I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
the action of EV acceleration.

If true it's a good reason to tax them more.

On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
> the action of EV acceleration.
>
> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.

How many potholes? Unless you can put figures on the cost of repair, you
have no idea how much extra to tax them. It could just be a fraction of
a penny.

On 2024-01-05, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote:
> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>> the action of EV acceleration.
>>
>> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>
> How many potholes? Unless you can put figures on the cost of repair, you
> have no idea how much extra to tax them. It could just be a fraction of
> a penny.
>
>

We do not even know what causes potholes. Problems with the subtarmac
surface?.

--
greymausg@mail.com
Are there no jails, no lockdowns?
Not even an .Influencer?

On 05/01/2024 10:24, maus wrote:
> On 2024-01-05, GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote:
>> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>>> the action of EV acceleration.
>>>
>>> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>>
>> How many potholes? Unless you can put figures on the cost of repair, you
>> have no idea how much extra to tax them. It could just be a fraction of
>> a penny.
>>
>>
>
> We do not even know what causes potholes. Problems with the subtarmac
> surface?.
>
>
You may not. Some of us do.

--
"If you don’t read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

On 05/01/2024 10:08, GB wrote:
> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>> the action of EV acceleration.
>>
>> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>
> How many potholes? Unless you can put figures on the cost of repair, you
> have no idea how much extra to tax them. It could just be a fraction of
> a penny.
>
>

It's just a matter of time until EVs will be taxed to make up for the
loss of fuel duty.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 05/01/2024 10:28, alan_m wrote:
> On 05/01/2024 10:08, GB wrote:
>> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>>> the action of EV acceleration.
>>>
>>> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>>
>> How many potholes? Unless you can put figures on the cost of repair,
>> you have no idea how much extra to tax them. It could just be a
>> fraction of a penny.
>>
>>
>
>
> It's just a matter of time until EVs will be taxed to make up for the
> loss of fuel duty.
>
>
Big dilemma. The gummint has been bribed to make them mandaTory, but
people can in general Do Simple Sums..

...and EV's just don't add up, and the political cost of enforcing them
(like renewable energy) is a further drop in living standards.

>
>

--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

alan_m wrote:

> It's just a matter of time until EVs will be taxed to make up for the
> loss of fuel duty.

They start paying next year, I think?

On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
> the action of EV acceleration.
>
> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.

It seems to be well established that damage to roads is roughly proportional to the fourth power of the weight of the vehicle. I can't find a good estimate of the average weight of an electric vehicle compared to one with a petrol/diesel engine, but I have seen figures that they are around 30% heavier because of the battery. This would make the road damage 2.8 times higher.

Of course governments everywhere have chosen to ignore this when taxing 40 ton trucks, otherwise they would pay about 2.5 million times as much as a one-ton car for the road damage element of their tax.

--
Clive Page

Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>> the action of EV acceleration.
>>
>> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>
> It seems to be well established that damage to roads is roughly
> proportional to the fourth power of the weight of the vehicle. I can't
> find a good estimate of the average weight of an electric vehicle
> compared to one with a petrol/diesel engine, but I have seen figures that
> they are around 30% heavier because of the battery. This would make the
> road damage 2.8 times higher.
>
> Of course governments everywhere have chosen to ignore this when taxing
> 40 ton trucks, otherwise they would pay about 2.5 million times as much
> as a one-ton car for the road damage element of their tax.

Let look at a few real world numbers.

The bicycle and rider:

Weight…100kg

Number of axles…2

Size of contact one patch…2800 mm^2

Load exerted on the road surface by one wheel =

(100/2)/(2800x(10^-6) kg/sq.m

= 1.8x(10^4) kg/sq.m

The car:

Weight…2000kg

Number of axles….4

Size of one contact patch…20500mm^2

Load exerted on the road surface by one wheel =

(2000/4)/(20500x(10^-6) =

= 2.4x(10^4) kg/sq.m

So from this analysis it can be seen that actual loads exerted on the road
surface through the combination of the contact patch of the tyre and the
loads acting through it are very similar for the case of the bicycle and
the larger modern car.

