The end of the combustion engine? | FT Energy Source
2023 ж. 19 Жел.
169 645 Рет қаралды
Across the globe, billions are being invested in the electrification of the car industry. Governments have put future bans on the sale of internal combustion engines, but recently we’ve seen politicians backtracking a little on the issue. Also, there are still huge infrastructure and cost challenges ahead for EVs. So, are reports about the death of the internal combustion engine a little premature?
#internalcombustionengine #electricvehicle #automotiveengineering
See if you get the FT for free as a student (ft.com/schoolsarefree) or start a £1 trial: subs.ft.com/spa3_trial?segmen....
► Check out our Community tab for more stories on the economy.
► Listen to our podcasts: www.ft.com/podcasts
► Follow us on Instagram: / financialtimes'
Julia was clearly the most informed there. She correctly summarized why ICE cars are cheaper than EVs - it’s efficiencies due to decades of manufacturing improvements. Mass scale EVs are only about 13 years old, give it another decade and they will dominate. You never bet against the technology with less moving parts.
The key point is that EVs have much more potential to improve on both cost and performance. The demise of ICE is inevitable and it's only a question of the timing. The latest EV offerings here in Australia are already very cost competitive with ICE cars, despite petrol prices here being quite cheap by European standards.
Julia is wrong that electric cars are not inherently more expensive. Currently modest EV battery at 60kWh is on average 4 days worth of electricity used by a household. People are charging 4 days worth of electricity within a day; the infrastructure required to support this is expensive. It's not about averages, it's about infrastructure that can safely handle the peak spikes. This is why small battery EVs(20kWh or less) are the ones that are not much more expensive, but how many big car companies are pushing to sell those?
@@longdang2681 People are not charging 60kWh every day though. 60 kWh will take you 300+ km in an efficient EV, average daily mileage is way less. But you do need batteries much larger than 20 kWh to be able to make longer trips in a reasonable time: 60 or 70 or 80 kWh.
@@arbitrary76 Not every day, true, they spike charge it for one day and then use their EV until it runs low. Average means nothing because they still spike charge it. It's like how you don't turn on the heater all year but when you turn it on in the winter; you blast it to 1kW because it's cold. It's not about average use(maybe 100W), it's about the device needing to handle 1kW. The problem is you need big batteries because you need the range. EVs are poorly suited for longer ranges and are more suited as a city run around where 20kWh is sufficient. Additionally little attempt is made by the big EV manufacturers to install user replaceable modular batteries like that found in the Silence S04 or Janus electric trucks. User replaceable modular batteries will allow drivers to take as much battery capacity as they need for each trip. EVs have their place as part of the solution for the future of driving but it's currently implemented really poorly.
I don't know why people think that Electric Vehicles have to replace Internal Combustion. In a free society it should be consumer choice. I don't care if people want to buy electric cars if they want to. Similarly I don't care if they want to have a golf cart, shotgun collection, skateboard, motorcycle or boat. But for some reason the EV proponents seem to have these dictatorial tendencies and insist that ICEs be replaced. You do you. Leave everyone else to make their own decisions.
One of my vehicles is 30 years old, another is 20 years old. And I have two other vehicles that are IC. I am middle age and fully intend to keep them all running well into my old age.
t'll be down to how much you'll be willing to *pay* to keep them running.
No matter what it costs to fix the cost is always LESS than buying so short lived and defective EV or even one of the high priced modern SUV's and Pickups which all those with defects below the belt insist on buying !!
Only problem is manufactures stopping production of parts, I'm sad to be living in a time where cars are leaning more towards environmental efficiency rather than sound and power @@riceast9054
Ok
Legacy auto like Toyota, VW and GM have hundreds of billions of dollars in debt. They won't survive the transition to battery electric cars, just as steam engine car manufacturers didn't survive the transition to internal combustion.
EV adoption is now moving at the pace of automobile adoption. In 1910, 90% of transportation was by horse. Ten years later, 90% of transportation was by automobile. S-curve transitions, such as smart phones, TVs, refrigeration, etc, are always exponential and we will see the same in this decade for electric transportation.
I guess its battery’s inflammable feature and the vulnerability against cold weather would be in the way
@@fmt0htm What do you mean by 'inflammable feature'? Do you know that an ICE powered car is 50 times more likely to burst into flames than an EV? You have been looking at too much anti-EV sensationalism in the press, I suggest you study the data on car fires properly and then take a view.
