An INTERESTING Viewpoint from the Car Sales Industry

[TIGHTCHOKE]

This is interesting, possibly too many hoops to jump through in our desperate bid for "Net ZERO"

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/09/12/planet-normal-public-coerced-into-buying-electric-vehicles/#:~:text=Royals-,Planet Normal%3A Public 'coerced' into buying,electric vehicles%2C warns Vertu boss&text=The public is being “coerced,biggest dealerships has said...

[JohnfromUK]

My understanding is that the UK range of vehicles has for a long time been 'skewed' by targets for vehicle pollution and fuel usage figures.

For example, Toyota (and I'm sure other manufacturers are the same) do not sell many of their larger engined thirstier vehicles in. Europe/UK because that (as a whole company) have to meet targets.  To do that they remove the bigger thirstier vehicles from the UK/European markets leaving only the smaller more economical ones in their 'catalogue'.

Meanwhile the US, Middle East, Australasia get a wider range of bigger cars.  Many of the larger "Land Cruiser" and equivalent Lexus models are not sold here despite being popular elsewhere. 

Similarly, there is a huger waiting list for the new (250 series) Land Cruiser (that is catalogued for UK) - but they aren't even taking orders as there are none scheduled for delivery to UK.  That is rumoured again to them being straight diesel models at present and they impinge on the 'quotas' Toyota have.  Not sure how that works, but should you wish to get one, they won't take an order and can't say when they will be available for order or delivery.

[oowee]

2 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

My understanding is that the UK range of vehicles has for a long time been 'skewed' by targets for vehicle pollution and fuel usage figures.

For example, Toyota (and I'm sure other manufacturers are the same) do not sell many of their larger engined thirstier vehicles in. Europe/UK because that (as a whole company) have to meet targets.  To do that they remove the bigger thirstier vehicles from the UK/European markets leaving only the smaller more economical ones in their 'catalogue'.

Meanwhile the US, Middle East, Australasia get a wider range of bigger cars.  Many of the larger "Land Cruiser" and equivalent Lexus models are not sold here despite being popular elsewhere. 

Similarly, there is a huger waiting list for the new (250 series) Land Cruiser (that is catalogued for UK) - but they aren't even taking orders as there are none scheduled for delivery to UK.  That is rumoured again to them being straight diesel models at present and they impinge on the 'quotas' Toyota have.  Not sure how that works, but should you wish to get one, they won't take an order and can't say when they will be available for order or delivery.

The UK's zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate requires car manufacturers to sell a minimum percentage of zero-emission vehicles each year: 

2024: 22% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 

2025: 28% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 

• 2028: 52% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 
• 2030: 80% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 
• 2035: 100% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 

[Gordon R]

The targets are laughable.

[London Best]

35 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

The targets are laughable.

So is “zero emissions”

[Gordon R]

I find it hard to take anyone seriously who genuinely believes in zero emissions. Not possible and costs a fortune whilst trying. They are happy to spend taxpayers money on their stupidity.

[Yellow Bear]

4 hours ago, Gordon R said:

The targets are laughable.

Particularly as the upgraded Grid to supply the power (locally at least as I cant find a national figure in the smoke and mirrors) does not even have planning approval yet and quotes the earliest date of 2032 and that is just for the main distribution.    Cloud cuckoo land and, as said elsewhere, on another planet.

[Gordon R]

Don't let Ed Milliband know, as it might make him look a bigger fool than when he suggested taking floodwater from Yorkshire, by tanker and dumping it illegally.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

36 minutes ago, Yellow Bear said:

Particularly as the upgraded Grid to supply the power (locally at least as I cant find a national figure in the smoke and mirrors) does not even have planning approval yet and quotes the earliest date of 2032 and that is just for the main distribution.    Cloud cuckoo land and, as said elsewhere, on another planet.

Perhaps that is why Admiral are now offering Electric Vehicle Re-Charge as part of its car insurance.   

[JohnfromUK]

7 hours ago, oowee said:

The UK's zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate requires car manufacturers to sell a minimum percentage of zero-emission vehicles each year: 

2024: 22% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 

2025: 28% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 

• 2028: 52% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 
• 2030: 80% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 
• 2035: 100% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 

Thanks.  I imagine that will be what I had heard.  When I was looking at a 'new' car (serious grade 4 x 4), I discovered that many of the bigger Jap 4 x 4s are not sold here.  Although the new Land Cruiser (J250) is theoretically sold here, you cannot even place an order (not that I was in that sort of price level).  My actual emissions are very low because I do a very low mileage.

