Anti-EV myths busted
Electric vehicle at a public charging spot1 Chapter 1: Introduction
The transition to battery electric vehicles (BEVs, or simply EVs) is undeniable in the 2020s, yet many people remain attached to traditional fossil-fuel-burning ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles. It is a fact that EVs have some downsides, just like any other technology. However, the “issues” that the vast majority of people worry about are often baseless.
Unfortunately, many people are easily misled by fake news, false claims, and counter-factual arguments — in a word, propaganda. EVs are no exception to this. I suspect this anti-EV propaganda is particularly intense because significant sectors of traditional industry — most notably traditional car manufacturers and the oil industry — are powerful entities with reasons to be unhappy about the shift to EVs, as it threatens their business models and profits.
Indeed, there seems to be a particularly strong sentiment of opposition against EVs in Japan. I observe a significantly greater number of posts, arguments, and articles against EVs than for them in both traditional and social media there. This is surprising, as I should theoretically be in a pro-EV “filter bubble”, given my own interests. Japan’s leading industry has long been automotive manufacturing, and Japanese manufacturers — including the industry leader, Toyota — mostly stuck with ICE vehicles until recently. Toyota has been the world leader in traditional (mild or full) hybrid vehicles (HVs) for two decades, starting with its flagship Prius. In this sense, I understand where the antagonism comes from: their “king” is facing defeat in the field of EVs, which hurts national pride. However, emotionally driven arguments ultimately do no good for anyone, the world, or future generations.
I have owned a battery electric vehicle, MG 5 Estate (2022), for over two years. It has a battery capacity of 61 kWh and a catalogued driving range (WLTP range) of 240 miles (∼390 km). My real-world experience with the MG 5 has taught me the advantages and disadvantages of EVs from a user’s perspective, going beyond simple theory.
In this article, I will list popular myths against EVs and counter them by explaining why they are wrong. I will also list the actual real-world disadvantages — which are seldom discussed — as well as the advantages. Some of these points are from a climber’s perspective; in fact, if EVs suit the heavy-use cases of climbers, they will likely suit almost anyone.
Note: I have generally ignored the upfront cost of EVs in this article, unless it is particularly relevant. This is partly because prices vary considerably year by year, and partly because a total-cost comparison depends highly on annual mileage. As an extreme example, if you own a vehicle but keep it in a garage and never drive it, the cheapest used ICE vehicle is economically and environmentally best for you because the operational benefits of an EV are irrelevant.
In this article, I use units of “mile”, where 1 mile corresponds to roughly 1.6 km (kilo-metre).
2 Chapter 2: Popular Myths
2.1 Driving range and charging time
The driving range and charging time are perhaps the number-one concerns by non-EV users.
A typical non-EV user might claim: A small family ICE car (like a Ford Fiesta) has a 40-litre petrol tank with a range of roughly 350 miles. Larger cars go even further. Very few EVs match this range, except for expensive top-end models. Furthermore, refuelling an ICE car takes minutes, while charging an EV takes hours. Surely, this makes EVs impractical?
2.1.1 My answer
2.1.1.1 Short answer
Neither driving range nor charging time is a practical problem for the vast majority of standard use cases. The “charging time” issue is largely a myth because, unlike driving all the way to a petrol station for refuelling, setting up a charge at home takes seconds, and you don’t need to stand there watching it.
2.1.1.2 Long answer
This claim is rooted in an old mindset specific to ICE vehicles — a mindset that is no longer relevant with EVs.
The vast majority of drivers (excluding professional lorry drivers) do not regularly drive 350 miles in a day. The average daily mileage in the UK is reportedly between 10 and 30 miles. You simply don’t travel far for commuting, school runs, or shopping.
You might occasionally drive long distances for a holiday. However, you arguably should not drive over 140 miles without a break for safety reasons. When you stop, you can recharge your vehicle, while you are having that break.
Because of this, most people do not actually need a 350-mile range. If you can charge at home while you sleep, a range of 100 miles would suffice for daily life. As a climber based in the Highlands, where hills and crags are farther apart than anywhere else in Britain, I frequently drive long distances. Yet, I rarely exceed 200 miles in a single day. My budget EV has a range of 210–240 miles. If even a Highland-based climber doesn’t need a massive range, who would?
Another misconception is the idea of “going to refuel”. ICE-vehicle drivers are used to the nuisance of detouring to a petrol station. Because it is a hassle, they want a long range to minimize these visits. With an EV, one of the greatest joys is that the owner, you, no longer visits petrol stations! You charge at home. Your “detour time” is zero. Plugging in generally takes ten seconds with no payment hassle, no diesel gloves, and no standing in the cold holding a nozzle. Since you are sleeping or relaxing at home while the car charges, the “time taken to charge” is effectively zero.
Unless driving is your profession, you simply won’t notice the charging time in daily life.
2.2 The lack of charging places
Claim: “There aren’t enough charging stations, and building them is too difficult/expensive.”
2.2.1 My answer
2.2.1.1 Short answer
The UK already has a decent charging network, and expanding it is not prohibitively expensive. The electricity grid reaches every populated area, and since chargers are unmanned, the operational costs are low.
2.2.1.2 Long answer
The number of EV charging locations has already exceeded the number of petrol stations and is growing rapidly. I believe there are no places in the UK unreachable by an EV, even one with a small battery. For example, charging points are strategically installed in the tiny villages of Laggan and Roy Bridge in the Highlands. These cover the eastern and western ends of a blank section of A86 — a 17-mile stretch of road that connects the east and west Highlands.
While I would prefer the network to be denser (especially in remote corners of Scotland), the current number of stations is not a major barrier. In fact, I used to worry more about running out of fuel in the Highlands at night in my old ICE car than I do now in my EV!