That's right. Here in France it took 8 years from the launch of the Renault Zoe to get to 1% of all cars on the road here being EV's, that is 370,000 battery electric vehicles. It took then 2.5 years to reach 2%, the 3% mark will come up in mid 2024 and would have taken 15 months...EV adoption is as you say following the same 'S' curve pattern as the switch to digital cameras, smartphones and just about every other new technology in history. The timebase of the S curve for road vehicles will of course be longer as they are more expensive capital items but the trends are just the same.
In Hungary, the average lifespan of a car is 14 years. So it will take 14 years to get to 50% adoption. We don't have money for buying new cars dude.
That was driven by the First World War, the Second World War was a war for oil, which drove the efficiency of production. In 1922 a gallon of fuel in the U.K., was 1s and 2p that is £48 today, it is actually £6.20 and most of that is tax.
I wholeheartedly agree that we need to move towards more green energy, electrification, etc. But as someone who has travelled often to Tokyo, Osaka, HK, Shanghai... you'll notice that pushing aggressively towards EV's just isn't that "front of mind". Why? Because ~95% of the people living in or around those cities don't even own cars. People get around on public transit which - while not perfect - is generally working well and so much more efficient than everyone getting around in personal vehicles. Instead of throwing billions into incentivizing the sale / purchase of EV's, governments would get better bang for buck if they just invested in better public transportation. My 2 cents.
Efficiency and effectiveness of public transportation is VERY dependent on population density. Works great in dense cities, but it’s terrible in rural or even suburban areas.
Public transport run by the State not for profit? As with Labour government to renationalise the train companies. Impossible for people living in apartments to charge cars unless the battery technology more accessible. The cost of electricity to charge cars? EV cars expensive to repair? Replacement batteries cost?
Governments prefer to give away taxes via subsidies to Ellon Must and the chinese rather than investing the same amount in the real environmentally-friendly solution: public transport. We should reduce the energy and materials consumption per person. For those who live outside the urban areas the use of a combustion engine is acceptable
@@marcor5886 That’s not stopping CO2, that’s just slowing it down a bit. Even if we reduced by 50% (which ain’t happening), that just means hitting 3c in 75 years rather than 50. Arguing to reduce consumption rather than replace it with a clean alternative is maybe a good anticapitalist argument, but it’s a lousy environmental argument and shouldn’t be made as an environmental argument.
@@davestagner the climate change dilemma is going to take multiple solutions. Especially when you have a significant chunk of the population ingrained in their beliefs or modes of transport - you have to work with them, sometimes around them; but in pushing EV's on that crowd, you are missing the low hanging fruit right in front of you. For folks living in cities, replacing every one of their ICE vehicles with an EV is just going to replace one large, inefficient mode of transportation with another (I would argue, expensive and resource intensive) mode. Imagine if even half of the millions of ppl riding around on the light rail systems (in cities that have them) had their own cars - how much more space, road infrastructure, vehicle services would these ppl need? Now imagine that in reverse, being able to take millions of cars off the roads in cities that currently have large multi-lane road networks going in every direction, never-ending traffic congestion, etc... my point is, those ppl don't actually need cars, once you give them a faster option, they will take it. Maybe they can rent a car when they need one. Sure, make that rental car an EV. I'm ok with some folks continuing to own ICE vehicles - ppl living in low density situations, outside of cities etc. Yeah, maybe fuel gets too expensive over time for them and encourages a shift to an EV. But address the problem that is affecting a much higher percentage of the population, and you get quicker, more efficient and longer lasting wins.
The top 1% (77 million people) generates the same CO2 as the bottom 65% (5 billion) in a year. A person in the bottom 95% would need 1500 years to generate the same CO2 as one billionaire. Net zero will not happen. Nonprofit Oxfam number I think.
I can't see New ICE cars being sold at any scale past 2030. Just as EVs are expensive today due to lack of scale ICE cars will increase in price as they lose scale and infrastructure One technology with declining cost vs another with increasing costs. Not to mention EV operating costs are much lower
Although the EV adoption point-of-view is sufficiently objective, the counter point-of-view is unjustifiably FUD. People who present this FUD appear to lack modern information, and therefore will likely be proven wrong by the 'test of time'.
