British Police Admit Electric Vehicles are Useless for Police Work

UK Police Lego. Rob Young from United Kingdom [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons (image modified)

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Breitbart; Police forces in Britain are facing questions over the waste of millions of pounds purchasing electric vehicles which are not up to the job of chasing criminals or responding to emergency situations.

Police ‘waste’ £1.5MILLION on electric cars that they admit are useless for chasing criminals because they ‘can’t go fast enough or far enough without a battery change’

  • Reports found cars do not meet demands of urgent response or pursuit driving
  • Forces have bought at least 448 environmentally-friendly vehicles to help them 
  • However almost all cars and vans are being used in non-emergency situations

By MARTIN BECKFORD FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 09:04 AEDT, 24 December 2019 | UPDATED: 10:45 AEDT, 24 December 2019

Police have spent millions of pounds on electric cars they admit are useless for chasing suspects or rushing to help victims.

Forces around the country have bought at least 448 environmentally-friendly vehicles to help them meet green energy targets.

But almost all of the cars and vans are being used in non-emergency situations or by chiefs to get to work.

Official police reports conceded that electric vehicles cannot meet the demands of urgent response or pursuit driving. They take too long to charge up to be ready for 999 calls and could run out of battery before a shift ends.

Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7822791/Police-waste-1-5million-electric-cars-useless-catching-criminals.html

Isn’t this senseless waste of precious police resources just the epitome of green groupthink?

Greens know renewables are not viable in their current form, at least the smart greens know this – but they still advocate spending billions of dollars building them.

Any police chief with a minute of operational experience must have known upfront that electric vehicles were useless – but they all went ahead and bought hundreds of the things.

When historians look back at our time, it won’t be the delusions of impending eco-doom which define us, it will be the mind boggling waste, the cash expenditures authorized by politicians and senior executives who knew upfront what they were buying would not work, but paid the money anyway.

Advertisements

124 thoughts on “British Police Admit Electric Vehicles are Useless for Police Work

    • You beat me to that meme. HOW DARE YOU.

      Young people will not forget that we bought them Legos and then played with them yourselves. (Or, perhaps My Little Pony, but that is another thing.)

      On the other hand Stars are still a hot topic.

    • I owned that set! Back when Lego men not only didn’t have arms, but didn’t have faces either.

      (Happy sigh)

      On topic, why am I surprised at this finding? Unless a vehicle needs to be exhaust free (indoor forklifts) there are few viable professional roles for EV. Here in my little home city the council has been signally for over a decade with an electric bus (painted green, just so you know).

      Thankfully it went out of service once the battery died for several years but when it did ‘work’ it was unreliable. The council ran it as part of the free local community loop service alongside a couple of conventional 19 seat diesel buses and it struggled. This was a one hour loop service and this green monster would regularly get to being 15 to 20 minutes late. It would also struggle with hills. You got to enjoy the aircon cutting in and out as the power management system prioritised the wheels.

      From memory they could run it for 3 hours and then needed to charge it again.

      Great bus, unless you had to catch it.

      Stupid thing is still around because good money after bad.

      (Unhappy sigh)

  1. Maybe that’s the cost of getting people to see sense. …
    … but the result of the last UK election suggests that the people got there first.

    • Liberals like to think of conservatives as stupid. I wonder how many liberals can recite the Iliad from memory. Boris Johnson can. Liberals fancy that, because they’ve got a degree or two, that they’re educated. It’s kind of sad really, especially if their degrees are in something like women’s studies. We used to joke about degrees in basket weaving. How could we have predicted the total abysmal lack of scholarship that has overrun half of our university departments. /rant

      • I don’t think a bit of rote learning really demonstrates intelligence. I hope he’s more than just a one-trick pollie.

        • But Obama reading from a teleprompter showed how brilliant he was?

          Trump can speak for hours without a written speach or teleprompter, but it is easier when you have values, not just poll tested talking points.

          • Well, Obumma could read (assuming he wasn’t just repeating what the ear-phone in his gigamongous ear was prompting).