Regarding construction costs, to build a charging station, you just need the grid (which is already everywhere) and a tiny piece of land, about one square metre. This is why supermarkets can easily install them. Unlike petrol stations, they require no on-site staff, keeping costs low.
One massive advantage for climbers and night-travellers is that most EV chargers operate 24 hours a day. Very few petrol stations in remote areas are open late at night or on Christmas. I recall once driving an ICE vehicle 35 miles backwards in the middle of the night in Scotland because we realized the petrol station ahead would be closed, and we didn’t have enough fuel to make the destination. That doesn’t happen with 24/7 automated EV chargers.
2.3 Battery degradation
Claim: “Batteries degrade badly after a few years (like smartphones), and replacements cost a fortune.”
2.3.1 My answer
2.3.1.1 Short answer
Modern EV batteries are designed to last. They will most likely retain decent capacity (>80%) for over 10 years or 100,000 miles, and potentially over 200,000 miles.
2.3.1.2 Long answer
Replacing a battery is indeed expensive (often costing as much as the car’s residual value), but you practically never need to do it. Most manufacturers warranty the battery for 8 years or 100,000 miles to roughly 80% capacity. Real-world reports often show degradation is much lower than this, even after high mileage.
While you should treat the battery well (avoiding leaving it at 100% or 0% for long periods), the warranty stands regardless of how you charge.
Crucially, battery degradation does not significantly affect efficiency (miles per kWh). A degraded battery is simply like having a slightly smaller fuel tank. The car runs just as efficiently; you just have a slightly shorter maximum range. Unless you plan to drive your EV for half a million miles, battery replacement is not a realistic worry. This is also why used EVs tend to hold their value reasonably well.
As such, the lithium-ion batteries onboard EVs have a reasonable life time. And, forthcoming solid-state batteries are expected to last a couple of times longer than lithium-ion batteries.
2.4 Weight, road damage, and tyre dust
Claim: “EVs are heavy (10× heavier!), damage roads, and create toxic tyre dust.”
2.4.1 My answer
2.4.1.1 Short answer
The “10× heavier” claim is absurd. EVs are typically 10–20% heavier than equivalent ICE cars. While they are heavier, they use regenerative braking, meaning they produce less toxic brake dust.
2.4.1.2 Long answer
A standard family ICE car weighs about 1.5 tonnes. If an EV were 10 times heavier, it would weigh 15 tonnes — the size of a fully loaded lorry! In reality, due to the heavy battery, BEVs are about 10–20% heavier than their ICE counterparts.
Road damage is roughly proportional to the fourth power of the axle weight. This means the vast majority of road damage is caused by lorries and buses, not passenger cars. The slight weight increase of an EV is negligible in this context.
Regarding environmental dust: EVs rely heavily on regenerative braking (using the motor to slow down). This means the physical brake pads are rarely used. As a result, EVs emit almost no brake dust (a major pollutant). While tyre wear can be higher if you drive aggressively, taking the full advantage of the high torque of EVs, a careful driver will not experience excessive tyre wear. And, in terms of potentially sporty driving, it is no different from driving powerful (luxury) ICE vehicles.
Finally, battery technology is evolving. Manufacturers like WeLion are developing solid-state batteries with densities a few times higher than the current standard EV batteries (see a press release), which could make future EVs even lighter than ICE vehicles.
On balance, EVs are vastly more environmentally friendly than ICE vehicles, even if they are currently slightly heavier.
Finally, I have never seen a single person who chooses a light car due to a concern about the damage on the road or potential tyre dust. So, if someone argues against EVs on this ground, it is suspicious and must be just an empty argument.
2.5 EV in cold climate
Claim: “If you get stuck in a blizzard, you will freeze to death because the battery will die quickly. An ICE car keeps you warm for longer.”
2.5.1 My answer
2.5.1.1 Short answer
False. An EV can keep the cabin heated for a very long time, often longer than an idling ICE vehicle.
2.5.1.2 Long answer
This is a common myth in cold regions. A modern EV can comfortably keep the cabin heated overnight in -20°C ambient temperatures.
For reference, a family of four in winter Hokkaido, Japan at the ambient temperature of about -5 degC allegedly consumes ∼20 kWh in 24 hours, mostly for heating, while MG 5 has a 61 kWh battery; this means that a fully-charged MG 5 battery can support the ordinary life of the family of four in a big house for 3 days. This gives an idea?
ICE vehicles are inefficient heaters; they rely on waste heat from the engine. To get heat, the engine must be running (idling), consuming fuel. EVs heat the cabin directly using electricity. If the car has a heat pump, this is incredibly efficient. Even without one, a fully charged EV has a massive amount of energy stored.
If you are worried about conserving energy in an emergency, you can use the seat heaters. These consume significantly less energy (by a factor of 3 or 4) than heating the whole cabin air. My budget MG 5 has heated seats, and they are a lifesaver (or cost-saver!).
It is true that EV efficiency drops in winter (due to cabin-heater use, air density, stiff tyres, and battery chemistry — specifically the viscosity of the electrolyte). However, ICE efficiency also drops in winter. The main difference is that EV drivers are more aware of it because the data are displayed on the screen.
Finally, the degradation of the battery performance in winter that originates in the chemistry of the lithium-ion battery is expected to markedly improve in the forthcoming solid-state battery (which does not rely on ion movements in liquid).
2.6 Efficiency depending on driving styles
Claim: “EV range drops drastically on the motorway.”
2.6.1 My answer
2.6.1.1 Short answer
Air resistance (aerodynamic drag) affects all cars equally. However, because EVs are so efficient at low speeds, the drop in efficiency at high speeds feels more noticeable than in an ICE vehicle.
