It is nice to see an electric vehicle on the streets of London but I was wondering why Daisy didn't take public transport like the majority of Londoners. Whilst I think that electric vehicles (ideally running on electricity generated from renewable sources) are excellent I think there is little justification for regularly driving in central London.

This is just plain silly.. What about the electricity she's using ? What about the low milage per charge ?

More importantly, she's polluting the planet just a little less than an equal-sized diesel/gasoline car, just this pollution is created mostly in the suburbs of London rather the downtown.

Her husband could convert his car to LPG and avoid the congestion charge and pay less than half the price of petrol to fill up.

I agree about public transport, driving in london if you don't need to is just stupid.

Daisy's main motivation is clearly the cost saving, with environmental impact just sneaking a mention (still, we'll take it!). I wonder if this (sample size of one) demonstrates that behaviour change which is beneficial to the environment will have to be driven largely by measures which hit people's pockets.

More importantly, she's polluting the planet just a little less than an equal-sized diesel/gasoline car, just this pollution is created in the suburbs of London rather than downtown.

The following is from the Going Green website: "- using just one quarter as much energy as a similar size small car with an internal combustion engine, the G-Wiz is the most energy efficient car on the road (source: Energy Saving Trust)."

Given that Going Green also encourage customers to switch to a renewable tarriff, plus their various offset commitments (they claim to offset all emissions from manufacture, shipping and two years worth of driving), I'd suggest that they are a very significant improvement, even over similar small cars such as the Smart.

Of course, the ready availability of (reasonably) reliable public transport in London is a very valid point. She would do better not driving at all. However, some people are likely to want to drive, and I'd much rather they choose her car to her husband's. Even if their main motivation is financial rather than moral/ecological.

Personally, I really wonder when the critics will stop nitpicking on being sensible. Why even mentioned about public transportation as an alternative when walking or biking to work is even more environmental friendly?

There will always be different levels people can participate. A car can save some people precious time so that they can do more during a day. For these people, they can balance personal needs with the environment and CHOOSE to drive an EV. If that’s not good enough, they certainly can rebel against the critics and just drive the worse gas-guzzler instead. If there wasn’t any laws or economic incentives, then why should any BOTHER to be green, if all they get are snubs from the critics.

The idea of having two cars pr household is pretty new in Europe, because few can afford it (insurance, road tax, service and repairs alone is enough not to have two). I really want a second car, and I really want an electric car, but because I also need a car that can carry 3 kids to the kindergarden, or take us 1000 km to visit grandparents or transport materials and garbage, simply won't cut it. So if I buy a Reva for the dayly commute, I would have to have a second car. And because I can't afford both, I have to choose.

The Reva is pretty cheap to buy, but an ordinary family simply can't afford to own two cars, wich basically reduses all electric cars to adspace and promotion vehicles unless prices drop even more, and for it to drop you need a higher volume sold.

Norway produces the Kewet, but the nearest repair shop is 500km away, they cost about 20000 dollars to buy(!), and doesn't look particularly cool, so the Reva would be a better choice, but then I would have to import it myself, and order spare parts from the UK, or India :) Which would be fun, but ...