Eu U-turn on petrol cars

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hasn't Germany resorted to refiring up their coal power plants again?
Don't believe russian propaganda, please... No coal power plant in Germany has been re-opened other than to bridge potential gas supply issues in the beginning of the Ukraine war in 2022, in fact, we are closing more and more. We have been 69% on green power last year, with zero own nuclear energy and an import of 0,5% of our consumption from France's Nuclear plants, simply because it was cheaper. Why is that? Because the Energy company goes into massive depth that is covered by the french government => the french people pay for it not with official energy cost but with their tax money. Great, eh? Same will happen with Hinkley point and any other Nuclear plant. There is not ONE Nuclear plant in Europe built in the past 10 years that runs cost effective or has matched their cost estimates when planned. The rest of the imports were green power in Germany btw. we imported from Skandinavia, where countries run not only on 100% green energy but have enough to even sell it to us... so - not possible to run 100% green? The Skandinavians must be really stupid... But then, they also have 100% of new cars being EV's, they run heat pumps in 80% of the private house holds since years (where we fight for our conventional, gas operating systems...) and so on. Statistics show, that quality of live and satisfaction is the highest in Skandinavia. But maybe there is no correlation, for sure it is just because of their Saunas... ;)

What the current German government (with Mrs. Reichel, who comes from the gas energy industry, but she is not a lobbyist, nooo.......) is planning is twice as many gas power plants (did I say she is not a lobbyist? She isn't, I am pretty sure... maybe...) as the former government under Robert Habeck. Not only has this plan been destroyed and refused by the EU as it moves us further away from the zero emission target in 2045 and makes no sense in that regard, it is also absolutely not necessary, as the power distribution has been build up and finalized under the last government so that wide parts of southern Germany have now energy coming from the wind mills in the northern sea... As said, we do not have a production capacity problem, we have storage and distribution problem. Once these two are fixed, we can come close to 100% green energy with dramatically lower cost! Especially, as the Energy cost for the industry needs to be around 6 Cent. If we go Nuclear, we would have to cover roughly 8 - 14 Cent at least with tax payers money. If we go wind energy, that is only 2 cent. A little difference, right?

Nuclear plants are useless from my point of view. For peaks, you can't use them, in Summer you might have to switch them off (see France), as a reserve they are also useless as a) they cost to much and b) you can not start and stop them like other power plants (Gas f.e.). If a gas power plant blowes up, you have a damage locally of maybe 3-5 Kilometers with some broken windows. If a nuclear plant blows up (Tschernobyl, Fokoshima, etc. etc. etc.), this is affecting thousands of square kilometers, it crosses boarders easily and poisens millions of people. Think also of a war situation... One conventional bomb into Hinkley point and UK is poisened for decades. you would have to import ANY food for the next 30+ years. Making you independent? Well...

And it is funny to think that a nuclear power plant would make you independent even in peace times... as Russia in most cases delivers the material... The reason Putin dared to invade Ukrain was because he counted on us beeing to dependent on him. He said in an Interview: "Europe can do nothing against Russia. They need our oil and gas, as what would they heat their houses with if not with our oil and gas? With wood? Well - where do they get it if not from russian forrests?" Same goes for Urane...

Oh - and if you think a swimming pool full of radio active material isn't something bad: take a swim in that pool, please... I kilo is enough to poison ground water supply for thousands of years. If you think this is all safe, my answer is: mankind has managed to fuck ANYTHING up that they thought would be safe. Not dangerous? Mmmhh... I have my doubts, sorry... The workers in Tschernobyl and also Fokushima were told that it is safe. Not many of them are still alive. Tschernobyl happend in the 80's. You still can't go there for longer than 30 Minutes without endangering your health seriously. Safe sounds different to me, to be honest. And please don't tell me that this was a different type of reactor, ours are mutch safer. That is what they told the people there, too, for decades...