2.6.1.2 Long answer
Simple physics: air resistance is proportional to the square of your speed (at high speed). If you speed, efficiency drops in an accelerated manner.
In an ICE vehicle, the engine is terribly inefficient at low speeds/idling. As you speed up, the engine actually runs more efficiently, which masks the penalty of air resistance. In an EV, the motor is almost perfectly efficient at all speeds. Therefore, the increased drag at 70 mph is immediately visible in your energy consumption.
Think of it like a rucksack.
- ICE vehicle: You are already carrying a heavy load of bricks (engine inefficiency). Adding a bottle of wine (drag) doesn’t feel like much difference.
- EV: Your rucksack is empty. Adding that same bottle of wine feels heavy immediately.
The energy required to push the car through the air is the same. The EV just doesn’t waste energy on other things, so the “cost” of speed is more obvious.
2.7 Risk of fire
Claim: “Lithium batteries are flammable and dangerous.”
2.7.1 My answer
2.7.1.1 Short answer
Petrol is also highly flammable. Studies show that EVs are less likely to catch fire than ICE vehicles.
2.7.1.2 Long answer
Lithium-ion batteries can catch fire if damaged, which is why they are encased in incredibly tough protective shells. However, petrol tanks are effectively thin metal buckets filled with explosive liquid! Data suggest that EVs are no more dangerous than ICE vehicles. In a catastrophic accident (like a movie-style crash), either vehicle could catch fire. The best protection is to avoid such accidents in the first place. Drive safe!
2.8 Holiday use
Claim: “I need a car for my annual holiday trip. EVs aren’t suitable for that.”
(Someone (Japanese) claims this in social media.)
2.8.1 My answer
2.8.1.1 Short answer
Do not buy a car based on 1% of your usage. Rent a car for the holiday if necessary.
2.8.1.2 Long answer
Owning a car solely for a once-a-year trip is financial madness (cost, tax, insurance, MOT, parking). If you live in a city, car-sharing or taxis are likely cheaper. If you need a car for daily life (commuting/countryside living), buy an EV, for the 360 days of the year it suits perfectly. For the 5 days a year you go on a massive road trip, hire a diesel car or a long-range EV. You get the best of both worlds.
2.9 Burden on the electricity network
Claim: “The grid will collapse if everyone charges EVs.”
2.9.1 My answer
2.9.1.1 Short answer
We must increase generation capacity to survive climate change anyway. EVs can actually help stabilize the grid.
2.9.1.2 Long answer
You need to reverse the order of priority.
We must decarbonize. This means electrifying transport. Yes, demand will rise, so we must build more generation capacity. The alternative (sticking with fossil fuels) leads to climate disaster.
Regarding grid stability, renewable energy (wind/solar) is variable. By contrast, EV charging is flexible. Most cars charge at night when demand is low. With “smart charging” tariffs and matching chargers or apps, EVs automatically charge when electricity is cheapest (sometimes even negatively priced!). This essentially turns the nation’s fleet of EVs into a giant battery that soaks up excess renewable energy, helping to balance the grid.
2.10 Environmental benefit on balance
Claim: “Manufacturing EVs is dirty, and electricity comes from coal anyway. EVs are no better than ICE vehicles.”
2.10.1 My answer
2.10.1.1 Short answer
Life-Cycle Assessments (LCA) consistently show EVs are cleaner, even on “dirty” grids, let alone the real grids, which significantly incorporate renewable energy sources.
2.10.1.2 Long answer
Even if an EV runs on electricity generated 100% by fossil fuels, it is still cleaner than a petrol car because power plants are vastly more efficient (40–60% efficiency) than small car engines (20—25% efficiency in practice). But the grid is not 100% fossil fuel. The UK grid is roughly 50% renewable; Norway is nearly 100%. As the grid gets cleaner every year, your EV gets cleaner every year. An ICE vehicle stays exactly as dirty as the day you bought it.
Regarding “rare metals”, lithium is fundamentally abundant (third most abundant element in the Universe — more abundant than oxygen); even though a rapid increase in demands may raise its prices temporarily, it is a short-term problem, unlike the fundamentally limited resouces like crude oil. While cobalt is a concern (ethical mining issues), many new batteries (like LFP batteries used by Tesla and BYD) are cobalt-free. The industry is moving towards cleaner supply chains rapidly.
2.11 Comparison with mild or full HVs
Claim: “Hybrids (HVs) are cheaper and efficient. Why bother with a full EV?”
2.11.1 My answer
2.11.1.1 Short answer
BEVs (Full EVs) are best for most daily needs. Hybrids have niche uses but are mechanically complex and still burn fossil fuels.
2.11.1.2 Long answer
For daily use, a BEV beats a (mild or full) HV because, in addition to the environmental concerns:
- Running cost: Electricity is cheaper than petrol.
- Tax: Tax benefit (maybe).
- Maintenance: BEVs have no engine to service. HVs have both an electric system and a petrol engine to maintain (worst of both worlds?).
- Driving feel: BEVs are much better.
There are following alternatives. They both are like a BEV in city driving, but switches to burning petrol beyond a ceratain range.
- EREV (Extended Range EV): Driven by a motor, but has a small petrol-based electric-power generator to charge the battery. They usually have a considerably smaller battery than a BEV. Good for range anxiety, but still burns fuel.