          • Obama hardly ever held a news conference.
            Said he would be transparent. The biggest liar president in
            modern times. Said I would save $2500. My health insurance
            went from $5500 to $11000.

        • It is standard to disparage rote learning. That prejudice resulted in the failed experiment with the ‘new math’.

          The underpinning of understanding is domain specific knowledge. In math, that requires rote learning of things like the times tables. In business education, it requires actually knowing about the industry for which you’re writing a case study. It’s why most Harvard MBAs are lousy managers. MBA education that relies on case studies rewards BS much more than wisdom.

          In 2003, Professor Mintzberg tracked the performance of 19 students who graduated from the Harvard Business School in 1990 and were at the top of their class academically. Ten of the 19 were “utter failures,” he said. “Another four were very questionable, at least,” he added. “So five out of 19 did well.” link

          Knowledge matters a lot. If you want to say anything sensible about the Iliad, it helps to have it memorized.

          • I agree with you about the math. When I was tutoring math at a local middle school several years ago I can’t tell you how many of the students couldn’t tell you what 4 * 4 was without a calculator. Without a knowledge of the basic times tables it becomes almost impossible to understand how to solve for variables in algebra using simutaneous equations or understanding how to balance chemical equations.

        • He is the author of several books on Roman civilisation and the history of London, has knowledge of the main European languages as well as Latin and Greek, so probably quite intelligent. But also said to be rather prone to complacency and laziness. I doubt that he is up until the “wee hours” studying official documents as Mrs Thatcher did -other types of figures perhaps.

          • Whatever you may say about Boris – and I have said a bit – he is lucky.
            Lucky in that the Leader of the Labour Party is an unreconstructed Marxist, who came with a complete crew of unemployable innumerates.
            Lucky in that the Leader [am I overstating the case?] of the Liberal Democrats [how crass can you be with a non-applicable Party name?] was Poor Daft Jo ‘Swinson’.

            Auto

          • Boris’ intellectual gifts go far beyond a good memory. He, like Trump, is a TV performer, but also a serious scholar, as well as an important journalist. His reports from Brussels almost single-handedly created Tory Euroskepticism, formerly the province of fringe Labour loons.

            Here he goes toe to toe in defense of classical Greek civilization against Mary Beard a leading historian of ancient Rome, herself a TV personality:

            https://youtu.be/2k448JqQyj8

        • I read a comment by a Greek woman who studied all the classical Greek stuff in high school, and she said she couldn’t understand a thing he said.

          • It’s because we study Homeric poetry in modern Greek phonology, which is very, very different than the Erasmian, whereby most non-Greek Europeans study it.
            By the way, Erasmian phonology is closer to the original, but quite off, too.
            (Most Greeks are extremely uneducated, so my advice is you never, ever have any faith in what they say at all!)

          • OK, so a native Greek speaker who studied the Illiad knows less about the subject than those who studied it in non-Greek schools. Got it.

            As a native Greek speaker who studied ancient Greek, the Iliad and Odyssey (and other ancient Greek texts/plays) over 4 years at high school (part of the compulsory curriculum in Greek state schools) I can confirm I understood absolutely nothing of what he is saying.

            https://twitter.com/YiokastiM/status/1209466603030667266

          • Erasmian phonology is an artifact of Roman Catholic scholarship. It began as a practical joke on Erasmus, who once he realized what happened disavowed it. So no wonder the woman mentioned above couldn’t understand a pronunciation that only exists in western academia.

          • @icisil

            She’s a native Greek speaker???
            Modern Greeks DO NOT speak ancient Greek.
            The two languages are vastly different.
            The former is my native language and the latter I studied six years, you?

            Erasmian phonology is closer to the original phonology of Homeric Greek than modern Greek phonology is. Some of it is wrong, though.
            And Johnson has a British accent.

            Therefore, it is pretty improbable that a Greek lefty would have understood him. She couldn’t and she had no intention to.

            I have watched the videos.
            He does speak Homeric, but with an Erasmian phonology and a British accent.
            It is very funny, yes, but Johnson is a clown already…
            Hehe

        • Its useful if one intends a career in foreign affairs because it teaches how power structures interact, and students can come to the subject bereft of any prejudices that the last thousand years of history may have imbued them with. 🙂

    • The Police/Fire/Emergency Vehicles shouldn’t have to depend on unreliables to power their vehicles. BUT, if criminals were limited to EVs it would make police work easier.

