EV Towing

[Johnb]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oLeKRNsSn4


Nothing surprising here - at least I didn't think so.
Simply underlines the reason I replaced my last diesel with another diesel (oh, and for rather less than £125,000!)

I can't begin to understand how anyone can face the anxiety of charging, with or without a van in tow.

In my case just to get from home to Dover would require a charge en route and then another very soon after arriving in France. The number of times I could relax on a 3,000 mile European tow would be zero I think.

It takes a very different person from myself to inflict such pain in everyday car usage but to have that increased when I'm on holiday and hoping to relax in unimaginable.

 

[Tobes]

This video had some valid points. And some that annoyed me. The drop in economy is real, but totally expected, and just as real for ICE vehicles. No mention of the different weather in the two days.
While I agree that buying an EV specifically for towing (especially very long distance over a short time) would not be sensible, using one as an occasional tow, where solo is still 90% of the usage is valid.

JohnB for your 3000 mile Eurpean tow - how frequently do you move and how far. My guess is you do that over several months, not days? And that you move perhaps 200-300 miles between stops? and each stop is a few days? If so, maybe each tow day has a single stop, or maybe 2, and you can charge when you arrive. Or maybe you cant. Either way, I would not base my decision to select a new tow vehicle (especially an EV) on the strength the information presented here.

 

[Buckman]

I thought this had been done to death on many other threads?

 

[Dustydog]

A very delicate subject with no winners😢😢

 

[Tobes]

I am not sure its delicate Dusty, but I am sure that there are other really good sources that have much more realistic information about EV towing than a petrol show who's last towing experience was a horsebox 10 years ago. The Andrew Ditton series is (IMHO) very good showing the "warts and all" view of EV towing, but from a real experience PoV, not just a 100 mile one off round trip.

The winners are those who choose to use the videos and correspondence to help form a more informed opinion of what can (and can't) be achieved. Many have said that as a result of some of my posts, they have no intention to move to an EV for towing. That's great because its based on some real-world feedback! Others have voiced the opinion that an EV may well work for them, or even started using one. Also great!

It's the debunking of myth and hearsay, and grounding of decisions in fact rather than fiction that is important.

 

[Buckman]

and I thought this can of worms had been closed tightly? Pity most of the myths are probably correct 😂

 

[otherclive]

and I thought this can of worms had been closed tightly? Pity most of the myths are probably correct 😂

You are at risk of reopening what you acknowledge was “closed tightly”. I have no objection to the topic as long as the discussion is measured and objective, which your second sentence isn’t.

Bunker time 🙈

 

[Parksy]

There are very few forum rules which govern which subjects can be discussed or debated on this forum.
The obvious prohibitions apply to politics, religion and sexual matters.
Towing vehicles are a valid forum subject, whether EV, hybrid or i.c.
One or two forum members may be a bit fed up with the debates surrounding E.V's, I must confess to being bored with it myself, mainly because I'm highly unlikely ever to buy one, but those who wish to participate in these discussions are free to do so.
Members who are not interested can simply scroll on by without reading the comments.

 

[Dustydog]

It's the debunking of myth and hearsay, and grounding of decisions in fact rather than fiction that is important.

Hence why it is a delicate subject.
Eg it is well documented that the mining of Lithium is a high polluting business with most of the element running out by 2030. This was quoted in the DT a few weeks ago , South America and Africa being the worst.
Hence it is delicate and not something I have any desire to be further involved in😉

 

[ProfJohnL]

Some people will have little or no say about going electric, the decision will be made for them, possibly by employers oras the sale of new cars s restricted to EV, or Hybrids by legislation. So the challenges of towing with EV's will be have to be faced.

This forum is about caravanning, and that does not exclude EV's as it is now and will increasingly become the reality for more caravanners. Consequently it would be very unfair if a few peoples stated anti EV preferences are allowed to stifle legitimate factual discussions about the issues related to towing with an EV.