It will all be objectively sufficient once the bugs are worked out. Just like whale oil, the steam engine, railroads, electric light, ICE, computers, the internet..
Bugs can also be worked out of internal combustion. @@marshalltito So why not leave people alone to make their own free market consumer choices? Buy anything you want to.
@@marshalltitoNio just demonstrated driving 1000 km on one charge in an modified ET7 featuring a 150 kWh battery pack, average car trips are MUCH shorter. I personally drove 3600 km in 5 days in a Tesla Y LR So imo the tech is ready
@@marshalltito we had EVs before ICE. They've been the next big thing for the last 129 years. They're the whale blubber that a few overly optimistic zealots couldn't let go of.
@thesnownigro7932 FUD!
There will be a tipping point in terms of getting fuel because you need to go to a business to get petrol or diesel. As those fuel businesses disappear, so does the fuel supply chain, so do the ICE cars as it becomes a hassle to refuel them. Sure, they will stay on the roads, for people who only use them occasionally.
True, and already happening in Norway where a refinery recently closed and petrol stations are closing too.
it is also true here in Toronto, gas stations are closing as well. Not because of fewer ICE vehicle, but the cost of real estate is so high that the station operators are selling them to developers. The developers are building condos, and commercial structures not EV charging stations.
@@kiae-nirodiariesencore4270 If I remember correctly, demand for fossil fuels in Norway already fell by a quarter from its peak demand. Meaning that there's a need for 25% less fuel stations, refineries, etc in the country. Soon we might start seeing situations where out-of-the-way places (and, later, even not so out-of-the-way places) don't have enough fuel sales to keep even a single fuel station open, at which point people living there that still have ICE cars will need to either move, give up on using cars, or change to an EV - accelerating the drop in fuel demand even more as people still clinging to old ICE cars are effectively forced to change.
If there is a demand for fuel, industry will supply it. Only someone with totalitarian tendencies would ban it.
Gasoline stations are very low profit margin businesses that rely on consistent volume. The whole chain is. Remember at the beginning of covid, when a small drop in global demand caused oil prices to actually go negative (because you can’t just shut down an oil well - it can’t be restarted).
If we spend a century and trillions of dollars on EVs then maybe we can more easily make a direct comparison to oil. I hate that so many people ignore the huge amounts of subsidies and power of the established industries that has been propping up fossil fuels when talking about BEVs.
From what I have Read oil is well subsidized in most countries and the legacy auto makers in the US have also had Bailouts except Ford.
@@number1genoaevery country subsidize oil, our tax money just to dig oil then we BURN it
we did. Thomas Edison made EV's in the 1800's and they failed back then too.
I was talking to a relative recently and he postulated that there isn't any industry that is truly financially independent Ie when you dig deeper it might be that all industries benefit to some degree from direct or indirect subsidies
@@rotaryenginepete A lot of electric products failed in the early days but are now essential.
We just bought our second Tesla and we are officially an EV only household with Solar and Powerwalls.
Fully electric vehicles, as of 2024 are worse for the environment than an efficient plug in hybrid
@@fe2nq pump oil out of gulf - transport it - use electricity to refine it - then transport it again to a gasoline station in a diesel semi - drive your hybrid to a gasoline station and use electricity to pump it into your hybrid. Yeah that is better for the environment.
There I fixed it for you
It would have been good to hear that despite e-fuels lauded as being an solution, ICEs running on them still produce some NOx and SO emissions (as well as some partially unburnt carbon products e.g. CO) and will still require an oil change (and fuel additives) at least every 20k miles.
Also, the cost of synthetic fuels will be prohibitive. They are likely to cost 3 to 4 times the price of unleaded gas/petrol.....
@@Brian-om2hh - This could be relatively easily reversed. Fossil oil is currently heavily subsidised and lobbied for (one only has to look at despicable behaviour of the COP28 hosts - b*stards!) The tech required for processing crop oil is much simpler and would not require the distillation columns and the amount of energy input of fossil oil.