It is funny that the local minister of Bavaria, Mr. Soeder, claimed, that the local nuclear plants could be "easily brought back online" before the election, right after the election, there is no talking about anymore... Even worse: he wanted the "NEXIT" (Nuclear Exit) in 2015/2016 and was proud to support this law, last year he wanted the nuclear plants back (during the election process, just to make the last government look bad and knowing this is bullshit...) and now he states that they never will go back to nuclear plants in Bavaria. Oh - and he never wanted to have the waste anywhere in Bavaria! But then he wants also fracking, but not in Bavaria...

Politicians only tell us what is best for THEM, not what is good for us...
 
Last edited:
I believe there have been discussions on tidal generators on the Bay of Fundy in New Brunswick..... not sure how that has been progressing.

I believe at one time there was a department store in New York City that generated it's power from tidal generation.

I could stand to be corrected on that.

As per Google:

  • The Gristedes supermarket
This initial test phase successfully operated for nearly two years, producing about 50 megawatt-hours of electricity and demonstrating the viability of tidal power in an urban setting.
Old hat.
 
Don't believe russian propaganda, please... No coal power plant in Germany has been re-opened other than to bridge potential gas supply issues in the beginning of the Ukraine war in 2022, in fact, we are closing more and more. We have been 69% on green power last year, with zero own nuclear energy and an import of 0,5% of our consumption from France's Nuclear plants, simply because it was cheaper. Why is that? Because the Energy company goes into massive depth that is covered by the french government => the french people pay for it not with official energy cost but with their tax money. Great, eh? Same will happen with Hinkley point and any other Nuclear plant. There is not ONE Nuclear plant in Europe built in the past 10 years that runs cost effective or has matched their cost estimates when planned. The rest of the imports were green power in Germany btw. we imported from Skandinavia, where countries run not only on 100% green energy but have enough to even sell it to us... so - not possible to run 100% green? The Skandinavians must be really stupid... But then, they also have 100% of new cars being EV's, they run heat pumps in 80% of the private house holds since years (where we fight for our conventional, gas operating systems...) and so on. Statistics show, that quality of live and satisfaction is the highest in Skandinavia. But maybe there is no correlation, for sure it is just because of their Saunas... ;)

What the current German government (with Mrs. Reichel, who comes from the gas energy industry, but she is not a lobbyist, nooo.......) is planning is twice as many gas power plants (did I say she is not a lobbyist? She isn't, I am pretty sure... maybe...) as the former government under Robert Habeck. Not only has this plan been destroyed and refused by the EU as it moves us further away from the zero emission target in 2045 and makes no sense in that regard, it is also absolutely not necessary, as the power distribution has been build up and finalized under the last government so that wide parts of southern Germany have now energy coming from the wind mills in the northern sea... As said, we do not have a production capacity problem, we have storage and distribution problem. Once these two are fixed, we can come close to 100% green energy with dramatically lower cost! Especially, as the Energy cost for the industry needs to be around 6 Cent. If we go Nuclear, we would have to cover roughly 8 - 14 Cent at least with tax payers money. If we go wind energy, that is only 2 cent. A little difference, right?

Nuclear plants are useless from my point of view. For peaks, you can't use them, in Summer you might have to switch them off (see France), as a reserve they are also useless as a) they cost to much and b) you can not start and stop them like other power plants (Gas f.e.). If a gas power plant blowes up, you have a damage locally of maybe 3-5 Kilometers with some broken windows. If a nuclear plant blows up (Tschernobyl, Fokoshima, etc. etc. etc.), this is affecting thousands of square kilometers, it crosses boarders easily and poisens millions of people. Think also of a war situation... One conventional bomb into Hinkley point and UK is poisened for decades. you would have to import ANY food for the next 30+ years. Making you independent? Well...

And it is funny to think that a nuclear power plant would make you independent even in peace times... as Russia in most cases delivers the material... The reason Putin dared to invade Ukrain was because he counted on us beeing to dependent on him. He said in an Interview: "Europe can do nothing against Russia. They need our oil and gas, as what would they heat their houses with if not with our oil and gas? With wood? Well - where do they get it if not from russian forrests?" Same goes for Urane...