For me the biggest point to arise from the Petrol Ped video, was the abysmal recharging facilities at the services. All sites need to consider the practicality of charging for all vehicles the number of charging points, and it including those who are towing, with the added issues of security if a trailer has to be uncoupled.

 

[Buckman]

This is probably another myth? It seems that they may have found a way to make green hydrogen from seawater however I am not sure of the cost. See https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/green-hydrogen-produced-seawater-fuel-alternative/152420/

 

[Tobes]

For me the biggest point to arise from the Petrol Ped video, was the abysmal recharging facilities at the services. All sites need to consider the practicality of charging for all vehicles the number of charging points, and it including those who are towing, with the added issues of security if a trailer has to be uncoupled.

The recharging while towing thing _is an issue_. Until we have a lot more chargers with drive through capability, unhitching will be a necessety. And this absolutly needs to be addressed by MSAs. The clubs and organisations like PC could do a lot to lobby for support for these issues. Fortunately, drive through chargers are (slowly) being deployed. FastNed (who originated in the Netherlands) have a standard model with a number of chargers under a solar canopy. Most are nose-in or tail-in, but those on the ends are drive through. Andrew Ditton used one in one of his videos.

But in other good news, the days of chargers being deployed individually in service areas are also more or less behind us. Almost all new locations I see these days have between 4 and 8 charging stalls available. The new Fastned location inOxford has 10 bays and is next to a new 12 bay Tesla supercharger. 22 new ultra rapid chargers in one location.

In high traffic areas, the existing stock are also being augmented to improve capacity. In the PetrolPed video, he pulled over in an MSA that had just one charger, which also has live status. He could have known it was busy from the screen of his car before he even got there. Just 9 miles further on the other side of Southampton there is a 4 bay Instavolt next to a Starbucks with lots of parking - also with live data.

Don't mistake me - it shouldn't be like this. Using an EV for towing (or at all) should be just as simple (indeed even simpler) than using an ICE car. And we are not there yet. But with a bit of planning and use of freely available tools, it can be a lot less painful than it has been made out to be in some reports.

 

[otherclive]

This is probably another myth? It seems that they may have found a way to make green hydrogen from seawater however I am not sure of the cost. See https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/green-hydrogen-produced-seawater-fuel-alternative/152420/

I don’t doubt the publication by Adelaide University of direct catalyst aided electrolysis of sea water, but they do state that it is early days with a lot more R&D required. But green hydrogen can still be produced from sea water that has been desalinised. But of course the power requirements are high so you really need excess electricity and storage. It will come though at some time. Although storing excess electricity in battery banks could be a better option. Horses for courses.

 

[Tobes]

It's the debunking of myth and hearsay, and grounding of decisions in fact rather than fiction that is important.

Hence why it is a delicate subject.
Eg it is well documented that the mining of Lithium is a high polluting business with most of the element running out by 2030. This was quoted in the DT a few weeks ago , South America and Africa being the worst.
Hence it is delicate and not something I have any desire to be further involved in😉

You are right DD. Debunking is delicate. But it does need doing to prevent myth perpetuating. Like the myth that we are going to run out of lithium by 2030. Demand may outstrip supply - but that is not the same as running out, as is discussed here.

And yes - mining lithium is an industrial process. As is mining anything. But the ecological impact of mining lithium is tiny compared to that of producing and using fossil fuel. The world consumption of lithium is expected to be 0.5 million tonnes in 2022, growing to 3.7 million tonnes in 2035. Just for a comparison, the UK consumes 1.24 million barrels of oil - per day. That's 43.4 million tonnes of oil - per day - for just the Uk.
Which is why I will try and continue to debunk myth.

 

[RogerL]

For me the biggest point to arise from the Petrol Ped video, was the abysmal recharging facilities at the services. All sites need to consider the practicality of charging for all vehicles the number of charging points, and it including those who are towing, with the added issues of security if a trailer has to be uncoupled.