  2. But they are so Green when the Plod use them to visit Brits at home to query them on the “intent” of their on line comments.
    Bureaucrats do not care if the expenditures are pointless and wasteful,in fact that is almost a must.

    • Agreed – it’s easy to see why they were purchased, whoever was on the purchasing board got great big promotions and maybe some kickbacks for buying these, while anyone who said they needed to stick to the Tried and True was probably kicked back down to night shift.

  3. 999, … what’s your emergency?

    “My electric car didn’t charge fast enough for me to get away from the guy who just robbed me.”

    OPERATOR RESPONDS: Stay calm, stay where you are, … as soon as the next available police car finishes charging, someone will be there to help you.

    • It’s probably the same elsewhere, but here in Cream Tea Country of Devon, UK, in rural crime situations when a crime is reported the police simply say “We’ll get someone out to you as soon as we can!”. On the other hand, like the old joke about it, if a caller says “There’s somebody trying to break into our house & we’re elderly & frightenend what might happen, oh wait, it’s ok don’t rush, my husband’s just shot him!”, there’ll be half a dozen police cars, two helicopters, & an Armed Response Team surrounding your home within minutes!!! Can’t wait for them to get an electric helicopter, that’s gonna be some real fun!!!!

      • +1000

        I have always said that to get a quick response say that if the Police don’t hurry you will have to kill the burglar for your own safety.

        There was a recent case of an EV police car chasing some bad people and it actually ran out of charge and had to stop.

      • Yep. I know from personal experience that if the cops seem disinterested, telling them you’re going to handle the situation yourself brings an immediate response.

  4. “But almost all of the cars and vans are being used in non-emergency situations or…………….
    ……………. by chiefs to get to work.”

    well…nice to know they didn’t have to buy their own cars

    • Right. For anything other than the most dire situation, a cop on a tricycle is issued, shouldering a plastic bat.

  5. The green politicians aren’t nearly ambitious enough. What’s needed is electric fire trucks.

    I propose a new internet law named after me.

    It’s hard to think up something so stupid that someone hasn’t already thought of it.

  6. What is really shambolic is that when a vehicle runs out of juice before shift change, the police who should be out on patrol are sitting in the station drinking coffee. And if the battery is good for an entire shift, the next shift can’t go out until the vehicle is recharged.

    Unless their is a drastic change in charging time there is only one solution: increase the number of cars so you always have one fully charged to swap for one needing charging. That would be a budget buster, and you are still failing to meet the need for speed.

      • The other thing you have to remember is that Police Vehicles have much more Electricity intensive equipment and are much heavier than standard vehicles.

        I would not like to see a £100,000 Tesla used in a rolling road block to try and stop a determined bunch of Robbers.
        It would be very badly damaged.

        • If you need an American vehicle for a roadblock, I recommend the M1 Abrams, or any of the other full size SUVs.

        • Not to mention fire bomb an EV, and it very quickly blows up, one small electrical short and goodbye. Try a Molotov on one, and you bet it will be entertaining.

          I’m waiting to see the day some stinking rebel goes up in smoke in a greeny greeny EV van, or try tell them the resulting smoke is non toxic and not harmful to the ummm atmosphere…

          Hey but didn’t we know all this stuff from the ‘leccy milkfloats that drove cow juice deliveries to people’s doorstops daily until very recently in London?

      • 0 to 60 has nothing to do with a high speed chase, unless whoever you’re chase is changing speed or direction a lot.

        The point of a high speed chase is HIGH SPEED. How long can a Tesla keep up with a Dodge Challenger doing 120? And I’m betting it drains its batteries in a lot less then 300 miles at those speeds.

        • Besides which, how do you KNOW that Tesla has a 300+ mile range? Because the brochure said so? Because, the nifty software tells you so? The only way to KNOW your Tesla has a 300+ mile range is to drive it until it stops and see how far you went and that’s not very good for your Tesla battery, so, you’ll never want to do that.