Oh - and if you think a swimming pool full of radio active material isn't something bad: take a swim in that pool, please... I kilo is enough to poison ground water supply for thousands of years. If you think this is all safe, my answer is: mankind has managed to fuck ANYTHING up that they thought would be safe. Not dangerous? Mmmhh... I have my doubts, sorry... The workers in Tschernobyl and also Fokushima were told that it is safe. Not many of them are still alive. Tschernobyl happend in the 80's. You still can't go there for longer than 30 Minutes without endangering your health seriously. Safe sounds different to me, to be honest. And please don't tell me that this was a different type of reactor, ours are mutch safer. That is what they told the people there, too, for decades...

It is funny that the local minister of Bavaria, Mr. Soeder, claimed, that the local nuclear plants could be "easily brought back online" before the election, right after the election, there is no talking about anymore... Even worse: he wanted the "NEXIT" (Nuclear Exit) in 2015/2016 and was proud to support this law, last year he wanted the nuclear plants back (during the election process, just to make the last government look bad and knowing this is bullshit...) and now he states that they never will go back to nuclear plants in Bavaria. Oh - and he never wanted to have the waste anywhere in Bavaria! But then he wants also fracking, but not in Bavaria...

Politicians only tell us what is best for THEM, not what is good for us...

Would one conventional bomb falling on Hinckley C be the same as one nuclear bomb falling on Birmingham ?


If you`re worried about nuclear fallout , then my money would be on the tensions between India and Pakistan over Kashmir escalating into open conflict .
India is currently spending more money developing it`s nuclear armed submarines per annum than the UK does maintaining it`s fleet of Trident armed subs .
Pakistan , being more land-locked , relies on airborne nuclear missiles ....... it`s current spending on it`s nuclear arsenal is roughly equal to the UK`s ...........
When tension flared a year or so ago , one Pakistani MP was calling for the use of tactical ( battlefield ) nuclear weapons to be used to settle the conflict ........

If India and Pakistan unleashed all their nuclear weapons against each other , this planet would be plunged into a nuclear winter lasting for thousands of years , extending all the way down from the tip of northern Europe down to the coast of Antarctica ...........

Kim Jong Un has got nothing on these guys ............


The point is ............. there is potential danger from nuclear energy and radiation fallout ,and the unleashing of nuclear weapons wherever you care to look on this planet ......... None of this stuff is going to un - invent itself , or quietly go away ...........

The dangers involved in harnessing nuclear power for domestic use , and even safe storage of the waste , rather slips down the league table when placed against the much more likely scenario of deliberate and intentional unleashing of nuclear weapons .............

This is the situation that exists today , and it`s not likely to change any time soon .......... like it or not ............

And you have to bear in mind that no one exists in isolation anymore ....... you can erect all the wind turbines you like for a nuclear free future ....... The problem is that radiation fallout , either accidental or intentional , doesn`t stop at a national boundary .......


BTW .... I believe that the whole point of Small Modular Reactors is that they are cheaper and quicker to construct , and more cost effective in operation than the full scale nuclear power plants you mention ........
 
Last edited:
Don't believe russian propaganda, please... No coal power plant in Germany has been re-opened other than to bridge potential gas supply issues in the beginning of the Ukraine war in 2022, in fact, we are closing more and more. We have been 69% on green power last year, with zero own nuclear energy and an import of 0,5% of our consumption from France's Nuclear plants, simply because it was cheaper. Why is that? Because the Energy company goes into massive depth that is covered by the french government => the french people pay for it not with official energy cost but with their tax money. Great, eh? Same will happen with Hinkley point and any other Nuclear plant. There is not ONE Nuclear plant in Europe built in the past 10 years that runs cost effective or has matched their cost estimates when planned. The rest of the imports were green power in Germany btw. we imported from Skandinavia, where countries run not only on 100% green energy but have enough to even sell it to us... so - not possible to run 100% green? The Skandinavians must be really stupid... But then, they also have 100% of new cars being EV's, they run heat pumps in 80% of the private house holds since years (where we fight for our conventional, gas operating systems...) and so on. Statistics show, that quality of live and satisfaction is the highest in Skandinavia. But maybe there is no correlation, for sure it is just because of their Saunas... ;)