Yet whenever I stop at a Motorway Services, the electric charging points have few cars parked there - I'm well aware that they didn't cope with the Christmas peak but then services never cope well with peak periods, and like the motorways themselves, are designed for average use, not peak use.

 

[Tobes]

I don’t doubt the publication by Adelaide University of direct catalyst aided electrolysis of sea water, but they do state that it is early days with a lot more R&D required. But green hydrogen can still be produced from sea water that has been desalinised. But of course the power requirements are high so you really need excess electricity and storage. It will come though at some time. Although storing excess electricity in battery banks could be a better option. Horses for courses.

Agreed OC. This is great news for the industries that need hydrogen, and who were hampered in using green hydrogen because of a lack of pure water. But this is not a story about a new abundant energy source. It's a story about a new way of turning sea-water into hydrogen without having to first desalinate it. It still uses an enormous amount of electricty (more than you get out by burning oxidising in a fuel cell the produced hydrogen at the other end).

 

[Buckman]

You are right DD. Debunking is delicate. But it does need doing to prevent myth perpetuating. Like the myth that we are going to run out of lithium by 2030. Demand may outstrip supply - but that is not the same as running out, as is discussed here.

And yes - mining lithium is an industrial process. As is mining anything. But the ecological impact of mining lithium is tiny compared to that of producing and using fossil fuel. The world consumption of lithium is expected to be 0.5 million tonnes in 2022, growing to 3.7 million tonnes in 2035. Just for a comparison, the UK consumes 1.24 million barrels of oil - per day. That's 43.4 million tonnes of oil - per day - for just the Uk.
Which is why I will try and continue to debunk myth.

The issue is not the mining, but the way it is being mined and the waste mountains that develop. I seem to recall that in some countries child labour is used to keep down costs?

 

[ProfJohnL]

I believe we should be concerned with the way materials are sourced, and the consequences of such processes such as pollution and other dangerous by products.

Make no mistake I believe we should doing what we can to bring such contentious processes to an end, but let's be clear, in respect of Lithium it's not all producers that are using such contentious methods. I am not suggesting this is an excuse to just turn a blind eye to such issues, and it is of course a very serious matter for those who are affected by poor practices, they should have reason to hope for a better future.

But is it therefore reasonable to overlook or condemn EV's just for the sins of a few.

If you really apply such high standards to the production and running of an EV, then it is hypocritical to ignore the sins that have been committed to produce and run ICE vehicles. There are many past and present contentious issues surrounding the prospecting and production of fossil fuels, equal in severity to, but on a much larger scale than those of Lithium.

EV's are here now! and they will grow in numbers and capability. There may be other alternatives in the future, but specifically Hydrogen fueled vehicles are very much less likely to become mainstream partly becasue of the head start EV's have, and the cradle to grave costs and poorer efficiency and practical challenges involved in the widespread production and distribution of Hydrogen to fuel private cars.

(Edit 1 hour later) I have just been advised that Australia claims to produce about 50% of the world present Lithium. Bearing in mind how they are fairly advanced with their approach to employment processes, I can't see how it's reasonable to suggest that its mainly produced by child labour.

 

[Buckman]

I believe we should be concerned with the way materials are sourced, and the consequences of such processes such as pollution and other dangerous by products.

Make no mistake I believe we should doing what we can to bring such contentious processes to an end, but let's be clear, in respect of Lithium it's not all producers that are using such contentious methods. I am not suggesting this is an excuse to just turn a blind eye to such issues, and it is of course a very serious matter for those who are affected by poor practices, they should have reason to hope for a better future.

But is it therefore reasonable to overlook or condemn EV's just for the sins of a few.

If you really apply such high standards to the production and running of an EV, then it is hypocritical to ignore the sins that have been committed to produce and run ICE vehicles. There are many past and present contentious issues surrounding the prospecting and production of fossil fuels, equal in severity to, but on a much larger scale than those of Lithium.

