Shell Eyes Looming UK Fuels Ban

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

Shell Eyes Looming UK Fuels Ban

 

 

(Bloomberg) -- Royal Dutch Shell Plc expects the U.K. can end the sale of gasoline and diesel vehicles in just a decade, as the nation attempts to eliminate emissions by the middle of the century.

The ban can be brought forward to 2030 with “the right policy and incentives,” Sinead Lynch, the head of oil giant Shell’s operations in Britain said on LinkedIn. That’s five years earlier than the deadline set by Prime Minister Boris Johnson in February, and also beats the 2032 date that Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said may be possible to achieve.

Johnson’s government is seeking to ban the sale of new cars powered by fossil fuels by the middle of the next decade as it seeks to ensure net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. That oil companies, which have been built on the back of demand for automobile fuels for over a century, are predicting the end of gasoline cars in the near future is a pivotal moment for the industry.

Europe’s biggest oil companies have been preparing for a slowdown in fuels demand, and are increasingly turning their attention to electricity production, primarily from renewable sources. Shell and rivals BP Plc and Total SA have all set their own net-zero emission targets.

Still, there are hurdles for the U.K. achieving the ban on oil-fueled car sales. The government needs to continue providing incentives to help customers use electric vehicles, Lynch said. Infrastructure for charging these needs to be built out, and investments are required in electricity networks to meet the extra demand, she said.

[Prometheus1354 + 178]

While these 'goals' are admirable. I guess.   They are not rooted in any sense of reality.  Now I'm not saying this can't be accomplished at some point down the road. Just not right now...

Sorry Pixie dust fans; just took that card outta the deck from y'all. Guess you'll have to do some reality based thinking now...

The idea is one that is being floated in Leftist circles here deep behind enemy lines in Commiefornia too.  Sadly the Pixie dust crowd have their teeth set in deep an show no signs of comin up for air much less any form of rational thought.

Now the main area(s) I see as roadblocks for the time frame mentioned are:

1. Requisite number of autos on the road too establish the critical mass needed justifying the massive costs for the infrastructure to support said autos.

2. The infrastructure.  Minor detail I know. But be as that may; it is the linchpin that will allow this to succeed or not.

This creates the Chicken or the Egg conundrum...  But in this case it's the infrastructure that is the driver.  No charging stations, no E-cars...  Or is it No E-cars, no charging stations???   Damnit all!!!  (lol)

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 hour ago, Prometheus1354 said:

While these 'goals' are admirable. I guess.   They are not rooted in any sense of reality.  Now I'm not saying this can't be accomplished at some point down the road. Just not right now...

Sorry Pixie dust fans; just took that card outta the deck from y'all. Guess you'll have to do some reality based thinking now...

The idea is one that is being floated in Leftist circles here deep behind enemy lines in Commiefornia too.  Sadly the Pixie dust crowd have their teeth set in deep an show no signs of comin up for air much less any form of rational thought.

Now the main area(s) I see as roadblocks for the time frame mentioned are:

1. Requisite number of autos on the road too establish the critical mass needed justifying the massive costs for the infrastructure to support said autos.

2. The infrastructure.  Minor detail I know. But be as that may; it is the linchpin that will allow this to succeed or not.

This creates the Chicken or the Egg conundrum...  But in this case it's the infrastructure that is the driver.  No charging stations, no E-cars...  Or is it No E-cars, no charging stations???   Damnit all!!!  (lol)

 

Well here in the endless suburbs of "Commiefornia " we are in luck because every house has a charger. Quite a good start on the infrastructure side I would say.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

And we have the Tesla factory which is producing the best selling car in the state. So that is a pretty big step forward on the number of autos on the road side of it.

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

4 hours ago, Prometheus1354 said:

While these 'goals' are admirable. I guess.   They are not rooted in any sense of reality.  Now I'm not saying this can't be accomplished at some point down the road. Just not right now...

Sorry Pixie dust fans; just took that card outta the deck from y'all. Guess you'll have to do some reality based thinking now...

