Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories



Green Building
"The most popular book on green building in the UK today."
New fourth edition in two volumes!

Order both books now for the combined price of just £9.95
and free delivery!

(free delivery applies to UK addresses only).

Or get both books for just £7.90 if purchased at the same time as a subscription to Green Building magazine





Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.




    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeApr 10th 2017 edited
     
    https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/you-never-own-riversimple-rasa-can-shares-future-sustainable-team

    "We will never sell a car

    The Riversimple Rasa fuel cell car will be available on subscription as a complete and cost-transparent service. It’s a lighter, simpler transport option for customers and it leads to a longer term business relationship with a number of significant advantages. Above all it is disruptive, turning the traditional business incentive to design cars for obsolescence on its head. In fact, when you sell “mobility” as a service the business incentive is to design cars for longevity, low running costs and sustainability.

    We won’t build giant factories but will be part of the local economy

    Our manufacturing model = profitable, regional operations each making a maximum of 5,000 cars a year; creating new high skilled jobs, employing local people and promoting local sourcing where possible."

    "As our first crowdfunding closed at midnight on Sunday 9th April, we were thrilled to have reached over £1,138,000.
    The entire team in LLandrindod Wells is in very high spirits. Thank you all."

    "Chris Reitz, famed for designing the iconic FIAT 500, styled the Rasa (as in Tabula Rasa)

    "who’s going to steal a car that you can’t sell?"
  1.  
    First Welsh made car since the Gilbern Invader?
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeApr 10th 2017 edited
     
    Seems all the rage - a keen Italian in Cardiff has just bought my 69 Fiat 124AC Coupe for restoration!
    http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/332147259579?ssPageName=STRK:MEUNSOLD:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1560.l2649
  2.  
    it is a very optimistic view of human nature. Yes, I can see that at the margins there will always be a few people who like such an arrangement, but there is a deeply entrenched part of our current way of thinking that wants to own our own stuff.
    I don't think the time is yet - maybe 20 years time? Or perhaps never?
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeApr 10th 2017
     
    I sent this reply comment to Riversimple:

    "If I had said in 1973 "I have seen the future of motoring, it has a 300 hp motor, is over 17 foot long and weighs over 2 ton", you would have laughed.
    But that is what Ford did with the F-150, and they sold 820,799 of them last year.

    This idea of a small, fuel-efficient car has been talked about for over 40 years, it has not happened yet.

    Gasoline is currently around 12p/kWh in the UK, slightly less than electricity is. It is too cheap to change behavior, that is the real problem."
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeApr 10th 2017 edited
     
    Just one thing to say - GenY/Z. Their attitude to possessions is so radically different, and their appetite for taking part in doing things, that us oldies find it hard to imagine. Really unprecedented. So, as it'll take that long for us to die off and them to take over, prob 20yrs is about right.

    Edited - it's GenY/Z not X/Y
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeApr 11th 2017
     
    Do you have any evidence for that Tom?
    The only stuff I have seen is by the companies that are trying to promote their involvement in the 'gig' economy (whatever that means).
  3.  
    There seem to be a number of barriers and counteractuals here:

    1 - Can he prove the effectiveness and efficiency of cottage industry over large scale manfacturing?
    2 - Only renting out cars seems to be a strange business model .. see popularity of Renault.
    3 - I think it is regulation not business models that mainly drive obsolescence.
    4 - Finance? He will need miltibillions not £1m.
    5 - How will he outcompete the car manufacturers.

    Ferdinand
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeApr 11th 2017
     
    Posted By: SteamyTeaDo you have any evidence for that Tom?
    Dozens of articles etc about GenY/Z bookmarked, some of which reference orifginal research - and believe me I discount propaganda from monopoly-capitalist dynosaurs like Uber.

    here's a nice one https://www.fastcompany.com/1842581/why-millennials-dont-want-buy-stuff
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeApr 11th 2017
     
    Tom
    That is an opinion piece that is devoid of facts, evidence and research.
  4.  
    Steamy Tea, you said: ''It is too cheap to change behavior, that is the real problem."

    I am sure I could change behavior - ''behaviour''. That wasn't too hard!

    :cool:
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeApr 11th 2017
     
    He's talking about American behavior.
    • CommentAuthorMikel
    • CommentTimeApr 11th 2017
     
    It depends on whether you get your spelling from the manufacturer or the middle-man.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeApr 11th 2017
     
    Posted By: Nick ParsonsThat wasn't too hard!
    :bigsmile:
  5.  
    I'm going to temper my earlier comment. An awful lot of NEW cars are not owned. The vast majority of people now get their vehicle on contract hire - 3 years at £x hundred per month. All they are interested in is the monthly payment.