- PHEV (Plug-in Hybrid): Can plug in for typically ∼30 miles of electric range, then switches to petrol. More economical and drives nicer than full HVs in city driving, but basically the same as full HVs beyond that.
| BEV | EREV | PHEV | Full-HV | old-ICE | Note | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Realistic carbon emission | Lowest | Low | Medium | High | Highest | in-city + some long drives |
| Battery capacity [kWh] | ≳50 | ∼25 | ∼15 | ∼1 | 0 | excl. 12V lead battery |
| Battery weight (capacity) | Highest | High | Medium | Lowest | 0 | excl. 12V lead battery |
| Mechanical weight | Lowest | Medium | Highest | Highest | High | excl. battery |
| Mechanical complexity | Lowest | Medium | Highest | Highest | High | ≒ maintenance cost |
| Can plug-in for electricity? | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | |
| Electric driving range | ≳180 | ≳90 | ≳50 | minimum | 0 | No user-control in Full-HV |
| Total driving range | ≳180 | ∼500 | ∼500 | ∼500 | ∼500 | for a mid-size family car |
| Petrol-drive cost efficiency | —— | Low | High | High | Highest | HV is heavier than old ICE |
Note: The petrol-driving efficiency here is in the most strict sense like a constant high-speed travel on the motorway, where the vehicle fully relies on petrol (or fossil-fuel) burning; the traditional ICE vehicle wins because it is lighter. By contrast, in the city driving, the full-HV consumes far less petrol (like 30% less) than the traditional ICE vehicle because the HV switches off an engine whenever unnecessary and uses regenerative braking whenever possible.
Essentially, which suits you best depends on the balance between your typical uses of in-city driving and long-distance driving, in addition to the environmental benefit and your tolerance level of less confortable driving (during fossil-fuel-burning driving). Among them, the PHEV definitely wins the full HV over any aspect except for its considerably higher upfront cost. Whereas you can enjoy a low-cost and comfortable driving for an extended mileage with an EREV than a PHEV, the EREV's fuel efficiency in the petrol-driving mode is significantly lower (like by 30%) than that of the PHEV; it is a trade off. Technically, you can, of course, charge an EREV or PHEV during your long-distance travel; but you need to make a far more frequent stops than BEVs, so you may not bother (and it beats their points).
The Climber’s Verdict: If you sleep in your car, BEVs are the undisputed king. You can run the heating/AC in silence. A Hybrid will wake you up every 20 minutes when the engine rattles into life to recharge the small battery, in addition to polluting the environment with exhaust.
All in all, HVs, PHEVs, and EREVs have some niche markets, depending on the frequency, neccesity, and urgency of long-distance trips. However, they are more “niche” than most people would think, even if you ignore thier environmental downside.
3 Chapter 3: Real-life problems of EVs
After using a budget EV, the MG 5 Estate (2022 model), for the last two years, I have encountered several issues, none of which I expected before buying the car. Conversely, some things I anticipated would be problems turned out to be fine.
Most of the major issues ultimately come down to the software/design of my specific budget EV and the current state of charging infrastructure in the UK and at my place. In other words, none of these problems are inherent to EVs themselves. I expect the situation will only improve over time; in fact, many of these are likely non-issues if you own a higher-end, modern EV with a good charging facility at home.
3.1 Common misconceptions about charging points
The biggest misconception I used to have was that every store with a car park should have EV charging points. I imagined a future where you could charge your car wherever you shopped. Just as supermarkets in the UK suburbs offer cheap petrol to attract customers, I thought installing EV charging spots would be a good way to attract EV users.
In reality, I almost never use charging points at supermarkets, so they offer zero incentive for me to visit, except while I am on a long-distance car journey. It is simple economics: charging with night-time electricity at home is the cheapest way to charge my car. Public charging points, including those at supermarkets, are usually much more expensive. Unless I absolutely need to charge (e.g., while travelling far from home), I won’t use them. Furthermore, supermarket chargers are rarely the cheapest or the fastest options, so I have little reason to use them (I note that Tesco, teamed up with PodPoint, may be changing this situation, as I just found a few days ago).
As mentioned earlier, most EV users charge at home the vast majority of the time. In this sense, a dense charging network is not as critical for daily life as most people think. Obviously, travellers (like myself on climbing trips) need charging, so a decent network is essential. But once the network achieves a certain level of coverage and speed, anything beyond that is merely a bonus.
One critical exception is (perhaps overnight) charging facilities at the parking of hotels. Their overnight guests who use the partking space are travellers and would massively appreciate the overnight charging.
Another exception would be slow charging points at remote parking spots for climbers and hill-walkers, where cars are parked all day. If I could drive to a distant parking spot like a layby, plug into a slow charger, and return from a day’s climb to a fully charged car, that would be fantastic! It is unlikely to happen soon, but it is my dream. (To be honest, for this specific use case, where I can’t charge at a destination and want to drive home immediately after a long day on the hill, I would actually appreciate super-fast charging. But this is a niche need for hill-goers and climbers!)
I once read a news story from Japan where a city council installed a slow (3 kW) EV charging point in their building’s car park, offering a cheap rate. They eventually removed it after realising the vast majority of users were not local citizens. I suspect the planners had no idea how EV users actually behave. They likely expected locals to charge while visiting the council for 30 minutes. They were mistaken.
Local users charge at home because it is more convenient and usually (much) cheaper. They wouldn’t bother plugging in for 30 minutes just to gain 1.5 kWh (roughly 6 miles of range). The drivers who would use such a charger are overwhelmingly visitors from far away who have nothing to do with the council but need a place to charge. If they leave their car for 6 hours, they can get 18 kWh, which is useful.
I believe it is a city council’s obligation to provide public charging as part of basic infrastructure, similar to roads. However, planners must understand that these chargers are predominantly for visitors to the city, much like motorway service areas, which locals rarely use.
