Audi Q2 (or even Q3)

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #188911 Reply
    Sarah

    hi folks,

    I have an audi q2 (black edition) on the scheme, lease doesn’t end until Sept next year.. but.. I watched the Q3 disappear from the scheme before I ordered (which is why I went Q2) and now I realise the Q2 is being discontinued by audi which im gutted about because its been a smasher of a car for me.

    does anyone know if the number of models (ie.. more audis) are likely to be back on the scheme by 2023, ive no idea if the Q3 is coming back, or if audi are discontinuing the Q2 (and the A1, incidentally) would this mean that more Q2s come on the scheme as they wind them down, or no?

    just not sure what Im going to do when my lease expires, I just wanted to get the exact same again – but even the black edition has disappeared and those models left on the scheme are more basic and twice (!!) the AP! 🙁

Viewing 11 replies - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #188923 Reply
    rox
    Participant

    Audi have taken the Q2 off the shelves globally. Audi’s spokesperson confirmed that the German carmaker is not looking forward to a second-generation model of the Q2. In addition to that, Audi have also pulled the plug on the A1 supermini which was on sale in international markets. Going forward, Audi will place their focus on bigger products that return higher profits.

    The A1 and Q2 will be retired after the current-generation models when the A3 will effectively become the entry point into Audi’s global lineup.

    So I guess that will mean there still will be a q3 but if it comes back onto the scheme i dread to think what the ap will be considering the ap’s of the q2’s which is the only audi currently on the scheme.

    #188924 Reply
    Jojoe
    Participant

    roxParticipant
    Audi have taken the Q2 off the shelves globally. Audi’s spokesperson confirmed that the German carmaker is not looking forward to a second-generation model of the Q2. In addition to that, Audi have also pulled the plug on the A1 supermini which was on sale in international markets. Going forward, Audi will place their focus on bigger products that return higher profits.

    The A1 and Q2 will be retired after the current-generation models when the A3 will effectively become the entry point into Audi’s global lineup.

    So I guess that will mean there still will be a q3 but if it comes back onto the scheme i dread to think what the ap will be considering the ap’s of the q2’s which is the only audi currently on the scheme.

    The move to EV’s is to blame for them removing smaller cars. I’m sure I read manufacturers had to meet figures for emissions across the brand, many of them did this by making small cars with low emissions. Now they make EV’s they don’t need to invest in smaller ICE cars.

    #188936 Reply
    rox
    Participant

    The A1 and Q2 will be retired after the current-generation models when the A3 will effectively become the entry point into Audi’s global lineup. Further down the line, the company will launch its last new vehicle equipped with a combustion engine in 2026 before ending production of ICE cars in 2033. However, the assembly of petrol-fuelled vehicles could continue for a few more years in China, depending on demand.

    So I guess it depends which markets we talking about. here in the uk no ice in 2030 but in the usa maybe baring California, sure they hoping for 2035 for no more ice cars to be sold.

    Meanwhile, the lineup will grow to include the Q6 E-Tron due to be unveiled before the end of the year as Audi’s first product based on the PPE platform co-developed with Porsche. In China, a Volkswagen Atlas-based SUV is said to arrive in 2022 with the rather confusing Q6 moniker. Also coming this year is the facelifted E-Tron, believed to change its name to Q8 E-Tron to better reflect its positioning in the range.

    What this tells me is that only those rich enough will be able to own/drive an audi.

    The real goal/agenda is to stop the masses driving at all.. Nothing happens overnight it’s a slow process so you don’t really notice till it’s to late. Pretty much like buying a house is now, owning a car will be out of the reach of many.

    I cannot justify leasing on the scheme at current high ap’s so have just recently left and bought an ice car albeit a mild hybrid. which I might keep for the rest of my life, or until they ban the sale of replacement parts for ice cars and no mechanics will touch them or know how to fix them.

    One huge factor is the raw materials needed for ev’s are limited and there’s nowhere near enough on the planet for cars currently just in the uk to be ev’s, never mind the world.

    It’s no real surprise to me at all and is the real reason smaller cheaper cars will be dropped in favour of higher end cars.

    This whole situation is being social engineered, pretty much the 4th industrial revolution is coming and the wef / un will put in place the structure so it does happen and all the companies and goverments will adopt and implement it.