What the current German government (with Mrs. Reichel, who comes from the gas energy industry, but she is not a lobbyist, nooo.......) is planning is twice as many gas power plants (did I say she is not a lobbyist? She isn't, I am pretty sure... maybe...) as the former government under Robert Habeck. Not only has this plan been destroyed and refused by the EU as it moves us further away from the zero emission target in 2045 and makes no sense in that regard, it is also absolutely not necessary, as the power distribution has been build up and finalized under the last government so that wide parts of southern Germany have now energy coming from the wind mills in the northern sea... As said, we do not have a production capacity problem, we have storage and distribution problem. Once these two are fixed, we can come close to 100% green energy with dramatically lower cost! Especially, as the Energy cost for the industry needs to be around 6 Cent. If we go Nuclear, we would have to cover roughly 8 - 14 Cent at least with tax payers money. If we go wind energy, that is only 2 cent. A little difference, right?

Nuclear plants are useless from my point of view. For peaks, you can't use them, in Summer you might have to switch them off (see France), as a reserve they are also useless as a) they cost to much and b) you can not start and stop them like other power plants (Gas f.e.). If a gas power plant blowes up, you have a damage locally of maybe 3-5 Kilometers with some broken windows. If a nuclear plant blows up (Tschernobyl, Fokoshima, etc. etc. etc.), this is affecting thousands of square kilometers, it crosses boarders easily and poisens millions of people. Think also of a war situation... One conventional bomb into Hinkley point and UK is poisened for decades. you would have to import ANY food for the next 30+ years. Making you independent? Well...

And it is funny to think that a nuclear power plant would make you independent even in peace times... as Russia in most cases delivers the material... The reason Putin dared to invade Ukrain was because he counted on us beeing to dependent on him. He said in an Interview: "Europe can do nothing against Russia. They need our oil and gas, as what would they heat their houses with if not with our oil and gas? With wood? Well - where do they get it if not from russian forrests?" Same goes for Urane...

Oh - and if you think a swimming pool full of radio active material isn't something bad: take a swim in that pool, please... I kilo is enough to poison ground water supply for thousands of years. If you think this is all safe, my answer is: mankind has managed to fuck ANYTHING up that they thought would be safe. Not dangerous? Mmmhh... I have my doubts, sorry... The workers in Tschernobyl and also Fokushima were told that it is safe. Not many of them are still alive. Tschernobyl happend in the 80's. You still can't go there for longer than 30 Minutes without endangering your health seriously. Safe sounds different to me, to be honest. And please don't tell me that this was a different type of reactor, ours are mutch safer. That is what they told the people there, too, for decades...

It is funny that the local minister of Bavaria, Mr. Soeder, claimed, that the local nuclear plants could be "easily brought back online" before the election, right after the election, there is no talking about anymore... Even worse: he wanted the "NEXIT" (Nuclear Exit) in 2015/2016 and was proud to support this law, last year he wanted the nuclear plants back (during the election process, just to make the last government look bad and knowing this is bullshit...) and now he states that they never will go back to nuclear plants in Bavaria. Oh - and he never wanted to have the waste anywhere in Bavaria! But then he wants also fracking, but not in Bavaria...

Politicians only tell us what is best for THEM, not what is good for us...
https://www.energyconnects.com/news...keep-reserve-coal-plants-longer-than-planned/

https://share.google/EdxDGcPA8S0N3VW7P
 
Don't believe russian propaganda, please... No coal power plant in Germany has been re-opened other than to bridge potential gas supply issues in the beginning of the Ukraine war in 2022, in fact, we are closing more and more. We have been 69% on green power last year, with zero own nuclear energy and an import of 0,5% of our consumption from France's Nuclear plants, simply because it was cheaper. Why is that? Because the Energy company goes into massive depth that is covered by the french government => the french people pay for it not with official energy cost but with their tax money. Great, eh? Same will happen with Hinkley point and any other Nuclear plant. There is not ONE Nuclear plant in Europe built in the past 10 years that runs cost effective or has matched their cost estimates when planned. The rest of the imports were green power in Germany btw. we imported from Skandinavia, where countries run not only on 100% green energy but have enough to even sell it to us... so - not possible to run 100% green? The Skandinavians must be really stupid... But then, they also have 100% of new cars being EV's, they run heat pumps in 80% of the private house holds since years (where we fight for our conventional, gas operating systems...) and so on. Statistics show, that quality of live and satisfaction is the highest in Skandinavia. But maybe there is no correlation, for sure it is just because of their Saunas... ;)

