Al2O3 said:
I'm just thinking out loud here............
I would have thought the statement about 50%-70% (whatever it is) of all original Land Rovers still being on the road will be referring to the series, 90, 110, and early Defenders. It's a time referenced statement and is often quoted to include the statement 'ever made'.
The LR technology is sustainable because it is of a type that is maintainable by motor engineering enthusiasts. How maintainable are the Leaf's lithium batteries? I've no idea. If it became a classic, cult vehicle kept alive by enthusiasts, how often would you expect to have to change the batteries? I have a young Defender at 22yrs, would the original batteries still be fine in a 22yr old Leaf?
How are you going to compare the fuel/energy efficiencies? Generating electricity in a power station is very inefficient, transporting electricity through cables is also very inefficient. Extracting oil and then diesel from it and transporting it must also be inefficient. Tricky stuff, but very interesting. Good luck with the study and dissertation.
Click to expand...

The quotation of the 50-70% is used as the muse for the research. It in itself holds no statistical value and is probably widely off but its the seed that started the thought process to look into it. It wont be referenced as data just the thought that started it all, everything has to start from somewhere.

The issue is even with constant car the battery will deteriorate, think of them as a mobile phone, after a few years the charge last less and less time. Studys comparing the 2 have to account for changed batterys, with some reports seeing 2 battery changes for the equivalent millage of 170,000 to 200,000 defending.
 
Kwakerman said:
Good point, the rusty remains of a defender can be melted down, lithium batteries are a lot more difficult to recycle plus you have a lot more plastics in modern cars and plastic is the latest evil killer!
Click to expand...

brian47 said:
One thing that annoys me about so-called "green, pollution free" devices such as electric cars is the "tree huggers" seem to forget that there will always be a cost for energy generation, even if that cost seems to be hidden such as the amount of land that becomes unusable because it has a vast photo-voltaic solar energy collection station on it. All that electric vehicles do is move the pollution from the vehicle tailpipe to the smoke stack at the power station.
Click to expand...

Al2O3 said:
I'm just thinking out loud here............
I would have thought the statement about 50%-70% (whatever it is) of all original Land Rovers still being on the road will be referring to the series, 90, 110, and early Defenders. It's a time referenced statement and is often quoted to include the statement 'ever made'.
The LR technology is sustainable because it is of a type that is maintainable by motor engineering enthusiasts. How maintainable are the Leaf's lithium batteries? I've no idea. If it became a classic, cult vehicle kept alive by enthusiasts, how often would you expect to have to change the batteries? I have a young Defender at 22yrs, would the original batteries still be fine in a 22yr old Leaf?
How are you going to compare the fuel/energy efficiencies? Generating electricity in a power station is very inefficient, transporting electricity through cables is also very inefficient. Extracting oil and then diesel from it and transporting it must also be inefficient. Tricky stuff, but very interesting. Good luck with the study and dissertation.
Click to expand...

I know the figures are old, will be looking for some more current but you get the idea of what I'm trying to get at. Playing on what you all were saying about the electricity generation and comparing the two different fuels. Obviously MPGs for the defender will be spec'd already although I'll do my own just to make sure they're alright. As for the EV the emissions list shows its as 0.543t CO2/MWh (even more when whole LCA taken into consideration) a lot more inefficient than the emissions of traditional fuel, factor in the more frequent charging of the EV might throw up some interesting result.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-06-22 at 12.08.09.png
    Screen Shot 2018-06-22 at 12.08.09.png
    21.7 KB · Views: 214
  • Screen Shot 2018-06-23 at 10.51.52.png
    Screen Shot 2018-06-23 at 10.51.52.png
    13 KB · Views: 183
dunning123 said:
The quotation of the 50-70% is used as the muse for the research. It in itself holds no statistical value and is probably widely off but its the seed that started the thought process to look into it. It wont be referenced as data just the thought that started it all, everything has to start from somewhere.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I realise that. If you can find a reasonably reliable source for a figure relating to surviving Landy's, it might be useful to use it in your final conclusion in support of the long term maintainability of the technology withing the LR

dunning123 said:
The issue is even with constant car the battery will deteriorate, think of them as a mobile phone, after a few years the charge last less and less time. Studys comparing the 2 have to account for changed batterys, with some reports seeing 2 battery changes for the equivalent millage of 170,000 to 200,000 defending.
Click to expand...
So, a new set of batteries approx every 100k miles. How much does a set of batteries cost?
 