     

     

     

    #189010 Reply
    Richard

    Extend your lease to 5 years would be the most sensible thing to do, high deposits and fewer cars in general will see more  people than usual take this option.

    #189012 Reply
    Rene
    Participant

    One huge factor is the raw materials needed for ev’s are limited and there’s nowhere near enough on the planet for cars currently just in the uk to be ev’s, never mind the world.

    Which raw materials are we talking about? Even without russian supplies, we already have the capacity to build 14 million EVs. This year alone.

    A typical car propulsion battery is made from, amongst other things, 8kg of Lithium, 20kg of Manganese and 14kg of Cobalt. That’s the rare stuff in battery packs.

    Lithium: 14 million tons.

    Manganese: 71 million tons.

    Cobalt: 7.6 million tons.

    So the most limiting factor is Cobalt. That’s 7.600.000.000kg. Or enough for 542,857,143 (543 million) car batteries. Those numbers don’t include recycling and advancements in battery technology reducing material cost. Even if we’d only get to half of the available cobalt, it’s more than enough to build all the EVs necessary.

    But by no means let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

     

    Current: SEAT Ateca Xcellence Lux 1.5 TSI DSG MY19
    On Order: VW Golf GTE PHEV DSG MY23

    #189013 Reply
    rox
    Participant

    Leading scientists set out resource challenge of meeting net zero emissions in the UK by 2050

    https://www.nhm.ac.uk/press-office/press-releases/leading-scientists-set-out-resource-challenge-of-meeting-net-zer.html

    A letter authored by Natural History Museum Head of Earth Sciences Prof Richard Herrington and fellow expert members of SoS MinErals (an interdisciplinary programme of NERC-EPSRC-Newton-FAPESP funded research) has today been delivered to the Committee on Climate Change
    The letter explains that to meet UK electric car targets for 2050 we would need to produce just under two times the current total annual world cobalt production, nearly the entire world production of neodymium, three quarters the world’s lithium production and 12% of one year’s total annual production of mined copper.

    A 20% increase in UK-generated electricity would be required to charge the current 252.5 billion miles to be driven by UK cars.

    Last month, the Committee on Climate Change published a report ‘Net Zero: The UK’s Contribution to Stopping Global Warming’ which concluded that ‘net zero is necessary, feasible and cost effective.’ As a major scientific research institution and authority on the natural world, the Natural History Museum supports the pressing need for a major reduction in carbon emissions to address further catastrophic consequences of climate change. Using its scientific expertise and vast collection of geological specimens, the Museum is collaborating with leading researchers to identify resource and environmental implications of the transition to green energy technologies including electric cars.

    A letter which outlines these challenges was delivered to Baroness Brown, who chairs the Adaption Sub-Committee of the Committee on Climate Change.

    Prof Richard Herrington says: ‘The urgent need to cut CO2 emissions to secure the future of our planet is clear, but there are huge implications for our natural resources not only to produce green technologies like electric cars but keep them charged.

    “Over the next few decades, global supply of raw materials must drastically change to accommodate not just the UK’s transformation to a low carbon economy, but the whole world’s. Our role as scientists is to provide the evidence for how best to move towards a zero-carbon economy – society needs to understand that there is a raw material cost of going green and that both new research and investment is urgently needed for us to evaluate new ways to source these. This may include potentially considering sources much closer to where the metals are to be used.’

    The challenges set out in the letter are:

    The metal resource needed to make all cars and vans electric by 2050 and all sales to be purely battery electric by 2035. To replace all UK-based vehicles today with electric vehicles (not including the LGV and HGV fleets), assuming they use the most resource-frugal next-generation NMC 811 batteries, would take 207,900 tonnes cobalt, 264,600 tonnes of lithium carbonate (LCE), at least 7,200 tonnes of neodymium and dysprosium, in addition to 2,362,500 tonnes copper. This represents, just under two times the total annual world cobalt production, nearly the entire world production of neodymium, three quarters the world’s lithium production and 12% of the world’s copper production during 2018. Even ensuring the annual supply of electric vehicles only, from 2035 as pledged, will require the UK to annually import the equivalent of the entire annual cobalt needs of European industry.

    The worldwide impact: If this analysis is extrapolated to the currently projected estimate of two billion cars worldwide, based on 2018 figures, annual production would have to increase for neodymium and dysprosium by 70%, whilst cobalt output would need to increase at least three and a half times for the entire period from now until 2050 to satisfy the demand.