    However, once the 3 (or 4) years are up, the vehicles do then get SOLD into the market and owned. Nobody IMHO wants to hire an old car.
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeApr 13th 2017
     
    Pity it's a fuel cell car.
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeApr 13th 2017
     
    It could be anything - even IC - the interesting bit is that 'you'll never own one', hence longevity not obsolescence; the internet-era thinking (it's 'in beta' - but it goes deeper than that); the intention to distributed manufacture; all enabled by crowdsourced funding, or anything other than the dictates and demands of venture capital.

    It seems to be a very complete prototype, not so much of the product, but of the new-breed of enterprise that the digital era and the new digital generations seemed to imply, but which so far got subverted by old-style monopoly-capitalist-on-digital-steroids corps while no-one was paying attention.
    • CommentAuthorCWatters
    • CommentTimeApr 13th 2017
     
    With my cynical hat on...

    The investment proposal amounts to them selling you a long lease on a £100,000 carbon fibre two seater sports car for only £70,000 with the tax payer forking out the remaining £30,000 in the form EIS tax relief.

    https://riversimple.sharein.com/rewards-terms

    http://www.enterprise-ip.com/eis-guide/?gclid=Cj0KEQjww7zHBRCToPSj_c_WjZIBEiQAj8il5DYliuM7t8XY37bHDR4qcepj1nB9hef78Tplkc0Q7wsaAuLf8P8HAQ
  6.  
    Logevity not obsolescense is super optimistic. It defies centuries of human and technical progress and basic human nature. Stuff progresses. Who wants a 25 year old car? Look at an old Citroen BX (which is what I had 25 years ago). You dont see many (any?). Because they fell apart, and even if they had not, who would want one? Given the choice of a modern unit?
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeApr 13th 2017 edited
     
    Changing the subject slightly, I see Elon Musk is going to launch a battery powered lorry, and a van.
    That is a better move I think, vans especially.
    • CommentAuthorEd Davies
    • CommentTimeApr 13th 2017
     
    Funny how people want new cars but lap up houses built at the same time as Model-T Fords and carry on building new ones to the standards of a Triumph Herald.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeApr 13th 2017 edited
     
    It is easier to buy more square metres of new cars than new housing. :wink:
  7.  
    Posted By: Ed DaviesFunny how people want new cars but lap up houses built at the same time as Model-T Fords and carry on building new ones to the standards of a Triumph Herald.


    For the first bit, its because house building (perhaps uniquely) has not really progressed much in the last 100 years. The 2nd bit reinforces the argument
    • CommentAuthorskyewright
    • CommentTimeApr 14th 2017
     
    Posted By: Ed Daviescarry on building new ones to the standards of a Triumph Herald.

    Fine little car the Herald (http://www.tssc.org.uk). Sure you aren't thinking of the Allegro... :wink:
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeApr 14th 2017 edited
     
    Posted By: SteamyTeaI see Elon Musk is going to launch a battery powered lorry, and a van
    So is Riversimple - see their website (well, not battery powered)
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeApr 14th 2017 edited
     
    Posted By: dimengineerWho wants a 25 year old car?
    Plenty, not just Classic Car nostalgists like me, but for example my old boss Charlie Ware's Bath Morris Minor Centre promoted 'the durable car' for decades, plenty of customers and plenty of copyist firms.

    Charlie, in previous role as 'enlightened' property developer, saviour of the city of Bath from developers and bulldozers etc (by turning Bath Preservation Trust into a fighting force) and I go back to the late 70s/early80s of Improvement Grants, by which swathes of sound but under-equiped housing was modernised instead of demolished, as hitherto. I thought back then 'why not apply that radical thinking to cars too?', the answer being of course that there was a mighty car industry (unlike the fragmented building industry) relying on continual 'demolition and comprehensive redevelopment' of the nation's car stock. So, politically difficult to incentivise a new industry devoted to continual upgrading of the nation's car stock, unlike the nation's housing stock.

    Yet, that principle was applied - Morris Minors were fitted with 1275 engines, Toyota 5-speed boxes and disc brakes, their metalwork made good with repair sections hand-bashed in Sri Lanka (Where Minors were plentiful and enduring). Other cars had their day similarly - Citroen 2CVs for example. The Triumph Herald was another such potential, with its structural ladder-frame chassis and all-bolt-on body, front suspension and steering universally adopted by the race-car industry and in the [Vitesse - edit that to read ...] GT6 mk3, excellent evolution of its independent rear suspension.