The idea is one that is being floated in Leftist circles here deep behind enemy lines in Commiefornia too.  Sadly the Pixie dust crowd have their teeth set in deep an show no signs of comin up for air much less any form of rational thought.

Now the main area(s) I see as roadblocks for the time frame mentioned are:

1. Requisite number of autos on the road too establish the critical mass needed justifying the massive costs for the infrastructure to support said autos.

2. The infrastructure.  Minor detail I know. But be as that may; it is the linchpin that will allow this to succeed or not.

This creates the Chicken or the Egg conundrum...  But in this case it's the infrastructure that is the driver.  No charging stations, no E-cars...  Or is it No E-cars, no charging stations???   Damnit all!!!  (lol)

 

Here in Commifornia, the best-selling sedan is the Tesla Model 3. That's best selling across all classes of sedan. This is possible, I guess, because we have a surplus of pixie dust?   No, this works because most driving is commuting, and the Model 3 has enough range to make the round trip to work and back, so we can charge at home. We may eventually need to increase the electrical power into the neighborhoods, but we actually have a fairly large reserve because the lines were originally engineered before the dramatic improvements in efficiency of appliances and (especially) lighting. We are also requiring residential solar on all new homes, which further reduces the need for bigger neighborhood power lines, especially for crazies who purchase home batteries. (Drink the Elon Musk koolaide, get the car, the solar roof, and the batteries.)

We also have lots of public charging stations. SAE1772 level 2 stations are nearly ubiquitous, with power up to about 15 KW. The number of superchargers is also increasing. We have a bunch that operate at 50 KW, and the newer ones operate at up to 250 KW.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

14 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Well here in the endless suburbs of "Commiefornia " we are in luck because every house has a charger. Quite a good start on the infrastructure side I would say.

I've "inherited" my brother's Leaf because he has nowhere to park and charge it. So you're really just saying if you park your car on the street, or live in an apartment building you're SOL.

Really, having an EV for you is just another form of white privilege virtue signaling.

Hey this is kind of fun, no wonder the leftists use this tactic. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

37 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

I've "inherited" my brother's Leaf because he has nowhere to park and charge it. So you're really just saying if you park your car on the street, or live in an apartment building you're SOL.

Really, having an EV for you is just another form of white privilege virtue signaling.

Hey this is kind of fun, no wonder the leftists use this tactic. 

No, I'm saying that an extremely large portion of the population has access to charging at home. Enough people to drive EV adoption forward immediately. All we have to do is solve the problem for apartment and other residential units and  the solution is actually very simple. The utilities are begging to be allowed to install the chargers and takeover for the gasoline industry. We have held them back because of monopoly concerns.

 

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

I've "inherited" my brother's Leaf because he has nowhere to park and charge it. So you're really just saying if you park your car on the street, or live in an apartment building you're SOL.

Really, having an EV for you is just another form of white privilege virtue signaling.

Hey this is kind of fun, no wonder the leftists use this tactic. 

True, but we are working on it in a trickle-down manner. The situation in shared parking garages (condos and apartments) is rapidly improving:

https://electrek.co/2020/07/22/charging-hundreds-of-evs-parked-at-a-condo-is-a-solvable-problem-heres-how/

In poor neighborhoods that only have street parking, it's tougher. (Note: "poor and has a car" only happens in America.) But on-street chargers will become cheap enough and robust enough to install anywhere it is safe to park a car, so the percentage of cars that cannot park at home will continue to decline. Ultimately (ten years?) street parking will be prohibited and cars will autonomously drive themselves to shared garages, and most people without garages will use shared autonomous cars anyway.

In the mean time, a lot of folks without home charging still have lifestyles that work for electric cars, with charging at the workplace or at retail locations.

[markslawson + 1,042]

On 7/23/2020 at 3:48 AM, ceo_energemsier said:

(Bloomberg) -- Royal Dutch Shell Plc expects the U.K. can end the sale of gasoline and diesel vehicles in just a decade, as the nation attempts to eliminate emissions by the middle of the century.

