Passing your driving test is a rite of passage for lots of young (and often older) people and you can’t help but feel thrilled when you get hold of your licence.

The independence to go where you want, when you want, is a huge motivator for learning to drive—whether that means popping out for a late-night snack or taking somebody out on a date. Those days might soon be over as the government considers banning young people from driving at night.

Introducing the Graduated Driving Licence

A Graduated Driving Licence (GDL) sets restrictions for new drivers for a fixed period.

In February 2018, former prime minister Theresa May requested an investigation into the effects of a GDL on the high number of crashes involving young motorists.

The GDL is one of 74 actions the Department for Transport (DfT) will consider as part of a new Road Safety Action Plan (published last Friday) to reduce road deaths in the United Kingdom.

In May last year, the DfT decided they would pilot a GDL in Northern Ireland (NI). There, rookie drivers must display ‘R’ (restricted) plates for 12 months, limiting their speed to 45mph. For the rest of the UK, displaying a ‘P’ plate on your vehicle shows you’ve just passed your test. You can leave these on your vehicles for as long as you choose but they’re not required by law.

The planned roll-out of GDLs across NI is throughout 2019 and 2020—although this idea is on hold because of the current absence of government there. The results of the pilot will decide whether the government extends the scheme to England, Scotland and Wales.

At the moment, the only specialised treatment for fledgling motorists is the reality of harsher punishments for breaking the law.

Motorists who get 12 points on their licence face disqualification, but for those who have driven unaccompanied for less than two years, it takes just six points to lose their licence. Inexperienced drivers might soon need supervision during after dark or find themselves with overnight curfews.

The rate of young drivers involved in road traffic collisions (RTC) is disproportionate to other age groups. Various sources show:

• One in five crash within 12 months.
• 25% experience an accident within the first two years.
• 400 young, UK motorists sustain serious or fatal injuries each year from RTCs.
• There were around 1,770 deaths on UK roads in the 12 months to June 2018.
• Young men are four times more likely than women to suffer serious or fatal injuries from an RTC.
• A small 7% of licence holders are between the ages of 17 and 24.
• Drivers aged 16 to 19 are a third more likely to die in a crash than those aged 40 to 49.
• The RAC’s Report on Motoring showed that 35% of motorists say the standard driving test doesn’t cover all the skills needed to cope with modern driving.

The UK has rejected programmes such as these before because of fears it might prevent young people from getting jobs and accessing education, but the government says the pilot will examine the economic and social impact of licence restrictions.

Many road safety and motoring groups support the idea because motorists who have just qualified (lacking experience but often feeling overconfident) are at an increased risk of RTC.

Both the AA and RAC back the scheme which would restrict motorists between six months to two years.

Restrictions for all ages?

Besides restricting driving at night, the government’s plan will also consider a limit on the car engine size, a minimum learning period before taking a test, and a restriction on the number of passengers under a certain age.

Neil Greig, Director of Policy and Research, IAM RoadSmart said:

‘In any graduated driver licencing (GDL) scheme, the key is building experience.

‘Too many young drivers pass the practical test unprepared for the road and this approach would help them survive the high-risk early months on their own.’

The GDL could apply to all inexperienced motorists of any age, although other countries where similar regulations are in place have included only those under 25.

There is already compelling evidence from other countries:

New Zealand, New South Wales and Victoria in Australia, Ontario and British Columbia in Canada, New York and California in the US, and Sweden all use a GDL for drivers under 25.

In New York, they only allow unsupervised driving at night for those commuting to and from work, while in California, the restrictions are between 11 pm to 5 am.

James Dalton, Director of General Insurance Policy at the Association of British Insurers, said:

‘The potential for Graduated Driver Licensing to dramatically improve road safety in the UK is indisputable and insurers have long called for its introduction.

‘The main aim must be to reduce deaths and serious injuries but it is also true that a dramatic reduction in accidents would do a lot to alleviate the pressure on insurance premiums for young drivers.

