Electric car thread

[old man emu]

32 minutes ago, octave said:

I think most of the pure EVs are still in the evaluation phase so if they are not up to the job they will surely be rejected. This is good, isn't it? 

Yes, it is good that they evaluate all vehicles for suitability for the task, but will you concede if they don't come up to scratch?

 

You seem to think that I am anti-EV. I agree with the concept, but also recognise the economic and practical disadvantages they have, AT THE PRESENT TIME.

[octave]

7 minutes ago, old man emu said:

but will you concede if they don't come up to scratch?

 Absolutely.  It won't be a blanket yes or no though. It will be a case of horses for courses.   Is a 4WD vehicle suitable for police work?  Well yes in some areas and not in others.  The local police in Alice Springs probably need to cover vast areas and speed and acceleration may not be important. Whilst here in Geelong police vehicles travel much shorter distances. With so many Teslas and other performance cars on the road, it will be a bit of a problem if the drivers of these cars know they can easily outrun any police vehicle.

 

11 minutes ago, old man emu said:

but also recognise the economic and practical disadvantages they have, AT THE PRESENT TIME.

 

The US is well ahead in this and much evaluation has been done   World's First 100% EV Police Fleet Saves Taxpayers $300k

Westport Police Tesla Model 3 Financial Analysis

 

 

Here is quite an in-depth video about one of the first Tesla police cars. It is quite long but I found it informative 

 

 

[octave]

This fire truck is an EV but has a diesel range extender for the rare longer trip.  They say that their average journey distance is 5 miles.   Some of the benefits are quicker acceleration out of the fire station and at traffic lights etc,  Also because diesel fire engines need to have their engine idling to power water pumps and lighting etc. This EV truck means less noise which helps with communication and less breathing in of harmful diesel fumes. 

 

  The A.C.T. has a firefighting support vehicle that is similar to this,

 

Gilbert Fire's new electric fire truck

 

[old man emu]

The UK. well mainly England, will be awash with Automated vehicles by 2026 after Charlie assented to the Automated Vehicles (AV) Act. 

 

As the autonomous vehicle industry has evolved and geared up for prime time, the need for a new legal framework became evident. The arrival of autonomous vehicles creates a need for a whole new vocabulary, new legal actors, and new regulatory schemes. The introduction of automated vehicles will have profound legal consequences. It requires new regulatory schemes and new actors (with new responsibilities and liabilities). The government has touted the potential safety benefits of self-driving cars in that they remove human error from roads, though it acknowledges that crashes will still happen. This is why liability is one of the core facets of the U.K.’s new regulation — who will bear responsibility in the event of a crash? The U.K. clarified this point in 2022 when it stated that its new legislation will make corporations responsible for any mishaps, meaning a human driver would not be liable for incidents related to driving while the vehicle is in control of driving.

 

Each approved self-driving vehicle will have a corresponding “authorized self-driving entity,” which will typically be the manufacturer but could also be the software developer or insurance company. And this entity will be responsible for the vehicle when self-driving mode is activated.

 

What could possibly go wrong?

[facthunter]

Just WHAT has gone right in the UK in the last 15 years?  Nev

[red750]

Rishi Sunak couldn't even get his announcement of the next election right. Rain was pissing down. It looked like he was wearing a leather suit, but it was just soaked. Had to do it in the street outside No. 10, like all previous public announcements.

[octave]

With regard to autonomous driving, I would argue that if/when it is safer than human driving it would be unethical not to adopt it, subject to the economics of course. I would argue that this may already be the case but to keep the argument simple let's just say that if it can be proven that autonomous is safer then.....

 

There will be a time in the near future I suspect when insurance companies will charge different premiums for those who choose to drive autonomously and those who self-drive and the premiums will be based on the statistical risk and payout amounts. 