The ban can be brought forward to 2030 with “the right policy and incentives,” Sinead Lynch, the head of oil giant Shell’s operations in Britain said on LinkedIn. That’s five years earlier than the deadline set by Prime Minister Boris Johnson in February, and also beats the 2032 date that Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said may be possible to achieve.

This is not a serious forecast and I don't believe it was intended to be taken seriously. Sinead Lynch is just boosting Shell's profile as a "green and caring" company. The goal can only be achieved by vast government spending - note, "right policy and incentives" - as has been shown by Norway. But Shell isn't going to be the one paying and Lynch is not likely to be in that job by the time the deadline rolls around. Everyone will have forgotten the forecast by then in any case. In the mean time its swallowed whole by the green cheer squad, as we've seen on this thread. Same thing happens with pronouncements by the Chinese government, incidentally. The Chinese do a few cosmetic things which they make a big deal of and Western green zealots then promote. Later it emerges that the Chinese are building more coal fire plants than the rest of the world already has, or some such ridiculous statistic, which goes virtually unremarked.

As for the UK car sales situation, a note of reality. In June 2020 EVs accounted for 10 per cent of all new car sales. Before anyone gets excited 14 per cent are hybrids and the rest petrol or diesel. To get the 10 per cent the government hands over GBP3,500 on cars worth 30,000 or some such plus some other grants including money for a charging point at home. To get to 20 or 30 per cent grants will have to increase and already its proving expensive. Lynch may well know all this but why would he care? He gets to pose and still sells petrol. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

47 minutes ago, markslawson said:

As for the UK car sales situation, a note of reality. In June 2020 EVs accounted for 10 per cent of all new car sales. Before anyone gets excited 14 per cent are hybrids and the rest petrol or diesel. To get the 10 per cent the government hands over GBP3,500 on cars worth 30,000 or some such plus some other grants including money for a charging point at home. To get to 20 or 30 per cent grants will have to increase and already its proving expensive. Lynch may well know all this but why would he care? He gets to pose and still sells petrol. 

Seems like they are right on track. 10% this year, 50% in '25 and 100% in '30. Grants won't have to increase per vehicle they will just increase for the whole program as more EV's are purchased. And it is money well invested.

The cost of EV are falling fast so the grant won't need to increase at all for the program in a few years.

Edited July 24, 2020 by Jay McKinsey

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

1 hour ago, markslawson said:

As for the UK car sales situation, a note of reality. In June 2020 EVs accounted for 10 per cent of all new car sales. Before anyone gets excited 14 per cent are hybrids and the rest petrol or diesel. To get the 10 per cent the government hands over GBP3,500 on cars worth 30,000 or some such plus some other grants including money for a charging point at home. To get to 20 or 30 per cent grants will have to increase and already its proving expensive. Lynch may well know all this but why would he care? He gets to pose and still sells petrol. 

Also, ICE cars continue to improve, especially in their longevity. This means that they will still be in service for many years after the last one is sold. It will take serious incentives or penalties or both to speed up the transition. In the end, something like a "cash for clunkers" program may be needed to kill the last of them. It's hard to figure out non-disruptive way to retire the petrol distribution and ICE maintenance infrastructure, also. In the US at least, decomissioning a gas station is not a simple task.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Just now, Dan Clemmensen said:

Also, ICE cars continue to improve, especially in their longevity. This means that they will still be in service for many years after the last one is sold. It will take serious incentives or penalties or both to speed up the transition. In the end, something like a "cash for clunkers" program may be needed to kill the last of them. It's hard to figure out non-disruptive way to retire the petrol distribution and ICE maintenance infrastructure, also. In the US at least, decomissioning a gas station is not a simple task.

I think it will be the shutting down of gas stations that drives out the last of the ICE. When you have to drive way out of your way for gas and start to get range anxiety you will switch to EV.

[markslawson + 1,042]

21 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

It will take serious incentives or penalties or both to speed up the transition. In the end, something like a "cash for clunkers" program may be needed to kill the last of them.

Dan - the point I should have made is that there is no appetite at the moment for the serious spending that would be required to get to the targets set by the oil guy. Sure electric cars will improve but to get sales consumers still have to be offered incentives/subsidies ect.. there is no indication that's changing..