@dunning123

While the subject of CO2 per MW or CO2 per 1000 miles is being considered, how do you intend to validate your figures in light of the recent claims that some major European vehicle manufacturers, notably Volkswagen, Audi and Bentley have been either accused of or proved to been using software to skew the published emissions figures for their vehicles?

Everybody knows or suspects that LR diesels produce pollution so there should be no need to "cook the books", but can you be sure that in light those three manufacturers have been named that others aren't employing similar methods to alter their figures?
 
dunning123 said:
I know the figures are old, will be looking for some more current but you get the idea of what I'm trying to get at. Playing on what you all were saying about the electricity generation and comparing the two different fuels. Obviously MPGs for the defender will be spec'd already although I'll do my own just to make sure they're alright. As for the EV the emissions list shows its as 0.543t CO2/MWh (even more when whole LCA taken into consideration) a lot more inefficient than the emissions of traditional fuel, factor in the more frequent charging of the EV might throw up some interesting result.
Click to expand...
On the face of it that looks like using electric motor creates twice as much CO2, but is the electric motor twice as efficient as the LR diesel engine? And so on final consumption it balances out, I honestly don't know.

brian47 said:
@dunning123

While the subject of CO2 per MW or CO2 per 1000 miles is being considered, how do you intend to validate your figures in light of the recent claims that some major European vehicle manufacturers, notably Volkswagen, Audi and Bentley have been either accused of or proved to been using software to skew the published emissions figures for their vehicles?

Everybody knows or suspects that LR diesels produce pollution so there should be no need to "cook the books", but can you be sure that in light those three manufacturers have been named that others aren't employing similar methods to alter their figures?
Click to expand...
I suppose it depend on if the figures being used are those taken, on trust, from the manufacturers :rolleyes: or from an independent body.
 
brian47 said:
@dunning123

While the subject of CO2 per MW or CO2 per 1000 miles is being considered, how do you intend to validate your figures in light of the recent claims that some major European vehicle manufacturers, notably Volkswagen, Audi and Bentley have been either accused of or proved to been using software to skew the published emissions figures for their vehicles?

Everybody knows or suspects that LR diesels produce pollution so there should be no need to "cook the books", but can you be sure that in light those three manufacturers have been named that others aren't employing similar methods to alter their figures?
Click to expand...

Data reliability is the biggest worry. Only thing I can do is account for the risk by being as transparent as possible with the calculations. Highlighting where the data comes from and its limitations. I'll be highlighting the assumptions and source data throughout. Only see it being an issue when calculating the manufacturing and car use emissions as other methods like material procurement and recycling will be backed up by previous studies and cited industry standards.

Impossible to guarantee that they haven't fiddled it. But the JLR data is independently audited by KPMG so that does increase its reliability to the point where I'm happy to use it.

Also for these companies to get ISO14001 accreditation a high level of transparency is required so you'd assume (more an educated assume) there figures to be legit.

In short, no way to be sure they aren't fiddling. Data is secured by outside auditing so fairly reliable. Will be ope and transparent with my data sources and calculations to cover my own arse.
 
Last edited:
Al2O3 said:
Yeah, I realise that. If you can find a reasonably reliable source for a figure relating to surviving Landy's, it might be useful to use it in your final conclusion in support of the long term maintainability of the technology withing the LR

So, a new set of batteries approx every 100k miles. How much does a set of batteries cost?
Click to expand...

If you're unlucky enough to fall outside of the 60,000 mile warranty £4100+VAT

Source: https://www.speakev.com/threads/cost-of-replacing-nissan-leaf-ev-battery-not-12-volt-battery.74881/
 
dunning123 said:
I'm writing a life cycle assessment comparison between a Landrover Defender and Nissan Leaf for my postgrad dissertation.