‘This will be even more important given the recent move by Government to set the rate for major compensation payments in a way which is likely to increase motor insurance costs, particularly for those younger motorists.’

There have already been several motoring reforms for UK drivers and last June, it became possible for learner drivers to have motorways lessons. But despite the announcement, it seems doubtful the government will introduce any new licencing system before 2022.

Stay safe after dark

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) reports a spike in the number of road users killed or injured when the clocks go back. While we’re enjoying long evenings, autumn will soon be upon us so, whether you’re a learner, new, or skilled driver, the following tips might be useful:

It’s illegal in the UK to drive at night without functioning lights, so check that your lights work as they should.

Turn on your car’s dipped headlights about an hour before sunset and keep them on an hour after sunrise. This makes sure we’re visible to other road users.

When using full beam, switch to dipped headlights as soon as another vehicle appears, so you don’t dazzle them and turn your gaze away from other lights and oncoming high beams, to avoid being dazzled.

Condensation or dirt on your windows can impair your view of the road and increase the glare from oncoming headlamps, so make sure they’re clear before driving.

Watch your speed even more so when driving after dark because as visibility deteriorates, you must reduce your speed for extra time to respond.

If you’re learning to drive, insist on getting some experience at night. If you’ve just passed, consider taking a Pass Plus course, which includes modules on night-time driving.

What’s your view on the UK having graduated driving licence scheme? Are you in favour? Share your opinion in the comments.

Twelve months on, and the database has helped police to prosecute over 1,200 drivers but privacy campaigners say the database ‘risks breeding a culture of mistrust and suspicion’ with drivers ‘spying on each other’.

Who’s informing on you?

Prior to the NDCP, each piece of dashcam clip received, took an average of 14 hours to review, process, and decide if an offence occurred because it required officers to handle dashcam evidence as they would eyewitness accounts—involving masses of paperwork and requiring interviews.

Yet, in 2016, North Wales Police discovered a loophole that means officers can treat dashcam and helmet cam footage the same as video from speed cameras—as sole evidence—and prosecute the motorists involved.

People submitted 4,891 clips to the portal in the first 12 months after the launch, which resulted in 1,223 prosecutions.

Nextbase says the NDCP has had a drastic effect on reducing police workload, which frees up critical policing time and saves valuable funds.

Twenty-two different forces use the system so far, with more expected to follow. Officers have direct access and don’t pay a fee for the privilege.

The police forces confirmed they reviewed 50% of the uploaded videos. Half of them ended with the driver either receiving a written warning and points on their licence, or a driving ban.

In 2015, the first person in the UK received a prison term because of dashcam evidence. The video showed the man’s dangerous overtaking—which forced another driver off the road. The Cheshire man received an eight-month sentence.

Officers review each video and send a penalty notice to the offender who can dispute the charge in court.

Offences might include: contravening red traffic lights, contravening solid white lines, dangerous driving, driving without due care and attention, improper control of a vehicle, and mobile phone offences.

A silly idea

But the AA warned that the portal shouldn’t be a substitute for having police on patrol saying in the past, that cuts to traffic policing are hampering efforts to crack down further on driving offences.

Edmund King, President of the motoring group, said, while the group supports dashcam use ‘for safety and insurance reasons’, needing to rely on dashcam coverage to supplement policing is a ‘sad state of affairs’.

King complained of the 20% cut in traffic police in the last decade and stated: ‘If we had more cops in cars, we wouldn’t need to use dashcam vigilantes.’

Silkie Carlo, Director of the privacy and civil liberties non-profit, Big Brother Watch expressed that motorists filming each other all the time ‘may be well-intentioned, but it risks breeding a culture of mistrust and suspicion.’

Describing it as a ‘silly idea’, Carlo said the automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) network ‘that surveils innocent drivers’ captures 40 million photos each day without ‘ordinary people being encouraged to spy on each other’.

Dash off

Spying is an active endeavour requiring at least some effort. While most of us buy dashcams for insurance and our safety, not to ‘grass up’ other drivers. If we’re driving and somebody causes a collision or a near-miss because of careless behaviour and our dashcam records it, were we ‘spying’?

Other people hold the attitude of, ‘let the police do the job they’re paid to do’ but our officers are struggling to work with reduced numbers. It isn’t their fault, but that of our government. In an ideal world, more police would patrol the streets. In the meantime, do we want them to put their efforts in, say, violent crime instead of motoring offences that technology can pretty well monitor?

Nicholas Lyes, Head of Roads Policy for the RAC, says their research shows law-abiding motorists are becoming ever more ‘fed up with the illegal actions of a minority that get away with tailgating, undertaking, and using handheld mobile phones when driving,’.

The database is for all road users including cyclists, drivers, horse riders, motorcyclists, and pedestrians. It’s simple to use and takes about 15 minutes to write a short description of the incident, answer a supporting questionnaire, and upload the clip. You’ll find the website here.

Many of us suspect that energy prices will skyrocket, that charging your electric vehicle will go from a few pounds to tens of pounds (at the very least), but what else is there? What could possibly link outdated ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) powered cars with the cleaner, greener, alternatives?

What will be the common denominator between the two?

The answer of course, is brakes, tyres and road surface degradation.

Government air quality experts

Ding ding ding … we have a winner.

While nobody is actually denying that applying your brakes to slow down causes brake dust, it should be pointed out that at this moment in time, there’s very little choice (unless you want to find out how long NHS waiting queues are) in using the brakes, and more importantly, the question needs to be asked just how ‘realistic’ (read: truthful) that figure is?

Michael Ellis, Transport Minister, has been quoted as saying: “We are engaging at an international level to identify how to measure these emissions, as well as aiming to develop standards to control them”. The emphasis in that paragraph is mine; How to measure these emissions.

Tyre technology

Yes, there are some manufacturers working on alternative tyres, mainly making them airless, but they’re years away from production, and they still may produce particles as part of their natural wear / grip cycle.

It’s a similar story for brakes – reducing particle pollution (with today’s accepted technology and designs) would amount to making the brake pads from a harder compound, which would then result in the need for a more wear-resistant disk, which of course reduces braking efficiency, along with costing the manufacturers millions in development.

Accepted level

Banning cars from a city centre is the perfect example – yes without doubt, it will lower air pollution within that targeted area, but it will also have a financial cost, potentially kill-off any trade within that city, and lead to more people becoming jobless (and simply shift the air pollution problem somewhere else).

Radically re-engineering brakes & tyres will have a similar effect – development costs will be passed on to the customer, there could be a potential safety implication, and any benefits will be marginal in the extreme. There should be more of an understanding between the need for road transportation versus the need for cleaning up our cities, it’s a balancing act that so far, is heavily weighted in the one direction.

Of course, technology and manufacturing processes change and develop over time, but with government officials calling for an ‘urgent review’ into the materials and processes, we could just be heading toward another panicked decision without any forethought to the wider picture.

Just how far can these government experts take the ‘car = pollution’ argument? I’ve said for a long time that the next step to easy money for them is a green tax on speeding; along with a fine, there will be a tariff added for the extra emissions caused by going over the accepted speed limit … they’ve got to keep that revenue generation coming from somewhere.

I’ve been in the automotive business for over thirty years, and when it comes to ‘positive’ news for motorists, that 30+ years of experience leads me to be very cynical; we’re so used to being downtrodden, taxed and made public enemy number one, that when a minister or government body announces something that could actually be of benefit, or even something that isn’t just another stealth tax, my first question is always: “Is there a General Election this year?”

Cynical.

The Department for Transport (DfT) have been conducting a study focusing on traffic speed and movements, the statistics released aren’t really a shock to anyone – over 50% of motorists exceed the 30mph speed limit for example, but the outcome of that study is somewhat of a surprise result.

The speeding statistics

The DfT have been using automatic traffic counters (ATCs) across 102 different sites, that have registered 655 million vehicles since they’ve been installed. The ATCs measure the number of axles, axle spacing and the length of the vehicle to identify the category of vehicle, and all statistics are taken from these counters – there’s no bias from those driver’s that don’t self-identify.

These counters tell us that 53% of UK motorists speed in 30mph zones, that’s for all categories including buses (the assumption is made that ‘speeding’ consists of anything above the posted limit), but only 47% of drivers speed on a motorway (with another assumption that road works or congestion have been factored in to the results).

While the motorway stats may be somewhat of a surprise, with many motoring groups expecting that number to be higher, that still isn’t the good surprise.

The good surprise

In 2015, goods vehicles weighing over 7.5 tons were allowed to increase their speed limits – from 40 to 50mph on single carriageways, and from 50 – 60mph on dual carriageways. The new report from the DfT shows that typically, speeds rose by 1.5mph on single carriageways, and increased by 0.4% on dual carriageways, and despite being slight, that increase has helped companies save time and money, with the report stating that for every 1mph increase, 650,000 drivers hours could be saved, which equates to around £10million per year.

Not only that, but there was a ‘statistically significant’ improvement in road safety, which is thought to be as a result of drivers making less risky overtaking manoeuvres of the slower vehicles, and it’s that statistic that has led to calls for an increase for motorway speed limits, from 70 – 80mph.

Jim O’Sullivan, Highways Agency CEO said that the speed limit on some motorways could safely be raised to 80mph, AA president Edmund King has stated “Driving at 80mph at an appropriate distance form the vehicle in front, in a modern car in good weather on a decent motorway is probably safe. Driving at 50mph tailgating the car in front is never safe”, and Liz Truss MP, potential cabinet member under Boris Johnson’s govt has said that an 80mph limit on motorways would boost productivity.

However, the news isn’t all positive – head of roads policy for the RAC, Nicholas Lyes has said that raising the speed limit to 80mph would ‘send out the wrong message’, and that it’s too risky as a great many drivers already exceed the 70mph limit.

70mph motorways

It could be argued that a speed limit set all the way back in 1965 has no bearing on today’s vehicles – handling, suspension, brakes and driver aids have all improved significantly since the 60s; let’s be honest, the majority of cars and trucks back then were almost reaching their top speeds, but conversely, motorway traffic has increased significantly since the 60s – in 2013, there were 76,700 vehicles for each mile of motorway per day.

Between 2003 – 2013, the volume of traffic on motorways alone grew by nearly 10%, there are no statistics for 1965, although overall vehicle miles for the country are available – approximately 100 billion vehicle miles for the UK in 1965, compared to 303 billion in 2013. Not only are there more vehicles on the roads, but we’re using the roads more.

While raising the speed limit to 80mph would bring us inline with many EU states, and Howard Cox from campaign group FairFuelUK believes it the right thing to do – “It’s high time that limits are increased to match those in all EU states, where it’s safe to do so. The positive benefits to the economy, travel times and driver stress will be substantial”, it must be noted that any official increase could potentially cost billions as new signage, processes and education would be needed.

A common-sense approach could be as simple as keeping the 70mph limit, but without fear of prosecution for those motorists travelling at 80mph.

What do you think to raising the speed limit? Should we stay at 70? Is there a better way (fairer?) to offer alternatives? Let us know in the comments.

In an interview last week with the BBC, Matt Pates, East Midlands regional traffic operations manager for Highways England, claimed that smart motorways were safe, if not safer without the hard shoulder. His comment was met with a howl of derision from various motoring groups.

Mr Pates said the need for hard shoulders had become redundant because modern cars are now fitted with technology that warns the driver when they’re about to break down, giving them plenty of time to act.

He also argued that vehicles are more reliable today than ever before and the chances of suffering a reliability issue are at an all-time low.

Motoring organizations such as the AA, MPs and the Police have all raised concerns over the increase in collisions on smart motorway sections with no hard shoulder, with an all-party parliamentary group asking for them to be halted until safety concerns are addressed.

Collisions in Red X lanes

Two people were killed in the same stretch of an ALR (All Lanes Running) on the M1 in Derbyshire. An 83-year-old man Derek Jacobs was killed when his van came to a halt, potentially due to a mechanical failure according to police, on a stretch of motorway that had no hard shoulder, just emergency refuge areas which are spaced just over a mile apart.

 Breakdown patrol workers have shown how dangerous it can be, especially if the smart motorway is an ALR and the dangers of ignoring the Red X^[1] above the lane as it risks lives every time.  And despite tough new penalties to drivers for driving in a lane marked red, collisions are still happening.

Police have also raised issues saying they struggle to get to the issue faster as there is no hard shoulder for them to cut through now, and the same applies for any emergency services.

Emergency services now must weave through the traffic to get to the crash which is often congested quite a long way back, increasing the amount of time it takes to reach the accident and save lives.

How do smart motorways work?

The first ever smart motorway was on the M25 in 1996 according to Highways England. Since then over four hundred miles^[1] have been converted across the country. In 2018 the Chancellor approved the installation of smart motorways all over the UK at a cost of £23 Billion.

Smart motorways use Active Traffic Management (ATM) to monitor roadways and make decisions on how to best control traffic. This is done by one of two methods. The first is a copper coil placed underneath the roads and when a car, which is metal, passes over it registers an electric current which then detects how fast the car is going and also how many cars are passing over. The second is a roadside “side-fire radar” which is the preferred method as it both easier to maintain and reduces the risk of potholes. This shoots a beam from the side of the road which then picks up the speed and distance between cars.

This data from either the coils or the beams are then sent to a central computer which uses a lengthy algorithm to determine whether it needs to slow the traffic down if it thinks the road is getting too busy to prevent congestion. It may seem strange slowing down when there seems to be no apparent reason, but this is all to prevent potential congestion rather than slowing down for congestion.

The computer can only change speed automatically everything else is done by human interaction. Lanes closing are controlled by the operations centre, which relies on members of the public, police, CCTV information and more. They will close lanes, show other messages and show lane merge messages.

There are three kinds of smart motorways; controlled, where people cannot drive on the hard shoulder, dynamic hard shoulder, where the hard shoulder can be converted into an extra lane using the overhead gantries and then an ALR (All Lanes Running) where there is a refuge area every 1.55 miles. 

Using a smart motorway safely

This isn’t just about your safety, this about the safety of others. For example, driving in a lane with a Red X above could end up with you crashing into the back of a police car or ambulance. Not only that but you’ll get a £100 fine and three points on your license.

Make sure you are aware of the gantries above, as these will tell you what to do and follow the instructions as best as possible by slowing down carefully and speeding back up carefully.

If you do breakdown or must seek refuge at the side of the road either pull over into the hard shoulder or the next refuge area. If this is not possible then use the verge. If you breakdown in a lane on a smart motorway and are not able to reach a refuge area call 999 immediatly.

Once you have stopped in an emergency refuge area call Highways England, either through an emergency roadside phone or on 0300 123 5000 from a mobile. They will then make the motorway safe for you and give advice on what to do next. In the event of a breakdown, phone your breakdown provider and then let them know where you are plus any more information you have.

Do you think smart motorways are safe? Would you feel comfortable in a refuge area? Let us know in the comments below

Campaigners from many groups welcomed the law after they warned AFVs were too quiet and presented a danger to other road users—guide dog owners and their animals in particular.

Quiet, please

The AVAS produces a specified level of noise that sounds like a combustion engine. It activates when the car’s reversing or when travelling below 20 kilometres (about 12.5miles) per hour.

Most generators involve speakers working in the direction the car is going—reducing the noise nuisance to people not in the way—and you’ll be able to turn off the system if you think it’s unnecessary, for example, when you’re in slow-moving motorway traffic.

Guide Dogs for the Blind Association (whose working name is Guide Dogs) have campaigned for laws to make noise generating systems compulsory on all AFVs. Guide Dogs statistics state that two million children and adults, affected by sight loss, live in the UK.

Their research found that quiet AFVs are 40% more likely to collide with pedestrians than cars with petrol or diesel engines. This could be because, in some environments, a person may not hear quiet vehicles until a few seconds before impact. Their data also showed a 54% rise in pedestrian injuries between 2012 and 2013, from accidents involving quiet cars.

 In their online poll on the safety of quiet AFVs, 76% of people agreed that quiet vehicles make the roads less safe for pedestrians with sight loss. Seventy-eight per cent said they put older people at risk, and 75% said they made roads less safe for children.

 Of the almost 35million cars on UK roads, there were around 200,000 ultra-low emission vehicles by the end of 2018 together with 15,474 registered battery electric cars—a year-on-year increase of 14%. There are around 57,000 pure electric vehicles in the UK but the National Grid has predicted as many as 9million by 2030, as manufacturers prepare for the ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel vehicles in 2040.

Making the right noises

‘The government wants the benefits of green transport to be felt by everyone and understands the concerns of the visually impaired about the possible hazards posed by quiet electric vehicles.

‘This new requirement will give pedestrians added confidence when crossing the road.’

Last October, we wrote how Jaguar had revealed the sound the AVAS would make in their I-PACE model. Guide Dogs charity applauded the car manufacturer ‘for being the first to launch an EV which meets standards before the new legislation even comes in.’ Last week, when the regulation came into force, a spokesperson for Guide Dogs, John Welsman, said they were ‘delighted’ that new models must come fitted with a built-in AVAS.

James White, former Head of Public Affairs and Campaigns for Guide Dogs, said:

‘Quiet vehicles put pedestrians at risk outside schools, in residential areas, and in our towns and cities.

‘The government is spending hundreds of millions of pounds to increase the numbers of quiet cars on the roads, and while we support the development of environmentally friendly vehicles, more needs to be done to protect pedestrian safety.’

Road sense

They say the government subsidies that encourage drivers to switch over to more sustainable cars means that as the number of low or zero emission vehicles grows, so does the volume of injuries caused by these vehicles.

Driving on an empty road is safer and, as long as other factors don’t prevent it such as rain or dim lighting, we can travel at the speed limit. Yet where pedestrians and other vehicles exist, the road becomes a busy place and, as motorists or cyclists (because they’re also silent, but that’s a whole other debate!), we need to slow down and pay attention so we don’t cause others harm. Take care at junctions and when pulling out from a parked position.

Check in all directions and follow the Highway Code, more so when using pedestrian crossings. It’s also a good idea, when possible, to walk facing traffic, not to cross the street like a zombie, absorbed in your mobile phone, and to be careful when wearing headphones—it might be wise to not block out all sounds from your surroundings!

The other question is no one knows how many EV or hybrid cars are now technically breaking the law by not having a fake engine noise. While it seems the government has rolled out this new rule just for new cars, one hopes that all the major EV and hybrid car makers are planning a product recall to install a fake engine noise retrospectively for pedestrian safety.

As Bob Dylan once wrote, ‘the times they are a-changing’. Like it or not, the internal combustion engine is dying a death. The days of thousands of polluting filling-stations might be over sooner than we thought with plans to build the first UK forecourt just for electric vehicles (EVs).

With a £1billion budget and proposals for over 100 sites, the project promises fast and stress-free EV charging for motorists who have already switched from petrol and diesel cars.

Staying Power

The brains behind the idea are Gridserve, a company who envisages their Electric Forecourts® replacing standard fuel stations by providing the UK public clean, sustainable energy for their EVs.

Forecourt designs follow a similar set-up to motorway services—offering toilets, coffee shops, supermarkets, somewhere to pick up healthy food, and other retailers.

The forecourts will include airport-style lounges with high-speed internet together with EV-related information hubs. These pit-stops will give people a quick and easy way to recharge both their vehicles and themselves.

Gridserve’s forecourts will use 100% renewable, clean, zero-carbon, solar-power energy and battery storage to power each of the sites’ 24 charging bays. Plans are likewise in store for areas devoted to fleet vehicles, allowing charging of buses and taxis, etc.

If they wish, drivers may book a bay ahead of time via an app on their smartphones and use it to plan journeys and pay for extra on-site services like car washing. Gridserve will reward users of the app with their loyalty and referral schemes for using services provided by them and their partners.

Overhauling the current ordeal EV owners go through, the bays will charge most electric and hybrid models within half an hour. And for those with some smaller cars capable of high-speed charging, a recharge will take a mere 10 minutes. The Electric Forecourts® promise prices rivalling those you pay to charge from home. For that, you get the most rapid charge your vehicle can support—500kW for cars and light commercial vehicles, which is the world’s fastest.

Development of the 80 already confirmed state-of-the-art forecourts will take place along busy roads. The first forecourt may be in Braintree, Essex with those in Hull and York—where Gridserve is building the most advanced solar farms in the UK—also starting work by the end of this year.

‘Accessible and seamless’

The present public charging network isn’t fulfilling the needs of EV owners. Gridserve plans to have over 100 operational Electric Forecourts® within five years, which can only be a good thing for the UK.

Toddington Harper, Chief Executive Officer from Buckinghamshire-based Gridserve said:

‘The latest generation of electric vehicles are awesome and ready for mainstream adoption, but drivers still worry about if or where they can charge, how long it will take, and what it will cost.

‘We plan to eliminate any range or charging anxiety by building a UK-wide network of customer-focussed, brand new Electric Forecourts® that will make it easier and cheaper to use an electric vehicle than a petrol or diesel alternative.

‘Our plan is to deliver for electric vehicle charging what Amazon has done for shopping online—make it simple, price competitive, and a great customer experience,’ he added.

Gridserve is working with developers, EV carmakers, fleet operators; investors, councils, and retailers who support their concept. One of Gridserve’s partnerships is with ChargePoint.

Christopher Burghardt, Managing Director, Europe, of ChargePoint, said:

‘The electric mobility revolution is upon us and ChargePoint continues to work to help create an open and accessible network that enables drivers to enjoy an effortless charging experience everywhere they live, work and play throughout Europe.

‘ChargePoint is committed to collaborating with partners like Gridserve to build out the EV charging network of tomorrow and make driving electric vehicles more accessible and seamless than ever.’

Moving forward

Climate and clean air targets mean we must transition fast to cleaner, sustainable, transport. With the population ever growing, a reliable EV-supporting infrastructure is vital. The UK ban on the sale of all new conventional petrol and diesel cars and vans comes into force in 2040. Scotland has the bolder target of 2032.

While the number of alternatively fuelled vehicles (AFV) grew by 30% last year, the amount of AFVs forms a small percentage of the 34.9m cars on our roads. Primary concerns motorists have, include the price of EVs, battery range, and the shortage of charging points causing extended waiting times to charge cars.

People also worry about the burden vehicle charging puts on the national grid, but Gridserve says their Electric Forecourts® will help this situation and IMPROVE both present and future grid issues.

Last year alone, research, design, and development of vehicle-to-grid (V2G) charging projects received £30million of government funding.

Energy stored in the batteries of EVs can act as mobile storage devices, providing support to the grid during peak hours. During off-peak hours, the battery recharges and is ready for the EV driver to begin their next journey.

As people learn about the upcoming Electric Forecourts® project, all the positive selling points should increase EV take-up and further transform the motoring landscape required for the great British electric switchover.

Does this news make you less concerned about switching over to an EV? Are you an EV driver looking forward to these new forecourts? Share your views in the comments.