    Posted By: dimengineerLook at an old Citroen BX (which is what I had 25 years ago). You dont see many (any?). Because they fell apart
    Indeed, that is the reason. Other than that, a brilliant car, ideal candidate for longtime usefulness and efficiency, aided no doubt by standard uprates that would evolve.

    Posted By: dimengineerBecause they fell apart, and even if they had not, who would want one? Given the choice of a modern unit?
    Plenty feel uneasy at being constantly up-sold on basically more and more gadgets, with no real increase in utility (unless hooked on that treadmill). Step-changes in major technology (battery or fuel-cell vs ICE) is something else but ever-heavier latest-style ICEs are really not of great benefit to humanity, planet etc.

    Squeezing the last drops out of absolutely-limited ICE fossil-burning efficiency, and instantly defeating that by adding more weight and more use of finite/rare resources, is not justifiable as necessary to finance R&D into more enlightened technologies and ownership/durability paradigms. By whatever means they've financed it, in addition to Crowdfunding, Riversimple prove that.
  8.  
    Tom. I think you miss my point. Compare a 25 year old car to a new one. See all the improments to safety, economy, niceness to drive, in car entertainement, comfort, etcetera, etcetra.
    Yep, a Morris minor might be fun for a while, but you'd get out, look at the much, much improved modern unit and swap. You would. People would. Continuous improvemenet for 25+ years. Why would you forego that?
    •  
      CommentAuthorfostertom
    • CommentTimeApr 14th 2017 edited
     
    You're in the area of an extremely fundamental assumption there - choosing between 2 divergent views of our future world.

    You're going along with the traditional (well, perhaps 35yr) notion of continuous expendability in interest of 100yr notion of 'progress'. That material and energy resources are ever more abundant, to make 'demolition and comprehensive redvelopment' the way to continually put the very latest gadgets and comforts (as convinced by marketeers) into the hands of an ever-growing global middle class. You may just be right, but it's on a knife-edge of potential imminent collapse.

    For sure, the foundational material and energy resource (as well as the planet's capacity to reprocess the consequences) is increasingly acknowleged (esp here on GBF, I hope) to be far from abundant. So viability depends urgently on quite fantastic, unprecedented strides in
    recycling (and energy-content upcycling) of every last drop of raw material from 'demolotion',
    reduction of energy input - and that all-renewable - to the 'comprehensive redevelopment', and
    every machine, every building, every everthing that humans make/do, as well as fulfilling its ostensible purpose, to be designed to actively assist the planet to re-process the mess we've alrady made and are continuing to accumulate much faster than the planet can re-process.

    Failing all of that, your 'notion of continuous expendability in interest of progress' is strictly time-limited - as I say, it's on a knife-edge right now.

    Failing that, the default is 'make do and mend', which is part of the Riversimple proposition.
    •  
      CommentAuthordjh
    • CommentTimeApr 14th 2017
     
    Posted By: fostertomThe Triumph Herald was another such potential, with its structural ladder-frame chassis and all-bolt-on body, front suspension and steering universally adopted by the race-car industry and in the Vitesse, excellent evolution of its independent rear suspension.

    I had a Vitesse. The rear suspension was INfamous, not excellent. I remember going over a bump on a bend and the rear of the car jacked itself up and literally jumped sideways. Luckily there was no oncoming traffic.

    Posted By: dimengineerLook at an old Citroen BX (which is what I had 25 years ago). You dont see many (any?). Because they fell apart
    Indeed, that is the reason. Other than that, a brilliant car, ideal candidate for longtime usefulness and efficiency, aided no doubt by standard uprates that would evolve.

    I had one of those too, a BX19 GTi, and yes I got in one cold night and all the plastic trim leapt off the car and into my lap. So other than being a bag of nails, it was brilliant? I much preferred the Xantia; it did have good suspension.
    • CommentAuthorskyewright
    • CommentTimeApr 14th 2017
     
    Posted By: djh
    I had a Vitesse. The rear suspension was INfamous, not excellent. I remember going over a bump on a bend and the rear of the car jacked itself up and literally jumped sideways.

    With the transverse leaf spring that sort of sideways skip more usually happened in hard cornering. I had it happen to me in a MkII Spitfire, a bit of a brown trouser moment, but the corner was negotiated successfully I'm very glad to say!
    The MkIII GT6 had 'proper' rear suspension and was a very nice drive; I have a feeling that the Vitesse never got that?

    Dragging things vaguely back to 'green' if not exactly back On Topic my experience of Herald, Spitfire & GT6 was that they were very good on mpg for their day (if driven sensibly).
   
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   
Logout    

© Green Building Press