This is basically a snowball idea from the statement that like half the defenders ever made are still in use. Its my thesis that this extension of use when considered in a products life cycle (along with JLR's closed loop manufacturing) will actually make the Defender a lot more environmentally conscious than most people would assume. Hence the comparison with the battery electric vehicle to help visualise that notion, as people see BEVs as environmentally friendly tech, if I can draw comparisons between that an a Defender I'm in business.

However I obviously need to reference where the statement of how many land rovers are still operating comes from but I can't remember, do any of you know?

Also if you have any other stories, info, journals or press releases you think may help prove this idea I would be proper grateful if you could point them in my direction. Cheers!!
Click to expand...
I have been a reader of land rover history for about 25 years. Books, video's and in more recent years visits to the factories. I find in interesting. The answer to how many left has never been answered. It has only ever been guessed.

The topic of how many left is constantly referred to. Problem for you is it's totally made up. Fiction not fact. And land rover and their employees in the know admit this. Figures usually range from 65 to 78%. Solihull factory on it's own has aged signs saying 67 and 78% ont factory walls. The fact is they just don't know as there is no overall record kept.

The figure quoted is a reference to the number of lr's made which are thought to be still used today. UK road tax figures will tell you how many we have but that's a very small percentage of production. Most were shipped overseas to places where they don't keep records. They may do now for newer sales but have nothing from the past. They don't have the tax system we have. Hence the number these countries have is never recorded. So your research is at a loss from the start oft. Also LR don't have precise build figures for every year. Theres a handful of years where there are inaccuracies. The 2 millionth tratter isn't, but for publicity it is.

Figures quoted are generalised. Phrases like "... It's believed..." or "...it's thought...". Problem is it's not known. And LR admit this. There's no way figures from the UK could be referenced as a % comparable to the rest of the world, then scaled up.

Also the comparison is flawed between the tratter and leaf. Most tratters don't do what they do best (second to freelanders) in every day life. Most only have one ocupunt and don't work for a living. Hence they're ability isn't used. So most of the vehicle built is a waste. Comparing their total carbon print or whatever is misleading. A vehicle running at half or one third mpg, weighing twice that of another vehicle is flawed. Also LR current production is said to be 100% carbon oftset if I read the advertising correctly. Comparing new and old tratters in the same rusty bucket doesn't work. Creating fool emissions from a vehicle which in the majority isn't fully used, then oftsetting the carbon print is bonkers. Yer can't purefy herself by eating an apple after a bag of chips.
 
Hippo said:
I have been a reader of land rover history for about 25 years. Books, video's and in more recent years visits to the factories. I find in interesting. The answer to how many left has never been answered. It has only ever been guessed.

The topic of how many left is constantly referred to. Problem for you is it's totally made up. Fiction not fact. And land rover and their employees in the know admit this. Figures usually range from 65 to 78%. Solihull factory on it's own has aged signs saying 67 and 78% ont factory walls. The fact is they just don't know as there is no overall record kept.

The figure quoted is a reference to the number of lr's made which are thought to be still used today. UK road tax figures will tell you how many we have but that's a very small percentage of production. Most were shipped overseas to places where they don't keep records. They may do now for newer sales but have nothing from the past. They don't have the tax system we have. Hence the number these countries have is never recorded. So your research is at a loss from the start oft. Also LR don't have precise build figures for every year. Theres a handful of years where there are inaccuracies. The 2 millionth tratter isn't, but for publicity it is.

Figures quoted are generalised. Phrases like "... It's believed..." or "...it's thought...". Problem is it's not known. And LR admit this. There's no way figures from the UK could be referenced as a % comparable to the rest of the world, then scaled up.

Also the comparison is flawed between the tratter and leaf. Most tratters don't do what they do best (second to freelanders) in every day life. Most only have one ocupunt and don't work for a living. Hence they're ability isn't used. So most of the vehicle built is a waste. Comparing their total carbon print or whatever is misleading. A vehicle running at half or one third mpg, weighing twice that of another vehicle is flawed. Also LR current production is said to be 100% carbon oftset if I read the advertising correctly. Comparing new and old tratters in the same rusty bucket doesn't work. Creating fool emissions from a vehicle which in the majority isn't fully used, then oftsetting the carbon print is bonkers. Yer can't purefy herself by eating an apple after a bag of chips.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, the fact that Solihull has it on its factory walls is something I can actually reference to!