@@andyroid7339 no need for crops for nuclear power-made e-fuels. Have a look at "John Bucknell - Nuclear Plant Economics & Synthetic Fuel Cogeneration @ TEAC8"
The only CO2 and particulates that are emitted are from "blow-by" from the oil rings..far lower than from conventional rice vehicles..and no one ever mentions the CO2 deficit that battery electric vehicles have at point of sale , purely because of the massive amounts of CO2 required for mining and manufacturing of batteries..if you live in a country that produces electricity with coal , gas or other CO2 emission sources then your transferring the CO2 from your exhaust pipe to a power station..the future of transportation is eclectic not battery electric!!.❤️🙏🇺🇸
@@caravanstuff2827 234gCO₂eq/kWh for my local area grid for 2023. About 58gCO₂eq/mile or about 37gCO₂eq/km for around town EV driving. My gasoline vehicle is about 400gCO₂eq/mile or 252gCO₂eq/km.
several howlers in this video, eg from Campbell FT - Every time someone drives up and needs 4:13 to fast charge, the amount of power 4:16 draw on that system is enormous. 4:18 That means the energy grid has to be much more robust. 4:21 That is very expensive and takes a very long time to put in. ..................................................... completely wrong - fast chargers will use their own stationary batteries to charge the EV and will recharge themselves slowly from the grid so that the demand is spread out ............................................................ Campbell FT- You will still be able to buy an internal combustion engine 8:14 car in Europe in 2034. 8:16 You'll be able to buy one in the US 8:18 much later than that, and Latin America much, 8:20 much later than that. 8:21 And these things are going to be on our roads for decades. .......................................... dont bet on it - making ICE cars is a numbers game and as the volumes drop it just wont be worth making them as the cost rises and EVs get cheaper and their running cost including charging, insurance and maintenance etc falls well below ICEs. So it will be a brave OEM that carries on with ICE in the face of market forces
When the transition really digs in, petrol stations will be as rare as hens teeth. People won't buy ice vehicles for the same reason they won't buy EVs now. Ice vehicles will be more expensive and the petrol distribution network will no longer make them viable for most people.
In UK people are complaining the EV costs more to charge than to fill the tank on an equivalent car.
Only because it is a new technology and the Guinea pigs buying now are paying well over the cost to manufacture to cover r&d costs.Also, you trust insurance companies, teslas cost on average three to four times more to cover than other electric cars and if insurance companies make insurance too prohibitive to buy an ev then manufacturers will have no choice but to start their own insurance, hopefully not as bad as tesla who don't have enough service centres to service existing teslas never mind those that need repairs due to accidents.@@geocam2
If you charge at home on a suitable off-peak tariff, the cost is around an 8th the price of using petrol. If you have no choice but to use public charging, then taking out a subscription to the charge network you use is the solution, and can reduce costs by as much as 50%. I take it you were not aware of subscription services? My local public charge network charges 38p per kwh using one of the 3 subscription rates they offer. That puts the cost at around the normal domestic home rate, and around half the cost of using petrol.....
Depends on where you charge. Charging at home is considerably cheaper, rapid charging depends on the vendor. Tesla compete very well, Gridserve are excellent but others can be quite expensive
The National grid, themselves said there is no risk to the grid as EV's charge over night when the grid is under used, EV's help to balance the grid
I think you mean no risk to the grid.
yup, in UK during a storm, utilities PAID EV owners to charge their cars as they had a surplus of wind-powered electricity. Soon as more cars get vehicle-to-grid features, EVs can act as home batteries, being paid to help stabilize the grid during high-demand times...
@@cgamigaWe are slowly moving away from a centralised power generation to every house being a generator. Solar panels and batteries are the future as many days in the summer I am generating over twice as much as I need for any 24 hr period, in the winter it's just 50% but I am limited to 4 kWh by the ability of the cable going to the street to carry more. If building regs stated 3 phase cable instead of single phase I could use more solar panels and generate enough to cover for winter generation levels
@@stevehayward1854unfortunately solar cannot play a very large part in the UK, because they produce much less in the winter and when all heating is electrified we will need much more elecricty in the winter. Once there are enough wind turbines to cover the winter demand there will be spare electricity during the summer, even if there were no solar panels. Adding solar will just make the excess worse. You will not be paid anything for exporting electricity most of the time once we reach that point. Only when the wind drops will solar export be valuable. Wind turbines are much more economical at large scale than small scale so most electricity will still be produced by power companies.
