France in Focus

It has been an ongoing discussion for many years already. The BBC tried earlier this year to summarise five big questions.

Unanswered questions: can we triple the capacity of the grid, more new high-voltage towers and digging up every street in every village, every city for additional medium voltage cables? What about the production of electricity within twenty or thirty years, before the 2050 deadline? Charging: local authorities like to say no to the burning of our fossil fuel. They don't always allow EV/hybrid owners to roll out a power cable from door to door over the pavement. Road safety: Euro NCAP has released the safety results of 11 electric SUVs. The cars ensure that occupants are safe in a collision, but their weight and high front end make them a danger to all other road users, the research institute concludes. All those warning lights in modern cars, distracting, are they really improving road safety? Range anxiety: I once got almost 1000 km from my turbo-diesel VW Sharan, going back to about 650 km in my gasoline Outlander feels already as a limitation, more fuel stops necessary, so I do not embrace the idea of an even further limited range without knowing exactly where to recharge. Sorry, out of order....

Practical considerations and high principles, always a difficult policy mix.

Well for both of us it's a no,no.
We will never go electric.
Will never understand why its not hydrogen, all those good cars going to waste when easily converted
Like Western Australia has.
PS.
I get 1400 ks a tank out of my Citroën C4.

All five of the big solutions in the link that are supposed to counter the reluctance of people to buy EVs are based on promises. Mostly by the government, and we all know what government promises are............mostly hot air and waffle.

“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” - Ronald Reagan (and others).

Doug wrote: ↑Sat Dec 09, 2023 3:03 pm Well for both of us it's a no,no.
We will never go electric.
Will never understand why its not hydrogen, all those good cars going to waste when easily converted
Like Western Australia has.
PS.
I get 1400 ks a tank out of my Citroën C4.

Toyota already do have a hydrogen car on the market 70K they also have a hydrogen Hilux on trails it has three longitudinal gas tanks set within its chassis rails, don't know when its on the market, we are due to swap in 25 so may be an option, but its bad to get electric charges its even worse to get a re-gas of hydrogen.

Is it better to use the electricity to make hydrogen ( hydrolysis) compress the H2 to liquify it store it and transport it to distribution tanks for pumping into your car, or use the electricity directly in your car?
H2 manufacture also requires high pressure pumps to treat water (reverse osmosis) to purify it for use in hydrolysis. Lots of electrical use before it even reaches your car.

niemeyjt wrote: ↑Sun Dec 10, 2023 1:18 am “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” - Ronald Reagan (and others).

Closely followed by "Trust me, I'm a doctor"

Polarengineer wrote: ↑Sun Dec 10, 2023 9:37 am Is it better to use the electricity to make hydrogen ( hydrolysis) compress the H2 to liquify it store it and transport it to distribution tanks for pumping into your car, or use the electricity directly in your car?
H2 manufacture also requires high pressure pumps to treat water (reverse osmosis) to purify it for use in hydrolysis. Lots of electrical use before it even reaches your car.

Except the production can take place entirely off-shore without the need for the massive pylons and on-shore turbines being deployed.

For me this is a definite NO and I think politicians will soon have no other choice to give up on this stupidity. Unfortunately, as they govern based on fanaticism instead of common sense, it will take time and, in the meantime, the people will suffer (as usual). Among the many issues discussed here, let's take a closer look at charging stations:
Let's not quibble and agree that with the progress of batteries, a range of approx. 500 km (only) will be reached soon.
Let’s take an example : Bordeaux is 583 km from Paris via the A10 motorway.
In the zone between the 350th and 500th kms (where the battery would be flat), there are 5 service areas that can accommodate charging stations.
The flow of vehicles on a big departure day is 80,000 in July or August,
That is 3,333 vehicles per hour (in reality concentrated on much fewer).
The time it takes to recharge a vehicle is at least 30 minutes with high power chargers (43 kWatts).
The 3,333 arriving vehicles will therefore have to benefit from 1,667 terminals, i.e. 333 terminals per station in the area.
All in perfect working order, with drivers distributed harmoniously day and night in front of the terminals.
And exemplary discipline to avoid delays between each person.
In reality, given these hazards, we would need at least to double or even triple the number of terminals available.
Between 700 and 1,000 per station !
1,000 chargers x 5 areas x 43 kWatts = 215 megaWatts for 150kms of motorway
In France, we have 12,000 kms of motorways + 8,000 kms of National roads = 20,000 kms, not mentioning the small roads (another 1,080,000 kms). For the motorways and National roads only, the power needed would be  215 x (20,000 / 150) = 29 gigaWatts , i.e. 29 more Nuclear plants (we currently have 56)
And we are not talking about electricity pylons and cables to transport “the juice”. 
Well, electric vehicles are the future...and we need to encourage “people” to acquire these vehicles as they say ?
But what if instead we strengthened the teaching of mathematics in the schools of politicians to give them the level of a 10 y.o. child of the 60s of the last century ?
Mr Macron: can you hear me ?

I can see a new "Green Tax" being levied to pay for the new nuclear power plants and pylons that will be needed. We are already in a position of barely producing enough during winters of high demand. If the money that is being squeezed out of the motorist was put toward better and cheaper public transport the cost of fuel alone would probably be enough to reduce car usage.