I was driven around in the BMW7hydrogen recently. Cool car. Shame about the boot (none) and the price (500 k).

@Eamon
Sorry I disagree with you. My ’sources close to the industry’ tell me that its is THE future. Parallel and Series hybrids may still exist but with fuel cells rather than internal combustion engines.

BTW Avego is based in Kinsale, Co. Cork by the way.. the s/w is written there as well..

Cool, it appears the government is already on it.

@ John

I can’t imagine fuel cells ever being the future - hydrogen is a distracting joke. That’s why the US DoE dropped funding for it. I can’t speak to why some car companies still believe in it.

@ Richard

In that situation you could rent a car for the day. It’s not terribly imposing but some behavioural changes will be required in the energy future. Even if all new cars were electric from now on it would take about 15 years to change the car fleet. Starting now with modest introduction is a sensible option to prepare for future oil scenarios. It’s not that we want to change, it’s that we’re being forced to.

Something like that would work. Car sharing is a growing market. Can only be niche, though: Think bank holidays.

A valid commentary of this model would be that the EV is the car for the weekday commute and that the ‘family’ also have a diesel/range extender hybrid (or have access to rent/hire one) for the weekend or ‘road trips’. With your domain knowledge I think you are best positioned to fit this ‘transport solution’ into the appropriate demographic.

Implementation wise - It will work well in France where they will EV commute to and from their RER/TGV/Light rail stations.

Most people have one car only. Although I, for one, typically drive short distances, I occasionally want to drive to the other end of the country and back in a day. All-electric is not for me so. I would not be surprised if this were true for many people.

The current emphasis on all-electric in Ireland’s political classes is misguided, I fear.

Your point is very well made. 30mins is slow for a charge but you need to get your head around the model for pure EV motors. The ‘industry’ views the future market something like this:

Short commute (school/shopping/work) = Pure EV car like Zoe or Leaf. This will be about 20-30% of the market supported by 3phase urban recharging points (http://m.guardian.co.uk/ms/p/gmg/op/view.m?id=193255&tid=120787&cat=Transport). Your car would be charged while you are at work or shopping or some such lazing about.

Long distance = Series or Parallel petrol or diesel hybrids or HCCI petrol or EVs with battery swap out

Future = fuel cell.

Maybe I should have included ’sources close to the industry’ in my posting - but my points are supported by an interview with Thierry Koskas, head of Renault’s electric vehicle project (http://www.renault.com/en/capeco2/vehicule-electrique/pages/entretien-thierry-koskas.aspx).

From Renault: Standard battery charge (at home): 4 to 8 hours; recharge at rapid station: 20 minutes; battery exchange at “quick drop”: 3 minutes

My source is not Thierry by the way.

You will be very interested in a report which Minister Ryan will launch in the RIA on 21 Oct, 1:30

30 min is slow. I can refilll my petrol tank in a fraction of that time.

The 400kg 70Kw/H battery in the Renault Zoe (think Clio size-ish) can be charged in 6 hours over single phase (off peak would be nice) and can be charged by 3 phase in less than 30 minutes (need to check this but it is pretty fast). Basically all Renaults will have single phase, 3 phase and battery swap out options (thus keeping them in the Project Better Place world).

Also, the French plant has already been selected and the Nissan Sunderland plant will have some role in the production of batteries.

Mules of the actual car platform with the major drive train components are ‘driving’ now.

The Renault batteries can of course be recharged, but only slowly.

“In fact, Renault is behind Nissan in realising its plans. Besides, their all-electric vehicles require battery-exchanges. These are being build in a few countries, but not in Ireland, so the Renaults are not relevant for Ireland.”

Not quite true on two counts:

(1) Given that they are pretty much the same company and share technology (in this case battery and drive train but not platform).
(2) The Renault vehicles don’t *require* battery swap out, as they can be charged overnight on single phase or on three phase.

The Nissan Leaf will be close in size to the Renault Zoe but uses a different rapid charging technology. As ‘@eamonn’ indicated above, volumes have been set and the French manufacturing plant has been selected. There is nothing running at a higher priority in Renault at the moment than their current EV projects.

Great article by the way

I suspect the reality is very few of these projects would give a positive return on investment unless you make not doing it very expensive.

The problem is not just the builders being around but doing the job properly. Our heating system works - if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. We had work done on the emersion and it hasn’t worked properly since despite numerous calls to and by the workman who did it.

The only way to get a big takeup on making people acting more “green” is to charge them. Take recycling. When we started paying for waste then we took action. It still costs more than it used to but we’ve got it to about one third of what it might have been.

Not the best time at the moment to hit people with higher bills.

As to your proposal, you’re turning utilities into banks.

A mandatory BER on sale or lease is fine. BERs are cheap (relative to the price of the house) and there is clear information asymmetry between buyer and seller.

I do not see any environmental justification in a minimum BER. If people want to live in a drafty house and pay a huge carbon tax, that’s their business.