EV's are here now! and they will grow in numbers and capability. There may be other alternatives in the future, but specifically Hydrogen fueled vehicles are very much less likely to become mainstream partly becasue of the head start EV's have, and the cradle to grave costs and poorer efficiency and practical challenges involved in the widespread production and distribution of Hydrogen to fuel private cars.

(Edit 1 hour later) I have just been advised that Australia claims to produce about 50% of the world present Lithium. Bearing in mind how they are fairly advanced with their approach to employment processes, I can't see how it's reasonable to suggest that its mainly produced by child labour.

No one is arguing about the end product which when complete may be environmentally friendly, but it is the process to get it to that stage that may be no different to sourcing material for ICE vehicles and could still impact the environment to the same degree. No one has suggested that it mined mainly using child labour as that could only be happening on one continent where it is not unknown.

 

[ProfJohnL]

No vehicle is entirely environmentally friendly, but some are less damaging than others, however throughout their life, all verifiable studies have shown that EV's have a lower impact than ICE vehicles. Whilst EV's may have greater environmental impact during their construction, due to the materials used to make the batteries, their impact during their usage is very low, and that even applies when the power used to charge them is derived from fossil fuels. Obviously where the power is derived from renewables or other low carbon sources, EV's overtake ICE vehicles much faster.

ICE vehicles may have less environmental issues during construction, but that advantage is reduced and eventually reversed with every litre fuel it consumes after is been made.

The processes used to produce the fuel are constantly harming the environment, the energy used to find, extract, refine,and transport the fuel has to be considered as it is so often for EV's.

IC engines only manage to convert typically less than a third of the energy locked up in the fuel for motive power, the rest is lost as heat, and of course the exhaust is continually producing multiple emissions whenever the engine is running. It's these factors that within a couple of years that cumulatively make Ice vehicles loose out to EV's on the environmental credentials.

Every balanced scientific or financial study comparing ICE to EV's has concluded that EV's are less damaging to the environment when compared on a medium to long term basis.

This is not to say that EV's will work for everyone, and for a variety of reasons alternative (including ICE or possibly Hydrogen) will probably be needed in some cases.

Moving transport to electric is only part of the effort needed to reduce harmful emmisions.

 

[RogerL]

It seems the Germans have been working hard on carbon-neutral clean versions of synthetic petrol and diesel and are threatening to block EU legislation unless IC vehicles using e-fuel are permitted to continue production/sale indefinitely.

Germany to abstain on combustion engine ban without e-fuel proposal

Germany will abstain in the final vote on the EU's de-facto ban on new petrol or diesel cars as of 2035 unless the EU Commission proposes how new combustion engine cars can be registered if they run exclusively on e-fuels.

www.euractiv.com

 

[Buckman]

I thought EVs used fossil fuel to re-generate their batteries? I would have thought that with EVs being so heavy that they would cause damage to roads plus tyre and brake wear being higher than with an ICE vehicle.

I am not disputing that the end product, the EV itself, is more environmentally friendly, but it is the journey to that goal that affects the environment just like an ICE vehicle.

 

[Buckman]

It seems the Germans have been working hard on carbon-neutral clean versions of synthetic petrol and diesel and are threatening to block EU legislation unless IC vehicles using e-fuel are permitted to continue production/sale indefinitely.

Germany to abstain on combustion engine ban without e-fuel proposal

Germany will abstain in the final vote on the EU's de-facto ban on new petrol or diesel cars as of 2035 unless the EU Commission proposes how new combustion engine cars can be registered if they run exclusively on e-fuels.

www.euractiv.com

Interesting. Most people will not be able to afford an EV now or even in 10 or 20 years time and will continue to run their ICE vehicle until it falls apart and this is understandable. This will push up the price of older ICE vehicles.
Eventually the gap between older 2nd hand ICE vehicles and 2nd hand EVs will close, but by that time hopefully a more environmentally friendly alternative means of propulsion may have been found.

