts in to flames, complete silence, EV goes up (which is pretty rare to be fair) and its terrible and evidence of how cars should never be powered by dangerous batteries, missing all the folk immolated every year in ICE car fires, I personally haven't seen an EV fire but seen a fair few ICE ones.
I am not an EVangelist, haven't got one, no desire for one but jesus the hypocrisy is stifling and pathetic.
Nobody has said EVs are perfect and run on fresh air with no environmental impact, but unless you eschew driving and walk/cycle everywhere than making a point about the environment is rather redundant, most really do not give a st about the environment, but like going on about it, strangely silent wirth regards to oil related disasters.Do you fly on an airliner to go on your yearly hols ? But EVs are still terrible for the environment, go and stand next to an idling airliner and a Tesla and which makes you feel queasy from the fumes after a few mins ?
There are genuine downsides to EVs but a lot of the anti comments seem largely, reading between the lines "Dont like new things, scary and expensive, doesnt go brum, do not want, I like safe and familiar, never been in one but I expect I wont like it"
Same folk "Cant go for EVs, no infrastructure you see", then in the next breath go "Hydrogen is the future", and they honestly believe you can just convert your 2012 Focus to run on Hydrogen in an afternoon, dead easy apparently. You never know what may happen with Hydrogen but I seen zero Hydrogen powered cars and am tripping over Teslas, Taycans, Leafs etc, Occams razor ? But you wont be converting your existing car to run on it with a kit from Halfords.
Need to look at our motivation for coming out with stuff, and try and be honest, its fine to not want an EV but no need to try and make stuff up, or discredit it with some pretend concern for the environment.
t."EV's are terrible for the environment", same person then extolls the benefits of their 12 mpg V8 car or how they can blast cyclists with diesel fumes from their DPF deleted oil burner.
Then moans about mines, for the rare earth minerals having never, ever mentioned the oil sands production, or the fact that Cobalt is used in fuel production as well as EV batteries.
ICE vehicle bursts in to flames, complete silence, EV goes up (which is pretty rare to be fair) and its terrible and evidence of how cars should never be powered by dangerous batteries, missing all the folk immolated every year in ICE car fires, I personally haven't seen an EV fire but seen a fair few ICE ones.
I am not an EVangelist, haven't got one, no desire for one but jesus the hypocrisy is stifling and pathetic.
Nobody has said EVs are perfect and run on fresh air with no environmental impact, but unless you eschew driving and walk/cycle everywhere than making a point about the environment is rather redundant, most really do not give a s
t about the environment, but like going on about it, strangely silent wirth regards to oil related disasters.Do you fly on an airliner to go on your yearly hols ? But EVs are still terrible for the environment, go and stand next to an idling airliner and a Tesla and which makes you feel queasy from the fumes after a few mins ?There are genuine downsides to EVs but a lot of the anti comments seem largely, reading between the lines "Dont like new things, scary and expensive, doesnt go brum, do not want, I like safe and familiar, never been in one but I expect I wont like it"
Same folk "Cant go for EVs, no infrastructure you see", then in the next breath go "Hydrogen is the future", and they honestly believe you can just convert your 2012 Focus to run on Hydrogen in an afternoon, dead easy apparently. You never know what may happen with Hydrogen but I seen zero Hydrogen powered cars and am tripping over Teslas, Taycans, Leafs etc, Occams razor ? But you wont be converting your existing car to run on it with a kit from Halfords.
Need to look at our motivation for coming out with stuff, and try and be honest, its fine to not want an EV but no need to try and make stuff up, or discredit it with some pretend concern for the environment.
Pereldh said:
Your math is all over the place sir. Considering the production footprint ALONE is 25tonne CO2 (before driven its first mile, official Volvo & Polestar figures) how then is its total lifetime footprint 22tonnes...?
Open the 'official Polestar' link i posted.The statement was for a renewably charged car.