[markslawson + 1,042]

22 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Seems like they are right on track. 10% this year, 50% in '25 and 100% in '30. Grants won't have to increase per vehicle they will just increase for the whole program as more EV's are purchased. And it is money well invested.

Jay - your balloon does not ever land, does it? The point I was making is that the government has to hand over serious incentives to get that 10 per cent.. there is no appetite at the moment for an increase in that spending. In fact, the budget for them has been cut. There is no indication that consumers have much interest in EVs, without some sort of subsidy. 50% in five years time ain't going to happen. Leave it with you. 

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

2 hours ago, markslawson said:

Dan - the point I should have made is that there is no appetite at the moment for the serious spending that would be required to get to the targets set by the oil guy. Sure electric cars will improve but to get sales consumers still have to be offered incentives/subsidies ect.. there is no indication that's changing..

EVs are getting cheaper and better at a fairly fast pace. The biggest part of the cost is the battery, and the lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) batteries that are now coming into production are a good bit cheaper than the lithium-nickel-cobalt batteries now in general use. Total cost of ownership for EVs are already lower than for ICEs in most circumstances, and  the straight sales price will likely cross over by 2024. Massive assumptions and magic in the formulas for computing these are subject to tweaking by the EV fanatics and the ICE fanatics, so it's a bit hard to tell. When the consumer is jsut comparing sales prices and the EV is cheaper, no incentives are needed. Incentives are needed to get the consumer past the sticker shock to consider TCO.  I don't know much about driving patterns in the UK, but at a wild guess, the UK driver will not need as high a range to be comfortable. Here in California, Elon Musk thinks the comfort level is about 300 miles, even though a lot of Nissan Leafs with <100 mile range were sold.

[0R0 + 6,251]

On 7/22/2020 at 9:44 PM, Jay McKinsey said:

And we have the Tesla factory which is producing the best selling car in the state. So that is a pretty big step forward on the number of autos on the road side of it.

Not sure that the Fremont plant will continue manufacturing. Musk apparently intends to move its production elsewhere as soon as he can do it without harming output goals.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

17 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

Not sure that the Fremont plant will continue manufacturing. Musk apparently intends to move its production elsewhere as soon as he can do it without harming output goals.

Not anytime soon. They are investing heavily in Fremont, increasing production of cars and soon batteries.  

https://electrek.co/2020/05/20/tesla-installs-production-robots-fremont-factory/#:~:text=Tesla says that its effort,by the end of 2020.

https://electrek.co/2020/02/11/tesla-building-pilot-battery-cell-manufacturing-line-fremont/

Musk said the plan is for Fremont to supply the western US and Austin to supply the eastern US.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

double post.

 

 

Edited July 25, 2020 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Just now, Jay McKinsey said:

No indication that consumers have much interest other than the fact that Tesla can't build their cars fast enough and the Model 3 is the best selling car in California.

UK seems to be working on their stimulus package, we'll have to wait and see what incentives they provide. Regardless, I know you refuse to believe it but the cost of batteries and thus EV's are decreasing and in a few years will be less than the purchase price of a comparable ICE at all price points. Tesla Model 3 is already less expensive than a BMW 3 series.

 

 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

On 7/23/2020 at 10:18 AM, Dan Clemmensen said:

True, but we are working on it in a trickle-down manner. The situation in shared parking garages (condos and apartments) is rapidly improving:

https://electrek.co/2020/07/22/charging-hundreds-of-evs-parked-at-a-condo-is-a-solvable-problem-heres-how/

In poor neighborhoods that only have street parking, it's tougher. (Note: "poor and has a car" only happens in America.) But on-street chargers will become cheap enough and robust enough to install anywhere it is safe to park a car, so the percentage of cars that cannot park at home will continue to decline. Ultimately (ten years?) street parking will be prohibited and cars will autonomously drive themselves to shared garages, and most people without garages will use shared autonomous cars anyway.

In the mean time, a lot of folks without home charging still have lifestyles that work for electric cars, with charging at the workplace or at retail locations.