What the current German government (with Mrs. Reichel, who comes from the gas energy industry, but she is not a lobbyist, nooo.......) is planning is twice as many gas power plants (did I say she is not a lobbyist? She isn't, I am pretty sure... maybe...) as the former government under Robert Habeck. Not only has this plan been destroyed and refused by the EU as it moves us further away from the zero emission target in 2045 and makes no sense in that regard, it is also absolutely not necessary, as the power distribution has been build up and finalized under the last government so that wide parts of southern Germany have now energy coming from the wind mills in the northern sea... As said, we do not have a production capacity problem, we have storage and distribution problem. Once these two are fixed, we can come close to 100% green energy with dramatically lower cost! Especially, as the Energy cost for the industry needs to be around 6 Cent. If we go Nuclear, we would have to cover roughly 8 - 14 Cent at least with tax payers money. If we go wind energy, that is only 2 cent. A little difference, right?

Nuclear plants are useless from my point of view. For peaks, you can't use them, in Summer you might have to switch them off (see France), as a reserve they are also useless as a) they cost to much and b) you can not start and stop them like other power plants (Gas f.e.). If a gas power plant blowes up, you have a damage locally of maybe 3-5 Kilometers with some broken windows. If a nuclear plant blows up (Tschernobyl, Fokoshima, etc. etc. etc.), this is affecting thousands of square kilometers, it crosses boarders easily and poisens millions of people. Think also of a war situation... One conventional bomb into Hinkley point and UK is poisened for decades. you would have to import ANY food for the next 30+ years. Making you independent? Well...

And it is funny to think that a nuclear power plant would make you independent even in peace times... as Russia in most cases delivers the material... The reason Putin dared to invade Ukrain was because he counted on us beeing to dependent on him. He said in an Interview: "Europe can do nothing against Russia. They need our oil and gas, as what would they heat their houses with if not with our oil and gas? With wood? Well - where do they get it if not from russian forrests?" Same goes for Urane...

Oh - and if you think a swimming pool full of radio active material isn't something bad: take a swim in that pool, please... I kilo is enough to poison ground water supply for thousands of years. If you think this is all safe, my answer is: mankind has managed to fuck ANYTHING up that they thought would be safe. Not dangerous? Mmmhh... I have my doubts, sorry... The workers in Tschernobyl and also Fokushima were told that it is safe. Not many of them are still alive. Tschernobyl happend in the 80's. You still can't go there for longer than 30 Minutes without endangering your health seriously. Safe sounds different to me, to be honest. And please don't tell me that this was a different type of reactor, ours are mutch safer. That is what they told the people there, too, for decades...

It is funny that the local minister of Bavaria, Mr. Soeder, claimed, that the local nuclear plants could be "easily brought back online" before the election, right after the election, there is no talking about anymore... Even worse: he wanted the "NEXIT" (Nuclear Exit) in 2015/2016 and was proud to support this law, last year he wanted the nuclear plants back (during the election process, just to make the last government look bad and knowing this is bullshit...) and now he states that they never will go back to nuclear plants in Bavaria. Oh - and he never wanted to have the waste anywhere in Bavaria! But then he wants also fracking, but not in Bavaria...

Politicians only tell us what is best for THEM, not what is good for us...
Blimey Lothar you really are putting in a lot of effort here. You do realise you are only talking to a few old farts and not the UN general assembly don't you ?
 