The lifetime footprint in that case pretty much all happens before it leaves the factory...
As for my maths being all over the place, don't make me laugh, I'm probably the only poster on PH who is willing (and able) to describe the physics and maths in whatever level of detail you desire, something I've been doing regularly for the last decade on PH.
Which is not surprising, given I've worked in the field of vehicle powertrains and electrification since the early 1990s.
Here is the graph from the link I posted, the usage phase footprint is in orange:
J4CKO said:
Largely ambivalent about this car, but I still cant get my head round how petrolheads suddenly start rattling on about CO2, resources and matters of an ecological natures after decades of not really giving a st.
"EV's are terrible for the environment", same person then extolls the benefits of their 12 mpg V8 car or how they can blast cyclists with diesel fumes from their DPF deleted oil burner.
Then moans about mines, for the rare earth minerals having never, ever mentioned the oil sands production, or the fact that Cobalt is used in fuel production as well as EV batteries.
ICE vehicle bursts in to flames, complete silence, EV goes up (which is pretty rare to be fair) and its terrible and evidence of how cars should never be powered by dangerous batteries, missing all the folk immolated every year in ICE car fires, I personally haven't seen an EV fire but seen a fair few ICE ones.
I am not an EVangelist, haven't got one, no desire for one but jesus the hypocrisy is stifling and pathetic.
Nobody has said EVs are perfect and run on fresh air with no environmental impact, but unless you eschew driving and walk/cycle everywhere than making a point about the environment is rather redundant, most really do not give a st about the environment, but like going on about it, strangely silent wirth regards to oil related disasters.Do you fly on an airliner to go on your yearly hols ? But EVs are still terrible for the environment, go and stand next to an idling airliner and a Tesla and which makes you feel queasy from the fumes after a few mins ?
There are genuine downsides to EVs but a lot of the anti comments seem largely, reading between the lines "Dont like new things, scary and expensive, doesnt go brum, do not want, I like safe and familiar, never been in one but I expect I wont like it"
Same folk "Cant go for EVs, no infrastructure you see", then in the next breath go "Hydrogen is the future", and they honestly believe you can just convert your 2012 Focus to run on Hydrogen in an afternoon, dead easy apparently. You never know what may happen with Hydrogen but I seen zero Hydrogen powered cars and am tripping over Teslas, Taycans, Leafs etc, Occams razor ? But you wont be converting your existing car to run on it with a kit from Halfords.
Need to look at our motivation for coming out with stuff, and try and be honest, its fine to not want an EV but no need to try and make stuff up, or discredit it with some pretend concern for the environment.
Because EV is being sold as saving the planet vs ICE that isn't. If it actually isn't that green then fair play to call it out.t."EV's are terrible for the environment", same person then extolls the benefits of their 12 mpg V8 car or how they can blast cyclists with diesel fumes from their DPF deleted oil burner.
Then moans about mines, for the rare earth minerals having never, ever mentioned the oil sands production, or the fact that Cobalt is used in fuel production as well as EV batteries.
ICE vehicle bursts in to flames, complete silence, EV goes up (which is pretty rare to be fair) and its terrible and evidence of how cars should never be powered by dangerous batteries, missing all the folk immolated every year in ICE car fires, I personally haven't seen an EV fire but seen a fair few ICE ones.
I am not an EVangelist, haven't got one, no desire for one but jesus the hypocrisy is stifling and pathetic.