 

I look forward to autonomous driving, especially as I get older. I well remember my father having his licence pulled at 85 (justifiably)  This was quite a blow for him. Living in a place without public transport was not good.  The doctor felt so sorry for him that after 6 months he allowed him to drive again.  Eventually, it became clear that he was a danger on the road.  My mother is now in aged care, and although she is in reasonable shape, it just became too hard for her to get around to shop and visit the doctor.  If autonomous cars were a thing right now at a reasonable price she would still be in her own home. 

[facthunter]

Some people are very safe drivers.. Using mean and averages doesn't make  it fair for everyone. It will be a field day for the Lawyers. Too bad for those who get hit by a car that didn't recognise you..   Nev

[octave]

4 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Some people are very safe drivers.. Using mean and averages doesn't make  it fair for everyone. It will be a field day for the Lawyers. Too bad for those who get hit by a car that didn't recognise you..   Nev

And too bad if you get killed by a human driver when an autonomous car would have avoided the accident.

 

I say again,IF autonomous cars reduce deaths and injuries then it would be unethical not to go in that direction if it is economically viable. Am I wrong in this assertion?

[old man emu]

2 hours ago, octave said:

to keep the argument simple let's just say that if it can be proven that autonomous is safer then.....

 

Autonomous passenger vehicles have long been thought of as the norm in the future. One only has to look at mid-20th Century predictions of the Future to see that, like the dream of flight, autonomous vehicles have captured the imagination. But let's get a definition of an autonomous vehicle. Are we talking about a vehicle similar to a taxi, but without the taxi driver. Users would get in and then simply tell the vehicle their desired destination, after which the vehicle's systems would take them there, or are we talking about a vehicle that requires a driver who can engage and disengage the autonomous systems, but must monitor the vehicle's performance? 

 

Leaving the definition aside, what I was looking at with my post was that unmentioned Devil in the Detail that is pointed to in this article: https://techcrunch.com/2024/05/20/uks-autonomous-vehicle-legislation-becomes-law-paving-the-way-for-first-driverless-cars-by-2026/

 

Each approved self-driving vehicle will have a corresponding “authorized self-driving entity,” which will typically be the manufacturer but could also be the software developer or insurance company, and this entity will be responsible for the vehicle when self-driving mode is activated. The English law is said to deliver the most comprehensive legal framework of its kind worldwide, setting out who is liable for AVs meaning that drivers can be assured that, while their vehicle is in self-driving mode, they will not be held responsible for how the vehicle drives. Can you imagine the buck-passing that would be going on in the event of even the most minor, property damage-only incident?

 

 

 

 

[Marty_d]

For fans of Total Recall (1990)

[spacesailor]

I am using " autonomous " driving !.

My daughter keeps telling me it's her that is in the driver's seat  & I should not tell her , the way I'd like  her to drive .

I have had my " public " transport, ( train ) trip .

And like the first trip nearly forty-five years ago ( red-rattler ) , it was tedious to say the least .

BUT . To please other's , I will have to give up that luxurious car transport .

spacesailor

Edited May 23 by spacesailor
AI changed a word

[old man emu]

Just a further thought on the effects of the English autonomous vehicle law.

 

I think that when the legal eagles working for the vehicle manufacturers have digested this little bit: Each approved self-driving vehicle will have a corresponding “authorized self-driving entity,” and this entity will be responsible for the vehicle when self-driving mode is activated", their advice will be to avoid the idea like the Plague. The manufacturers have had enough experience being sued in product liability cases where design or quality control failures have lead to litigation. Why would they open themselves up to more risk?

 

Once again we see that an idea for something that would be nice to have, fails to deal with its possible adverse consequences, "for fools rush in where angels fear to tread" (Alexander Pope).

[red750]

EV prices are plummeting. Now is not the time to order a new EV.

 

[pmccarthy]

1 hour ago, red750 said:

EV prices are plummeting. Now is not the time to order a new EV.

 

Lotus has gone up!