          The range of a Tesla, or any other electric vehicle, may or may not be what is showing on the screen and you have NO WAY to know if that number is accurate or is being fudged if you NEVER drive any further than a few dozen miles a day. You’re at the mercy of the software and what it tells you and the software can me made to tell you anything the manufacturer wants and, in most cases, on the fly. Oh, and don’t depend upon how much electricity it takes to ‘FULLY’ charge your electric vehicle. It will only draw what the software says it can and, if a 3/4 charge is what the software says is a full charge, then who the hell is to say otherwise? AND, you’ll never know you’re driving around only partially charged until you try and go on a long range jaunt and the excuses for why you only managed to get 200 miles on a full charge will be legion.

          Think I’m being silly? Well, just take a look back at what Telsa did when Tesla owners who HAD NOT opted for the extended range battery option were tying to flee a hurricane in Florida. Turns out, many had the extended range battery and Tesla pushed out an update to vehicles in the path of the hurricane to allow them to utilize that extended range. Hmmm… Seems to me that Electric Vehicle manufacturers can, through the use of subterfuge, make it seem like the batteries in their cars last forever and never degrade over time, or very little that is. Again, who’s going to say otherwise? Gonna’ take it to an independent auto-repair shop and have them do a full diagnostic? If such a shop exists it will be using a manufacturer produced and approved diagnostic tool that will show everything is peachy keen because that’s what it’s supposed to show. About the only way to know if the battery pack is degraded would be to remove it, cut it open, and test each and every cell, individually, to identify how many were bad. Of course, there would come a point where there’s no hiding how badly a battery is degraded but, if that reality can be pushed out several years by fudging things a bit, then the positive PR of showing doubters of battery life wrong will be worth it.

          Think something like that can’t happen?

          Cast your gaze the direction of VW and their emissions standards scandal for a lesson on how an auto manufacturer can get away with using software to FUDGE numbers for years. Turned out the superior engine technology in use by VW was the software they were using to cheat the emissions testing and they made billions hyping low emissions and high MPG as a selling point for their diesel powered vehicles.

          If a degraded battery pack bursts into flames and turns the entire vehicle into a puddle of aluminum, will there be enough left to determine the cause? Just wondering.

          Rant over.

          Cheers

          Max

          • It’s probably cheaper to build all the battery packs the same and use software to limit the range to what the owner has paid for.

            Yes, using only the middle 60 kw of a 100 kw battery lets it last about 15 years. The tradeoff is that eithrt Tesla never has to pay out warranty on the ’60’ or gets more money up front and still seldom has a claim.

            Probably the police EVs are more like fully enclosed golf cart sized parking monitor units than P100 mosel S Teslas.

        • Unless it’s a motorway or A road, they’ll be plenty of twists and turns, most UK car chases end up going around the local back streets in an attempt to shake of the police car.
          You do realize that the UK is relatively small, 480km will get you about half way across the country, transiting through multiple police districts, they could swap out as many Teslas ( assuming that’s the vehicle in use) as they want during the chase. Long distance chases are rare in the UK.

          Anyway, EV’s are perfect for their intended role of patrolling the suburbs and towns, along with a massive saving in fuel costs.

  7. I imagine there are plenty of non-emergency uses. I don’t know if there are 448 non-emergency uses, but I guess that depends on the size of the city.

  8. They just need to invest in really long extension cords…

    Or maybe they can install bicycle pedals connected to a small generator they can use to keep the charge up?

  9. Many persuits involve helicopters too. So they will be deploying battery powered helicopters with battery powered FLIR at night? Yeah right!

  10. I have inside/personal information about what’s in the works in the way of electric vehicles, and you know what? Because of stories like this WUWT post and other information readily available on the web I’m pretty sure it’s plain ol’ bullshit.

  11. Really? They aren’t suitable? Who’d have thought?

    Meanwhile here in Oz, a newspaper story today is encouraging children to nag their parents to do more about climate change, because of all those nasty fires that are actually rather common in Australia when its summer and a drought, worsened by people living in the bush who are not allowed to remove trees close to their homes because of idiot Council regulations.