    Energy cost of metal production: This choice of vehicle comes with an energy cost too.  Energy costs for cobalt production are estimated at 7000-8000 kWh for every tonne of metal produced and for copper 9000 kWh/t.  The rare-earth energy costs are at least 3350 kWh/t, so for the target of all 31.5 million cars that requires 22.5 TWh of power to produce the new metals for the UK fleet, amounting to 6% of the UK’s current annual electrical usage.  Extrapolated to 2 billion cars worldwide, the energy demand for extracting and processing the metals is almost 4 times the total annual UK electrical output

    Energy cost of charging electric cars: There are serious implications for the electrical power generation in the UK needed to recharge these vehicles. Using figures published for current EVs (Nissan Leaf, Renault Zoe), driving 252.5 billion miles uses at least 63 TWh of power. This will demand a 20% increase in UK generated electricity.

    Challenges of using ‘green energy’ to power electric cars: If wind farms are chosen to generate the power for the projected two billion cars at UK average usage, this requires the equivalent of a further years’ worth of total global copper supply and 10 years’ worth of global neodymium and dysprosium production to build the windfarms.

    Solar power is also problematic – it is also resource hungry; all the photovoltaic systems currently on the market are reliant on one or more raw materials classed as “critical” or “near critical” by the EU and/ or US Department of Energy (high purity silicon, indium, tellurium, gallium) because of their natural scarcity or their recovery as minor-by-products of other commodities. With a capacity factor of only ~10%, the UK would require ~72GW of photovoltaic input to fuel the EV fleet; over five times the current installed capacity. If CdTe-type photovoltaic power is used, that would consume over thirty years of current annual tellurium supply.

    Both these wind turbine and solar generation options for the added electrical power generation capacity have substantial demands for steel, aluminium, cement and glass.

    The co-signatories, like Prof Herrington are part of SoS MinErals, an interdisciplinary programme of NERC-EPSRC-Newton-FAPESP funded research focusing on the science needed to sustain the security of supply of strategic minerals in a changing environment. This programme falls under NERC’s sustainable use of natural resources (SUNR) strategic theme. They are:

    Professor Adrian Boyce, Professor of Applied Geology at The Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre

    Paul Lusty, Team Leader for Ore Deposits and Commodities at British Geological Survey

    Dr Bramley Murton, Associate Head of Marine Geosciences at the National Oceanography Centre

    Dr Jonathan Naden, Science Coordination Team Lead of NERC SoS MinErals Programme, British Geological Society

    Professor Stephen Roberts, Professor of Geology, School of Ocean and Earth Science, University of Southampton

    Associate Professor Dan Smith, Applied and Environmental Geology, University of Leicester

    Professor Frances Wall, Professor of Applied Mineralogy at Camborne School of Mines, University of Exeter

    #189014 Reply
    rox
    Participant

    Why Electric Cars Won’t Save Us: There Are Not Enough Resources to Build Them

    https://www.treehugger.com/why-electric-cars-wont-save-us-there-are-not-enough-resources-build-them-4857798

    British scientists do the math and find that we come up short for cobalt, lithium and copper.

    TreeHugger previously covered the UK Committee on Climate Change report, and complained that that it was too much business as usual, particularly with its suggestion that electric cars could replace all the ICE (internal combustion engine) powered cars in the UK, and its lack of interest in alternatives.

    Mining Shortfall
    Now, a letter from the Natural History Museum’s head of Earth Sciences, Professor Richard Herrington, along with other experts, points out the scale of the problem of building so many electric cars. They calculate that, even with the most efficient batteries available, full electrification of the auto fleet by 2035 would need a lot more mining.

    The worldwide impact: If this analysis is extrapolated to the currently projected estimate of two billion cars worldwide, based on 2018 figures, annual production would have to increase for neodymium and dysprosium by 70%, copper output would need to more than double and cobalt output would need to increase at least three and a half times for the entire period from now until 2050 to satisfy the demand.

    Energy Costs
    It would also take a lot of energy to make these cars:

    Energy costs for cobalt production are estimated at 7000-8000 kWh for every tonne of metal produced and for copper 9000 kWh/t. The rare-earth energy costs are at least 3350 kWh/t, so for the target of all 31.5 million cars that requires 22.5 TWh of power to produce the new metals for the UK fleet, amounting to 6% of the UK’s current annual electrical usage. Extrapolated to 2 billion cars worldwide, the energy demand for extracting and processing the metals is almost 4 times the total annual UK electrical output.