Last edited:
To me "may need to keep coal plants longer" and "reactivating coal plants" is something different, don't you agree? And "may" signalizes a conjunctive. The article is from January this year, so one year old. To my knowledge, as said before, no coal plant has been activated since then.

The other article is obviously old, as it refers to Robert Habeck, who is not longer in the government...
 
To me "may need to keep coal plants longer" and "reactivating coal plants" is something different, don't you agree? And "may" signalizes a conjunctive. The article is from January this year, so one year old. To my knowledge, as said before, no coal plant has been activated since then.

The other article is obviously old, as it refers to Robert Habeck, who is not longer in the government...
Sure Lothar, but those two article were the first two that I came across. Even you must agree that the Guardian and Bloomberg are far from Russian propaganda.

I also don't pay attention to German politics.

You have your views and I have mine.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2025-12-19 145209.png
    Screenshot 2025-12-19 145209.png
    149.6 KB · Views: 4
Last edited:
The usage of coal is constantly decreasing in Germany and was in the first half of the year below 21%, an all-time low with a decrease year over year of roughly 5-8% (down from 24 to 21 in 2 years)!

The green alternatives were constantly rising, massively under Robert Habeck. We are not re-opening coal plants at all, this is just fals "information" if not wild speculation. Even the current government only wants to build new gas power plants. So - any wild speculations here are simply wrong and haven't happened.
 
although I love my old petrol burning engines, the Laverdas and my Betas and have good memories of my race times with two stroke Suzuki, Maico and Casal bikes I have to admit that EV will be the future and we all have to find soloutions to reduce CO2 emissions.
Well, I took the plunge a while back and bought an EV. This is my 36th car, as far as I can remember.
I have had about the same number of motorcycles as well, all petrol powered ;)
The EV is now 3 years old, and has had zero issues, and it still has 4 years warranty to run. I am really happy with the car, to the extent that I will buy another one should anything happen to it.

Why do I like it? It is fast, comfortable, quiet and incredibly cheap to run, as I can charge it off our solar roof for a good part of the year. Range is probably about half that of a similar-sized petrol car, but this doesn't worry me. I don't miss changing gears; I've had automatics for the last 20 years. It's ability to drive itself makes longer trips much more relaxed, even if it insists I keep a hand on the steering wheel. The car is permanently online, and it's ability to find available fast chargers in seconds and then navigate to them is impressive.

The charging infrastructure in Germany, France, Belgium and the Netherlands is perfectly adequate for the current EV population, and I have no objection to taking a 40 minute break every 3 hours or so to charge it on longer trips. Trips to the UK can be trying, as the charging infrastructure there is iffy, but still do-able. Based on personal experience, I can't see a problem with EVs, provided the infrastructure is adequate.

But, do I want an electric motorcycle or an electric aircraft? No, not at the current level of battery technology. I would probably reconsider if the range reaches adequate levels, though.
So, I am quite happily living with a foot in boths worlds, so to speak.
I can't see what the fuss is about...
 
Well, I took the plunge a while back and bought an EV. This is my 36th car, as far as I can remember.
I have had about the same number of motorcycles as well, all petrol powered ;)
The EV is now 3 years old, and has had zero issues, and it still has 4 years warranty to run. I am really happy with the car, to the extent that I will buy another one should anything happen to it.

Why do I like it? It is fast, comfortable, quiet and incredibly cheap to run, as I can charge it off our solar roof for a good part of the year. Range is probably about half that of a similar-sized petrol car, but this doesn't worry me. I don't miss changing gears; I've had automatics for the last 20 years. It's ability to drive itself makes longer trips much more relaxed, even if it insists I keep a hand on the steering wheel. The car is permanently online, and it's ability to find available fast chargers in seconds and then navigate to them is impressive.

The charging infrastructure in Germany, France, Belgium and the Netherlands is perfectly adequate for the current EV population, and I have no objection to taking a 40 minute break every 3 hours or so to charge it on longer trips. Trips to the UK can be trying, as the charging infrastructure there is iffy, but still do-able. Based on personal experience, I can't see a problem with EVs, provided the infrastructure is adequate.