3.2 Out-of-service charging points
In Scotland, I often find publicly-available charging places (hereafter, “public charging points”, most of which are run by private firms) to be out of service. This can be daunting, especially when you arrive with a depleted battery. Most sites have multiple charging outputs, and usually one is working, but it is disappointing — especially if the working one is already occupied.
The good news is that smartphone apps can tell you the live status of all public charging points, including which and how many outputs are “in use” or “out of service”. You can check before you drive there, although this doesn’t eliminate the slight risk of someone arriving a minute before you and taking the last spot!
In practice, I have never been in serious trouble during my two years of ownership of an EV, partly because there are currently far more chargers than the demands in the Highlands, and partly because I rarely charge away from home except at a few familiar, free spots.
3.3 Pricing of charging points
A highly annoying issue is that public charging prices fluctuate massively.
With petrol stations, price differences in a local area are usually small (within 5% or so). It rarely makes sense to detour just to save pennies on fuel. Motorway petrol stations are exceptions (charging 10–20% more), but even this pales in comparison to EV charging price differences.
For EVs, the price difference can be threefold depending on the operator and charging speed. In Scotland, excluding the few remaining free chargers, the cheapest rates are around ~30p/kWh (as of 2025), while the most expensive can be 100p/kWh. In England, the average price seems higher (around 40p/kWh minimum), and the fast chargers often cost 89p/kWh or similar, though my knowledge about the pricing in England is limited to the NorthWest England and down to Midlands only.
Because of this massive disparity, spending time to hunt for the cheapest charger — even if it requires a detour — makes financial sense. It feels similar to hunting for the cheapest rail or flight tickets. If you don’t research, you will be ripped off.
I believe this situation is wrong. I have always been a believer in flat pricing for public transport (e.g., a return ticket should simply cost double a single). Transport infrastructure should not be a lottery. The UK road network has achieved this mostly (no tolls on most roads), and I believe EV charging should be similar. Users shouldn’t have to worry about being ripped off when using essential infrastructure.
Note: Tesla Superchargers use variable pricing (cheaper at night), a little like home electricity tariffs. I understand the logic here regarding grid demand. I would happily accept time-dependent pricing if the base rates across different operators were more consistent. I suppose that achieving this likely requires government intervention.
3.3.1 The Cost Reality
Unfortunately, public charging in the UK is very expensive, if with some rare exceptions. If I charge at home using a night tariff (e.g., 19p/kWh), my cost per mile is roughly half that of a similar-sized ICE vehicle. However, the cheapest rapid chargers in Scotland cost ~45p/kWh. Motorway chargers often cost 70p–89p/kWh (as of 2025). This means a long road trip in an EV can actually cost twice as much as an ICE vehicle in terms of electricity/fuel.
This pricing structure is backwards if we want to incentivise people to switch to EVs. In my opinion, the government should either regulate public charging costs or significantly increase taxes on fossil fuels, or both.
3.4 Not easy to spot charging points
A minor but frustrating issue is locating the actual physical charger. While apps provide locations, the precision is often lacking. Unlike petrol stations, which have huge totem signs visible from miles away, EV chargers are small boxes often tucked away in corners, making them hard to spot, especially at night.
I have had trouble multiple times in the “last 100 metres”, spending 10 minutes driving around a car park trying to find the unit. This could be solved if apps provided 5-metre precision or a detailed “last mile” map, which is often on a private land and out of the Google Map.
Because of this, you rarely find chargers by chance while driving (except at motorway services). You must actively search for them, using a phone app or your car’s sat-nav. This is a stark contrast with petrol stations on the main roads in urban areas. To be fair, given the massive price differences mentioned above, you will likely want to plan your stops in advance anyway.
3.5 Complexity in payment in public charging points
Payment at petrol stations is straightforward: pay at the pump or the counter. As of 2025, EV charging is far more complicated, except for some motorway chargers that accept standard contactless card payments.
In most cases, you need an operator-specific smartphone app or an RFID card (Radio-Frequency Identification card), or maybe both. As a result, I have half a dozen charging apps installed on my phone. The user interfaces vary, and payment methods range from direct card registration to “topping up” their specific digital wallet.
Even starting a charge is non-trivial. You may user your RFID card; or you may tap a specific button on your app; or you may follow the on-screen instruction and press buttons, whereas some chargers of some operators have no on-site instructions or no screen. And, I have experienced multiple instances where charging simply wouldn’t start after all the efforts.
Worse than not starting is the “cable grab”: the EV locking the cable and refusing to release it. This usually happens after a failed attempt. It is terrifying because you cannot drive away to try the next charger five metres away.
I understand this is a safety feature (high current requires a secure connection), but it is frustrating. My MG 5 has zero control about charging, which I hear is unusual. I have lost count of how many hours I have wasted in attempting charging, which I had no idea what was happening…… While EV travel time is generally comparable to ICE-vehicle travel, the risk of a massive delay due to charging failure is real.
Note: This might be specific to my budget EV! I would love to hear other EV owners’ experiences.
Unlike petrol stations, chargers are unmanned. If charging fails, you are on your own. I once had a Tesla Supercharger fail to charge, yet it didn’t refund my deposit immediately. I spent 20 minutes on hold in a telephon call to their support before giving up (I got the money back 4 weeks later after a series of painful and time-consuming negotiations). ChargePlace Scotland is generally better, with shorter wait times (~10 minutes), but “better” is just relative……
To me, this complexity and failure rate is the number one deterrent for new EV buyers (if they know) — much more so than charging speed.
