9 ms·

I’m afraid these bans get systematically sabotaged by well funded ice lobby groups. Just look at what happened to the EU’s ice ban for personal vehicles. Spoi

• geysersam 3y ago
  Why would anyone want to use e-fuel in 2035 instead of electricity? (Except for "luxury" brands that just want to be special to distinguish themselves from the rabble.)
  • mdp2021 3y ago
    > Why would anyone want to use e-fuel in 2035 instead of electricity It will depend on their needs and if the device covers them. For example (as said already even here): long distance travel, practicality of refuelling (no, the need of some will not be fulfilled by leaving the car in charge nightly), decent technology (e.g. some will refuse to own an internet connected vehicle).
    • dalyons 3y ago
      Long distance and refueling will be solved by 2035. They’re close now. I’m will to bet all new gas cars are going to be internet connect too, it’s already heading that way, and has little to do with EVs
      • mdp2021 3y ago
        > I’m will to bet all new gas cars ... little to do Would you drive them? Would you own an internet connected door, vehicle, pacemaker? Some would rather find the keys out of the asylum. You say «little to do», but the point was that we are informed of «gas cars» without wireless connection, whereas word is that for some reason all electric vehicles seem to be. We know that some «gas cars» are spared, but they say all electric ones will be bound to the wave of improper engineering, so this defines some hope or way out for the traditional making and rules out the new one.
    • LeFantome 3y ago
      The very article you are responding to is touting energy densities that could lead to 1000 km in Teslas next year and the super chargers planned for the same time period would charge those cars in 15 mins. You do not even have to go out 5 years before “long distance travel, practicability of refueling” will favour EV owners. I just got back from a 2000 km EV road trip through the worlds second biggest country ( and one of the sparsest populated ). The longest leg between charging networks was about 300 km in the Rocky Mountains. The longest we sat at a charger was around 20 minutes. Most of that time was spent placing take-out dinner orders for the 5 of us in the car. This is my first long trip in an EV vehicle but my wife drove about a 1000 miles through eastern Washington State a few weekends ago ( also mountains - even more remote ). She had to plan but there was certainly no risk of getting stranded. At least one of the hotels had overnight charging for free. All this is today. These are going to be non-issues 5 years from now.
  • theK 3y ago
    The core of the matter is this: They are only LABELED as e-fuel cars. You can run them just fine with classical fuels. EDIT: emphasis
    • crote 3y ago
      A lot of gas stations have differently-sized nozzles for regular gasoline and diesel, and the fueling opening in the car is sized so that a diesel nozzle does not fit in a gasoline car. They should do something similar for e-fuel so people don't "accidentally" fuel them with classical fuel.
      • theK 3y ago
        What you are forgetting is that diesel engines only work with diesel and gasoline ones only work with gasoline. This creates a natural incentive for the customers to not mix this up. In the e-fuel vs trad-fuel story you do not have that incentive. What you DO have, is an incentive to actually do the switch. Projections put e-fuel production costs at a 1500% premium over fossil fuels and wide spread availability is actually a hard scientific problem as even the announced global production capacity* of e-fuels is only enough for a few thousand vehicles. * Apparently, to date, the biggest portion of announced e-fuel production misses either an energy provider or financial backing or both. A good German summary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnrudYCzh2E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnrudYCzh2E
  • ant6n 3y ago
    Well the FDP party which is in the coalition govt of Germany and torpedoed the EU ICE ban in the last minute and forced the inclusion of this e-fuel nonsense for the whole EU is run by a dude who likes to drive a Porsche and who is friends with the Porsche company. Porsche is the only major car producer in Germany that favors efuels. So uh, I think the FDP doesn’t like the ICE ban, because as a Laisser-faire party, they favor “open technology solutions” and want the “market” to decide on the best technological solutions for the climate problem.
  • ilyt 3y ago
    braBRAAAAAAP, that's why
  • bartvk 3y ago
    Long distance trucks?
    • Slapshot_gd 3y ago
      That was exactly my thinking actually..... I own an equestrian property as a hobby, I need a big diesel truck (1 ton) to haul horses, hay, tractor, etc... Sometimes for very long distances (>1000kms) for shows, etc... There are no viable options today, or in the near (10-15 years) future that offer viable alternatives in the form of an EV... at least not from traditional HD truck vendors.....
    • theK 3y ago
      The EU ICE ban discussd here only targets personal vehicles. The trucking and aviation industroies are different discussions.
  • NDizzle 3y ago
    I'll still be driving my land cruiser in 2035.
    • geysersam 3y ago
      The ban is for new vehicles so that's not relevant.
• cultureswitch 3y ago
  The timelines for ICE bans within a decade are ridiculous from a technology and market standpoint and terrible for the environment. The best car technology is the one you don't use much. And we already have decades of cars in good enough condition to be driven weekly rather than daily. EVs will barely scratch the surface of environmental issues with transportation. And they will create a new range of supply problems while also not solving traffic congestion issues that plague our cities. It would be far more preferable to encourage people to use the same car for longer and especially to leave it in the garage when they can use other modes of transportation. Or, use car sharing rather than a personal car.
  • em500 3y ago
    ICE bans apply to sales of new cars. It will take another 20 years or so after a ban before most of the existing stock of ICE is actually replaced.
    • bluGill 3y ago
      It will be faster than you think, mostly because gas stations will be closing and so the inconvenience of fueling you car will cut that tail of - except for niches where EVs are particularly bad.
      • ilyt 3y ago
        Right because ICE trucks will also magically stop existing /s
      • BurningFrog 3y ago
        If you're the only gas station in an area, raising prices should be a better strategy than closing.
        • bluGill 3y ago
          By then people who need fuel will know to special order it. Because if you are the only one selling gas that means someone lives in a less dense area that can't get fuel at all. Either that or you have competition, they are just not across the street and so you have to keep prices low enough people won't drive the extra miles to your competition.
• xienze 3y ago
  > I’m afraid these bans get systematically sabotaged by well funded ice lobby groups. They'll be sabotaged by reality. Thinking ICE cars and gas stations will become a fading memory by 2035 is wishful thinking. Politicians get big headlines and praise for proposing ICE bans and such, but as the date draws closer the reality of "OK, maybe we're not quite there yet" sets in and the date will be pushed back again and again. There is a very long tail with ICE, and it's going to take a very, very long time to replace them. Wholesale upheavals of established technology are difficult. For a noteworthy example in another domain, IPv4 has been on its last legs for how long now?
  • nicoburns 3y ago
    They're banning new ICE car sales in 2035: existing ones can continue to run. So the aim would be to mostly phase out ICE cars by something more like 2050-2060 (bearing in the mind the last generation of ICE cars will probably get a slightly extended lifetime to smooth the transition). That seems pretty realistic to me, perhaps with some exceptions for certain niche uses (which would probably be <5% of vehicles).
    • xienze 3y ago
      Sure, I’m mostly addressing the folks in this thread who are musing on whether there will be more than a few gas stations total in the country by 2035…
  • theK 3y ago
    How is this related to IP? We are talking about legislature being written to force us to be more Eco friendly. No politician ever wrote or proposed legislation for IP versions.
    • xienze 3y ago
      > How is this related to IP? It’s an analogous situation demonstrating how hard it is to unseat an incumbent, ubiquitous technology with another, and how long it takes, even if that alternative is superior.
• lelanthran 3y ago
  > I’m afraid these bans get systematically sabotaged by well funded ice lobby groups. Nonsense; it's just harsh reality landing on green wet-dreams. They effectively propose a ban on cheap cars, and you expected ... what, exactly? The only way they're replacing ICE vehicles is by making the EVs cheaper, and there is a limit to how high they can tax sales of ICE vehicles or fuels without a population revolt.
  • hutzlibu 3y ago
    "The only way they're replacing ICE vehicles is by making the EVs cheaper" Even if electric cars would be cheaper, faster and longer running - some people would rather die, than give up their ICE cars and motorcycles. The strong lobby in germany against banning aren't the poor, but the rich who want to drive their roaring Porsche till eternity. They literally say that. I can somewhat understand the appeal of an loud engine, the feel of the road etc., but personally I will indeed celebrate the day, all those loud polluting machines are gone from the cities and one other bright day also from the mountains. But I am not sure if I will see that day, as cars have allmost a religious meaning to quite some people, especially here in germany, but not only here. But yes, the bigger problem in the short run will be economics. Otherwise all the old cars just will get sold to africa and go on running there. But china is mass producing cheap electric cars for example, so things are scaling up.
    • tshaddox 3y ago
      If it’s really only about the rich, then just tax the heck out of the cars, or better yet the gasoline. If the price of gas includes the full cost of carbon sequestration then sure, why not? It’s still not a great look from the perspective of income inequality, of course.
      • CRConrad 3y ago
        That would force all the poor Joe Schmoes to switch from fossil fuel-driven vehicles to electric ones, but the billionaires (and probably many [most?] of the multi-millionaires) would still be able to afford burning fuel. All the billionaires and even the single-millionaires could of course also afford to switch to electric vehicles... but the poor Joe Schmoes can't. So what you're proposing is basically "Let's make using cars (even more than it already is) something for the rich only!"
• AtlasBarfed 3y ago
  In the 10-year timeframe it probably doesn't matter. Ev drivetrain's and batteries are going to drop well under what ICE drivetrain cost will be simply because there's just so many less components and announcements like this and the sodium ions stuff really leads out a path to that economic super advantage
• tshaddox 3y ago
  They will definitely get “sabotaged” if they turn out to not be even remotely realistic, for example if lithium production is nowhere near what it needs to be to replace all new automobile production.
  • theK 3y ago
    While this is true in theory I don't see how it is relevant. The battery industry is in overdrive right now, new chemistries are being put to the test daily and multiple manufacturers are already working on productizing energy storage that doesn't use rare earths at all. Also, breakthroughs like the main post mema that you need less and less rare earths for the same bang. It becomes increasingly certain that we won't need as much lithium as the fossil lobby would like us to believe.
    • giobox 3y ago
      The recent announcement (also from CATL!) of sodium ion batteries that are competitive with typical vehicle grade Lithium cells (LFP chemistry) means Lithium is unlikely to be the blocker people argue either. Lithium Ion is already potentially no longer the only viable battery chemistry at scale. > https://www.electrive.com/2023/04/21/catl-and-byd-to-use-sodium-ion-batteries-in-evs-this-year/ https://www.electrive.com/2023/04/21/catl-and-byd-to-use-sod...
• onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
  VERY few places are even thinking of banning ICE sales within 5 years - most timelines are 15 years - at which point, if you're looking at realistic projections - you won't even need to ban them. The sales will already be very low (in the places that are thinking about the bans). The reality of these bans is that exception after exception is tacked on for a long time. One of the cool things about this type of political maneuver is that it's a bit like the Fed Put. You can get the market to move in the direction you want without actually shooting your bazooka. Just by saying your thinking about banning ICE cars - you're going to get manufacturers and sellers preparing for that and shifting over as much sales as they can to non-ICE cars.
• dragonelite 3y ago
  With Sodium batteries, range and infrastructure improvement and BYD showing they can make EV as cheap if not cheaper than ICE. I'm convinced a EV future in Eurasia is secured, how it will be handled in the west im not so sure given how they are Isolating themselves more and more becoming fortress NATO.