Nowhere in these calculations was it necessary to invoke some ‘fourth
power’ ‘rule’. Contact patch sizes were obtained from cycling and motoring
web sites.

I suspect that the EV/pothole issue stems from the EV being able to exert
more torque at the road wheels at zero speed, than an ICE vehicle.

--
Spike

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 09:56:02 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
<jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

>I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>the action of EV acceleration.
>
>If true it's a good reason to tax them more.

As a side issue but still on the topic of EV's, how do the batteries
survive being immersed in flood water for a couple of days?

--
Chris

On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 10:58:22 +0000, Clive Page wrote:

> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>> the action of EV acceleration.
>>
>> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>
> It seems to be well established that damage to roads is roughly
> proportional to the fourth power of the weight of the vehicle. I can't
> find a good estimate of the average weight of an electric vehicle
> compared to one with a petrol/diesel engine, but I have seen figures
> that they are around 30% heavier because of the battery. This would
> make the road damage 2.8 times higher.

I drive a full hybrid, identical to my previous car except for that being
diesel. It is 2% heavier.

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 05/01/2024 10:41, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 05/01/2024 10:28, alan_m wrote:
>> On 05/01/2024 10:08, GB wrote:
>>> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>>>> the action of EV acceleration.
>>>>
>>>> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>>>
>>> How many potholes? Unless you can put figures on the cost of repair,
>>> you have no idea how much extra to tax them. It could just be a
>>> fraction of a penny.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> It's just a matter of time until EVs will be taxed to make up for the
>> loss of fuel duty.
>>
>>
> Big dilemma. The gummint has been bribed to make them mandaTory, but
> people can in general  Do Simple Sums.

It's personal choice. I am not currently forced to run an EV. Not sure
why you should think you are?

> ..and EV's just don't add up, and the political cost of enforcing them
> (like renewable energy) is a further drop in living standards.

New cars don't add up. EVs will come down in price, depending on the tax
structure surrounding them. The more tax, the lower the resale price.

On 05/01/2024 12:21, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 10:58:22 +0000, Clive Page wrote:
>
>> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>>> the action of EV acceleration.
>>>
>>> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>>
>> It seems to be well established that damage to roads is roughly
>> proportional to the fourth power of the weight of the vehicle. I can't
>> find a good estimate of the average weight of an electric vehicle
>> compared to one with a petrol/diesel engine, but I have seen figures
>> that they are around 30% heavier because of the battery. This would
>> make the road damage 2.8 times higher.
>
> I drive a full hybrid, identical to my previous car except for that being
> diesel. It is 2% heavier.

To be fair hybrids only have a battery range of 10 or so miles and
therefore don't have the weight.

I've always liked the plug-in hybrid. The average journey is only a few
miles so hybrids should run on their batteries for much of the time.

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 10:28:43 +0000
alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

> On 05/01/2024 10:08, GB wrote:
> > On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
> >> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be
> >> due to the action of EV acceleration.
> >>
> >> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
> >
> > How many potholes? Unless you can put figures on the cost of
> > repair, you have no idea how much extra to tax them. It could just
> > be a fraction of a penny.
> >
> >
>
>
> It's just a matter of time until EVs will be taxed to make up for the
> loss of fuel duty.

No. *Everybody* will be taxed by GPS tracking, and there will *still*
be fuel duty.

--
Joe

On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 10:58:22 +0000, Clive Page wrote:

> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> [quoted text muted]
>
> It seems to be well established that damage to roads is roughly
> proportional to the fourth power of the weight of the vehicle.

That's one factor. The force of acceleration is another. It creates a
shear force surely ?

On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 12:19:03 +0000, Chris Hogg wrote:

> On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 09:56:02 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
> <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
>
>>I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>>the action of EV acceleration.
>>
>>If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>
> As a side issue but still on the topic of EV's, how do the batteries
> survive being immersed in flood water for a couple of days?