[Jerry_Atrick]

On Autonomous Vehicles, I haven't read the AV Act, but the legal commentary has been it is largely tweaks to facilitate AVs to be able to be rolled out. There is no suggestion that by 2026 there will be a mass of AVs on the roads all of a sudden, nor the current government expect or are encouraging AVs to be flooding the roads in 2026. So, to frame it as some sort of policy failing waiting to happen  is inaccurate. Thanks again, MSM.

 

On 23/05/2024 at 5:49 AM, facthunter said:

Just WHAT has gone right in the UK in the last 15 years?  Nev

Of course, it depends from what side of the fence you are looking. If you are a wealthy Russian oligarch, quite a lot ;-). Seriously, there are some things they have got right, or more right than others. The furlough scheme here, which was Sunak's design, was far better than the crap they served up in Australia for lock-downs. The aggressive pursuit of a vaccine was also seen widely as a success; of course, the dilly-dallying with the lockdowns wasn't, but if ScoMo has the same power as BoJo did, it is likely the deaths would have been much higher in Aus. And the UK has been investing heavinly in renewables and are way ahead at rolling out EV infrastructure. I agree their overall scorecard has been bad, but would argue not that much worse than under 13 years of Aussie conservative rule.

 

But this looks like something they have got a positive start on. What they have said is, that when a car is driving in autonomous mode, someone has to bear responsibility - in othe words, the usual strict liability liability that is on the driver at fault under the Road Traffic Act passes to the manufacturer while the car is in autonomous mode. This seems reasonable (as OME alludes to, depending on the meaning of autonomous mode). The driver has surrendered control of the car to software and hardware which was manufactured or purchased by the car manufacturer (and distributed by the distributor). It also has had to meet standards specified by the Act and regulations (to be written) under the Act and of course, it has to be tested to meet standards. The manufacturer, not the driver, warrants the AV mode meets requiremens. The driver has had no input and does not know how the AV system was built, nor tests it (well, production useis the ultimate test). Therefore, should the liability at the point the dirver surrenders control of driving the car not transfer to what has control - the car, and therefore, the makers of the car? As an example, if a driver of a normal new car has an accident which was the fault of a design flaw of that car, doesn't the obligation shift to the manufactuer of the car from the driver who was under control? What the Act is doing is setting a standard

 

I don't know if there are limits, or some form of contributory negligence - for example, if the driver neglects to meeet maintenance schedules, or drives and engages the AV mode after an accident or a sensor has been compromised through a shopping trolley interaction that ought to have been identified. I have yet to read anything that suggests that manufactureres liability will be an issue as it was in the US.  I agree, manufacturers will be apprehensive at first, which is why it is doubtful that there will be any AVs in mass numbers by 2026.

 

BTW, in the UK, the aircraft operator has absolute liability for damages caused by an accident. That means, the wing can fall off through a manufacturing fault, and the operator bears all liability for claims of damages that arise from the accident. The answer - insurance. My guess wuill be the AV components manufacturers will have to provide indemnities to the car manufacturer and that the manufacturer/distributor will take out an insurance on a per-car basis, which they will simply pass onto the consumer.

[nomadpete]

4 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

On Autonomous Vehicles, I haven't read the AV Act, but the legal commentary has been it is largely tweaks to facilitate AVs to be able to be rolled out. There is no suggestion that by 2026 there will be a mass of AVs on the roads all of a sudden, nor the current government expect or are encouraging AVs to be flooding the roads in 2026. So, to frame it as some sort of policy failing waiting to happen  is inaccurate. Thanks again, MSM.

 

Of course, it depends from what side of the fence you are looking. If you are a wealthy Russian oligarch, quite a lot ;-). Seriously, there are some things they have got right, or more right than others. The furlough scheme here, which was Sunak's design, was far better than the crap they served up in Australia for lock-downs. The aggressive pursuit of a vaccine was also seen widely as a success; of course, the dilly-dallying with the lockdowns wasn't, but if ScoMo has the same power as BoJo did, it is likely the deaths would have been much higher in Aus. And the UK has been investing heavinly in renewables and are way ahead at rolling out EV infrastructure. I agree their overall scorecard has been bad, but would argue not that much worse than under 13 years of Aussie conservative rule.