@@adrianthoroughgood1191 Any renewable energy generation system will need a balance of all types of generators and storage to handle the intermit supply of renewables, some days Solar produces too much and others not enough and the same for wind, except with Wind it generates energy when we dont need ie overnight, so the grid must have storage to save all that excess power to use it when we dont have enough. Solar is not the whole picture nor is any other renewable. Today in the UK, Wind generated 50% of our energy needs and Gas 10%, in total fossil fuels generated just 15% of our power, soon it will be none
I bought an electric car 12 years ago, and I have been recharging it from my off grid solar system. I have no regrets. In fact, it’s the smartest thing we could ever do..
Good for you, but unfortunately, here in Europe, most people live in apartment blocks, not in houses. They have no chance of charging their cars at night, let alone with solar panels.
I don't care if electric of ICE as long as I can buy it at less than £8000. Never bought a new car in my life (not financially ignorant enough to do it). My current car was bought at £7500 about 8 years ago and still run like normal (just typical regular services and maintenances).
The used EV market is already thriving. One well known KZheadr bought a 2016 Renault Zoe with 35k miles on it for £4400 a few weeks ago. Something like that, along with a decent off-peak tariff, and you've got motoring at less than 2p per mile. I know a guy who got a new but unused EV home charger for £250. It was still in it's original packaging......
I think ithe variety and quality of new models is exploding - that explosion is only just beginning to reach the 2nd hand market so I feel it's worth waiting a year or 2 - some of the great cars that were released last year might be entering the second hand market by then.
Here is perfect example of how important proper mathematics education is for society: logistic curves are ubiquitous in nature. We are about to exit the incubation period and jump into the exponential growth.
Food for fuel is feckin madness 😢
Please put a name to some of these incompetents being interviewed. Any one following this tech should know by now the cobalt is not being used by any of the major battery manufacturers today. Cobalt prices have tanked worse than Li and some Cobalt mines in Australia have in recent months.
I think it’s reduced demand due to increasing use of cobalt-free battery chemistries and reduced demand for petro fuels as cobalt is used to remove sulfur from petroleum during the refining process. So, double-whammy on cobalt demand!
40% of the worlds Lithium today is mined in Australia but refined in China, it wouldn't be too much of a problem to build refineries everywhere, negating the dominance of China
Maybe that’s why they took away Australia’s weapons
@@fe2nq ?
I'd like to hear a discussion around fuel prices. At what point in the reduction in oil use will it become too expensive to use
Why do you think that oil production will be reduced? Oil is used to make just about everything - clothes, plastics, etc.
Half of the barrel of oil is used for things other than energy. Oil ain't going away.
Oil producing countries will reduce prices and profit margins and increasingly sell more to developing countries that are still evolving from foot, horse, bicycle and motorcycle transport into ICE cars, likely discarded cars from first world countries ...
This is the general idea. Private transport and the RIGHT to own the means of transportation by the individual will be targeted by the combined obscene cost of EV's & their power source and unjustified fuel oil cost spikes by means of more TAXES on both - WATCH THIS SPACE - GOVERNMENT MANIPULATION OF THE RIGHT'S AND FREEDOMS OF THE INDIVIDUAL AT IT'S FINEST.
@@neilmckay8649ice will not be their choice, the same way they skipped several iterations the ”west” did with phone tech. They go directly to current tech, or the previous generation, they skip the other gen’s! Oil companies are fighting tooth and nail with lobbyists, useful idiots and bribes, but in the long run, new tech will win.
Cars using ICE are about 20% efficient in converting chemical energy to mechanical energy. Fossil fuels are one of the most dense sources of chemical energy making its portability feasible. However, electric motors are up to 90% efficient in converting electricity to mechanical energy. So that part is a no brainer. Transmissions are not necessary in EVs and most of the mechanical functions can be done with electronics making them cheaper once they are in production. The F16 is an example of how hydraulic and mechanical systems can be supplanted by electro-mechanical systems. Julia has a much better grip on the subject than the others.
The fact that you still call it "fossil fuel" when it has nothing to do with fossils just blows my mind.
You're easily impressed.@@goodtoBfit
Visit Norway for a working example. System supported electrification many years ago, of course thanks to its oil profits as well. But today EV is still the option with discounted price and better benefits by the system, infrastructure is there after the decade of building, public sector uses EVs and anybody can buy their own while there is a massive 2nd-hand market thanks to all af this. ICE is not going anywhere. Electrification is a process, but it can work 😊
Tesla and others are already making or about to, affordable EV's. MG sell the MG4 for about 25k and the Tesla "Model 2" will be sub 25k
VW ID2 as well
HA!
@@waynerussell6401 ?
The recycling of electrification, is also key to stop polution.
This entire report is insightful and surprisingly honest about the state of EV and ICE vechiles! Well done!
E fuels will be important. That said, they will be too important for the de-carbonization of long haul aviation to waste them in motor vehicles - for which battery electric is a much more efficient solution.
It will become less important and less relevant, due to the cost implications. The cost to produce e fuels will be high, and it will still need to be transported all over the place, to where it is sold and used. Electricity needs no transportation, as it uses the grid.... Even the fuelling stations e fuels might use *still* rely on a supply of *electricity*
Yes. We need different things for different uses. It's only the idea that efuels mean you don't need to switch to EV that is wrong. Same as we need green hydrogen for some uses but that doesn't mean you don't need to install a heat pump for your home.
I have held off buying a car for 50 years now and listened to all the hypocrites who drive ICE cars since the first EV cars rolled out.
ICE : 6000 moving parts, 25 to 42% of efficiency, 95 to 200kg of materials. Electric machine : 1 to 4 moving parts, 90 to 97% efficiency, 35 to 90 kg of materials
Lotus Elise 723kg, Tesla Roadster 1305kg
And those rare earth materials will be expensive and in short supply. On the other hand, there's almost an unlimited supply of fossil fuel thanks to fracking and shale oil extraction.
There are not 6000 moving parts on an ice drive train. You have been lied to.
@@bobcrow1462 >> And those rare earth materials will be expensive and in short supply. > On the other hand, there's almost an unlimited supply of fossil fuel thanks to fracking and shale oil extraction.
gas is about 100 times more efficient than an average lithium battery in EVs today: 160KWh/kg (pack level density), which means more weight and raw materials.
Combustion engines are complicated and i hate to go to mechanic every other month with something leaking or breaking
Very balanced summary. Power generation needs to be carbon free. It is carbon emissions anywhere that is the environmental issue. No gain in building gas and coal PS. Oil producing countries will cut the price and profit margins and sell to developing third world ICE driving countries.
There is a change: If you can't deny the climate change, go for maximal delay and make measure as complicated as possible. And this is, what the FT is doing here by transporting this message.
personally i like ev better than ice, but here in indonesia the cheapest one can't drive uphill with four person in it plus there is some terrifying thought about batery pack replacement price as brand new car like what happen in canada with hyundai, if hyundai suggest to buy new car instead replacing defect batary pack, how other brand won't do the same thing
We will witnessed the death of FT before the combustion engine !
What is FT? Why did you abbreviate it? There's plenty of room here for comments.
Banning combustion engines by a certain date is irrelevant, EV's are commercially inevitable
The problem is people take sides in this super complex debate. We need each technology to get better. The greatest issue with the internal combustion engine is not running at optimum conditions to get best thermal efficiency out of the fuel. Engines need to be under high load, with high compression and extremely fast combustion. We are working with some old and very simple converted diesel engines with pre-chamber spark ignition and port injecting Hydrous Ethanol circa 90% (The greatest error is expensive E-Fuels) and we are seeing well over 50% thermal efficiency on a wide load range. It is ideal for hybridisation for offroad applications. Let electric motors provide propulsion as they are very good at it. NOTE: Hydrous Ethanol is much easier to produce and takes significantly less energy than Anhydrous as mixed in E10 gasoline. Just adding a comment from someone who does hands on work with engines....
I keep cars for 20 years I guess that won't be affordable with replacing batteries. So a lot of people will be junking cars around 10 years if the battery gets weak. That is a lot of trash.
Nope a ev battery can last much more than 20 years right now, the problem is battery manufacturers don't want them to last that long, but wait solid state is emerging as the new battery technology, 5 years max and they will be selling in huge numbers and they can basically last a lifetime. No not a future technology they exist right now.
Almost all the people complaining have no experience of owning an electric car.
Copper metal …… is the backbone of Electrical transition …… and Billionaire investors already fixed their eyes in this metal !!