[Robden]

Net zero?!? Yeah right.  M1 motorway service station. 8 or 10 ev charging points (all taken). Behind the main building there's a dirty great generator supplying the charging points with power......guess what's making the Genny run??????

[TIGHTCHOKE]

1 hour ago, Robden said:

Net zero?!? Yeah right.  M1 motorway service station. 8 or 10 ev charging points (all taken). Behind the main building there's a dirty great generator supplying the charging points with power......guess what's making the Genny run??????

Oh come on, be reasonable, it helps all those people justify their use of the massively expensive EV's and helps their consciences.

[Mungler]

Just what is the point? If we stopped where we are we’d be on the hook for perhaps 1% of the global carbon footprint. We’re now committing financial suicide and will become poorer, whilst the real global offenders carry on regardless and are growing their economies using cheap carbon based fuels?

I’m all for a cleaner push but slower, more measured and on any basis that makes better sense to me.

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, Mungler said:

I’m all for a cleaner push but slower, more measured and on any basis that makes better sense to me.

This.  Like most things in life, technology moves on and the usual 'lifecycle' of the technology we use on a day to day basis is that the 'old one' is replaced (and hopefully recycled) as and when it is coming to a natural end of life and replaced by a 'new' latest technology one that is more up to date and 'better',  nowadays notably better environmentally. 

By using this natural cycle to 'migrate' from old to new technologies, most people happily update and at a cost impact similar to normal product lifecycle costs.  Example - the transition to digital TVs.  Most people did it just as part of the normal 'time for a new TV' lifecycle.

Being coerced/forced into a relatively expensive and not very mature technology needing an infrastructure that is only very early in it's roll out is not good and will put peoples backs up.  Where we are now on EVs will suit some well, but will be poorly matched to others needs and aspirations.

[London Best]

1 hour ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Oh come on, be reasonable, it helps all those people justify their use of the massively expensive EV's and helps their consciences.

Ah! The old ‘mental health’ thing.

At the moment they need mental help for buying one!

[oowee]

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

This.  Like most things in life, technology moves on and the usual 'lifecycle' of the technology we use on a day to day basis is that the 'old one' is replaced (and hopefully recycled) as and when it is coming to a natural end of life and replaced by a 'new' latest technology one that is more up to date and 'better',  nowadays notably better environmentally. 

By using this natural cycle to 'migrate' from old to new technologies, most people happily update and at a cost impact similar to normal product lifecycle costs.  Example - the transition to digital TVs.  Most people did it just as part of the normal 'time for a new TV' lifecycle.

Being coerced/forced into a relatively expensive and not very mature technology needing an infrastructure that is only very early in it's roll out is not good and will put peoples backs up.  Where we are now on EVs will suit some well, but will be poorly matched to others needs and aspirations.

I am comfortable with the parameters being tightened by government. Look at the strides we made with fuel efficiency, appliances, thermal insulation etc. That said it would be good to see things joined up. What is the plan for power? Phasing out hybrids is also pretty rapid. It's not going to be delivered unless we are in lock step with the EU. 

ps I have long wanted a Toyota Fortuner a hatchback hilux. They are common in Africa but not brought to UK. 

 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

4 hours ago, London Best said:

Ah! The old ‘mental health’ thing.

At the moment they need mental help for buying one!

Yes, but we are NOT allowed to mention that sort of negativity.

[oowee]

8 hours ago, Robden said:

Net zero?!? Yeah right.  M1 motorway service station. 8 or 10 ev charging points (all taken). Behind the main building there's a dirty great generator supplying the charging points with power......guess what's making the Genny run??????

https://fullfact.org/online/diesel-generators-electric-car-chargers/

 

[markm]

7 minutes ago, oowee said:

https://fullfact.org/online/diesel-generators-electric-car-chargers/

 

There was on doing the rounds from Northumberland a few weeks ago with 2 charging points with a generator behind. 
 

The generator was for  four traffic lights out of the picture.  

[JohnfromUK]

5 hours ago, oowee said:

I am comfortable with the parameters being tightened by government. Look at the strides we made with fuel efficiency, appliances, thermal insulation etc. That said it would be good to see things joined up. What is the plan for power? Phasing out hybrids is also pretty rapid. It's not going to be delivered unless we are in lock step with the EU. 

ps I have long wanted a Toyota Fortuner a hatchback hilux. They are common in Africa but not brought to UK. 