There is a health justification in a minimum BER. Cold and damp make you ill. As long as health care is heavily subsidised, there is a case for a public policy to prevent people from falling ill.

What is a typical cost to bring the house up to a minimum BER and how much would it save? The windows are old so I know I could put in PVC but these would be €20k to €30k. I suspect the payback is not there.

Our next door neighbour when having an extension done looked at solar and it was just too expensive for the savings.

More on this house retrofitting, sorry! There was a rather excellent report put out today by the Committee on Climate Change in the UK which you may have seen. It’s here (from page 9 onward):

http://hmccc.s3.amazonaws.com/docs/21667%20CCC%20Report%20Chapter%205.pdf

It contains lots of useful figures and a few MACC curves. I imagine much of the analysis is applicable to Ireland also. One figure that surprised me was the £650-£1350/tCO2 of solar thermal!

The report offers evidence that 30-50% of people would not even take completely FREE efficiency measures. They’re just not bothered.

Anyway, one of the ideas presented that I’d like to run by you is the idea that:

-Houses are given a complete house audit (BER I guess)
-Presented with a package of measures and offered finance
-The finance is placed on the house and set against their electricity/gas bills at a level equal to the amount they should save
-It is rolled out community by community with show houses to encourage takeup and vault over those nasty indifference barriers.

Does that sound palatable to you?
Also, do you support the idea that houses being offered for rent or put on the market should have a minimum BER which is gradually increased or is this double regulation?

Thanks,
Eamon

“You mixing up John Eakins and Paul Ekins”

OK thx

The ‘Fuel Allowance’ in the Irish social welfare system is a top-up of €20 per week for 32 weeks from September 1st (€23.90 in cities and towns where coal is banned). It is paid to all recipients of long-term social transfers who meet certain additional qualification rules.

There is no requirement that it be spent on fuel.

I can provide some cultural info on why the Sodiers support hare coursing and are prepared to let stag hunting go by the wayside. hare coursing is a past-time of the plain people of Ireland (who have their dinner in the middle of the day) and who used vote FF. Stag hunting is the past-time of large farmers (and Protestants) who primarily vote FG. Simple rally. Mink coats are worn by the nouveau riche wives and mistreses of property developers but they are all bust now, so who cares. Simple politics really.

BTW, instead of CFLs why don’t we think about a switch to FLs?

As I said in a previous post, I oppose a blanket ban on CFLs.

1) True. If using CFLs, don’t use dimmers.

2) As Richard said, don’t use them in garages, sheds etc. The bit about taking a few minutes depends on the quality of the CFL. I have several bulbs that require no warming and one or two that are dark at the beginning. But it does not take a few minutes. More like 30 seconds in my experience.

3) Special light fittings? Why on earth would you need those

4) Again I defer to Richard.

I agree that the saving is underwhelming but it does make a difference. But the vast majority of energy saving will have to come from heating in the home. Irish houses are amongst the worst in terms of emergy efficiency and I have lived in four countries. Simple things like installing a thermostat/timer switch on your immersion and a bit of foil/padding behind radiators attached to external walls will save more than changing your whole house to CFL. In that respect, I find this focus on CFLs a bit nonsensical and counter-productive.

I’m not sure how often I need to write this: I advocate reducing current spending on fuel allowances to finance capital spending on home insulation.

The dogs are muzzled in hare coursing for 10+ years since. Contrary to the coffee table talk in Dublin boudoirs the supporters of hare coursing are likely to be homely elderly rural people rather than blood-lust crazed demons intent on torturing bunnies. Given how comfortable those people are with the lack of cruelty in coursing they will react negatively to being painted as animal hating scum by any party and likely never vote for them again. This would likely cost FF a number of marginal seats and number of party members. The same is true for FG.

Most of Labour and the Greens, as urban parties, would not recognise these people unless they appeared as those urbanites imagine them, i.e., with a wild look in their eyes, blood dribbling from their mouths and various dead baby animals hanging from their baling twine belts. [A bit OTT I know, but seeing as it is the season for going over the top in our criticisms of all things Green..]

“Indeed. The Commission on Taxation got it quite wrong in this case.”

It appears that the ESRI may have got this one too. Professor Eakins who co-wrote ESRI paper with Sue Scott with in 2002 noted in relation to carbon tax that “compensation is not the only policy measure to hand” and that energy efficiency programmes could also have positive spin-offs.

I note also from paper you co-authored, Working Paper 262, that “Improvements to the housing stock are a sine qua non for sensible policy on fuel poverty, and even more so with high energy prices prevailing in the foreseeable future” p32, November 2008. Yet we should use revenues to increase allowances?

Anyway you can take it up with Professor Eakins - he will be launching Carbon Energy Taxation: The European Experience in the IIEA, Wednesday 12:45.

http://www.iiea.com/events/carbon-energy-taxation–the-european-experience

The decision whether to leave them on or off thus requires that you predict where your kids will be between now and t+15.

In sheds, garages, bathrooms, incandescent bulbs are cheaper and use less energy (over the life cycle).