    I am advocating starting with a reverse climate nag of getting the kids to cut their emissions by 75%. Remove all phones, electronic games, access to the internet , dishwashers (make them wash and dry by hand for their chores) and walk everywhere. Should be fun watching the reaction. Because these kids have been brainwashed thoroughly but with almost nothing about the consequences.

    • What country are you in? All authorities and websites in oz encourage tree clearing around dwellings. And how does going Luddite have anything to do with climate change. Solar powers all devices for us in bris.

  12. Duh. A simple study would have told them that, and it probably did, but they continued to gain some social justice points.

  13. If the chase takes our green crime fighters far from the city center they may have trouble finding a place to recharge if they hope to return home.

  14. This is why electric vehicles must be compulsory for everyone and vehicles with thermal engines banned everywhere, with NO exceptions, because otherwise, as an example, thugs could commit their misdeeds with fire trucks or ambulances.

    /s

  15. Donald L. Klipstein
    ” Is there more to this? 448 vehicles for 1.5 million means 3,348.21 per vehicle” I immediately saw that dude, and you can bet the media hasn’t.

  16. “No, our ruling class recruits and renews itself not through meritocracy but rather by taking into itself people whose most prominent feature is their commitment to fit in. The most successful neither write books and papers that stand up to criticism nor release their academic records. Thus does our ruling class stunt itself through negative selection. But the more it has dumbed itself down, the more it has defined itself by the presumption of intellectual superiority.”
    –America’s Ruling Class and the Perils of Revolution,Angelo M. Codevilla

    The police are Subject to Orders. Their masters ordered “buy green vehicles”, so they did.
    Replace the masters. Or at least mock them unceasingly.

  17. That’s MY tax money they’re spending.

    The rationale behind taxes is that the government know how to spend MY money better than I do. Nice to see it demonstrated.

  18. You think that’s funny? A report some months ago that the British Army are developing electric tanks.

    https://news.yahoo.com/british-armys-next-game-changer-130000006.html

    Britain is developing electric combat vehicles. Not just because they’re better for the environment than those old gas-guzzling, carbon-emitting tanks. But also because it will make the military a more attractive career for a new generation of prospective recruits who are passionate about issues such as climate change.

  19. The generic phenonomenon of which this is an instance is worth noting. In general you find the Greens demanding actions in response to the alleged problem of Global Warming that, if their own theory is correct, can have no effect on it.

    They also refuse to demand the actions which, if their theory is correct, are required to have an effect.

    For instance, the demand by Extinction Rebellion that the UK close down its airports because flooding from intense rain in the UK. The demand that Australia lower its emissions because hot dry summer and forest fires. The agitation to switch off standby appliances, or in this case, the demand that a public service in the UK buy electric cars. The attempts by municipalities to become zero emission zones, by lowering a tiny proportion of their emissions. The demand to install wind and solar generation systems, when they do almost nothing to reduce emissions, and when, in any case, even if they did, the proportion of emissions due to electricity generation is not big enough that reducing it will have any effects.

    As soon as you ask how much effect any of these proposals will have, it beccomes clear the answer is just about zero. None of them reduce global emissions enough to have any global effect even if the theory is correct, and even were they to reduce the emissions they target. Even if the West did everything demanded, both local and global emissions would be mainly unaffected.

    Partly because the West is emitting too small a proportion of global emissions for its actions to have any effect. Partly because the emissions targeted by the activists are too small a proportion of what the West does emit.

    In terms of the refusal to demand effective action, consider the refusal to demand that the worlds largest and fastest growing emitters reduce their emissions – China, India etc. Consider also the refusal to demand actions which would have substantial effects on local emissions – the abolition of the ICE industry, for instance.

    It is possible for the UK or Germany to reduce emissions substantially. All you have to do is abolish ICE cars and trucks and make the consequent moves of population into dense energy efficient housing. Transport needs locally would have to be walking or biking, and longer distances by train or tram. It can be done, it is the way the West was in 1900 or 1920. People lived within walking or biking distance of work, leisure and shops.