3.6 Charging speed
3.6.1 Available types of EV charging systems
Below is a summary of charging speeds in the UK (Note: JP refers to Japan standards). Here, AC and DC refer to alternating and direct currents, respectively.
| Kind | DC? | Power [kW] | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Household 2-pin JP socket | AC | 1 | |
| Household 3-pin UK socket | AC | 2 | |
| Slowest public charger (JP) | AC | 3 | |
| Slowest public/dedicated home | AC | 7 | Max AC power for many EVs |
| Common AC public charger | AC | 22 | Few EVs can use it fully |
| Fastest AC public charger | AC | 43 | Very few EVs; dying out |
| Slowest rapid charger | DC | 40 | CCS2 or CHAdeMO |
| Common rapid charger | DC | 50 | CCS2 or CHAdeMO |
| Common super-rapid charger | DC | 150 | Max 90 kW for MG 5 |
| Most rapid charger (2025) | DC | 360 | CCS2 only |
| Lorry and next-gen chargers | DC | 1000 |
Technical Note: In the UK, AC chargers use Type-2 connectors. DC chargers use CCS2 or CHAdeMO. CCS2 (usually called just “CCS” in the UK, although CCS1 is not compatible with CCS2) is the dominant standard in Europe, and as far as I have seen, all public rapid chargers in the UK proivde CCS2 plugs. CHAdeMO is becoming rarer and is often capped at 50 kW in the UK.
3.6.1.1 Time to charge
My EV MG 5 Estate (2022) has a battery capacity of 61 kWh for a WLTP driving range of 240 miles, which was a long range in 2022 for family EVs, whereas the average (whatever it means) in 2025 is reported to be close to 300 miles according to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) for reference. With this battery capacity, it takes roughly 30 hours to charge my EV from 0 to 100% off a household 3-pin UK mains socket and 9 hours with a UK-standard dedicated home charger (which I don’t have) or at the slowest AC public charging point. With the standard rapid charger of 50 kW, my car is charged up to ∼70% after an hour (see point 5 in the subsection below for the estimate).
Note that the estimates above are for 0 to 100% charging, which in reality pretty much never happens.
3.6.2 Basic knowledge about EV batteries and charging
- Rapid charging and battery health: Rapid charging puts more stress on the battery than slow charging, though modern batteries are increasingly robust. Manufacturers advise against charging in rain due to safety, but this is unrealistic in the UK! Slow charging is generally safer in this sense and anyway better for longevity if you have the time.
- The 20-80% Rule: Lithium-ion batteries degrade faster if kept close to 0% or 100%. It is best to keep the charge between 20% and 80%. Only charge to 100% immediately before a long trip.
- The Charging Curve: Charging is not linear against time. A 50-kW charger will not deliver 50 kW the entire time. As the battery fills up (past 80%), the charging power (thus speed) drops significantly to protect the cells, unless the charging power is small like 7 kW (with my MG 5).
- Power Caps: Charging speed is limited by the “weakest link” — either the charger or the car. My MG 5 can take max 7 kW AC and 87 kW DC. Plugging into a 350 kW charger works, but I will still only get 87 kW at maximum.
- Power Sharing: Many public units share power. If two cars plug into a 50 kW unit, you might only get 25 kW each. Personally, I have experienced this situation only once in 2 years, but it can happen.
- Overstay Fees: Many rapid chargers charge heavy penalties (e.g., £1/min) if you stay longer than 45–60 minutes. Most (but some) of the dedicated slow public chargers do not pose this restriction.
3.6.3 Desirable charging speed for EVs
What is the actual minimum speed you need? The answer is more nuanced than “as fast as possible.” It depends entirely on whether you are charging overnight or stopping mid-journey.
Remember no one drives their EVs 24 hours. You stop for a prolonged time for sleep etc, where slow charging is perfectly adequate and is usually (much) cheaper. In this sense, most private EV users slow-charge their vehicles perhaps 90% of time (see point 1). If every accommodation and campsite in the country is equipped with a sufficient number of slow EV chargers in the future, the need for rapid chargers will steeply decline, except for long-distance drive.
3.6.3.1 Desirable slow-charging speed for EVs (Home/Destination)
The Short Answer: 7 kW is the UK gold standard and is sufficient.
Here is the breakdown. The most common charging scenario is overnight at home, typically using an 8-hour window (e.g., 23:30 to 07:30) to capitalize on cheap night-time electricity tariffs.
Consider a modern long-range EV with a 60–80 kWh battery. To maintain battery health, you ideally operate between 20% and 80%. This means a “full” daily charge requires replenishing about 60% of the battery (roughly 36–48 kWh), or usually less in practice.
- The Math: Charging for 8 hours at 7 kW (the standard UK home wallbox speed) delivers 56 kWh.
- The Verdict: This easily covers the 36–48 kWh needed to “fill” the battery for daily use.
3.6.3.1.1 Is even less power acceptable?
Personally, I do not have a dedicated 7-kW home charger. I use a standard 3-pin UK domestic socket, which outputs just 2.3 kW. Over an 8-hour night, this delivers roughly 18 kWh (about 25–30% of my battery). So, this is sufficient for me in most cases! Unless I arrive home near empty and need to leave with a full battery the very next morning, this slow “trickle charge” covers my daily mileage perfectly.
3.6.3.2 Desirable rapid-charging speed (Travel)
The Short Answer: 50 kW is actually sufficient for most journeys, though (an increasingly available) 100 kW provides a nice buffer.
You only need rapid charging during long-distance travel. For safety and health, drivers are advised to take a break every two hours. Suppose two hours of motorway driving covers roughly 120 miles, and you will have consumed approximately 30 kWh of energy, based on an average efficiency of 3.5–4 miles per kWh.
Ideally, you want to replenish this 30 kWh while you take your break.
- 50 kW Charger: Replenishing 30 kWh takes ~36 minutes. This is acceptable (see below).