But, do I want an electric motorcycle or an electric aircraft? No, not at the current level of battery technology. I would probably reconsider if the range reaches adequate levels, though.
So, I am quite happily living with a foot in boths worlds, so to speak.
I can't see what the fuss is about...
The fuss is about change.
Paul
 
To me, the big advantage to EVs is not so much the electric motor, but the elimination of the transmission! The smooth constant acceleration with no herky jerky gear changes was a revelation on first encounter. For transportation electric power is an amazing improvement, for fun, not so much. I’ve never ridden an electric motorcycle, yet, but I expect I will find it to be too smooth, too characterless. On the other hand, I have ridden e-bikes for many miles on and off the road and I love them. But a bicycle is not a motorcycle!
 
A motorbike is about several things, it is about sound, acceleration, vibration, handling etc.. However, the more modern a motorbike is, the less noise it produces, vibrations get killed by countershafts and torque is limited due to the fact that the engine capacity is more and more reduced and power is gained by higher revs.

I love my Jota and it is far, far from being a quiet bike... it is a dino though and I get away with it. I was riding the Triumph 765 RS my son recently bought. almost no vibrations, sound only starts to be nice when you go beyond 9.000 rpm and the low end punch is not really existing.

now - imagine a bike that has it's full 80, 100 or more Nm torque from standing still right when you pull throttle. It accelerates quicker than anything you have ever driven. Overtaking a car is a question of 2-3 seconds.

Only downside is that the battery only allows for something like 80 - 100km of range currently. Not sure how long it takes to re-charge?!?

I would be interested in one if charging on the way is no isse...
 
I had a test ride on a Zero, superb handling and brakes, incredible acceleration and torque, super smooth. But I missed the sound, and the gear changing, and whatever it is that makes the character of a motorcycle. On the electric there is no getting the gear/throttle set up for the corners, which is all part of the motorcycle experience for me. And the electric range just isn’t there, 100 miles is of no use other than commuting. If the range went up to 250-300 miles I’d have one, but it wouldn’t replace my Lav, it would be alongside.
 
Well - to be honest, the average ride on a sunday isn't really more than 100km/60 miles mostly, so the range wouldn't bother me to much for most of the rides. Going to a meeting though would be a bit of an issue, if charging takes to long. And that seems to be the problem currently: I checked the net and it seems that even on a fast charger, most of them can only charge the battery with 40 - 50kw/h, which results in charging times of 40 minutes (from 20 - 80%, which is the quickest) or an hour for up to 95% - and these are the quick ones... On the Zero though, there is the flag ship bike with claimed 280km range, which isn't to bad.

100 miles though is roughly what you get out of most of the Laverdas before you need re-fueling, due to bad carb settings or other issues, if we are honest... 🤷‍♂️ 😂
 
Last edited:
I live on a small island in the Mediterranean and was at one time seriously considering an electric motorcycle. My commute was only 25 - 30 minutes depending on traffic with the possibility to charge either end of the journey.
I dislike riding any of my ICE bikes repeatedly for such short distances as they’re never getting fully heated, charged, dried out, etc. So it really makes sense.
Then I found out how much one would cost. Plus import duties and registration fees etc.
There were then no dealers on the island (no idea if there are now). Incidentally at about the same time a motorcycling colleague in the UK had bought a Zero, at vast expense, loved it and was assured of its anti theft security due to its clever electronic security features.
It was stolen and never recovered. It is alleged that the importers were steeling them to supply the parts market. No idea if this is true but IF that is the case in the UK what chance me being able to source parts on my little island where life is already expensive enough.
I’ve since changed jobs and now organise the burning of 800,000 litres of marine diesel per 3000nm for the entertainment of a single individual and his friends.
 
I’ve since changed jobs and now organise the burning of 800,000 litres of marine diesel per 3000nm for the entertainment of a single individual and his friends.
Back when my Daughter was in primary school and I was flying private jets for a living, The class was set a project to establish the carbon footprint of each pupil's family.
Ours accounted for 85% of the class total.

C560 Captain January.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top