    It is also possible for the world to reduce its total emissions very substantially. All you have to do is persuade China and India and Indonesia and the developing world to reduce, and persuade the West to match those reductions. We could get back to emissions of under 5 billion tons of CO2 a year. It would be 1920 but with computers and biotech.

    However, the Greens, at the same time as they activate for doing things that will never make any significant reducts also refuse to argue for what it would take to do this.

    The question which needs careful thought is the cause of this phenomenon. My own answer, after observing it for a couple of decades, is that no-one believes in the problem and no-one believes that the policies advocated are either effective or at all possible or likely to implement.

    So why advocate for them? Read Alinsky for an answer.

    The measures are not being advocated to save the planet or to have any effect on local or global emissions. The motivation is quite different. They are being advocated precisely because they will not be implemented and will never persuade policy makers they should be done. Because they are only advocated in order to organize. What you want, as an organizing issue, is something that will not be done, because that way its effectiveness continues and you can lament and protest about the intransigence of the authorities. Once implemented, they are scrutinised. You don’t want that.

    What you want is some large thing you can protest about, use as a basis for organisation and to come to power on a wave of popular feeling, and then quietly forget about when you are in power and getting on with the real agenda.

    Look at it like this, and you see how to look at the police purchases. They are collateral damage, like the huge useless wind farms visible off the Norfolk and Essex coasts. The poor fools have been misled into trying to implement something which was only ever intended as a protest demand. Of course its not working. If you like, the activists were mistaken in their choice of an objective. It has turned out, and its very counter productive for them, to be possible to meet their demands. You can actually build electric cars, you can actually erect wind farms.

    When the history of the Global Warming mania is written, 20 or 30 years from now, this is what historians will draw attention to, and some future Alinksy will lament the activists’ strategic error in picking demands that could actually be met, and thus seen to be idiotic.

    They should have stuck to demanding fusion, or maybe a return to the days of sail, or the total abolition of cars, malls and suburbs. Or perhaps they should have stuck to demonstrating outside the Chinese Embassies around the world.

  20. “it will be the mind boggling waste, the cash expenditures authorized by politicians and senior executives who knew upfront what they were buying would not work, but paid the money anyway.”

    This statement sums up the entire green get-rich model so well. A false moral imperative provides their justification for the allocation of huge sums of the public largesse from which a relatively small number of connected people make huge cash windfalls at the expense of everyone else. Renewable energy is obviously the worst offender where literally trillions of dollars gets spent globally on a form of energy that is mostly worthless.

    In Australia the ABC media recently celebrated that 33GW of new RE had been added to the grid. What they forgot to mention was that only 3-6GW of that energy is available at midday and usually less that 2GW is available when the sun goes down. And of course there are times when there is almost zero output, meaning you need to maintain 100% FF backup capacity, just in case.

  21. “It is possible for the UK or Germany to reduce emissions substantially … Transport needs locally would have to be walking or biking, and longer distances by train or tram. It can be done, it is the way the West was in 1900 or 1920. People lived within walking or biking distance of work, leisure and shops.”

    Or, to put it another way, back in the 1920s work, leisure and shops existed within walking or biking distance of people. Not any more – and the CO2 emitted as a consequence of tearing down all those out-of-town shopping complexes, business parks and leisure centres and rebuilding them in urban areas would be enormous. And even if you could find somewhere to put them (the old industrial sites were built over long ago), would people really appreciate a factory at the end of their street?

    But then, as you say, none of this is intended to happen 🙂

  22. Look up on gridwatch.templar.co.uk for the amount of wind derived electricity on Christmas Day.
    A big flat zero from wind just when everyone was cooking their lunch, and a compensation spike in generation from CCGT.
    At least at present we have an alternative source of electricity.
    Imagine how all the young would feel if they couldn’t use their electronic Chrismas present toys.

    • At 11:00am Christmas Day morning when most household switched their ovens on, this was how the grid met the UK’s demand for electricity:

      37% of total demand was provided by: Nuclear 20% (maxed out); Gas fired power stations 15%; Coal fired power stations 2%.