    And then, of course, there is the electricity required to power all these electric vehicles. Building wind farms to generate that much would require more copper and more dysprosium, and building solar farms requires yet more high purity silicon, indium, tellurium, gallium. Professor Herrington notes:

    The urgent need to cut CO2 emissions to secure the future of our planet is clear, but there are huge implications for our natural resources not only to produce green technologies like electric cars but keep them charged.

    Seen in the south of France: e-bikes for mail delivery/ Lloyd Alter/CC BY 2.0

    As I noted in an earlier post on copper, we have to stop talking about how electric cars will save us; it takes too much stuff to make them all, puts out too much upfront carbon, and nobody is going to make enough of them fast enough. All that copper and lithium and nickel and aluminum and steel has to come from somewhere. We have to look at getting people out of cars, at making it easier for people to use e-bikes and cargo bikes, transit and feet.

    Again, this is why we go on about sufficiency all the time. What is the best tool for the job? Cars are convenient for some, but we can’t just build electric powered two and three ton boxes moving one person a few miles. We have to look at alternatives that use less stuff more efficiently. Electric cars won’t save us.

    #189018 Reply
    rox
    Participant

    Will Lithium Prices Kill Demand for Electric Cars?
    Prices have increased by 500% in the past year. Car prices will follow.

    https://www.treehugger.com/will-lithium-prices-kill-demand-for-evs-5223980

    #189032 Reply
    Rene
    Participant

    The metal resource needed to make all cars and vans electric by 2050 and all sales to be purely battery electric by 2035. To replace all UK-based vehicles today with electric vehicles (not including the LGV and HGV fleets), assuming they use the most resource-frugal next-generation NMC 811 batteries, would take 207,900 tonnes cobalt, 264,600 tonnes of lithium carbonate (LCE), at least 7,200 tonnes of neodymium and dysprosium, in addition to 2,362,500 tonnes copper. This represents, just under two times the total annual world cobalt production, nearly the entire world production of neodymium, three quarters the world’s lithium production and 12% of the world’s copper production during 2018.

    This says that to replace every single car in the UK with an EV, you need two years worth of Cobalt.

    The target is 2050. Yeah, we can’t mine enough to make 36 million EVs in one year. That’s why we’re making them over the next 20 to 30. Then suddenly, the “almost twice the annual world cobalt production” becomes, even if we take 10 years as an example, 20% of the annual cobalt production. Which granted, is still quite a lot, but that’s assuming that we replace every single petrol/diesel vehicle in the UK within the next 10 years, which already is a stupid assumption since no one who’s running a petrol car will immediately buy an EV at the deadline. New ICE cars are banned, people can still drive their current ones that they bought new in 2029, and they can run it for a decade or more.

    Next:

    The worldwide impact: If this analysis is extrapolated to the currently projected estimate of two billion cars worldwide, based on 2018 figures

    This one’s particularly stupid. It’s not going to be 2 billion cars. There’s 1.4 billion vehicles (including trucks) currently, somehow in the next few years that’s gonna increase by 50% and on top of that, we replace every single car worldwide despite only a few countries actually banning them. Everywhere else, EVs will certainly grow in market share, but they won’t be the only means of transport available.

    And then, of course, there is the electricity required to power all these electric vehicles. Building wind farms to generate that much would require more copper and more dysprosium, and building solar farms requires yet more high purity silicon, indium, tellurium, gallium.

    I forgot. There’s no other means of electricity generation other than Wind and Solar.

    If anything, you’re making a point for removal of all wind and solar farms since a few nuclear reactors would solve those problems much simpler, without any of the drawbacks that wind and solar have (like having to have vast energy storage to counter less breezy days, and not having sun at night – which require even more of them expensive batteries). Modern nuclear reactors and infrastructures don’t produce much waste, some of which is even fuel for other types of reactors. And we have reactors already, it’s not like in germany where you have an uphill battle against an absolutely idiotic green party and nuclear reactors are outlawed.

    Prices have increased by 500% in the past year. Car prices will follow.