I thought generally a submerged car is a write off. You will never get
the smell out. Certainly that was the story I was told when a customers
car got submerged when they parked too close to a tidal part of the
Thames (can't remember where now).

On 05/01/2024 11:28, Spike wrote:

>> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>>> the action of EV acceleration.

> I suspect that the EV/pothole issue stems from the EV being able to exert
> more torque at the road wheels at zero speed, than an ICE vehicle.
>

That's what Jethro suggested in the OP, too.

On 05/01/2024 10:28, alan_m wrote:
> On 05/01/2024 10:08, GB wrote:
>> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:

>>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>>> the action of EV acceleration.
>>>
>>> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>>
>> How many potholes? Unless you can put figures on the cost of repair,
>> you have no idea how much extra to tax them. It could just be a
>> fraction of a penny.

> It's just a matter of time until EVs will be taxed to make up for the
> loss of fuel duty.

They'll introduce road pricing so the gummint will know exactly where we
go all the time. The "Tony Blair Institute" wants this (well, not the
second part, but that's a given).

https://www.gbnews.com/lifestyle/cars/car-tax-changes-urgent-tony-blair-institute-electric-car

--
Max Demian

On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 12:38:16 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

> On 05/01/2024 12:21, Bob Eager wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 10:58:22 +0000, Clive Page wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due
>>>> to the action of EV acceleration.
>>>>
>>>> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>>>
>>> It seems to be well established that damage to roads is roughly
>>> proportional to the fourth power of the weight of the vehicle. I
>>> can't find a good estimate of the average weight of an electric
>>> vehicle compared to one with a petrol/diesel engine, but I have seen
>>> figures that they are around 30% heavier because of the battery. This
>>> would make the road damage 2.8 times higher.
>>
>> I drive a full hybrid, identical to my previous car except for that
>> being diesel. It is 2% heavier.
>
> To be fair hybrids only have a battery range of 10 or so miles and
> therefore don't have the weight.
>
> I've always liked the plug-in hybrid. The average journey is only a few
> miles so hybrids should run on their batteries for much of the time.

True, but it has a socking great 2.5 litre engine.

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 10:58:22 +0000, Clive Page wrote:
>
> > On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
> >> [quoted text muted]
> >
> > It seems to be well established that damage to roads is roughly
> > proportional to the fourth power of the weight of the vehicle.
>
> That's one factor. The force of acceleration is another. It creates a
> shear force surely ?

Are these potholes on stretches of road where people regularly do 0 to 60?
Do they have burnt rubber type tracks on them?

Many potholes are in the traffic lane where people are proceeding at a
constant-ish speed, ie acceleration = 0.

Often they develop by water ingress into the road surface and then
freeze-thaw weathering, which is why they're worse after snowy/frozen
weather and at the side of the road where water collects.

Theo

Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 12:19:03 +0000, Chris Hogg wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 09:56:02 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
> > <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
> >
> >>I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
> >>the action of EV acceleration.
> >>
> >>If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
> >
> > As a side issue but still on the topic of EV's, how do the batteries
> > survive being immersed in flood water for a couple of days?

The batteries are sealed, exposed to the underside of the car and with a
water cooling loop, so they are already protected against liquid damage from
both inside and outside. You won't know if the seals were good until you
try them, and other electrical parts like motors may have been damaged in
the flood. It is quite possible the car detected the floodwaters and blew a
pyro fuse to protect the battery, which would make the car inert until
somebody replaces the pyro (often inside the battery itself).

> I thought generally a submerged car is a write off. You will never get
> the smell out. Certainly that was the story I was told when a customers
> car got submerged when they parked too close to a tidal part of the
> Thames (can't remember where now).

There's so many places the water could go and cause mischief, in any car,
it's not worth the insurance company's time to find out - they'll just write
it off. Then it goes off to Copart etc auction and some salvage yard buys
it and either takes it to bits to dry it all out or tears it apart for parts
(those which are usable) or scrap.