      23% of total demand was provided by: Biomass fired power stations 8.5% (using wood pellets imported from USA); All 9,711 Wind Turbines barely 7%; Solar 6.5% (luckily the sun was shining); Hydro 1%.

      The remaining 40% needed to ensure all the UK’s lights didn’t go out was being imported from France, Holland & Ireland.

  23. When historians look back at our time….

    You’re expecting people in the future to be smarter than the people of the present?

    Hopeful, is all I can say.

  24. because they ‘can’t go fast enough

    The Model S’ top speed is software-limited at 155 mph.

    If chase is faster than that, the police has other options.
    Chasing a stampeding Porsche 911 with a conventional ICE police car is not so easy either.
    Wasn’t there a Hollywood film once where a police officer was chasing a car thief in her electric parking attendant car? Do not remember if she were successful.

    • It’s not that they can’t go fast enough, but at those speeds the draw on the batteries will be severe. They will either run out of battery prematurely or the batteries/motors will overheat and shut down the car before the pursuit is finished. Either way, EVs are not well suited to long, fast chases. They can be pretty good a drag racing, though.

      • It’s definitely true that EV fuel economy declines once you drive faster than about 50-55 mph. I don’t think (but could be persuaded with evidence) that the motors overheat, presuming that the manufacturer stuck a big enough motor in the vehicle to begin with.

        I think the problem in the UK as far as EV cop cars go is that they seem to have bought BMW i3s, which originally came with 22 kWh batteries and small motors. Those things were never designed for high-speed chases. For that, you’d want at least 60 kWh and bigger motors.

        To think that those i3s would be suitable chase cars was just stupid on someone’s part. It’s the EV equivalent of outfitting the force with Toyota Priuses and telling the cops to go chase cars. The newer EVs, suitably equipped, would make for excellent chase cars, provided that the department made sure to fill ’em up at the start of a shift.

        By the way, don’t the UK police have radios and roadblocks? That country isn’t big enough or empty enough for very long chases, but if it were a problem they could just radio ahead. It reminds me of the time I got stopped in Nevada in a very powerful car (VW Phaeton W-12) going 97 mph, having slowed down from 120.

        “Do you know why I stopped you?” he asked, this being the standard opening question when these things happen.

        “I was going like a bat out of hell,” I answered. “You got me fair and square.”

        He reduced the ticket to 90 mph, which saved me a lot of money and enabled me to “attend” an “online driving school” and keep the ticket away from the inquisitive eyes of my insurance company. Told me that he was giving me a break because I pulled over right away; didn’t lie to him; and didn’t try to outrun him.

        “This car will go 200 miles an hour,” I replied while thanking him, “but I figure you guys have radios.”

        We both laughed. I was on my way to Vegas, and told him that having gambled and lost already, I’d stay away from the slot machines. LOL

  25. and could run out of battery before a shift ends…. – article

    Well, that’s a giggle-snort all by itself.

    I’ve got a great idea: having seen a series of photos of New York then and New York now, meaning 100 yeas ago and even further back, into the 19th century, why not just go back to horses and buggies? It worked in the 1800s. It can still work today. 🙂 Not such a strange idea, either.

    Also watched a brief video on China’s ghost cities that are supposed to house over 64 million people, but nobody lives there. And some Congress critter in WDC wants to eliminate single-family housing in the counties next to WDC and make it all “mixed culture” and no POVs at all, so you have to take public transportation just to get groceries, like it or not. Obviously, he doesn’t do any kind of shopping and is unaware that in a city like Chicago, public transportation was in use long before automobiles became a “thing” – and still are. If i had to go back into Chicago for any reason, I’d take the train to the station, then catch a bus and walk the remainder of the way after that. POVs aren’t a “thing” unless you live in the ”burbs and have one to get to the train station or do local shopping.

    The ignorance of politicians never fails to surprise me. Maybe Boris Johnson can put a stop to the EV fad as being ‘out of” or “above budget”.

  26. A 1.5 million expense on a test is hardly worth mentioning. And in London they are allowed in the low emission zone. There is are areas of use where EV are quite advantageous so the disappointment tels more on the buyers than on the goods.