Thanks for the link. Sorry I'm only now getting to this, didn't get the notification. The article was interesting but not ground shattering technology. I'm curious how apartments apportion costs to the units. Many places they probably don't, or didn't even consider it. Having multiple meters is a huge PITA because nowadays, thanks to "green" games they get to pay meter fees that can run over $25/month, before the first watt gets delivered. Essentially the system you linked to trickle charges the vehicles. Not sure how much their charging systems like that. 

I'm not really knocking EV's, I'm just pointing out the obvious and real flaws in their deployment. My brother isn't exactly poor, he just happened to buy a house with a huge yard but a tiny garage. He loves gardening and has about an acre to garden, but no way around the house to drive in there. The single car garage is almost too small to park in anyway, and be uses it for storage. The driveway holds exactly one car. With his setup there's just no way to accommodate the EV he owns, so I end up "taking care of it".

Never mind apartments, there's a lot of America built like that. My other brother has a house with a shared driveway. That's standard where he lives so it's more convenient to park on the street. Those houses sell for north of $500k so not exactly poor. If it was kalifornistan those same houses would go for at least double that. Standard city lots are 50 feet wide by 75-100 feet deep. That leaves you not much room for wide driveways and 3 car garages unless you want to settle for a crackerbox house. 

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

10 hours ago, 0R0 said:

Not sure that the Fremont plant will continue manufacturing. Musk apparently intends to move its production elsewhere as soon as he can do it without harming output goals.

Nope. That was just Elon throwing a tantrum when Alameda County wanted him to obey the law and stay shut down. The issue is resolved. Tesla is building new factories, not shutting down the Fremont factory. Tesla opened an additional "pop-up" assembly line at the factory to increase Model Y capacity, and total capacity at Fremont is now about 500,000 vehicles/year. Now if Tesla ever ends up with capacity in excess of demand, I'm sure they will cut back at Fremont first, since this is a high-cost area, but there are advantages to having a factory in your biggest market, as the vehicles can be sold the day after they are built: no inventory or transport costs.

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

1 minute ago, Ward Smith said:

Thanks for the link. Sorry I'm only now getting to this, didn't get the notification. The article was interesting but not ground shattering technology. I'm curious how apartments apportion costs to the units. Many places they probably don't, or didn't even consider it. Having multiple meters is a huge PITA because nowadays, thanks to "green" games they get to pay meter fees that can run over $25/month, before the first watt gets delivered. Essentially the system you linked to trickle charges the vehicles. Not sure how much their charging systems like that.

It's not exactly trickle charge. Those linked chargers share more on a time basis, so available power (from a single meter) gets allocated to the cars based on a complicated magical algorithm, not just blindly apportioned equally. The power to each car is logged by the system, just like at public charging stations, so the system owner can charge the users fairly if desired. Remember: the cost of an individual charging unit is driven by the cost of that big ugly cable, the big ugly car connector, the big ugly AC wiring, and the big ugly AC relay. The the remainder of the charger is the control electronics, which in its simplest form costs about $5.00. Adding a highly sophisticated computer to the charger will cost about $10.00 more in volume production.

All EVs that I am aware of  are happy to "trickle charge" e.g. from a SAE1772 "level 1" charger on a 120 VAC 15 A circuit. Most EVs are sold with one of these to use as an emergency backup.  In fact, the batteries themselves are happier when trickle charging.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

2 minutes ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

It's not exactly trickle charge. Those linked chargers share more on a time basis, so available power (from a single meter) gets allocated to the cars based on a complicated magical algorithm, not just blindly apportioned equally. The power to each car is logged by the system, just like at public charging stations, so the system owner can charge the users fairly if desired. Remember: the cost of an individual charging unit is driven by the cost of that big ugly cable, the big ugly car connector, the big ugly AC wiring, and the big ugly AC relay. The the remainder of the charger is the control electronics, which in its simplest form costs about $5.00. Adding a highly sophisticated computer to the charger will cost about $10.00 more in volume production.

All EVs that I am aware of  are happy to "trickle charge" e.g. from a SAE1772 "level 1" charger on a 120 VAC 15 A circuit. Most EVs are sold with one of these to use as an emergency backup.  In fact, the batteries themselves are happier when trickle charging.

