Another wheel has just flown off the EV dream

They will save the planet, they are quieter, they will rebuild local industries, and they even come with attractive tax breaks. Re-wind a couple of years, and there were plenty of reasons for buying a shiny new Tesla or Polestar electric vehicle instead of an old-fashioned, high-pollution, petrol or diesel car.
And yet, one by one, all those arguments have been punctured. They won't help the environment as much as we think, they are mostly made in China, the tax breaks are gone, and now we learn that they are more likely to break down as well.
If you were not already worried enough about where the heck you might be able to recharge your electric car during a long drive over the summer, now there is something else to fret about as well.
You are more likely to break down than the other cars on the road. According to a poll of 30,000 drivers by WhatCar, EV's suffer from a higher breakdown rate than petrol, diesel or hybrid vehicles, with 16.8 per cent of owners reporting some kind of fault, compared to 15.4 per cent for diesel, the second worst offender.
It gets worse. The faults on EV's were less likely to be something that could be fixed on the side of the road by an emergency repair service, meaning that motorists were less likely to be able to complete their journey, and might have to pay for an expensive towing service as well.
And of course, if something does go wrong it will probably cost more to fix, with surveys suggesting that EVs cost 30 per cent to 50 per cent more to repair than petrol cars, while replacing the tyres if you get a puncture will be pricey as well, with each one, according to one survey, costing £77 more on average than traditional vehicles.
Perhaps not very surprising, the insurance is more expensive, given that the costs are higher if anything goes wrong, and that has to be recouped somehow or other. The costs start to add up very quickly. An EV is turning into a very expensive choice.
That is not what we were promised. One of the strong selling points for EVs over conventional vehicles was that because they had so few moving parts compared to internal combustion engines, they were far less likely to go wrong.
And overall, they were meant to be far cheaper to run than the vehicles they were replacing. One by one, all the arguments for owning an EV have been falling apart. It turns out that they cost more to run. The tax breaks are gradually being withdrawn; as of this year, they are no longer exempt from road tax, and from Christmas they will have to start paying the congestion charge in London, and probably very soon in other major cities as well.
On top of all that, they are handing the auto industry to China, destroying one of Europe's major industries, and given the environmental impact of the manufacturing process, and all the minerals that go into them, they might not even be better for the environment either.
In reality, the drive to force us all to switch to EVs was top-down. I was state-planning at its very worst. It set arbitrary targets, lavished subsidies and tax breaks on an industry, only to withdraw them when they became too expensive. Perhaps worst of all, it backed an unproven technology that may well turn out to be an expensive flop. The wheels are coming off the EV dream – and once drivers are convinced that they are not the right choice, it will be very hard to persuade them to start buying EVs again.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mail​

an hour ago

• Daily Mail​

China praised for extreme method to prevent students from cheating during exams as people call it 'genius'

More than 13 million anxious students in China filled exam rooms this year to sit the notoriously challenging gaokao. The two-day exam determines whether students can secure a place at university, and teens spend years studying for the big test. But students this year faced more than just academic pressure, as those taking the university entrance exams had to deal with some of the most extreme anti-cheating methods yet. Facial recognition technology, metal detectors, drones and phone signal blockers were regularly used in schools this year amid the Chinese government's latest attempt to clamp down on cheats. AI firms have also been involved in the government's latest efforts to curb cheating. Last week, as students sat to take their university entrance exams, some major AI platforms in China appeared to freeze certain functions during test hours. This meant that if students tried to upload a picture of an exam question, they were met with a message telling them that the feature was not available in that moment. One tech giant, Tencent, explicitly cited the integrity of the exams to explain why some of its features were unavailable. 'Dear user, to ensure the fairness of gaokao, this function is unavailable during gaokao hours. Tencent Yuanbao wishes gaokao sitters all success in the exams', the company's chat-bot told users when they tried to upload photos of exam papers during the exam window. Chinese AI model DeepSeek also prevented users from uploading photos of test papers during the same period. Asked if photo recognition was suspended because of the exam, the chat-bot answered: 'yes. Deepseek Chat could temporarily suspend photo recognition for test question search during gaokao and other important exams'. The measure was to 'ensure fairness in the college entrance examination', the firm said, adding that relevant functions would 'return to normal after gaokao.'. Moves made by Chinese AI companies sent some students into a panic, with one user writing on social platform Weibo: 'College entrance exam candidates, you are all s**t'. 'I can't use DeepSeek to upload pictures, I have to download ChatGPT again, I hope you all go to community college​​​​', another complained. It comes after Chinese authorities last month announced the use of stricter entry checks at exam points, biometric identification, enhanced screening for digital devices, and radio signal blockers. The government already made cheating in tests a criminal act back in 2016 Members of the public have had mixed reactions to China's latest cheat-proof measures. One social media user wrote on Instagram: 'A bold but necessary step. When 13 million students are fighting limited spots, even the smallest tech loophole could disrupt fairness. Respect to China for treating academic integrity seriously.' 'China is 200 years ahead', another said. 'No wonder China is winning', a third added. Another praised China for 'leading by example', calling them 'trailblazers in modern technology'. But others were sceptical of the country's anti-cheating measures. 'This is only gonna make [students want to] cheat even more. They're [going to] to try to figure out way around this block. While China has tried to deter students from using AI technology during their exam periods, in another drastic move, schools have ironically turned to AI patrol and surveillance systems to check if pupils are cheating. These technologies are designed to detect suspicious behaviour in the exam room, such as whispering, passing objects, exchanging glances, peeking or using forbidden tools. In the province of Jiangxi, schools are known to review footage taken from exam rooms rooms to detect any potential cheaters. The suspension of certain AI functions has been widely criticized by university students who say they have been unable to use tools to assist them with their studies. The education ministry and police have repeatedly urged local governments to take the crackdown on cheating seriously, and this is not the first time China has turned to extreme xxxx in a bid to prevent cheating. In 2016, China introduced a rule that would see students sent to prison if they were caught cheating in the highly competitive exams. Cheaters can face up to seven years in jail and be banned from taking other national education exams for three years under the amendment that was made to the Criminal Law nearly a decade ago. In 2018, six people were imprisoned for their part in a scheme to cheat in school exams Exam takers were provided with wireless transmitters and receivers and told to read the questions out loud, according to the reports. Researchers off-site would then find the answers in textbooks and read them to the test takers through their receivers. The six defendants were sentenced to between 20 months and four years. University entrance exams are a moment of high stress in China, as millions of students compete for only a limited number of university places. For students from rural homes, the exam has been praised as a leveller of the playing field and a catalyst for social mobility.