  27. Huh, who knew?

    I wonder if anyone could have predicted such a dismal outcome. Too many variables I think.

  28. C’mon. Nothing says “respect the authority” of this law enforcement person (be it man/woman/hermaphrodite) like a crisp uniformed figure toddling slowly along on one of those Segway two-wheeled electric scooters.

  29. No problem: just require that all doughnut shops have fast charging stations for the police to use.

    /rimshot

  30. I can agree with the facts, all I’d like to point out is that electric-powered vehicles are superior if your time between charges allows it. Until you have driven a good quality electric vehicle you can’t understand the difference in driving experience.

    • an electric-powered vehicle can be superior, depending on the application. Also superior is somewhat subjective and depends on application and circumstances.

      Cheers,

      Joe

  31. Every time I see an electric taxi cab I just shake my head and wonder how much money the cab company is losing every shift.

  32. Referring to “electric cars” this way is stupid – they are, at best, referring to the cheapest EVs. While there may not be cheap electrc cars right now, the claims they aare making about electric cars as a whole are totally wrong. Current EVs can charge quite fast – 80% charge in less than 10 minutes in some cases, and shortly will be true for all, or most, EVs. Driving ranges now are over 300 miles for several EVs and some are close to 400 miles. A police car does not travel very far on a shift – over 200 miles is probably the exception. As for speed, an electric car can easily outrun any gas powered car on the street. Apparently the British police bought cheap electric cars – probably Nissan Leafs first generation, which had the shortest driving range of any EV. And electric cars do not require constant maintenance – such as chaning the oil, anti-freeze, etc

    • Current EVs can charge quite fast – 80% charge in less than 10 minutes in some cases, and shortly will be true for all, or most, EVs.

      Assuming 30% to 80% of full charge in 10min on 60kWh battery:
      60/2*60/10=180kW
      Ten police cars on charge at 180kW is 1.8MW per police station in a bright future.
      I am not sure if you understand what that means in terms of grid dimensions?
      1.8MW is something a large factory is using. They have their own transformer station or share one with other factories in the industrial district. A normal household is seldom using more than 10kW peak.
      New cables, transformers, power stations, etc. sized up 10 to 100 fold is possible, will give a lot of jobs, take decades and cost titanic sums and resources, adding insanely to your tax bill and electricity bill.
      In terms of fast charging, apart from grid limitations, the current type batteries used will have shortened life.

      There is a previous article on WUWT where you can read about practical limitations on clusters of fast chargers, where the cluster has to “share” what capacity is available to the facility:
      Black Friday Tesla Fail: Half a Mile Queue to Recharge
      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/12/07/black-friday-tesla-fail-half-a-mile-queue-to-recharge/

    • Current EVs can charge quite fast – 80% charge in less than 10 minutes in some cases

      That’s a lie. The very fastest charges take at least 45 minutes to achieve an 80% charge, and add range at a maximum of 6 miles per minute.

    • I read the article, and it’s exaggerated. I own a dinky little EV with a 24 kWh battery, and if I run it down to empty (did this once), it’ll take 25 kWh, or an extra 4%. If it was off by 15% as the article (which is 4 years old, by the way) suggested, it would have taken 27.6 kWh to recharge mine.

      Look, I’m far from an EVangelist. I bought it strictly out of curiosity, and even then only because the company (Think) was going out of business and I was able to get it at a very deep discount. My other vehicle is a Ram 3500 diesel pickup, which I like quite a bit more than the EV. But I see no reason to do anything other than tell the straight truth about them.

  33. Obama hardly ever held a news conference.
    Said he would be transparent. The biggest liar president in
    modern times. Said I would save $2500. My health insurance
    went from $5500 to $11000.

  34. Well done the police for admitting it.. A very rare thing, if ever, for an institution to do. Sanity has a hard job getting recognised and usually gets incorporated under the radar, so no one knows how it got there without looking under the carpet.

  35. I saw an article about it in the English press, and it pictured one of those electric BMWs with the small batteries. Stick a big enough battery in an EV and remove the speed governor, and it will do just fine.

Comments are closed.