The parts cost of an iPhone is also about $10, yet they sell for a thousand. I'm guessing Evercharge isn't giving those units away. I'd bet $500-1000 each, plus installation and "maintenance" fees. But hey, capitalism so I'm OK with it. Might well be worth it, given that apartment complexes don't want to be stuck with the bill for the subset of renters who have EV. 

I wouldn't call a 15 amp charger an "emergency trickle charger". That's the only charger my  brother's Leaf has. I own real trickle chargers that put out 2 amps or less at 12 volts that keep my lead acid batteries charged. If the battery were dead, those chargers are useless. 

BTW I've double checked and current city lots are only 40 feet wide so even less room for garages and parking chargers. 

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

39 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

The parts cost of an iPhone is also about $10, yet they sell for a thousand. I'm guessing Evercharge isn't giving those units away. I'd bet $500-1000 each, plus installation and "maintenance" fees. But hey, capitalism so I'm OK with it. Might well be worth it, given that apartment complexes don't want to be stuck with the bill for the subset of renters who have EV. 

I wouldn't call a 15 amp charger an "emergency trickle charger". That's the only charger my  brother's Leaf has. I own real trickle chargers that put out 2 amps or less at 12 volts that keep my lead acid batteries charged. If the battery were dead, those chargers are useless. 

BTW I've double checked and current city lots are only 40 feet wide so even less room for garages and parking chargers. 

Agreed. You used the term "trickle charge", but the EverCharge system will never go down that far. It will probably go as low as 1KW.

Your use case (a Leaf and a level 1 charger) demonstrates that even fairly modest EVs with fairly modest charging can be useful. Your charger gives you about 5 miles of range for every hour of charging. Your diminished old battery is only good for about 50 miles, so it takes 10 hours to fill it from empty.

I also agree that there are a whole lot of situations where home charging is problematical today. Your personal experience (and mine) affect our perceptions, so we may have different ideas of the percentage of cars that will be affected. I had my i3 for a year before I finally moved into a little house where I could install a charger. Before that, I level-1 charged at work, losing ground a little each day, and made it up on weekends at public level 2 chargers while shopping. I think we need a new type of charging station that can be installed curbside like a parking meter, with a cord that belongs to the car owner, not the station.

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 7/22/2020 at 12:48 PM, ceo_energemsier said:

Shell Eyes Looming UK Fuels Ban

 

 

(Bloomberg) -- Royal Dutch Shell Plc expects the U.K. can end the sale of gasoline and diesel vehicles in just a decade, as the nation attempts to eliminate emissions by the middle of the century.

The ban can be brought forward to 2030 with “the right policy and incentives,” Sinead Lynch, the head of oil giant Shell’s operations in Britain said on LinkedIn. That’s five years earlier than the deadline set by Prime Minister Boris Johnson in February, and also beats the 2032 date that Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said may be possible to achieve.

Johnson’s government is seeking to ban the sale of new cars powered by fossil fuels by the middle of the next decade as it seeks to ensure net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. That oil companies, which have been built on the back of demand for automobile fuels for over a century, are predicting the end of gasoline cars in the near future is a pivotal moment for the industry.

Europe’s biggest oil companies have been preparing for a slowdown in fuels demand, and are increasingly turning their attention to electricity production, primarily from renewable sources. Shell and rivals BP Plc and Total SA have all set their own net-zero emission targets.

Still, there are hurdles for the U.K. achieving the ban on oil-fueled car sales. The government needs to continue providing incentives to help customers use electric vehicles, Lynch said. Infrastructure for charging these needs to be built out, and investments are required in electricity networks to meet the extra demand, she said.

Powering cars with renewables is going to be a very daunting task in that timeline, just for cars. Trucks will have to go to natural gas or hydrogen. Natural gas makes a lot more sense. Powering vehicles, industry, heating buildings and homes is a lot different than lighting homes and running fans, and household appliances. This is going to be very funny to watch. I hope someone is writing a history of all the failures and the soaring costs involved!