 

But this looks like something they have got a positive start on. What they have said is, that when a car is driving in autonomous mode, someone has to bear responsibility - in othe words, the usual strict liability liability that is on the driver at fault under the Road Traffic Act passes to the manufacturer while the car is in autonomous mode. This seems reasonable (as OME alludes to, depending on the meaning of autonomous mode). The driver has surrendered control of the car to software and hardware which was manufactured or purchased by the car manufacturer (and distributed by the distributor). It also has had to meet standards specified by the Act and regulations (to be written) under the Act and of course, it has to be tested to meet standards. The manufacturer, not the driver, warrants the AV mode meets requiremens. The driver has had no input and does not know how the AV system was built, nor tests it (well, production useis the ultimate test). Therefore, should the liability at the point the dirver surrenders control of driving the car not transfer to what has control - the car, and therefore, the makers of the car? As an example, if a driver of a normal new car has an accident which was the fault of a design flaw of that car, doesn't the obligation shift to the manufactuer of the car from the driver who was under control? What the Act is doing is setting a standard

 

I don't know if there are limits, or some form of contributory negligence - for example, if the driver neglects to meeet maintenance schedules, or drives and engages the AV mode after an accident or a sensor has been compromised through a shopping trolley interaction that ought to have been identified. I have yet to read anything that suggests that manufactureres liability will be an issue as it was in the US.  I agree, manufacturers will be apprehensive at first, which is why it is doubtful that there will be any AVs in mass numbers by 2026.

 

BTW, in the UK, the aircraft operator has absolute liability for damages caused by an accident. That means, the wing can fall off through a manufacturing fault, and the operator bears all liability for claims of damages that arise from the accident. The answer - insurance. My guess wuill be the AV components manufacturers will have to provide indemnities to the car manufacturer and that the manufacturer/distributor will take out an insurance on a per-car basis, which they will simply pass onto the consumer.

It sounds like a wise move to put this new legislation in place early.

 

Would this forward thinking legislation be a reminder of something that should have veen considered before social media went mad?  For instance I see a similarity (in concept) to the issue of social media billionaires basically now saying "don't blame me for the outcomes" when their software has permitted unconscionable damage to individuals through distribution of unfettered misinformation.

 

Had there been some legislative groundwork been laid in the early days, the internet might be a bit safer today.

 

However, that tiger is already out of the bag.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Veering of topic, but the whole net-neutrality thing, to me is BS.. It is basically saying let's keep the wild west, wild. The internet is a media channel, just likeother media chennels - with one exception - there is no governance andf anyone can say what they like. Yes, you could argue there is not enough governance with MSM, and I would agree, but at least it is not open slather.. well, not until recent times.. which I can't help but think is allowed to allow them to compete with the internet.

[old man emu]

5 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

it is doubtful that there will be any AVs in mass numbers by 2026

Quite correct. All this legislation does is set the basic responsibilities of the use of these systems.

 

Unfortunately I have lost the link to another article that went into some of the external things that are needed to enable the system to work. An essential thing is the upgrade of the data used by GPS systems  to navigate. In England, this data has to be supplied by the local council. Imaging the effort involved in getting details about every street, lane and track in even such, to Australians, a small area.  Goggle Maps won't help because not every road has been recorded in detail. The road I live on, which is a very minor road used to access a few farms, hasn't been photo-mapped like the highway it runs off.

 

Also, while this data is available can be obtained for England, it is not as available for Wales, and the legislation says that autonomous operation will not be permitted in Northern Ireland. I doubt if it would work north of Hadrian's Wall.

 

And can you imagine the work involved in keeping GPS data updated? Land is being developed in England for housing estates. Having worked as a shuttle bus driver in southwest Sydney where houses seem to spring up like field mushroom after rain, I can tell you that trying to find a street in a new development can be nightmarish. I often wonder how builders find the site where they have to build a house on the first day.