Theo

On 05 Jan 2024 14:28:24 +0000 (GMT), Theo
<theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

>Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 12:19:03 +0000, Chris Hogg wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 09:56:02 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
>> > <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>> >>the action of EV acceleration.
>> >>
>> >>If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>> >
>> > As a side issue but still on the topic of EV's, how do the batteries
>> > survive being immersed in flood water for a couple of days?
>
>The batteries are sealed, exposed to the underside of the car and with a
>water cooling loop, so they are already protected against liquid damage from
>both inside and outside. You won't know if the seals were good until you
>try them, and other electrical parts like motors may have been damaged in
>the flood. It is quite possible the car detected the floodwaters and blew a
>pyro fuse to protect the battery, which would make the car inert until
>somebody replaces the pyro (often inside the battery itself).
>
>> I thought generally a submerged car is a write off. You will never get
>> the smell out. Certainly that was the story I was told when a customers
>> car got submerged when they parked too close to a tidal part of the
>> Thames (can't remember where now).
>
>There's so many places the water could go and cause mischief, in any car,
>it's not worth the insurance company's time to find out - they'll just write
>it off. Then it goes off to Copart etc auction and some salvage yard buys
>it and either takes it to bits to dry it all out or tears it apart for parts
>(those which are usable) or scrap.
>
>Theo

OK, thanks. So EV's are at no greater risk of being written off than
any other type of vehicle. I wondered if the battery was more likely
to fail in some fashion if immersed, needing expensive replacement,
compared to say an ICE. Apparently not.

--
Chris

GB <NOTsomeone@microsoft.invalid> wrote:
> On 05/01/2024 11:28, Spike wrote:
>
>>> On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>>>> the action of EV acceleration.
>
>
>> I suspect that the EV/pothole issue stems from the EV being able to exert
>> more torque at the road wheels at zero speed, than an ICE vehicle.

> That's what Jethro suggested in the OP, too.

Not exactly…Jethro’s suggestion was general, mine is specific.

--
Spike

On 05/01/2024 09:56, Jethro_uk wrote:
> I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
> the action of EV acceleration.
>
> If true it's a good reason to tax them more.

I've not found any reports that support that, but have seen a claim by
the suppliers of asphalt that unclassified roads could be in danger from
the weight. Classified roads are already built to withstand the weight
of HGVs, but unclassified roads, which account for about 60% of the
network, are not built to the same standards and some could be at risk
from the weight.

--
Colin Bignell

On 05 Jan 2024 14:28:24 +0000 (GMT), Theo
<theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

>Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Jan 2024 12:19:03 +0000, Chris Hogg wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 09:56:02 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
>> > <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>I recently read a suggestion that some potholes in the UK may be due to
>> >>the action of EV acceleration.
>> >>
>> >>If true it's a good reason to tax them more.
>> >
>> > As a side issue but still on the topic of EV's, how do the batteries
>> > survive being immersed in flood water for a couple of days?
>
>The batteries are sealed, exposed to the underside of the car and with a
>water cooling loop, so they are already protected against liquid damage from
>both inside and outside. You won't know if the seals were good until you
>try them, and other electrical parts like motors may have been damaged in
>the flood. It is quite possible the car detected the floodwaters and blew a
>pyro fuse to protect the battery, which would make the car inert until
>somebody replaces the pyro (often inside the battery itself).
>
>> I thought generally a submerged car is a write off. You will never get
>> the smell out. Certainly that was the story I was told when a customers
>> car got submerged when they parked too close to a tidal part of the
>> Thames (can't remember where now).
>
>There's so many places the water could go and cause mischief, in any car,
>it's not worth the insurance company's time to find out - they'll just write
>it off. Then it goes off to Copart etc auction and some salvage yard buys
>it and either takes it to bits to dry it all out or tears it apart for parts
>(those which are usable) or scrap.
>
I had a brand new car that took in a lot of water and flooded the
passenger side. I took it back and said I wanted it checked and a new
carpet. They said the carpet would be okay. I said I would never get
the smell out. They were right and there was nothing wrong with the
carpet.