EV depreciation

They might be still under warranty - certainly if they're with the original owner. Many BEV manufacturers give an 8 year guarantee that their battery will retain 75% of its capacity after this time. But I wonder if it's one of these guarantees that can never be claimed on. I was foolish enough to buy a new Mercedes some years ago because of their Mobilo 30 year guarantee against rust - provided that it was serviced at a Merc dealer.

When it started to go rusty after 4 years (just outside normal guarantee) I took it down to the dealer thinking that it would be rectified without argument. I was referred to the fine print of the Mobilo guarantee. It was immediately clear that the car would have to have large holes in the bodywork for any claim for repair to be upheld. And the dealer told me that he'd had 3 year old Mercedes coming in for rust repairs and Mercedes refused to contribute anything.

It's another scam.

So we will have one firm monopolise motorway charging will we?

I think it's pretty obvious to anybody who knows anything about BEVs that they're a hoax. Even if they were viable they wouldn't save any CO2, which appears to be what the requirement is. But they're not viable for so many obvious reasons.

It's a hoax, I'm afraid, and it becomes more obvious by the day.

BEVs are NOT the future - they're a ridiculous dead-end and those who work in the industry know this perfectly well. The thing is that if a government tells an industry to do something stupid they don't turn round and tell them to fuck off, they just say OK how much will you pay us?

A good example of this is the recent decision of Tata to build a BEV battery plant in Somerset. They know perfectly well that it's impossible to make an energy-intensive process like battery production viable in the UK because of the cost of energy, but they also know that that they can pocket a good proportion of the £500 million that the govt has offered and then just abandon the project when it goes bust. Which it will.

It's the same with BEVs. All the manufacturers know perfectly well that they're a non-starter, but the govt have mandated them by 2030 and are providing subsidies for purchasers, so the manufacturers are perfectly happy to provide them while they're making money. Why not. But most manufacturers (apart from Tesla) retain their ability to make conventional cars and can fairly easily revert to ICE cars, when BEVs become unviable.

I think China's involvement in this debacle is pretty sinister. I'm pretty sure that the whole BEV project was started because of disinformation about CO2's role in so-called "climate change". The requirement to cut CO2 has made ICE cars a bete noire with many stupid people who think that CO2 is a pollutant as opposed to an essential part of the atmosphere. The disinformation about CO2 almost certainly comes from China and Russia. It's not a coincidence that moving to BEVs means that China can virtually take over world car production and battery production because the West's huge advantage in ICE car production would disappear - anyone can make electric cars.

At some point people will realise what's going on. People are already going off BEVs as they realise that they're not cheaper to run and that they're a pain to recharge in most parts of the country and also take a very long time.

Just read an article on EV's and Hybrid cars the Fire Brigade if called to a car fire they usually send just one Fire Tender, if its an EV or Hybrid they send two as they are harder to put out, they burn that fiercely and shout out flames of fire like a rocket fir up to several metres , they burn much hotter and produce Hydrogen Cyanide