 

The public have zero confidence in Gov't 'advice' because;

1. The public originally had cars - and paid a fixed fee annually for a 'tax disc' and duty on motor fuel, then in possibly not quite this order;
2. Catalysts and (for petrol cars) unleaded became compulsory
3. The public were strongly encouraged to switch to diesel because it was less polluting (less CO2) because the engines were more efficient.
4. Taxation rather than being 'flat' per vehicle became based on a whole variety of factors, price, fuel type/consumption, CO2 emissions, different 'luxury' rates for 1st year and next 4 years
5. Various 'low-emission zones' were brought in with fees for pre Euro 4 and Euro 6(?) vehicles in some (big) areas
6. People were encouraged to switch back away from diesel - and diesels were made to use first DPF's (that were in many cases severely unreliable under some conditions) then also 'Adblue' systems
7. Petrol was changed to a ethanol/petrol mix that doesn't suit some older cars.
8. Overall there has been continual 'tinkering with the advice and rules, continual increasing charges, taxes and technical 'add ons like DPFs that all cost money and reliability and overall motoring has been made MUCH more complex and have generally been aimed squarely at the less well off motorist and small trader who has an older vehicle rather than the well off who typically have the latests 'under warranty' vehicles.

After all this additional complexity and 'messing around' with the advice, rules and vehicle specific legislation by both central and Gov't and local Gov'ts is it any wonder that the public - and especially the less the less well off public have ZERO confidence that any decision they make on vehicle choices based on current advice will remain correct for the time they have the vehicle.  Over the last 20 years or so there has been a plethora of new rules, conflicting advice, additional charges - and the only certain thing is that those dreaming them up have no idea what they are doing and are receiving utterly incompetent advice.  It really is scandalously incompetent if you look back.

 

[miki]

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

<snip> It really is scandalously incompetent if you look back.

Yes, 100%

[Vince Green]

On 12/09/2024 at 09:44, JohnfromUK said:

My understanding is that the UK range of vehicles has for a long time been 'skewed' by targets for vehicle pollution and fuel usage figures.

For example, Toyota (and I'm sure other manufacturers are the same) do not sell many of their larger engined thirstier vehicles in. Europe/UK because that (as a whole company) have to meet targets.  To do that they remove the bigger thirstier vehicles from the UK/European markets leaving only the smaller more economical ones in their 'catalogue'.

Meanwhile the US, Middle East, Australasia get a wider range of bigger cars.  Many of the larger "Land Cruiser" and equivalent Lexus models are not sold here despite being popular elsewhere. 

Similarly, there is a huger waiting list for the new (250 series) Land Cruiser (that is catalogued for UK) - but they aren't even taking orders as there are none scheduled for delivery to UK.  That is rumoured again to them being straight diesel models at present and they impinge on the 'quotas' Toyota have.  Not sure how that works, but should you wish to get one, they won't take an order and can't say when they will be available for order or delivery.

Honda produce a 2.6 petrol version of their CRV

Popular in America and Australia  it has never been sold here. The biggest engine sold here was 2.0 petrol

Not suprising given the weight of the vehicle the 2.6 is reckoned to give better fuel consumption than the 2.0 so how does that help the environment?

[JohnfromUK]

12 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

so how does that help the environment?

Well possibly it may be 'cleaner' even if thirstier.  I believe one of the most polluting cars was the 2CV Citröen.  It used little fuel as it was light and underpowered even for the weight, but what fuel was used was burned very poorly - air cooling gave very variable temperatures and a crude carburettor and low compression gave poor emissions.  It's 600cc un-catalised motor apparently produced more 'unburned hydrocarbons' that Mercedes top model (600) with an engine around 10x the capacity, but will full 'California grade' emissions proofing!

But most likely is that the rules that penalise manufacturers are everything to do with the European regulators prejudices, market protection and restrictions to show 'we can make you do what we want' type attitudes are the main reason.  The likelihood that they actually reflect a 'real' situation is unlikely.

[enfieldspares]

I predict that there will be an increase, maybe, in the value of good condition secondhand petrol cars as 2035 approaches. I fear that we are only enabling China with this electric madness. It would have been far better to encourage further fuel efficiency in today's cars which are now superb at using fossil fuels to best economical effect.

[bluesj]

On 12/09/2024 at 10:49, oowee said:

The UK's zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate requires car manufacturers to sell a minimum percentage of zero-emission vehicles each year: 

2024: 22% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 

2025: 28% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 

• 2028: 52% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 
• 2030: 80% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 
• 2035: 100% of new cars sold must be zero-emission 

That could be a problem as so far this year  only 17% of cars sold are electric