Cold Calling

DANNY WILLIAMS ‘COLD CALLING’

Each month our special correspondent Danny Williams* replies to a reader’s letter...

“You have referred to being a bit of a petrol head previously Danny. How does a future without noisy diesels and polluting petrol engines appeal? We are replacing our vehicles with electric versions as a positive signal to our customers? Are you doing the same?”

KB Essex

Well KB, you have struck a chord with me: I do indeed have a passion for the internal combustion engine, so much so that through most of my life I have endangered life and limb, mostly my own, by hurling myself around motor racing circuits in sundry vehicles acquired or built for that purpose. Neither have my exploits been confined to wheeled vehicles: back in the ‘Nineties I raced for the Seadoo jet ski team and these days I am more likely to be found on water than tarmac, though I have a passion for sail as much as power on the high seas.

It appears that the march towards the replacement of internal combustion powered vehicles on our roads is unstoppable. And despite my passion for all things powered by ICEs, I agree that a dramatic reduction in our carbon footprint is way overdue. Whilst I have not taken on any electric cars I have been close to acquiring a Tesla and admire the technology that goes into them. But electric, or at least the wholesale and unquestioned commitment to the eradication of the internal combustion engine, replaced directly by electric powered vehicles, is reckless, irresponsible and brings with it enormous dangers. In a nutshell, electric vehicles are replacing pollution with pollution, with enormous impact on the environment. The issues are widely known and still we march towards the edge like lemmings, led by politicians globally, that have encouraged the inevitable rise of electrification through legislation. They have done this despite not only the science that says it’s wrong to commit so totally, but against the ability of infrastructure to keep step in the meantime. And probably going forward too. There is so much knowledge now about the negative impact that the production of electric vehicles has on the environment, it is irrefutable. A total commitment to EVs is not the solution: they are more expensive to buy; mining for lithium and cobalt amongst other materials is ruinous to the areas mined and highly dangerous to extract; and the safe disposal of end-of-life batteries hasn’t been scratched yet. Even saintly Volvo agrees: It is the only manufacturer able to make a direct comparison between the impact of producing ICE vehicles compared to electric, as the vehicles are produced on the same production line. The firm has produced a fascinating report comparing the two. Some of the starkest details are these: It says that ‘The accumulated emissions from the materials production and refining, Li-ion battery modules and Volvo Cars manufacturing phases of C40 Recharge are nearly 70 per cent higher than for XC40 ICE.’ The ICE powered version of the similar XC40 produces 59 tonnes of CO2 over 200,000km. By comparison the carbon footprint for a C40 plug in powered using a ‘global electricity mix’ is 50 tonnes, reducing to 27 tonnes if charged using wind-generated electricity. But there is currently no way to guarantee the supply of clean electricity, so this is moot. The report also asserts the plug in electric C40 only becomes carbon positive against the ICE version after around 70,000 miles. Not so clear cut at all, is it?

Ownership of electric cars is fraught with peril: unless you are a smug Tesla driver the chances are you will suffer from range anxiety and the genuine fear of being unable to charge your vehicle when needed. And whilst I wouldn’t want to have an accident in any car, remember that should you have the misfortune of having a collision in an electric vehicle, the rescue services cannot remove the occupants of a vehicle until the battery is isolated and, horror of horrors, lithium batteries burn with incredible intensity and cannot be extinguished with water or foam. The chance of survival when trapped in an EV fire doesn’t bare thinking about. And breath….

The language surrounding ICE cars and their ecological impact is wrong. The problem is not the internal combustion engine: it is the fossil fuels that are burned in them. ICEs are cheap to build, reliable, understood and easily recycled. Synthetic fuels are a reality and currently being demonstrated in F1 racing cars. They are expensive but as with all such things the cost will come down as volumes rise. And hydrogen can be used in ICEs, with minimal adaptation. The difficulties in the production of hydrogen are well understood, and they are being resolved with solutions that would be found even quicker if the government backed them. We are even running out of generation capacity, an issue that has been well-known and discussed for years. And now we are loading more strain on a system that at best, is decades behind where it should be. Nuclear is the only realistic solution and each plant will take 10 years to build, even after the politics and protests allow work to begin. Now if the government had simply changed the emission requirements on cars to be much lower, much sooner manufacturers would have spent the last ten years developing even cleaner engines. Advance the cause further by increasing tax on polluting vehicles or a mileage tax applied at MOT, scrappage schemes etc. Then set hydrogen power as a clear goal, with electric vehicles as a choice too, just not the only solution. As admitted, I was attracted by a Tesla, as it appealed to my inner hooligan; but that phase quickly passed. Now, the only reason to consider an EV is the immediate tax benefit but that is outweighed, in my view, by the whole premise upon which they are based being flawed and fundamentally immoral.

You did ask, KB.

“Now if the government had simply changed the emission requirements on cars to be much lower, much sooner manufacturers would have spent the last ten years developing even cleaner engines. Advance the cause further by increasing tax on polluting vehicles or a mileage tax applied at MOT, scrappage schemes etc. Then set hydrogen power as a clear goal, with electric vehicles as a choice too, just not the only solution.”