 

[Johnb]

This video had some valid points. And some that annoyed me. The drop in economy is real, but totally expected, and just as real for ICE vehicles. No mention of the different weather in the two days.
While I agree that buying an EV specifically for towing (especially very long distance over a short time) would not be sensible, using one as an occasional tow, where solo is still 90% of the usage is valid.

JohnB for your 3000 mile Eurpean tow - how frequently do you move and how far. My guess is you do that over several months, not days? And that you move perhaps 200-300 miles between stops? and each stop is a few days? If so, maybe each tow day has a single stop, or maybe 2, and you can charge when you arrive. Or maybe you cant. Either way, I would not base my decision to select a new tow vehicle (especially an EV) on the strength the information presented here.

I have to say that the video I linked is not to be regarded as a definitive resource when considering an EV. That's not in contention.

Of course a drop in fuel economy is to be expected when towing and the same can be said for my diesel car. The crucial implication for me is not the economy but, of course, the ease of finding a place to re-fuel. Planning a journey with my car requires no need to consider where and how (unhitch van etc etc) I can re-fuel.

For me either here in the UK, or in Europe, there is the same issue. I can fairly reliably estimate how long my journey will take to be at a site when I want to be but the complication of planning a route that takes in a charging station, finding it available and not in use, unhitching my van and leaving it somewhere, passing how ever long it takes to re-charge somehow and then, eventually, continuing my trip is not for me.

I watched an Andrew Ditton video after this one and have to say, as might be expected, his conclusions are not any more "scientific" than those in the more light hearted video I've linked. In fact I enjoyed watching "my" video and found the Andrew Ditton presentation far from convincing and whatever "warts and all" he pointed out were liberally coated with sugar.

It was, for example, fortuitous that he found the charging station on the end of the row in the video I watched. It's that sort of uncertainty that does nothing to make for a relaxed method of transport - at least not for me. I will not plan routes, build in "plan B", to be able to go where I want without the disaster of running out of power.

The European trip usually lasts 6 or 7 weeks. We downgraded (upgraded for us) our van from a fixed bed Lunar Clubman to a Swift 480 3 years ago. We may spend up to 2 weeks some years on a particular site on the Mediterranean but the remainder is spent exploring Europe. Having a smaller van opens routes for us that might be uncomfortable with an 8 feet wide twin axle.

Our van is a means to an end and not an end in itself. The constraints imposed by an EV would do nothing for our preferred style of caravanning.

You say: "If so, maybe each tow day has a single stop, or maybe 2, and you can charge when you arrive. Or maybe you cant".

Well, yes, that's exactly the dilemma.

Bottom line is, like you, I would NOT base any decision regarding buying an EV on the video I linked. BUT nor would I take much notice of anything Andrew Ditton is involved in. Bit like reviews in the Caravan Magazines where ALL caravans/motorhomes are judged seen through "rose tinted spectacles".

Bottom, bottom line is I am pleased I opted for my Santa Fe 3 years ago and fully intend to keep it for as long as I need a tow car. The day will come when I "hang up my hitch" and by then, almost certainly, there will be a better infrastructure servicing EV needs.

At that time I don't doubt we will run only one car. The car we run will be smaller than the current cars. It is likely that car will be an EV.

 

[RogerL]

I thought EVs used fossil fuel to re-generate their batteries? I would have thought that with EVs being so heavy that they would cause damage to roads plus tyre and brake wear being higher than with an ICE vehicle.

I am not disputing that the end product, the EV itself, is more environmentally friendly, but it is the journey to that goal that affects the environment just like an ICE vehicle.

Brake wear is lower on an EV, thanks to regenerative braking - under Euro 7, all cars wiil be subject to limits of particle emissions from tyre and brake wear, both IC and EV.