Nobody has said EVs are perfect and run on fresh air with no environmental impact, but unless you eschew driving and walk/cycle everywhere than making a point about the environment is rather redundant, most really do not give a s
t about the environment, but like going on about it, strangely silent wirth regards to oil related disasters.Do you fly on an airliner to go on your yearly hols ? But EVs are still terrible for the environment, go and stand next to an idling airliner and a Tesla and which makes you feel queasy from the fumes after a few mins ?There are genuine downsides to EVs but a lot of the anti comments seem largely, reading between the lines "Dont like new things, scary and expensive, doesnt go brum, do not want, I like safe and familiar, never been in one but I expect I wont like it"
Same folk "Cant go for EVs, no infrastructure you see", then in the next breath go "Hydrogen is the future", and they honestly believe you can just convert your 2012 Focus to run on Hydrogen in an afternoon, dead easy apparently. You never know what may happen with Hydrogen but I seen zero Hydrogen powered cars and am tripping over Teslas, Taycans, Leafs etc, Occams razor ? But you wont be converting your existing car to run on it with a kit from Halfords.
Need to look at our motivation for coming out with stuff, and try and be honest, its fine to not want an EV but no need to try and make stuff up, or discredit it with some pretend concern for the environment.
TX.
Terminator X said:
J4CKO said:
Largely ambivalent about this car, but I still cant get my head round how petrolheads suddenly start rattling on about CO2, resources and matters of an ecological natures after decades of not really giving a st.
"EV's are terrible for the environment", same person then extolls the benefits of their 12 mpg V8 car or how they can blast cyclists with diesel fumes from their DPF deleted oil burner.
Then moans about mines, for the rare earth minerals having never, ever mentioned the oil sands production, or the fact that Cobalt is used in fuel production as well as EV batteries.
ICE vehicle bursts in to flames, complete silence, EV goes up (which is pretty rare to be fair) and its terrible and evidence of how cars should never be powered by dangerous batteries, missing all the folk immolated every year in ICE car fires, I personally haven't seen an EV fire but seen a fair few ICE ones.
I am not an EVangelist, haven't got one, no desire for one but jesus the hypocrisy is stifling and pathetic.
Nobody has said EVs are perfect and run on fresh air with no environmental impact, but unless you eschew driving and walk/cycle everywhere than making a point about the environment is rather redundant, most really do not give a st about the environment, but like going on about it, strangely silent wirth regards to oil related disasters.Do you fly on an airliner to go on your yearly hols ? But EVs are still terrible for the environment, go and stand next to an idling airliner and a Tesla and which makes you feel queasy from the fumes after a few mins ?
There are genuine downsides to EVs but a lot of the anti comments seem largely, reading between the lines "Dont like new things, scary and expensive, doesnt go brum, do not want, I like safe and familiar, never been in one but I expect I wont like it"
Same folk "Cant go for EVs, no infrastructure you see", then in the next breath go "Hydrogen is the future", and they honestly believe you can just convert your 2012 Focus to run on Hydrogen in an afternoon, dead easy apparently. You never know what may happen with Hydrogen but I seen zero Hydrogen powered cars and am tripping over Teslas, Taycans, Leafs etc, Occams razor ? But you wont be converting your existing car to run on it with a kit from Halfords.
Need to look at our motivation for coming out with stuff, and try and be honest, its fine to not want an EV but no need to try and make stuff up, or discredit it with some pretend concern for the environment.
Because EV is being sold as saving the planet vs ICE that isn't. If it actually isn't that green then fair play to call it out.t."EV's are terrible for the environment", same person then extolls the benefits of their 12 mpg V8 car or how they can blast cyclists with diesel fumes from their DPF deleted oil burner.
Then moans about mines, for the rare earth minerals having never, ever mentioned the oil sands production, or the fact that Cobalt is used in fuel production as well as EV batteries.
ICE vehicle bursts in to flames, complete silence, EV goes up (which is pretty rare to be fair) and its terrible and evidence of how cars should never be powered by dangerous batteries, missing all the folk immolated every year in ICE car fires, I personally haven't seen an EV fire but seen a fair few ICE ones.
I am not an EVangelist, haven't got one, no desire for one but jesus the hypocrisy is stifling and pathetic.