- 100 kW Charger: Replenishing 30 kWh takes ~18 minutes. This is the perfect “coffee and toilet break” duration.
- 350 kW Charger: Replenishing 30 kWh takes ~5 minutes. While impressive (comparable to refueling petrol), you barely have time for toilet before the car is ready.
- 1 MW Charger: Replenishing 30 kWh takes <2 minutes. For buses and lories.
In the real world, you rarely need to fully replenish that 30 kWh at a single stop. As long as you have enough battery to reach your final destination (or your next planned stop), you can disconnect early and drive away if you want.
For example, if you are driving 200 miles in a car with a 240-mile range, you might want a safety buffer. A quick 15-minute stop at a 50 kW charger adds about 12 kWh (approx. 45 miles of range). That is plenty to ensure you reach your destination comfortably, where you can then charge overnight cheaply.
Unless you are undertaking an ultra-long journey (e.g., over 400 miles in a single day) where you need to cycle through nearly empty-to-full battery loads multiple times, a 50 kW charger is perfectly adequate. It matches the natural pace of driving: stop, stretch your legs, use the toilet, grab a coffee, and by the time you are done, you have enough charge to finish your trip.
3.6.3.2.1 Real-world limitations
- The Charging Curve: Even if you plug into a 350 kW charger, your car might not accept that speed. My MG 5 peaks at 87 kW. Furthermore, as the battery fills past 80%, the car drastically slows the charging speed to protect the cells.
- Cold Weather: In winter, lithium-ion batteries struggle to accept high currents. Without a good battery pre-heating system, your “rapid” charge might be capped at 30–40 kW (which is the case with my MG 5), regardless of how powerful the charger is, though more modern EVs seem to handle this issue considerably better. Fundamentally, this is a known limitation of current liquid-electrolyte batteries, though upcoming solid-state batteries promise to solve this.
In conclusion, for the general public, a network of 50 kW chargers is mostly sufficient, and that of 100 kW chargers is the practical ideal. The UK has almost achieved the former and is heading towards the latter — I think most of the major motorways in England have already achieved it. Ultra-high-power chargers (1 MW+) are being developed by companies like BYD, but these are necessary for electric lorries and buses, not your average family car.
4 Chapter 4: EV or ICE vehicle?
4.1 Why choose an EV? (The advantages)
Before discussing who might not want an EV, it is essential to highlight why EVs are superior to ICE vehicles for the vast majority of people.
For me, the critical motivation is ethical: switching to an EV is one of the most effective steps an individual can take to decelerate climate change while maintaining our current freedom of movement. But beyond the environment, the user experience is simply better.
Here are the key advantages of EVs over ICE vehicles:
- Ethical responsibility to the future generations
- Superior Driving Experience
- EVs are smooth, incredibly quiet, and offer instant torque (acceleration) when needed.
- “One-pedal driving” (using powerful regenerative braking to slow down) makes city driving and traffic jams much less stressful. To quote a friend: “Any EV drives better than a comparable ICE car.”
- Reliability and Cost
- Maintenance: EVs have far fewer moving parts. No oil changes, no spark plugs, no exhaust systems, no clutch. Brake pads last vastly longer because of regenerative braking (which is much more powerful than that of HVs).
- Running Costs: If you can charge at home on a night tariff, the cost per mile is significantly cheaper than petrol or diesel.
- Value: Despite higher upfront costs, used EVs currently hold their value well (though the market fluctuates).
- “Cabin Life” (The Climber’s Advantage)
- You have a massive battery bank at your disposal.
- Sleeping in the car: You can sleep in the cabin with the climate control (heating or cooling) running all night. It is silent, emission-free, and safe. Doing this in an ICE car requires running the engine (noisy, polluting, and dangerous due to fumes) or a standalone heater. In an HV, the engine wakes up intermittently, ruining your sleep. In an EV, it is pure bliss.
- Convenience
- If you have home charging, you start every day with a “full tank.” You never have to detour to a petrol station or stand in the freezing cold holding a fuel nozzle again.
- No need to worry about fuel stations and travelling to them, especially late at night (real problems for climbers).
4.2 Who would still prefer ICE vehicles?
Despite the advantages listed above, there are specific groups for whom an EV might not yet be the best tool:
- Serious long-distance drivers (The “Mick Fowler” style): Famous climber Mick Fowler used to drive from London to the Scottish Highlands (and back) in a single weekend, driving some 1200 miles in between. He drove through the night, swapping drivers, stopping only for fuel. Current EVs cannot do this efficiently. If you need to shed every possible minute to maximize climbing time, an ICE vehicle is still the only tool for the job. (However, if you only do this once a year, consider renting an ICE car for that trip and keeping an EV for daily use!)
- The “Speed Demons”: EV efficiency drops off a cliff at high speeds (drag is proportional to the square of velocity). If you cruise at 90mph+ on the Autobahn (or illegally in the UK), your driving range will vanish.
- ICE lovers: The electric motor has pretty linear characteristic curve for its input/output or the degree of pedalling and acceleration, whereas as engines have far more varied characteristic curves. Although casual drivers would much prefer the former, one of my motorcyclist friends prefers the featured characteristic curve. Fair enough!
- Van-dwelling Climbers: If you live in a van and travel to remote crags, the range may be key. Heavy electric vans are expensive, and range suffers even more when converted into campers (due to weight). Having said that, the situation is changing. For example, the electric Citroën Dispatch (230-mile range) may be a viable option for many?
- People without off-street parking: This may be the
most common barrier. If you live in a flat or terraced house with no
driveway, you cannot easily access cheap overnight charging. Relying
entirely on expensive public chargers makes an EV more expensive to run
than an ICE vehicle. Let us hope the government will solve on-street
charging costs soon.