I'm not competing the two on their utility or how effective they are at their job. If I was conducing a study on the emiosns emitted by the utility a certain car gives the driver I'd have to agree with you although it would be subjective on what people aim to get out of using their cars. I am infact for my study going on the assumption that the 2 cars will simply be used for transport and nothing else, hence using statistics of MPG from road use scenarios. The fact a defender weighs twice that of the leaf is in part the reason I picked it, because I hope to show that they are in-fact a similar in their environmental impacts than people commonly believe.
 
Who was it the coined the phrase 'lies, damn lies & statistics' ?
All those involved in the debate will only major on the facts that suit their case, at the end of the day the ensuing argument sells newspapers, promotes research, provides employment for committees etc. & is all about money, thinly disguised as attempts to save the plant.
nb: I read somewhere that the average life of EV batteries was 8 years, but don't know if that still holds true.
 
norseman said:
Who was it the coined the phrase 'lies, damn lies & statistics' ?
All those involved in the debate will only major on the facts that suit their case, at the end of the day the ensuing argument sells newspapers, promotes research, provides employment for committees etc. & is all about money, thinly disguised as attempts to save the plant.
nb: I read somewhere that the average life of EV batteries was 8 years, but don't know if that still holds true.
Click to expand...

Disraeli, IIRC -

....and I agree, EV's are a complete and utter scam - but there are, er, "one or two" such scams in this modern world!
 
Dunning, is this an under or post grad?

You could take a large sample group using a sampling tool. The recipients could complete a series of questions including have you changed the chassis, engine etc etc. This data could be triangulated with data from JLR or other similar sources. I suspect if you put a link on numerous LR forums, you would achieve a high response rate. Which you would need in order to posit generalisations for your question.

Your Lit Review could include primary data on the emissions produced for replacement parts, new vehicles and scrappage.

Interesting topic. JLR will employ you afterwards!
 
bluehaze said:
Dunning, is this an under or post grad?

You could take a large sample group using a sampling tool. The recipients could complete a series of questions including have you changed the chassis, engine etc etc. This data could be triangulated with data from JLR or other similar sources. I suspect if you put a link on numerous LR forums, you would achieve a high response rate. Which you would need in order to posit generalisations for your question.

Your Lit Review could include primary data on the emissions produced for replacement parts, new vehicles and scrappage.

Interesting topic. JLR will employ you afterwards!
Click to expand...

Postgrad man. Actually using a fair wack of knowledge of this forum which uni is surprisingly ok with!

Interesting you note scrappage as a factor, reckon it will play a massive part just need to work out how to quantify it first!
 
If you were to ask what repairs individuals have done, you could ascertain from any given manufacturing year what has been done. As an example from a sampling group of 100 in 1988 25% of the respondents stated that they had replaced their chassis. Although this would only provide some very general assumptions, however you could say that from 1988 25% of the vehicles produced would without repair expected to be scrapped due to chassis damage or corrosion.

LR could probably provide the data on the numbers produced. Not sure if the DVLA could provide scrappage data?

Compare the emissions and costs of manufacturing and swapping a chassis, for example, compared to total scrappage and manufacturing a new vehicle.

Wish I'd thought of this a few years ago.

Have you liaised with JLR? They may pay for the degree!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kimbo 110
Defender 110 Defender 110 300tdi
Replies
2
Views
2K
Kimbo 110
Kimbo 110
kevinhenry
Bissell SpinWave Wet and Dry: Best Bissell Vacuum Cleaner for Automatic Cleaning
Replies
6
Views
2K
gold rover
gold rover
D
New Defender and recommendations for advice/help
Replies
5
Views
599
Hippo
Hippo
300bhp/ton
Driven: New Defender - On & Off Road. Is it a Pretender?
2
Replies
29
Views
5K
tottot
tottot
Lief Zpring
A day in the life of Defender electrics
Replies
19
Views
1K
Lief Zpring
Lief Zpring