Spectator

3 hours ago

• Spectator

It's time to ban the Chelsea tractor

City dwellers across Europe will have noticed an ominous and growing presence on our streets, nudging cyclists onto pavements, looming over pedestrians crossing the road, and generally spoiling the view. It is gratifying to learn that we are neither going mad nor shrinking in the wash: cars really are becoming huge. The bonnets of newly-sold cars across Europe now average 83.8cm in height, up from 76.9cm in 2010 – coincidentally the perfect height for caving in a toddler's head. That's according to a new report from Transport & Environment (T&E), an advocacy group for clean transport and energy that is campaigning against what it calls 'carspreading'. A resident of Zone 3 has no business owning a car that can trace its lineage to the Jeep Ironically for a vehicle so closely associated with mums doing the school run, the Chelsea tractor is a clear danger to primary-aged children, making it much likelier that the driver will squish them into the tarmac. A similar fate awaits adults, though the lucky ones will merely absorb the impact in their torso, where they keep their vital organs. This shows there's only one thing for it: it's time to ban four-wheel drives from Britain's cities. Bluntly put, a resident of Zone 3 has no business owning a car that can trace its lineage to the Jeep, a vehicle literally built to fight Nazis. Whatever the shortcomings of Sadiq Khan, no London street is sufficiently dangerous that you need a light utility vehicle to navigate it – or at least, no street that a man who could afford a Land Rover might live in. The yummy mummies of Clapham, the financial bros of Hampstead, or the international wealth treating Chelsea as their playground – none of them should be allowed a four-wheel drive. The growing height of car bonnets is partly down to an increasing number of SUVs, to use the American term for a four-wheel drive. T&E reckon they account for a little over half of new cars sold in Europe, with many 4×4 bonnets sitting more than a metre off the ground. Four-wheel drives are therefore likely to account for a growing proportion of the nearly 30,000 people killed or seriously injured in Great Britain each year in road collisions. While the bulk of the roughly 1,600 deaths are car or motorcycle users, about a quarter are pedestrians. Such incidents are sufficiently commonplace that we don't normally read about them. One noteworthy exception, however, did catch public attention in July 2023. Driving through Wimbledon, Claire Freemantle lost control of her Land Rover Defender and ploughed through the fence at The Study Prep school, killing eight-year-old Nuria Sajjad and Selena Lau. Initially arrested for dangerous driving, Freemantle was eventually let off without charge on the grounds she had suffered a seizure. The case has since been reopened. Unsurprisingly, Europeans have alighted on the old standby to any problem: more regulation. The heads of various worthy causes have written to the European Commission urging them to commit to months of fruitful work to create limits on how big new cars can be. Their suggested implementation date is a decade hence, by which point we will presumably all be driving SUVs. The response from Brussels has been wholly inadequate, a predictably timid European disappointment. But free from the EU's clutches, the British should act decisively: we should outlaw the Chelsea tractor on our own. Four-wheel drives are no doubt safer for their passengers. Analysis by The Economist of American road accidents last year concluded that the fatality rate of occupants in a Ford F-350 Super Duty pickup truck was about half that of those travelling in a Honda Civic. But such safety comes at the expense of everyone else. As cited in the same report, a 2004 paper by Michelle White of the University of California estimated that for every deadly crash a 4×4 avoids, there are 4.3 more among other drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. The negative externalities pile up from there. Larger vehicles generally pollute more, consuming more fuel to move more weight and emit more CO2. Their tyres leave more particles in the air, water and soil. They also create more potholes in the roads, such damage often being cited as a reason to own a 4×4 in the first place. That's alongside the sheer intimidation of a small tank driving down streets built for horses and carts, as well as the inconvenience to others when you try to park. When they aren't running you over or polluting your lungs, Chelsea tractors make cities uglier and unpleasant for everybody else. Yes, there should be exemptions. Any man in possession of an actual tractor may legitimately be in want of a SUV. Just as we allow farmers to shoot vermin, we should allow them to haul equipment in a four-wheel drive. Jeremy Clarkson need not return to the barricades over this policy. But as for the rest of us, there is simply no need. Get the urbanites off their tractors and back in their hatchbacks.

Auto Car

4 hours ago

• Auto Car

Who needs a city car when you can rent a golf buggy?

The brains behind the Yo-Go buggies is Samuel Bailey. The automotive engineer wanted to give Londoners an alternative to the expensive electric car and found the answer in China, where the buggies are built by a company called Marshell. Each has a small 5kWh battery powering a 4kW electric motor and giving a range of 30 miles. Charging is via London's lamp-post network or a roof-mounted solar panel, which, after a day's sunshine, can provide a six-mile top-up. However, for all its clever electronics, a Yo-Go buggy is still a golf cart, right? In fact, the vehicle is homologated for UK roads, so it's now classified as an L6e quadricycle. Its body has been redesigned, too, to make it more practical and weatherproof. Even so, my fear of being the laughing stock of the capital's road users is not helped by the sight of my test buggy awaiting me at Yo-Go's Parsons Green parking spot. The small vehicle looks only a couple of rungs up the evolutionary ladder from the rickshaws that clog London's West End. And what city needs yet another electric 'personal mobility' solution? My scepticism isn't helped by the buggy's questionable weather protection, its basic plastic interior (although the two seats look comfortable) and its twin rear-mounted boots, which can't be locked. At least the foot pedals marked 'Stop' and 'Go' appear to be foolproof and, save for indicators and a windscreen wiper, there are few extras to distract the inexperienced driver. Driving the buggy is just a case of 'unlocking' it, belting up, selecting D for drive and pressing the Go pedal. Thanks to its low weight, the buggy surges forward effortlessly; helped by fairly aggressive brake regen, it stops easily too. Independent front suspension absorbs the worst of the area's battered roads, and although the buggy is narrow, its track is just wide enough to clear speed cushions.