1 hour ago, nomadpete said:

It sounds like a wise move to put this new legislation in place early.

Definitely.

[spacesailor]

Please Mi-lord . It wasn't I , that refused to stop for the police, it was the 'autonomous car ' , doing it's own thing 

I was merely a passenger .

spacesailor

[kgwilson]

I haven't been here for a while. A few comments.

 

EV sales world wide continue to grow despite a downturn in some markets & that downturn also applies to ice cars. Toyotas sales have slumped in China despite growing in other markets but with a world wide decline.

 

40% of all cars now sold in China are pure electric

 

1000km range is now common among the top level Chinese EVs. Nio, BYD, Geely & Tesla (Chinese built) now have 1000km range options

 

NMC & LFP batteries are proving to last much longer than even the pundits thought.

 

CATL now provide a 1 & 1.5 million km warranty for new bus/truck batteries in China.

 

Geelys Zeekr  has a battery that can be swapped out in under 4 minutes at an automated battery swap station.

 

A good small hatchback EV in China now costs 16-20k.

 

Battery prices have reduced by over 40%in the last year though that is not reflected in new EV pricing mainly due to many manufacturers selling at a loss & so are now making up for lost profit.

 

The surge in Chinese EVs around the world has started a price war especially at the +60k end of the market.

 

So what do these comments mean for us in Australia? The future is here, it just takes a while to trickle down to backwaters like Australia where our charging infrastructure is abysmal and prices are high. There are few places that can repair EVs after a crash & many Insurance companies write them off after relatively minor damage. There is a general reluctance to change which is normal but not sensible. Smart vehicle service organisations will be upskilling to take advantage of the increase in EV numbers. Those who don't will eventually die out. A year ago EV sales were about 2-3% of all vehicle sales. That number has jumped to just over 10% now.

 

There are a lot more hybrids (mainly Japanese) around than a year or so ago. These appeal to many but the facts show that they are not as efficient as they have been made out to be by the manufacturers, they are complex with 2 propulsion systems and expensive both to manufacture and maintain.

 

My top of the range MG4 cost 47k but then that is less or similar to a hot ICE hatch. It has 150kw (204 hp) of power available from zero rpm & beats most ICE cars off the line, has superb handling & makes no noise except from the tyres & noise generator at 20km/h or less. It costs virtually nothing to run as I charge at home from solar energy & requires very little maintenance. The first scheduled service is at 2 years of 40,000km. Teslas do not have any maintenance schedule at all. So yes I am a convert and won't ever go back to an ICE car. The argument over whether EVs are really greener continues but this article provides some interesting findings.

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-27/comparing-electric-cars-and-petrol-cars/103746132

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I was driving behind one of these yesterday: https://www.renaultgroup.com/en/news-on-air/news/twizy-2/

 

As a sporty little town runabout, I would think they are hard to beat.. Not sure how much shopping you can get in one - maybe have to go for the two seater. But it looked fun, and the acceleration was brisk...

[kgwilson]

Typically French with weird looks & where do you put the shopping bags. Great round town concept though & you could easily just park it bum to kerb.

[Marty_d]

Horses for courses as always.  That little French thing meets a need for singles who don't tend to do huge shops anyway and live in inner city/close suburbia - and there's a lot meeting that criteria.

 

There's a lot of straw man arguments about not being able to travel the outback in EV's or tow a 3 ton caravan, but 99.9% of people don't do that anyway.  I'd even argue that 90% or more of big-ass 4wd's out there never actually go offroad and never tow anything.

Edited May 28 by Marty_d

[spacesailor]

Granddaughter has bought an " MG  " hybrid. 

But cannot  charge from home ( state housing ) ,

As it puts her power I'll too high . Only running petrol. 

Nurses wage are not high enough to pay " market " rent

And higher purchase for that ' essential '  transport need.

spacesailor