Nobody has said EVs are perfect and run on fresh air with no environmental impact, but unless you eschew driving and walk/cycle everywhere than making a point about the environment is rather redundant, most really do not give a s
t about the environment, but like going on about it, strangely silent wirth regards to oil related disasters.Do you fly on an airliner to go on your yearly hols ? But EVs are still terrible for the environment, go and stand next to an idling airliner and a Tesla and which makes you feel queasy from the fumes after a few mins ?There are genuine downsides to EVs but a lot of the anti comments seem largely, reading between the lines "Dont like new things, scary and expensive, doesnt go brum, do not want, I like safe and familiar, never been in one but I expect I wont like it"
Same folk "Cant go for EVs, no infrastructure you see", then in the next breath go "Hydrogen is the future", and they honestly believe you can just convert your 2012 Focus to run on Hydrogen in an afternoon, dead easy apparently. You never know what may happen with Hydrogen but I seen zero Hydrogen powered cars and am tripping over Teslas, Taycans, Leafs etc, Occams razor ? But you wont be converting your existing car to run on it with a kit from Halfords.
Need to look at our motivation for coming out with stuff, and try and be honest, its fine to not want an EV but no need to try and make stuff up, or discredit it with some pretend concern for the environment.
TX.
Reality is somewhat different to advertising, and to be fair to EV's, no smoke from the tailpipe, but its a big metal box full of batteries and plastic, would have to be a right derp to think the process for manufacturing that is all eco freindly.
And again, they are a lot more efficient day to day and can be powered by 100 percent renewable energy, they arent all the time yet, but as of now the electricity you put in would be 40 ish percent from wind and solar etc. I am nipping to the airport in my car in a bit to pick one of my kids up, thats petrol and none of that is renewable.
I think they over egg the planet saving bit, but never met an EV owner that is pious about it, I think its mainly down to they can make it work for them, they spend less powering it, it accelerates well and there are tax advantages, eco concerns seem to be much lower down for EV owners than petrolhead anti folk, but for a lot of us thats like Jimmy Savile pontificating about child safety.
I just dont have any desire for one, dont hate them, could go and buy one but would feel like I have sold out and I know I would miss my noisy petrol cars, but dont feel the need to hate them, just not for me, right now, I reserve the right to change my mind and rattle on about how great my Tesla or whatever is
Quickmoose said:
If you'd like to converse about the point I made, happy to do so.
At this point I have no interest discussing 'lifetime' energy/resource usage, accepting it's a very useful chat to have....with someone else perhaps.
You said resources, and you referred solely to kerb mass.At this point I have no interest discussing 'lifetime' energy/resource usage, accepting it's a very useful chat to have....with someone else perhaps.
I just don't see how anyone can ignore the 10 tons+ of diesel or petrol that an ICE requires to have any purpose?
Fuel outweighs kerb mass by many multiples, and has a similar many multiples contribution to carbon footprint than the 'manufactured' mass of the car.
Let's just ignore carbon though and talk solely about physical resources, is oil not a physical resource?
Why would you fixate on what is 20% of the resources required and give the other 80% a free pass?
Terminator X said:
Because EV is being sold as saving the planet vs ICE that isn't. If it actually isn't that green then fair play to call it out.
TX.
EV’s ‘saving the planet’ is a click-bait media term, trotted out to make a point they are not doing this.TX.
Literally, no EV maker, or owner has ever said an EV is doing this.
No doubt you’ll keep posting made up numbers and headlines
Edited by SDK on Tuesday 2nd July 18:12
Honeywell said:
smilo996 said:
Every Polestar makes Tesla look like their cars were designed by Fisher Price. The rear no screen might be a step too far for some but another solid performance from them.
But the Tesla rivals are much lighter and much more efficient. Plus whilst a Polestar driver is heabutting an Ionity charger trying to get it to work with his App the Tesla driver is plugged into a Supercharger.Style over substance?
I quite like the Mercedes Me charging app, is that a trick only Mercedes use, or do other manufacturers also have a single app to use with every charger provider?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff