7 ms·

Italy seeks to shield supercars from combustion engine ban

33 points by aloukissas 5y ago

josephcsible 5y ago
This seems reasonable to me. The overwhelming majority of cars are not supercars, and most supercars spend their lives sitting in garages, so this will curtail a lot of powerful resistance to the electrification movement despite only negligibly reducing the CO2 savings it will bring.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  It would be asking too much require rich people to follow the same rules as everyone else.
  - perl4ever 5y ago
    From my perspective, "the same rules" would mean having the same legal/financial consequences for each gram of CO2 emitted. In which case people who don't drive a car much wouldn't be punished as if they do, regardless of wealth or other factors. It's like the classic question about which is heavier, a pound of lead or a pound of feathers? Is it impossible to agree that a kilo of CO2 is the same whether it's emitted by a Prius or an SUV or a Ferrari?
- tibbon 5y ago
  Indeed, despite the poor fuel economy of many of them, most rarely hit mileage in their lifetimes that most cars would hit in their first year or two. The main inefficiency is really just the building of them in the first place- but they don’t have much impact in only driving 10k miles compared to most vehicles
- m0zg 5y ago
  Yep, let's continue to shield the ultra-rich from the consequences of the laws they have their pet MPs write for them. As in, "climate czar" John Kerry for example, who seems to be physically unable to fly commercial or live in a reasonably sized house. I'm sure people like that exist in Italy as well.
- Bostonian 5y ago
  So my ordinary sedan (a Honda Accord) would be banned but luxury cars get an exemption? The middle class will not tolerate that.
  - cblconfederate 5y ago
    The ban is on new engines
  - bnt 5y ago
    There are 50 million of your Accords on the streets, there are thousands of supercars. Are you that thick?
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      This comment is not up to HN standards, try a bit harder please.
  - ardit33 5y ago
    Speciality cars are also extempt form some safety requirements, also older ‘classic’ cars as well, today. The reason: They are not used for every day commuting, and preserving history is worth the exemptions
  - Karunamon 5y ago
    Luxury cars and supercars are not equivalent terms; the latter is about speed and power (and so, carbon). Example; a Rolls-Royce is a luxury car, where a Lamborghini Veneno is a supercar.
    - perl4ever 5y ago
      They are different terms, but I don't think the difference has much to do with power or CO2 emissions. An entry level Rolls-Royce has emissions of about 343g/km, and the Veneno supposedly 499g/km. They both have V-12 engines of broadly similar size and power. For comparison one of the most efficient hybrids (I looked up my car) with a gas engine emits about 115 g/km.
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  “Terrorists are rare, and get mad, so we are exempting them from security screenings at the airport.” Come on. If you can afford a super car you can afford the tax.
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    Afford the tax? Isn't this article about a ban, as in, you won't be allowed the cars at any price?
    - londons_explore 5y ago
      But when you violate a ban, you get fined... Kinda the same thing..
      - josephcsible 5y ago
        I don't know about Italy, but in the US, driving an illegal car can end up with it getting sent to an impound lot and then a crusher, and you getting sent to prison.
      - peoplefromibiza 5y ago
        You can't drive illegal cars in Italy. Each model needs to be approved and the spec cannot be changed (you can't even mount tyres not approved by the authorities for that model) otherwise the owner would be heavily fined and the car would be confiscated
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- jandrese 5y ago
  On the other hand tacking on a $10,000 carbon surcharge on a car that costs $1.5m doesn’t seem likely to hurt sales.
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    I agree with that, but isn't this article about an exemption from a ban, not from a surcharge?
    - vladd 5y ago
      It's always relevant to ask: what problem are we trying to solve? The ban is meant to bring EU closer to the 2050 zero-CO2 emission goal. This will be achieved by shrinking current emissions while increasing CO2 removal ( see https://assets.weforum.org/editor/responsive_large_webp_XR_qHznZP2wIwP20tBDyUoNjL6922gkebF8R-yA-L3I.webp https://assets.weforum.org/editor/responsive_large_webp_XR_q... ). If someone brings in the discussion the ability to have 10'000 extra for the co2-net-zero goal, let's think -- it is helping the goal? Can we remove with this money more CO2 than the super-car would be producing over its lifetime? Bringing out the stick to keep the discussion on topic must be traded-off carefully against the danger of killing relevant novel ideas and different ways to look at the problem.
      - gnomewascool 5y ago
        However, by that argument, we should just impose a high tax on all combustion engine cars, or perhaps simply introduce an appropriate carbon tax, instead of banning the combustion engine. Some of the reasons we don't want to do that are: 1. A carbon tax is regressive and might result in the middle class still being just about able to afford cars, but the lower class completely unable to, which would be unfair. 2. By forcing the shift away from the combustion engine with a ban, rather than just nudging away from it with a tax, we're providing a stronger spur to innovation. Both of these reasons apply to supercars to a large extent: 1. Elites being able to buy combustion engine (super)cars, while the rest of society cannot, would be unfair. 2. Forcing companies to innovate in the case of supercars, which provide a greater engineering challenge, increases the chance that the all the relevant engineering obstacles are solved for "normal" cars. IMO the two end-points: 1. We just introduce a sufficiently high carbon tax, together with appropriate redistribution to make up for its regressiveness, and let the free market decide whether combustion engines are still affordable after internalising the externality. 2. We ban the combustion engine on the basis that we're all in this together and we want to make sure that the transition definitely does occur. are defensible. The middle-ground where we tax supercars, but ban all other combustion engine cars is far less so.
- neither_color 5y ago
  Yes, and the ultra wealthy will keep flying private jets too while the brunt of the sacrifice will be done by the plebs. They should also be allowed to own mega yachts while we try to limit the effects of sea freight and cruise ships on the atmosphere. Sorry, some things matter for what they symbolize more than their absolute effect. It's easy to say that the sum total of all carbon emissions by the wealthy are a drop in the bucket compared to the sum total of all the plebs, but if the plutocracy has no skin in the game then I won't reduce my consumption lifestyle for their benefit.
  - Karunamon 5y ago
    You're reducing it for the benefit of all - which is not even relevant here because it's only about new engines. This crab bucket mentality needs to end. The atmosphere doesn't care about where the carbon comes from, only its presence. Refusing to do your part because someone else isn't doing theirs is not a sustainable, or moral, mindset.
  - flyinglizard 5y ago
    If you’re an average American then you already pollute many times what an average global world person does. Perhaps it’s better to focus on the essence and not on the optics.
  - sharken 5y ago
    Am on the same page here, setting up lenient rules for the rich sends the wrong signal. There should be no exception to the rule and Italian carmakers should get started on the transition away from combustion engine today. We're all in this together, you don't get to opt out just because you are wealthy.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      Fiat (also to a large extent an Exor (Agnelli) property will definitely make that move and is by far the largest Italian car maker. This won't move the needle from a pollution perspective but an exemption simply sends the wrong signal. What's good enough for the swine should be good enough for Jupiter as well in this case, to turn a nice proverb upside down.
throw3849 5y ago
This is crazy. Lightweight low emission cars are banned for strict limits, but supercars get exception?
jacquesm 5y ago
Bad idea from an image perspective, from a statistics perspective it wouldn't matter. But if you want to create buy-in from the population the best way to sink that is to give an exemption to the ultra rich. The easiest way would be to start enforcing the ban today, but percentage wise, and then over the course of the next 14 years enforce a fixed percentage of the cars produced to be fully electric until the last vehicle to roll off the line with an ICE is made in 2035. That way nobody gets an excuse and the likes of Ferrari can make bank by selling their ICE based vehicles at auction for ever higher prices. Problem elegantly solved.
- wmf 5y ago
  These companies seem to be a point of pride in Italy so the political effects could go either way.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    Yes, absolutely, but Ferrari is simply a part of the Agnelli empire and the other brands are going to have to follow suit anyway. So Ferrari may just as well accept the inevitable, Italy certainly isn't going to drop out of the union on account of a couple of thousand of vehicles, besides, at some point the stigma of buying a new ICE car will be such that it may well be that nobody wants them except for collectors who just want to own the cars and not drive them (which isn't rare with Ferrari's to begin with). The problem with an exemption from a ban is that once you go down that road there will be plenty of others that will want an exemption as well, so best to leave that door closed. Because all those little exceptions in the end do add up. Why exempt say Ferrari but not MB/AMG or Maybach or Rolls Royce, or even the (currently dormant I believe) Phaeton line.
- nradov 5y ago
  Instead of mandating particular technologies, a better solution would be to just impose a gradually escalating carbon tax and let the free market sort things out. If gasoline costs €20/l then consumption will be so low as to make the environmental impact minimal.
Why_O_My 5y ago
Is there even an agreed upon definition for a "hypercar", what whould stop say Tesla from calling their model s one?
- josephcsible 5y ago
  Why did you phrase your question in a way that implies it'd be ridiculous to call the Model S a hypercar? The Plaid edition set new world records for both 0-60 and 1/4 mile times among production cars.
  - Why_O_My 5y ago
    This wasn't meant to be an attack to Tesla, it was just a random car model I chose. And in terms of price the plaid is far off from the other commonly accepted hypercars.
  - perl4ever 5y ago
    A rocket sled accelerates very quickly too; that doesn't make it a competitor to Ferrari and Lamborghini. The Model S seems analogous to quartz watches, that meant expensive watches couldn't compete on accuracy any more, but that doesn't make it a hypercar even if it were to make them obsolete.
- mym1990 5y ago
  I believe hypercars are typically much more limited in supply than even supercars. With respects to the timeline that they get developed in, the technology in them is so bonkers that it basically makes them modern marvels. I doubt there is anything stopping Tesla calling the Model S a hypercar, but I don't even know if they would want to be in that 'market'.
joncrane 5y ago
This is essentially to protect Ferrari and maybe Lamborghini...can you name any other italian supercars? I don't really count Maserati.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Lamborghini also makes an SUV https://www.lamborghini.com/en-en/models/urus https://www.lamborghini.com/en-en/models/urus
- OnlineGladiator 5y ago
  Lamborghini already makes an SUV and Ferrari is working on one. The only reason Porsche still exists today is because the Cayenne was/is such a profitable car that it carried them through a rough financial patch. SUVs make money so that they can spend that on developing other cars (in the case of Ferrari, Lamborghini, Porsche, etc it will go towards developing supercars). It's an economic reality in the automotive industry. EDIT: Originally OP made a comment about not caring about car companies that make SUVs, but he since removed that from his comment.
  - _fat_santa 5y ago
    The thing that sucks about the Urus, Cayenne, RSQ5 and other performance SUV's under VW Group is they are all the same car underneath and use the same engine. Like I get why they do that sure, but in another way I feel like it cheapens the Lamborghini brand in particular.
    - perl4ever 5y ago
      So get an LM002. https://www.classicdriver.com/en/car/lamborghini/lm-002/1987/839927 https://www.classicdriver.com/en/car/lamborghini/lm-002/1987...
    - lossolo 5y ago
      And Huracan is basically an R8, but it's still an AMAZING car.
    - 5y ago
jimmar 5y ago
They don't think they can make electric super cars in 14 years? They have plenty of notice. On a side note, John Carmack was on Joe Rogan's podcast and talked about supercharging his Ferraris. In the same podcast, Carmack said he actually prefers his Tesla over the Ferrari. The supercar companies may be in trouble, and extending the life of combustion engines is unlikely to help. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM_tqQNJWzc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM_tqQNJWzc Around 11:56 he talks about why his Tesla wins in many ways over his Ferraris.
- peoplefromibiza 5y ago
  What you are missing is that pure performances are not what make a Ferrari. For example Tesla brakes are made by Brembo, an Italian company. For Ferrari using parts built in another country is unacceptable. That's not how a Ferrari is made, Ferrari has to be 100% produced in Italy. Brakes: Brembo Electronics: Magneti Marelli Tyres: Pirelli etc. etc.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - rasz 5y ago
    You are falling for the marketing. For example Ferrari 599 GTB shocks are made in Poland. My favorite is rear shelf stuffed with $5 corrugated plastic starting to creak after 10 years https://youtu.be/GkQdyn6Xz9k?t=499 https://youtu.be/GkQdyn6Xz9k?t=499
- bradlys 5y ago
  There’s more to a car than numbers. But for many people who haven’t driven these cars or aren’t into cars - it’s hard to understand. Some people see “better” number and they think the car must be better but that’s not how it is.
mertd 5y ago
I have no hard stats on who buys supercars but I have a feeling a significant number of them don't like the idea of cars not running on oil.
_fat_santa 5y ago
As a massive gearhead I am absolutely in favor of this exception. Lots of practical and pragmatic arguments are being made here like the fact that very few of these cars are sold and they spend most of their lives in a garage, but allow me to make an emotional argument. I got to drive a Ferrari a about 2 years ago, and after that drive I am convinced that the only way to understand why these cars is to drive them. Sure the look insane and the spec sheet is equally insane, but the thing I took away most is all the little sensations you get while driving it. The exhaust crackle, the whipping acceleration when the turbo spools, the rev jump when you downshift. All these little pieces of magic will be lost if supercars have to go electric. Yes they will all retain the same power and handling, but when I drove that Ferrari the most fun I had wasn't when I was flooring it but when I was just putting around town, shifting between 2nd and 3rd gear and hearing the exhaust crackle and engine rev. After my drive I was left with chills down my spine and a determination to one day have one in my garage. I really really hope Ferrari and Lamborghini get this exception, it will be one of the saddest days in the automotive world when these automakers have to put their V8's and V12's to pasture.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  The ones that have been made will remain. And besides that the fuel distribution network will at some point likely diminish to the point that driving one of these will not just be un-economical, it will be impossible. It's a matter of time before there will be environmental zones in between wherever you are and wherever you want to go that make it impossible to use an ICE. So quite likely, ban or not, the ICE will die out completely. I've re-built a 24 year old car with an ICE and I fully expect it to be my last car, at 56 I see no point in buying something new and if and when I can't/won't drive it we'll have a nice paperweight.
  - generalizations 5y ago
    > And besides that the fuel distribution network will at some point likely diminish to the point that driving one of these will not just be un-economical, it will be impossible. I'm very skeptical that the gasoline fuel distribution network is going away in our lifetimes. There's too much of the rest of our lives and infrastructure that depend in some way on the energy density of gasoline.
fy20 5y ago
One thing a lot of the comments here are missing is that EVs are already very close to matching the performance of ICE supercars. The Tesla Model S Plaid has the fastest quarter mile time for a mass production car, and it's not a sports car, it's a family car. Just wait until Ferrari or Lamborghini bring out a real supercar EV. Nobody will want to buy ICE after that...
- js2 5y ago
  My first car was a 1968 Camaro SS. I've been to the 12 hours of Sebring a half dozen times. My dad has owned a lot of cars over the years with a lot of different motors. I used to think I'd really miss the sound of an internal combustion engine[1]. Then we got a Chevy Volt which compared to a Tesla is nothing. That smooth, quiet, constant acceleration. It kicks the shit out an ICE. It turns out, I don't miss the sound of an ICE at all[2]. [1] The horrible screech of Wankel engines excluded. [2] I recently switched to an electric mower. I hate my neighbor's ICE mower so much now I may buy him an electric one too. :-)
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    Rotaries are something special, it's such an elegant design, pity it never really worked well enough to warrant mass adoption.
    - js2 5y ago
      My recollection is that besides sounding like a very loud beehive[1], they never held up very well in endurance racing, or on the street for that matter. 1. https://youtu.be/WoA-ujI9HW0 https://youtu.be/WoA-ujI9HW0
      - jacquesm 5y ago
        Yes, the geometry of the engine dictates large areas to seal and that problem was never properly solved.
stanislavb 5y ago
Just imagine a nice and quiet street/neighborhood with EVs only, and then someone passes by every morning with a roar of a super car…
- peoplefromibiza 5y ago
  then you are living in a super rich area. because nobody, with the money to buy one, drives a supercar everyday, let alone every morning. I would be more worried about those extra loud american choppers...
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    That's mostly because they don't have 1 car, they have five or more so the mileage gets spread out over a much larger number of cars. I just checked the second hand Ferrari's for sale through the Dutch dealer network, a single car with > 70K km on the clock the bulk a small fraction of that.
    - peoplefromibiza 5y ago
      That's because they're not a day by day car. They are not built for that task. Just like you wouldn't ride a BETA EVO 300 to go to work.
jsnell 5y ago
This reminds me of one of Peter F Hamilton's book series, set in a world ruined by climate change with a strict ban on fossil fuel use. One of the characters is a billionaire who is still being driven around in a Rolls Royce with a combustion engine, since he likes the sound of them or something equally banal. But since he is a good guy billionaire, he gets around the ban by installing a carbon capture system on the car. I wonder whether that would actually be a viable real world solution, or if the weight and performance problems would from it. (Oh, who am I kidding. In the real world the Ferrari owning jerks would just disable any such system except for inspections.)
- beambot 5y ago
  There are solutions to electrochemically produce gasoline in a carbon neutral way for cheaper pump prices than you get today from digging up & refining oil. https://www.science.org/news/2019/07/former-playwright-aims-turn-solar-and-wind-power-gasoline https://www.science.org/news/2019/07/former-playwright-aims-... Currently being commercialized by Prometheus Fuels. So not crazy.
peoplefromibiza 5y ago
I think everybody is getting it wrong. As Italian (and Ferrari fan, but that's another story) what really matters for Ferrari (and ~~Lamborghini~~ Maserati) is that they aren't mass produced, they are not an industrial product (most of them are assembled by hand) and - most of all - all of the parts are produced in Italy! What the minister is saying is that if Ferrari can't build autonomously their own batteries - from scratch - they can't produce a real Ferrari. Of course this is different from buying batteries from a supplier and strapping them in a mass produced car, assembled by machines. It has nothing to do with rich people or taxes, it's just a matter of bootstrapping an entire industry from the ground up. Of course Ferrari knows how to build electric engines, it's completely out of touch to think that one of the leading car producer in the World in terms of know how can't do what BYD does (Ferrari is the only F1 team that still manufactures all of the components of their car from the engine to the chassis and everything else) edit: Maserati, not Lamborghini.
- lossolo 5y ago
  > and Lamborghini btw Lamborghini is owned by Volkswagen and all new Lambos (like Huracan and successor to Aventador) are designed by Audi because they've better quality than ones created by Italians (like Aventador, which has a lot of issues), Huracan has almost no issues and you can drive it like a daily car. Volkswagen have their own battery source.
  - peoplefromibiza 5y ago
    Correct. I wrote Lamborghini, but I was thinking about Maserati. Also what the Italian minister said has been wrongly translated. According to Italian sources, minister Cingolani is worried that in Italy what we call "the motor valley" will have to close if forced to rebuilt itself in only 14 years (it's really a short timeframe to reconvert an entire production chain) then he also talks about the niche supercars market, not only of Italian brands like Ferrari and Maserati, but also Lamborghini and McLaren.
the_third_wave 5y ago
Just make the things run on some "renewable" fuel like ethanol or RME and that whole carbon thing can be relegated to the sideline. If/when it comes that far it'll probably be more expensive to run these cars but given that the clientele is not that price-conscious that should not be a problem. While it is not really feasible to produce enough ethanol to run the entire ICE fleet it should not be any problem to produce enough for a limited number of "exemption" vehicles. Included in that list can be classic cars, many of which were built to be able to use multiple fuels anyway - e.g. a Model T or Model A Ford can run on ethanol straight from the factory by adjusting the mixture (which is a standard part of operating such a vehicle anyway). Ethanol has a high octane number and as such is useable for high-compression engines like those in "supercars". Fuel consumption will go up but the clientele does not care about such trivialities. Converting petrol engines to ethanol is a simple task so Ferrari (et al) should not have any problems doing such.
giuliomagnifico 5y ago
That’s funny, because I’m Italian and here the chairman of Ferrari already said that they’ll launch an electric Ferrari by 2025 > “If we bring in new technology, then we need to bring something new to the market. That’s how Ferrari has always worked with new technology. The evolution of new technology is 100% in the DNA of Ferrari.” https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/ferrari-launch-first-ev-2025 https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/ferrari-launch-f... Same for Lamborghini > Lamborghini R&D boss Maurizio Reggiani: “If you look at the timing for a fourth model line, there is the potential that this will be the right time for a full-electric vehicle,” https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/lamborghini-plots-all-electric-four-door-gt-2025 https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/lamborghini-plot... So I think the Italian politicians are quite dull and short-sighted, as (almost) always.

33 points by aloukissas 5y ago

This seems reasonable to me. The overwhelming majority of cars are not supercars, and most supercars spend their lives sitting in garages, so this will curtail a lot of powerful resistance to the electrification movement despite only negligibly reducing the CO2 savings it will bring.

user-the-name 5y ago
It would be asking too much require rich people to follow the same rules as everyone else.
- perl4ever 5y ago
  From my perspective, "the same rules" would mean having the same legal/financial consequences for each gram of CO2 emitted. In which case people who don't drive a car much wouldn't be punished as if they do, regardless of wealth or other factors. It's like the classic question about which is heavier, a pound of lead or a pound of feathers? Is it impossible to agree that a kilo of CO2 is the same whether it's emitted by a Prius or an SUV or a Ferrari?
tibbon 5y ago
Indeed, despite the poor fuel economy of many of them, most rarely hit mileage in their lifetimes that most cars would hit in their first year or two. The main inefficiency is really just the building of them in the first place- but they don’t have much impact in only driving 10k miles compared to most vehicles
m0zg 5y ago
Yep, let's continue to shield the ultra-rich from the consequences of the laws they have their pet MPs write for them. As in, "climate czar" John Kerry for example, who seems to be physically unable to fly commercial or live in a reasonably sized house. I'm sure people like that exist in Italy as well.
Bostonian 5y ago
So my ordinary sedan (a Honda Accord) would be banned but luxury cars get an exemption? The middle class will not tolerate that.
- cblconfederate 5y ago
  The ban is on new engines
- bnt 5y ago
  There are 50 million of your Accords on the streets, there are thousands of supercars. Are you that thick?
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    This comment is not up to HN standards, try a bit harder please.
- ardit33 5y ago
  Speciality cars are also extempt form some safety requirements, also older ‘classic’ cars as well, today. The reason: They are not used for every day commuting, and preserving history is worth the exemptions
- Karunamon 5y ago
  Luxury cars and supercars are not equivalent terms; the latter is about speed and power (and so, carbon). Example; a Rolls-Royce is a luxury car, where a Lamborghini Veneno is a supercar.
  - perl4ever 5y ago
    They are different terms, but I don't think the difference has much to do with power or CO2 emissions. An entry level Rolls-Royce has emissions of about 343g/km, and the Veneno supposedly 499g/km. They both have V-12 engines of broadly similar size and power. For comparison one of the most efficient hybrids (I looked up my car) with a gas engine emits about 115 g/km.
ceejayoz 5y ago
“Terrorists are rare, and get mad, so we are exempting them from security screenings at the airport.” Come on. If you can afford a super car you can afford the tax.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  Afford the tax? Isn't this article about a ban, as in, you won't be allowed the cars at any price?
  - londons_explore 5y ago
    But when you violate a ban, you get fined... Kinda the same thing..
    - josephcsible 5y ago
      I don't know about Italy, but in the US, driving an illegal car can end up with it getting sent to an impound lot and then a crusher, and you getting sent to prison.
    - peoplefromibiza 5y ago
      You can't drive illegal cars in Italy. Each model needs to be approved and the spec cannot be changed (you can't even mount tyres not approved by the authorities for that model) otherwise the owner would be heavily fined and the car would be confiscated
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
jandrese 5y ago
On the other hand tacking on a $10,000 carbon surcharge on a car that costs $1.5m doesn’t seem likely to hurt sales.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  I agree with that, but isn't this article about an exemption from a ban, not from a surcharge?
  - vladd 5y ago
    It's always relevant to ask: what problem are we trying to solve? The ban is meant to bring EU closer to the 2050 zero-CO2 emission goal. This will be achieved by shrinking current emissions while increasing CO2 removal ( see https://assets.weforum.org/editor/responsive_large_webp_XR_qHznZP2wIwP20tBDyUoNjL6922gkebF8R-yA-L3I.webp https://assets.weforum.org/editor/responsive_large_webp_XR_q... ). If someone brings in the discussion the ability to have 10'000 extra for the co2-net-zero goal, let's think -- it is helping the goal? Can we remove with this money more CO2 than the super-car would be producing over its lifetime? Bringing out the stick to keep the discussion on topic must be traded-off carefully against the danger of killing relevant novel ideas and different ways to look at the problem.
    - gnomewascool 5y ago
      However, by that argument, we should just impose a high tax on all combustion engine cars, or perhaps simply introduce an appropriate carbon tax, instead of banning the combustion engine. Some of the reasons we don't want to do that are: 1. A carbon tax is regressive and might result in the middle class still being just about able to afford cars, but the lower class completely unable to, which would be unfair. 2. By forcing the shift away from the combustion engine with a ban, rather than just nudging away from it with a tax, we're providing a stronger spur to innovation. Both of these reasons apply to supercars to a large extent: 1. Elites being able to buy combustion engine (super)cars, while the rest of society cannot, would be unfair. 2. Forcing companies to innovate in the case of supercars, which provide a greater engineering challenge, increases the chance that the all the relevant engineering obstacles are solved for "normal" cars. IMO the two end-points: 1. We just introduce a sufficiently high carbon tax, together with appropriate redistribution to make up for its regressiveness, and let the free market decide whether combustion engines are still affordable after internalising the externality. 2. We ban the combustion engine on the basis that we're all in this together and we want to make sure that the transition definitely does occur. are defensible. The middle-ground where we tax supercars, but ban all other combustion engine cars is far less so.
neither_color 5y ago
Yes, and the ultra wealthy will keep flying private jets too while the brunt of the sacrifice will be done by the plebs. They should also be allowed to own mega yachts while we try to limit the effects of sea freight and cruise ships on the atmosphere. Sorry, some things matter for what they symbolize more than their absolute effect. It's easy to say that the sum total of all carbon emissions by the wealthy are a drop in the bucket compared to the sum total of all the plebs, but if the plutocracy has no skin in the game then I won't reduce my consumption lifestyle for their benefit.
- Karunamon 5y ago
  You're reducing it for the benefit of all - which is not even relevant here because it's only about new engines. This crab bucket mentality needs to end. The atmosphere doesn't care about where the carbon comes from, only its presence. Refusing to do your part because someone else isn't doing theirs is not a sustainable, or moral, mindset.
- flyinglizard 5y ago
  If you’re an average American then you already pollute many times what an average global world person does. Perhaps it’s better to focus on the essence and not on the optics.
- sharken 5y ago
  Am on the same page here, setting up lenient rules for the rich sends the wrong signal. There should be no exception to the rule and Italian carmakers should get started on the transition away from combustion engine today. We're all in this together, you don't get to opt out just because you are wealthy.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    Fiat (also to a large extent an Exor (Agnelli) property will definitely make that move and is by far the largest Italian car maker. This won't move the needle from a pollution perspective but an exemption simply sends the wrong signal. What's good enough for the swine should be good enough for Jupiter as well in this case, to turn a nice proverb upside down.

throw3849 5y ago

This is crazy. Lightweight low emission cars are banned for strict limits, but supercars get exception?

jacquesm 5y ago

Bad idea from an image perspective, from a statistics perspective it wouldn't matter. But if you want to create buy-in from the population the best way to sink that is to give an exemption to the ultra rich. The easiest way would be to start enforcing the ban today, but percentage wise, and then over the course of the next 14 years enforce a fixed percentage of the cars produced to be fully electric until the last vehicle to roll off the line with an ICE is made in 2035. That way nobody gets an excuse and the likes of Ferrari can make bank by selling their ICE based vehicles at auction for ever higher prices. Problem elegantly solved.

wmf 5y ago
These companies seem to be a point of pride in Italy so the political effects could go either way.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Yes, absolutely, but Ferrari is simply a part of the Agnelli empire and the other brands are going to have to follow suit anyway. So Ferrari may just as well accept the inevitable, Italy certainly isn't going to drop out of the union on account of a couple of thousand of vehicles, besides, at some point the stigma of buying a new ICE car will be such that it may well be that nobody wants them except for collectors who just want to own the cars and not drive them (which isn't rare with Ferrari's to begin with). The problem with an exemption from a ban is that once you go down that road there will be plenty of others that will want an exemption as well, so best to leave that door closed. Because all those little exceptions in the end do add up. Why exempt say Ferrari but not MB/AMG or Maybach or Rolls Royce, or even the (currently dormant I believe) Phaeton line.
nradov 5y ago
Instead of mandating particular technologies, a better solution would be to just impose a gradually escalating carbon tax and let the free market sort things out. If gasoline costs €20/l then consumption will be so low as to make the environmental impact minimal.

Why_O_My 5y ago

Is there even an agreed upon definition for a "hypercar", what whould stop say Tesla from calling their model s one?

josephcsible 5y ago
Why did you phrase your question in a way that implies it'd be ridiculous to call the Model S a hypercar? The Plaid edition set new world records for both 0-60 and 1/4 mile times among production cars.
- Why_O_My 5y ago
  This wasn't meant to be an attack to Tesla, it was just a random car model I chose. And in terms of price the plaid is far off from the other commonly accepted hypercars.
- perl4ever 5y ago
  A rocket sled accelerates very quickly too; that doesn't make it a competitor to Ferrari and Lamborghini. The Model S seems analogous to quartz watches, that meant expensive watches couldn't compete on accuracy any more, but that doesn't make it a hypercar even if it were to make them obsolete.
mym1990 5y ago
I believe hypercars are typically much more limited in supply than even supercars. With respects to the timeline that they get developed in, the technology in them is so bonkers that it basically makes them modern marvels. I doubt there is anything stopping Tesla calling the Model S a hypercar, but I don't even know if they would want to be in that 'market'.

joncrane 5y ago

This is essentially to protect Ferrari and maybe Lamborghini...can you name any other italian supercars? I don't really count Maserati.

jacquesm 5y ago
Lamborghini also makes an SUV https://www.lamborghini.com/en-en/models/urus https://www.lamborghini.com/en-en/models/urus
OnlineGladiator 5y ago
Lamborghini already makes an SUV and Ferrari is working on one. The only reason Porsche still exists today is because the Cayenne was/is such a profitable car that it carried them through a rough financial patch. SUVs make money so that they can spend that on developing other cars (in the case of Ferrari, Lamborghini, Porsche, etc it will go towards developing supercars). It's an economic reality in the automotive industry. EDIT: Originally OP made a comment about not caring about car companies that make SUVs, but he since removed that from his comment.
- _fat_santa 5y ago
  The thing that sucks about the Urus, Cayenne, RSQ5 and other performance SUV's under VW Group is they are all the same car underneath and use the same engine. Like I get why they do that sure, but in another way I feel like it cheapens the Lamborghini brand in particular.
  - perl4ever 5y ago
    So get an LM002. https://www.classicdriver.com/en/car/lamborghini/lm-002/1987/839927 https://www.classicdriver.com/en/car/lamborghini/lm-002/1987...
  - lossolo 5y ago
    And Huracan is basically an R8, but it's still an AMAZING car.
  - 5y ago

jimmar 5y ago

They don't think they can make electric super cars in 14 years? They have plenty of notice. On a side note, John Carmack was on Joe Rogan's podcast and talked about supercharging his Ferraris. In the same podcast, Carmack said he actually prefers his Tesla over the Ferrari. The supercar companies may be in trouble, and extending the life of combustion engines is unlikely to help. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM_tqQNJWzc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM_tqQNJWzc Around 11:56 he talks about why his Tesla wins in many ways over his Ferraris.

peoplefromibiza 5y ago
What you are missing is that pure performances are not what make a Ferrari. For example Tesla brakes are made by Brembo, an Italian company. For Ferrari using parts built in another country is unacceptable. That's not how a Ferrari is made, Ferrari has to be 100% produced in Italy. Brakes: Brembo Electronics: Magneti Marelli Tyres: Pirelli etc. etc.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- rasz 5y ago
  You are falling for the marketing. For example Ferrari 599 GTB shocks are made in Poland. My favorite is rear shelf stuffed with $5 corrugated plastic starting to creak after 10 years https://youtu.be/GkQdyn6Xz9k?t=499 https://youtu.be/GkQdyn6Xz9k?t=499
bradlys 5y ago
There’s more to a car than numbers. But for many people who haven’t driven these cars or aren’t into cars - it’s hard to understand. Some people see “better” number and they think the car must be better but that’s not how it is.

mertd 5y ago

I have no hard stats on who buys supercars but I have a feeling a significant number of them don't like the idea of cars not running on oil.

_fat_santa 5y ago

As a massive gearhead I am absolutely in favor of this exception. Lots of practical and pragmatic arguments are being made here like the fact that very few of these cars are sold and they spend most of their lives in a garage, but allow me to make an emotional argument. I got to drive a Ferrari a about 2 years ago, and after that drive I am convinced that the only way to understand why these cars is to drive them. Sure the look insane and the spec sheet is equally insane, but the thing I took away most is all the little sensations you get while driving it. The exhaust crackle, the whipping acceleration when the turbo spools, the rev jump when you downshift. All these little pieces of magic will be lost if supercars have to go electric. Yes they will all retain the same power and handling, but when I drove that Ferrari the most fun I had wasn't when I was flooring it but when I was just putting around town, shifting between 2nd and 3rd gear and hearing the exhaust crackle and engine rev. After my drive I was left with chills down my spine and a determination to one day have one in my garage. I really really hope Ferrari and Lamborghini get this exception, it will be one of the saddest days in the automotive world when these automakers have to put their V8's and V12's to pasture.

jacquesm 5y ago
The ones that have been made will remain. And besides that the fuel distribution network will at some point likely diminish to the point that driving one of these will not just be un-economical, it will be impossible. It's a matter of time before there will be environmental zones in between wherever you are and wherever you want to go that make it impossible to use an ICE. So quite likely, ban or not, the ICE will die out completely. I've re-built a 24 year old car with an ICE and I fully expect it to be my last car, at 56 I see no point in buying something new and if and when I can't/won't drive it we'll have a nice paperweight.
- generalizations 5y ago
  > And besides that the fuel distribution network will at some point likely diminish to the point that driving one of these will not just be un-economical, it will be impossible. I'm very skeptical that the gasoline fuel distribution network is going away in our lifetimes. There's too much of the rest of our lives and infrastructure that depend in some way on the energy density of gasoline.

fy20 5y ago

One thing a lot of the comments here are missing is that EVs are already very close to matching the performance of ICE supercars. The Tesla Model S Plaid has the fastest quarter mile time for a mass production car, and it's not a sports car, it's a family car. Just wait until Ferrari or Lamborghini bring out a real supercar EV. Nobody will want to buy ICE after that...

js2 5y ago
My first car was a 1968 Camaro SS. I've been to the 12 hours of Sebring a half dozen times. My dad has owned a lot of cars over the years with a lot of different motors. I used to think I'd really miss the sound of an internal combustion engine[1]. Then we got a Chevy Volt which compared to a Tesla is nothing. That smooth, quiet, constant acceleration. It kicks the shit out an ICE. It turns out, I don't miss the sound of an ICE at all[2]. [1] The horrible screech of Wankel engines excluded. [2] I recently switched to an electric mower. I hate my neighbor's ICE mower so much now I may buy him an electric one too. :-)
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Rotaries are something special, it's such an elegant design, pity it never really worked well enough to warrant mass adoption.
  - js2 5y ago
    My recollection is that besides sounding like a very loud beehive[1], they never held up very well in endurance racing, or on the street for that matter. 1. https://youtu.be/WoA-ujI9HW0 https://youtu.be/WoA-ujI9HW0
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      Yes, the geometry of the engine dictates large areas to seal and that problem was never properly solved.

stanislavb 5y ago

Just imagine a nice and quiet street/neighborhood with EVs only, and then someone passes by every morning with a roar of a super car…

peoplefromibiza 5y ago
then you are living in a super rich area. because nobody, with the money to buy one, drives a supercar everyday, let alone every morning. I would be more worried about those extra loud american choppers...
- jacquesm 5y ago
  That's mostly because they don't have 1 car, they have five or more so the mileage gets spread out over a much larger number of cars. I just checked the second hand Ferrari's for sale through the Dutch dealer network, a single car with > 70K km on the clock the bulk a small fraction of that.
  - peoplefromibiza 5y ago
    That's because they're not a day by day car. They are not built for that task. Just like you wouldn't ride a BETA EVO 300 to go to work.

jsnell 5y ago

This reminds me of one of Peter F Hamilton's book series, set in a world ruined by climate change with a strict ban on fossil fuel use. One of the characters is a billionaire who is still being driven around in a Rolls Royce with a combustion engine, since he likes the sound of them or something equally banal. But since he is a good guy billionaire, he gets around the ban by installing a carbon capture system on the car. I wonder whether that would actually be a viable real world solution, or if the weight and performance problems would from it. (Oh, who am I kidding. In the real world the Ferrari owning jerks would just disable any such system except for inspections.)

beambot 5y ago
There are solutions to electrochemically produce gasoline in a carbon neutral way for cheaper pump prices than you get today from digging up & refining oil. https://www.science.org/news/2019/07/former-playwright-aims-turn-solar-and-wind-power-gasoline https://www.science.org/news/2019/07/former-playwright-aims-... Currently being commercialized by Prometheus Fuels. So not crazy.

peoplefromibiza 5y ago

I think everybody is getting it wrong. As Italian (and Ferrari fan, but that's another story) what really matters for Ferrari (and ~~Lamborghini~~ Maserati) is that they aren't mass produced, they are not an industrial product (most of them are assembled by hand) and - most of all - all of the parts are produced in Italy! What the minister is saying is that if Ferrari can't build autonomously their own batteries - from scratch - they can't produce a real Ferrari. Of course this is different from buying batteries from a supplier and strapping them in a mass produced car, assembled by machines. It has nothing to do with rich people or taxes, it's just a matter of bootstrapping an entire industry from the ground up. Of course Ferrari knows how to build electric engines, it's completely out of touch to think that one of the leading car producer in the World in terms of know how can't do what BYD does (Ferrari is the only F1 team that still manufactures all of the components of their car from the engine to the chassis and everything else) edit: Maserati, not Lamborghini.

lossolo 5y ago
> and Lamborghini btw Lamborghini is owned by Volkswagen and all new Lambos (like Huracan and successor to Aventador) are designed by Audi because they've better quality than ones created by Italians (like Aventador, which has a lot of issues), Huracan has almost no issues and you can drive it like a daily car. Volkswagen have their own battery source.
- peoplefromibiza 5y ago
  Correct. I wrote Lamborghini, but I was thinking about Maserati. Also what the Italian minister said has been wrongly translated. According to Italian sources, minister Cingolani is worried that in Italy what we call "the motor valley" will have to close if forced to rebuilt itself in only 14 years (it's really a short timeframe to reconvert an entire production chain) then he also talks about the niche supercars market, not only of Italian brands like Ferrari and Maserati, but also Lamborghini and McLaren.

the_third_wave 5y ago

Just make the things run on some "renewable" fuel like ethanol or RME and that whole carbon thing can be relegated to the sideline. If/when it comes that far it'll probably be more expensive to run these cars but given that the clientele is not that price-conscious that should not be a problem. While it is not really feasible to produce enough ethanol to run the entire ICE fleet it should not be any problem to produce enough for a limited number of "exemption" vehicles. Included in that list can be classic cars, many of which were built to be able to use multiple fuels anyway - e.g. a Model T or Model A Ford can run on ethanol straight from the factory by adjusting the mixture (which is a standard part of operating such a vehicle anyway). Ethanol has a high octane number and as such is useable for high-compression engines like those in "supercars". Fuel consumption will go up but the clientele does not care about such trivialities. Converting petrol engines to ethanol is a simple task so Ferrari (et al) should not have any problems doing such.

giuliomagnifico 5y ago

That’s funny, because I’m Italian and here the chairman of Ferrari already said that they’ll launch an electric Ferrari by 2025 > “If we bring in new technology, then we need to bring something new to the market. That’s how Ferrari has always worked with new technology. The evolution of new technology is 100% in the DNA of Ferrari.” https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/ferrari-launch-first-ev-2025 https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/ferrari-launch-f... Same for Lamborghini > Lamborghini R&D boss Maurizio Reggiani: “If you look at the timing for a fourth model line, there is the potential that this will be the right time for a full-electric vehicle,” https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/lamborghini-plots-all-electric-four-door-gt-2025 https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/lamborghini-plot... So I think the Italian politicians are quite dull and short-sighted, as (almost) always.