- I live in a flat, though. In my search for a flat, being able to charge an EV at home was the top priority. My place, though the living area situated at the first floor, has the front door downstairs with, luckily, a cat-flap(!) (which a cable can be put through), and has a designated parking spot 30 metres away from the front door. So, I can and do charge my EV overnight off 3-pin mains upstairs with a 35-metres extension cable. Admittedly, it is a pain to lay out at night and retrieve in the morning the 35-metre cable every time I charge my EV… But it is doable, and I have been doing so in the last 2 years. My dream is installing a dedicated home EV charger, though.
5 Chapter 5: Some realistic advice for new EV buyers
Before buying my MG 5, I did my research. But there were things I missed. Here are my tips for new buyers.
- Charger Connector Type: Ensure your car has CCS2 (for DC) and Type-2 (for AC). CHAdeMO is a dying standard in Europe (used mostly by older Nissan Leafs and the Lexus UX300e). It seems CCS is the future.
- Vehicle-to-Load (V2L): If you want to power appliances (like a microwave or laptop) from your car while camping, check for V2L capability. MG, Kia, and Hyundai offer this via a Type-2 adapter. (I think) Nissan does with CHAdeMO.
- Max AC Charging: Ensure the car can take at least 7 kW AC. 11 kW or 22 kW is a nice bonus but not essential for the UK (where most homes are single-phase electric).
- Driving Range: I have explained about this in
detail. You don’t need as long range as with ICE vehicles because you
don’t have to go to petrol stations.
- Real-world Range: Ignore the WLTP official figure. Deduct 10–15% for “real world” driving, and deduct up to 30% for winter driving.
- Winter Features
- Battery Temperature Management: Check out the performance in winter if you regularly drive in cold environments.
- Heat Pump: Nice energy saver in cold climates (Scotland!).
- Seat Heaters: They keep you warm using a fraction of the energy of the main cabin heater.
- LED Headlights: They are efficient but don’t produce heat, so snow can build up on the lenses and block the light. Check if the car has headlamp washers or a heated lens feature.
- The “App” Ecosystem: Check the car’s software. Can you schedule and control charging? Can you pre-heat the cabin (defrost the car) from your bed on a frosty morning?
- Driving Assistance: Some EVs are capable of near drivreless driving. It should be a nice (or even essential?) addition.
- At the Dealership: Ask for a charging
demonstration. Actually plug it in yourself, and start and end charging.
You may also ask them about how public charging points work.
- When I bought my first (and so far only) EV, I drove off the lot and failed to charge at two different stops because I didn’t understand how it works, ending up sleeping in the car until the next morning to ask the dealer! Don’t make my mistake. Ask the “stupid” questions before you drive away.
1.1 Comment on Propaganda
It is not uncommon for people — even the well-educated — to argue confidently(!) against a popularly accepted scientific consensus based on some intuitive “concerns” they have. A typical example is the claim that EVs are pointless because ‘manufacturing batteries is dirty’ or ‘electricity comes from fossil fuels anyway’. While experts rigorously calculate these trade-offs, called Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA), and have reached a consensus that EVs are cleaner, laypeople often grasp at these isolated facts to dismiss the technology entirely, ignoring the comprehensive data.
As a rule of thumb, if there is a consensus among the entire community of experts in a relevant field, a layperson should consider it indisputable. It is highly unlikely that you, as a non-expert, have discovered a fatal flaw that thousands of career scientists missed. Experts have likely scrutinised the very “concerns” you have come up with years ago and reached the current consensus despite them.
I remember twenty years ago, a colleague of mine — who was himself a scientist — argued against human-caused global warming. His argument was based on the record that Romans grew grapes in northern England, suggesting the climate was naturally milder back then. His argument made no sense for two reasons: first, a local, vague historical anecdote does not disprove global warming; and second, how could experts in climate science possibly have neglected such an obvious historical point? It seemed incredibly unlikely that he had discovered a fact that the entire scientific community had overlooked.
The irony is that when this colleague wrote papers in his own specialised field, I am sure he considered every possible concern that experts could raise in preparation for peer review. He would have likely dismissed any “crucial” points a layperson threw at him with solid logic and evidence. Yet, for some reason, he became a “confidently sceptic” layperson when stepping into a different field of science.
I believe in critical thinking. You should not swallow everything you are told without assessment. However, the same applies to sceptical arguments against well-known consensus; you must apply critical thinking to the scepticism itself.
Determine what is “right” is not simple. However, if something is agreed upon by the entire community of scientists in a field, it usually represents the best effort of humanity at that time. While it could still have a fundamental flaw (humans are never perfect), if someone manages to spot it, they are likely to be awarded a Nobel Prize or similar.
So, if you as a layperson think you have found a fundamental flaw in a scientific consensus, I suggest pausing to wonder if you are indeed the genius who deserves that Nobel Prize. In 99.9999% of cases regarding natural science, it is your logic or knowledge that is flawed, not the consensus. That said, it is still valuable to maintain an attitude of critical thinking and to keep questioning — your effort to resolve those questions will help you gain a deeper understanding of the subject. It is by definition a progress for you!
I should note, however, that not all views presented by individual scientists are correct. Scientists can be biased by their background or sponsors. When you see a claim that looks like a consensus, your first priority should be to assess whether it is genuinely held by the wider community.
A tip for assessing a claim: look for quantitative descriptions of reliability, such as “95% confidence” or “2σ level”. These are signatures of genuine scientific rigour. The representative claims by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) are good examples of this. If an article does not provide this context, you should perhaps take the claim with a pinch of salt.