    Much like Silicon in 2008, when people argued that solar power is unscalable (not “doesn’t scale well”, but “impossible to scale”) because of the price of Silicon.

    Yet here we are, a decade later, with panels being less than a third per watt than they were in 2010.

    This is alarmist at best, not to mention, has basically nothing to do with your original argument claiming this:

    One huge factor is the raw materials needed for ev’s are limited and there’s nowhere near enough on the planet for cars currently just in the uk to be ev’s, never mind the world.

    Here’s what those articles are. Nonsense. The articles assume (falsely) that either A: immediately all cars are EVs (“A 20% increase in UK-generated electricity would be required to charge the current 252.5 billion miles to be driven by UK cars”). What kind of argument is that? That we, right now, don’t produce enough electricity to power the amount of EVs projected for 2050 – all charging at the same time? Or B: all cars in the world (and then some) are becoming EVs, which of course is bollocks too. Russia, the africas, south america, the middle east, most poorer countries basically most of the world won’t follow suit (yet, your articles argue as if they do). Ignoring the fact that there isn’t even an alternative to some things like lorries and busses, without electrification of the road. There’s no usable battery powered lorry. The ones “available” currently like the DAF CF have a whopping 155 miles range, which means they can make 300 miles per day. Assuming that the hundreds of lorries every hour can actually all charge at service stations, which i very much doubt (they require 300kw chargers, too – and at least 25-50 per service station).

    Its easy to argue with numbers that have no basis in reality. The timeframe goes to 2050. That’s almost 30 years from now. That’s the projection for full electrification in the UK. That’s 36 million electric vehicles in 28 years (which, again, includes commercial vehicles/lorries which so far are exempt). That’s what, 1.3 million cars a year? That’s already just a quarter of annual EV production. And we literally just started mass production, this is going to ramp up significantly over the next decade.

    We certainly can have an honest debate about the environment, but straight up front, i don’t think that the average citizen has more responsibility than “not being wasteful”. Cars of course do pollute, but even with NOX (where people went ape over), cars produce a whopping 12% of it in the UK. Total. The entirety of the transport sector (all lorries, busses, cars, vans, motorbikes, trains – everything) contributed 24% to all green house emissions in the UK. Now you replace every single car with an EV, and it’ll drop to what, lets say, 10%. Great. At great cost to the environment and population, we basically achieved barely anything. 21% of total greenhouse gas comes from the electricity sector (which of course will increase, be it directly or indirectly through production cost). Remove gas/coal, add nuclear reactors, and ding, you already did vastly more for the environment than by replacing all cars with EVs. 30% of all greenhouse gas from business/agriculture. 16% residential. A household creates as much greenhouse gas as a car, but yet, we build infrastructure, ravage the planet for material to replace cars with EVs – and ignore the much, much worse issues.

    Hell, here in wales (and i bet in other parts of the country too), you could just start by electrifying the trains, rather than having them burn diesel.

    Sorry, nah. This is fear mongering, based on numbers they pulled out of their nose because it makes the argument look strong. If you actually look at the numbers, it might be not “easy”, but far from impossible or even a challenge.

    And, closing, lets be real. All this is just virtue signalling in the first place. Action was needed 10 years ago. Increasing pollution to mine etc for EVs for the next 25 years isn’t actually helping. As in, literally, it doesn’t do anything to combat global warming. For that, decisive action would’ve been needed, 10 years ago, and not just the automotive sector but more importantly business and energy sectors.

    If this sounds aggressive or something, i apologise, this isn’t meant as a personal attack.

    Current: SEAT Ateca Xcellence Lux 1.5 TSI DSG MY19
    On Order: VW Golf GTE PHEV DSG MY23

    #189034 Reply
    kezo
    Participant

    I think the majority f manufacturers are moving away from cobalt electrodes in favour of lithium iron phosphate for example.

    Nevertheless that does not stop the pollution of mining for rare earth materials or the fact that an EV’s carbon foot print is nearly double that of a fossil fueled vehicle when sat next to each other in a showroom 🤣

    #189031 Reply
    Brad

    Wow – didn’t know audi are discontinuing the a1 and q2! They both do brilliant in sales. If it ever comes on, the Audi q3 is an absolutely fantastic car. We had the old model in 2017 couldn’t praise it anymore

Viewing 11 replies - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
Reply To: Audi Q2 (or even Q3)
Your information: