Huge blow as 100k EV chargers that can't be upgraded will soon become obsolete
Brits with electric vehicle (EV) chargers have been warned that the handy appliance will soon become completely obsolete.
As the UK continues its drive toward cleaner, greener transportation, there's a looming environmental issue few saw coming — more than 100,000 EV chargers could be destined for UK landfills by 2030. Experts at Simpson & Partners, a British company that designs and manufactures EV chargers, explained that the issue lies in the design of these devices.
Most home EV chargers today are sealed units, so while they can be updated with new software remotely thanks to over-the-air updates, hardware is a different story altogether as these devices are not built with upgrades or repairs in mind. This is similar to many modern smart phones and headphones that have been designed with a business strategy named 'planned obsolescence' - which encourages consumers to repurchase products again and again rather than being able to fix the item and use it forever.
Many EV chargers fall under this category, and cannot typically be opened and serviced once they leave the manufacturer. If a component fails, or when the hardware becomes incompatible with newer models or power standards, the unit is essentially useless.
A major problem lies in the fact that even if you wanted to repair or replace a part inside the charger, you generally can't do so without destroying the device — they're not made to be taken off the wall and disassembled for repairs. There's no simple way to open them up without breaking the unit or voiding its safety certifications, so once the technology inside the unit is outdated — an inevitability given the pace at which EV tech is evolving — the charger simply becomes electronic waste.
At some point in the life of each of these devices, owners will face a simple but unfortunate choice — throw the charger away or take it to a landfill and leave it in the e-waste pile. There is currently little in the way of a sustainable infrastructure to recycle or refurbish these chargers.
As EV charging technology moves forward, the hardware issue remains largely unaddressed. While companies like Simpson & Partners produce upgradable charger designs, unfortunately these are the exception rather than the rule at the moment.
Co-founder and brand director Mandy Simpson said: "At Simpson & Partners, we've taken a different path. We've built our chargers to be modular, weatherproof and engineered to evolve.
"Both hardware and software are repairable, upgradeable and updatable. So yes, you can still do over-the-air updates, but when the hardware eventually needs to be replaced, it can be. They're built to stay useful for the long haul."
For now, the vast majority of home EV charge points are sealed and built for short-term use rather than long-term sustainability. This damming situation could create a major headache for the government's green commitments, and feels like a huge slap in the face for Brits who have switched to EVs to help save the environment.
Without a major shift in how EV chargers are designed, repaired and recycled, the UK could soon find itself dealing with over 100,000 pieces of obsolete plastic and metal junk that can't be reused. This would come as a huge blow — for both consumers and the environment alike.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Auto Blog
2 hours ago
- Auto Blog
BMW Says Its Revival of Rolls-Royce Was a Secret Operation
By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. Nobody needed a wider, faster Cullinan, but we got one anyway. BMW may make luxury cars, but a Rolls-Royce is a Rolls-Royce To many people who are and aren't car enthusiasts, the British ultra-luxury brand Rolls-Royce is recognized as one of the most well-known brands producing some of the most luxurious cars on the road. Today, they're owned by another name known for uncharted luxury and refinement: BMW. 2025 Audi S3: 4 reasons to love it, 2 reasons to think twice Watch More The Bavarians revived the brand in the early 2000s by creating modern marvels like the Phantom, Ghost, and Cullinan, which combine opulent old-world elegance in a package tailor-made for the well-to-do in the 21st century. As part of BMW North America's 50th anniversary, the company is sharing a series of stories from its illustrious history previously known only within Bavarian Motor Works. One such story recounts BMW's revival of Rolls-Royce, as it saved the brand in a fascinating and secretive revival with a twist worthy of a spy novel. By providing your email address, you agree that it may be used pursuant to Arena Group's Privacy Policy. We may receive compensation. Source: Rolls-Royce BMW took advantage of a major technicality In 1998, defense and engineering firm Vickers PLC sold Rolls-Royce and Bentley to Volkswagen for £430 million ($703 million), as it 'lacked the expertise or the resources needed to modernize the cars' sold under the respective marques, per BMW. In The Complete Book of BMW, Tony Lewin wrote that BMW offered to buy 20% of Rolls and Bentley in the early 90s, but Vickers offered to sell the entire automotive operations, which Beemer refused. However, BMW kept a working relationship with Vickers by sharing its expertise, including some of its tech, components, and testing facilities, resulting in the 5 Series-based 1994 Bentley Java concept, the BMW V12-powered Rolls-Royce Silver Seraph, and the BMW V8-powered Bentley Arnage. Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. Though it seemed BMW would have to say goodbye to its relationship with Rolls-Royce, they discovered a technicality that it could take advantage of. Volkswagen had purchased the intellectual property, including its engineering and design documents, in its multi-million Euro transaction; it did not have possession of the Rolls-Royce name. Coincidentally, the Rolls-Royce trademark and the famous double-R logo actually belonged to Rolls-Royce PLC, the aerospace company, a BMW business partner. For just £40 million ($66 million), BMW secured the trademarks, while Volkswagen agreed to sell BMW the Spirit of Ecstasy ornament design and grille shape trademarks in a separate agreement. Source: Rolls-Royce Re-starting Rolls had to be done in secret, according to BMW executives With the rights to the Rolls-Royce name in hand, BMW needed an all-new car, a factory, and a dealer network in order to get the 'new Rolls-Royce' up and running. Unabashed Anglophile, Karl-Heinz Kalbfell, BMW's then Head of Worldwide Product Planning, led the charge. Determined to keep the brand rooted in England, he struck a deal with the Duke of Richmond to build a facility on the Goodwood estate in Chichester, home to the Festival of Speed. But until January 1, 2003, Volkswagen held the rights to sell Rolls-Royces, and BMW couldn't legally use the Rolls-Royce name on a car. So Kalbfell's team worked in a secret London office, supported by engineers in Munich and Gaydon. Per BMW, 'BMW hadn't acquired any of Rolls-Royce's pre-existing intellectual property such as engineering or design documents, leaving the team free to create a truly new automobile.' As a result, BMW designed a Rolls that was unlike any other Rolls. The new Phantom featured an aluminum space frame, a 6.75-liter BMW-based V12 tuned for massive torque, and design work by Ian Cameron, who reimagined the iconic grille and the Spirit of Ecstasy to be sleeker, safer, and theft-resistant. Source: Rolls-Royce This level of secrecy extended to the car's reveal. Robert Austin, the then North American Communications Director, recalled that in order to show the cars to prospective dealers, BMW rented out industrial buildings with 'no signage, just a number on the door,' to show the new Phantom to a tightly-controlled audience. 'We set up three 'closed rooms' across the US. One was outside Miami, another in Culver City, California, and the third in a warehouse in Lyndhurst, New Jersey,' Austin said. '[…] Upon arrival, you'd be served coffee in a nice reception area, and then you'd be taken into a room where you'd see the story of Rolls-Royce. Finally, the lights would go out and we would reveal the new Phantom, long before anyone had even seen a spy photo of the car. It had a truly James Bond-like quality, and people loved it.' Source: Getty Images The wraps officially came off at the 2003 Detroit Auto Show. 'Most of the people at the show were kind of awe-struck,' Austin said. 'It was more than they expected, physically overwhelming. But everyone had to admit that the new Rolls-Royce was beautifully built and exquisitely finished.' At $324,000, it wasn't built for the average car buyer, but perfect for those with mansions, CEOs, celebrities, and anyone who wanted 'the best car in the world.' Customization was the key. Each Phantom was bespoke—buyers could choose any color, commission mother-of-pearl inlays, or have a monogram stitched into the upholstery, features that were invaluable to high earners in sports and entertainment. 'You know why so many people in the music business love Rolls-Royce cars?' Austin said. 'Because it's virtually silent inside, and it's got a killer audio system.' Final thoughts This story raises many questions based on hypothetical scenarios, but mainly, it would be curious to know what would happen if BMW hadn't repurchased the Rolls-Royce trademarks in 1998. Would the next Rolls-Royce after the Silver Seraph be something that is based on a Bentley Continental GT? We may never know, but it's nice to hear the story from the storytellers who were there to see it for themselves. About the Author James Ochoa View Profile
Wales Online
3 hours ago
- Wales Online
Emirates bans use of common travel item onboard flights from October
Emirates bans use of common travel item onboard flights from October The Dubai-based carrier has introduced a ban on a common travel item onboard its flights from October with passengers warned to be aware of the new rules In response to escalating safety concerns an airline has enforced a ban during flights. Emirates has declared that from October 1, 2025, passengers will no longer be allowed to use power banks whilst in-flight. This comes after travel experts warned that a dead phone battery could potentially bar people from travelling. Under the new rules passengers may carry one power bank with a capacity of up to 100 watt-hours but it must remain switched off throughout the flight. Charging power banks using the aircraft's power outlets will also be prohibited. Separately Brits have also been warned to check one document carefully as 12 Spanish airports face strikes. Power banks must be housed in the seat pocket or under the seat in front of passengers and placing them in overhead lockers or checked luggage will no longer be allowed. Other airlines like TUI, easyJet, Ryanair, and Jet2 have also banned certain food items on their flights. Emirates stressed that these measures are intended to enhance passenger safety by enabling cabin crew to quickly handle any battery-related emergencies. For our free daily briefing on the biggest issues facing the nation, sign up to the Wales Matters newsletter here . The worry stems from the nature of power banks, which employ lithium-ion or lithium-polymer batteries that pose a risk of overheating due to a process known as thermal runaway, reports the Liverpool Echo. This happens when a battery generates heat faster than it can dissipate, potentially leading to fires, explosions, and the emission of harmful gases. While many smartphones have built-in protections to prevent overcharging some power banks lack these safety features, increasing the risk onboard. Emirates has issued a statement saying: "After a comprehensive safety review Emirates is taking a firm and proactive stance to mitigate risk when it comes to power banks onboard. "There has been a significant growth in customers using power banks in recent years resulting in an increasing number of lithium battery-related incidents onboard flights across the wider aviation industry. "Power banks primarily utilise lithium-ion or lithium-polymer batteries and their function is as a portable battery pack designed to recharge devices on the go. "The batteries contain lithium ions suspended in an electrolyte solution. The ions flow through the electrolyte, travelling back and forth between two electrodes as the battery charges and discharges. "If the battery is overcharged or damaged it may result in 'thermal runaway.' "Thermal runaway in batteries is a self-accelerating process where heat generation within a battery cell exceeds its ability to dissipate heat, leading to a rapid and uncontrollable temperature increase. "This can result in dangerous consequences like fire, explosions, and the release of toxic gases. "Most phones and sophisticated lithium battery-powered devices have an internal trickle system which slowly adds current into the battery to prevent overcharging but many basic power banks may not have this safeguard, increasing the risk. "All power banks are subject to the new rules onboard Emirates. "Emirates new regulations will significantly reduce risks associated with power banks by prohibiting their use while onboard the aircraft. "Storing power banks in accessible locations within the cabin ensures that in the rare event of a fire trained cabin crew can quickly respond and extinguish the fire. "Safety is one of Emirates' core values and a cornerstone of all operations and practices. Emirates is committed to maintaining and improving levels of safety on an ongoing basis, safeguarding customers and staff at all times." Article continues below Additional details are available on the Emirates website.
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
The proof that older drivers are not the most dangerous
Drivers between 17 and 24 are twice as likely to be killed or seriously injured at the wheel as those aged over 70, data from the Department for Transport show. As the Government prepares to introduce compulsory eye tests for the over-70s, analysis suggests that serious accidents are more common among the youngest drivers than the oldest. Brian Macdowell, a spokesman for the Association of British Drivers, warned of 'unintended consequences' from the planned crackdown on older drivers. He said: 'We think it needs a much more comprehensive review of the subject.' Statistics show that 121.5 drivers aged between 18 and 24 are killed for every billion vehicle miles travelled, compared with 60.9 for over-70s (and just 30.9 for those in between). The data covers travel within Great Britain in 2023, the latest year for which figures are available. Young men in particular are to blame for the age disparity, being three times more likely to be involved in a deadly or life-threatening accident than over-70s. The numbers for women are broadly similar across both age groups. Overall, the under-20s and over-70s account for a broadly similar proportion of drivers who are injured on the roads, respectively at 8.2 and 9.1 per cent of the total where an age was recorded in 2023. But when it comes to severe injury and death, the older group is considerably more likely to be affected, at 9.1 of the total compared with 16.2 per cent. This is likely an indication of the fact that older drivers are typically more frail, rather than because they are more of a danger in the driving seat. DVLA records towards the end of that same year showed almost 6.2 million full or provisional driving licence entitlements held by those aged 70-plus, relative to just under 2.6 million to those under 21. Although the data does not necessarily back up eye tests for the over-70s, there is a marked rise in the likelihood of serious accidents later in life. Drivers aged 86 and older had a higher rate of death or serious injury, at 202.5 per billion miles travelled. Mr Macdowell added: 'We're not per se against some regulation that requires you to have an eye test, but we do not think it should be targeted just on people over 70.' 'It could be a way forward, but not if it's a draconian step, which could involve people losing their licences, because that is the risk of these proposals, that they have unintended consequences.' Police data show that older drivers are much more likely to be involved in an accident where one cause was a failure to look properly. This was a factor in 28 per cent of cases involving the over-70s between 2019 and 2023, compared to 19 per cent for younger motorists. However, young people in collisions are far more likely to have been recorded as driving drunk or on drugs. Some 7.1 per cent of those 20 and under were found to have been impaired by alcohol, to 0.9 per cent of those 70 and over. The comparable figures for drugs came to 5.8 and 0.2 per cent respectively. The overhaul of UK road safety legislation is also tipped to include a reduction of the drink-drive limit. Separate data show older people are far more likely to be reliant on their cars to access essential services, thus risking being cut off should their licence be withdrawn. Of the 10 local authorities with the highest proportion of people aged 70 or over as of the middle of last year, seven were classified as 'rural' by the Office for National Statistics. Across the 32 local authorities in England and Wales where at least a fifth of the population was at least in their seventies, there were an average of 8.6 supermarkets per 100 square kilometres – substantially more sparse than the 53.4 across other councils. A similar pattern emerges for post offices, with respective concentrations of 6.1 to 18.1, and pharmacies at 4.8 to 39.5. Seb Goldin, chief executive of Red Driver Training, however, described it as 'totally inadequate' that drivers aged over 70 'can self-certify that they can see' and highlighted that a coroner criticised the system earlier this year. He said: 'We'd be keen that [the government] goes further than the initial proposals, and also include showing evidence of an eyesight test at the driving test. 'At the moment, it's the same measure of how good your eyesight is as when the driving test was created in the 1930s, namely can you read a number plate at a certain distance.'