The premise of the question is flawed. We need to be sensitive to the direction of causality. The available energy, is what determines the best technology, which is what determines the social arrangements in which it is embedded. Cheap abundant fossil energy made possible the culture of automobiles, and commensurate urban design, land planning and infrastructure. The future of energy cannot and will not be the same, so the technology and social organization surrounding it will be different too. Single user vehicles are not efficient or cost-effective, they do not ‘fit’ well with mass electrification. Public transportation seems far more suited to urban needs, and a high speed rail network for intercity linkages. I anticipate EV’s to be used predominantly in rural settings, to transport commodities to transportation hubs, and for emergency services and security or defense fleets. Unlike in the past, we have a specific future to achieve, and this suggests some thoughtful planning and investment are appropriate.
Industrial energy use can be curtail using high tempature nuclear reactors. These reactors can be reduce in size and cost by developing newer designs.
Usually called 'the greatest misalloation of resources in human history' though I think nuclear weapons may be even worse.
They said transportation only accounts for 8% of emissions, including airplanes, ships, etc. So why this battle against passenger cars, they probably account for 5% of emissions or less!!!
Once petro fuels become difficult to get, and more expensive, they will disappear quite quickly. In 13 years petrol cars replaced horses, the petrol car will disappear just as quick.
E-fuels and hydrogen are each a fool's errand. The economics of energy alone will drive most customers to BEVs, despite the hold-outs in niche markets.
They will be useful for planes. Not much use for cars.
The market will decide this one not just because of the regulations., but because of the opportunity for profit.
Ummm that is only tesla that is suffering due to their idiotic move to cast half the car as one piece ,and the cost of a new ev, which will drop by more than 50% in 5 years, once prices drop insurance will be much, much cheaper than what we see now unless there is just a profit grasp because it is new tech. Teslas insurance costs will never drop and that is why they will be out of the market as soon as r&d costs have been paid by the Guinea pigs buying evs now. Important to remember the history of cars and how they were seen as way too expensive compared to the horse and cart the benefits outweigh the negative so much, eventually every family has a car@@geocam2
Please give us EV’s at affordable prices. They are the way forward.
What the ICV requires are new Euro and EPA Standards harmonized with the thermodynamic limitations of the natural combustion processes, forcing them did not lead us to anything such as EGR, DPF, etc. and other unnecessary and expensive electronics.
Materials for electrification are plentiful and are recyclable so once mined will used over and over again. There is a lake in America just discovered that has enough Lithium for 327 million vehicles alone, the supply chain is growing
They are all right. Nothing can go faster. But it WILL happen.
Replacement with Fully Charged EV Battery in 4 /5 Minutes is A Game Changer Already Huge Huge Success in China 🇨🇳
Considering extremely cold / hot weather, life expectancy of battery, charging wait time , charging availability…. EV may be a second car option of suburban. A Japan ice car can last for 20-30 years and in the meantime, EV need to change the battery 1-2 times.
yeah and during the 20-30 years of an ice car life you don't have to do anything on it!
If it's a modern ICE car, then the oil has been changed every year, a few belts exchanged, or a chain, spark plugs a few times, air filter, petrol filter, Nox sensor broken, exhaust replaced. Cost: 5000 and the rest.....as I am touching the tip of the iceberg. My oil change costs 350 from the dealer.
Why would you "change" the battery? Haven't you heard of battery pack refurbishments?
Deeply ignorant lies not based on any research or backed with data - ie FUD! Average miles of an ICE without maintenance is ~3000-5000 miles before an oil change, 100k for transmission fluid and 150k for coolants. Forgetting to do these can result in catastrophic failure, because moving things wear a lot without care. Timing belts and water pump are recommended every 60,000-100,000, muffler replacement in urban driving at least twice, catalytic converter and automatic transmission ~ 100k miles. Average mileage before scrapping is 133k miles. Only 1 percent of cars built every year make it past 200,000 miles (Road&Track 6 Dec 2022). An extensive data base on the Dutch-Belgium Tesla Forum tracks early Tesla battery packs at 300-500k miles with an initial degradation of 5% after 50k miles and thereafter 1% per 50k. Tesla early testing in the lab simulated over 500,000 miles to 80% of its original capacity. Modern LFP batteries from CATL are rated at a million miles and BYD a million kilometres. Dahn has lab tested NCM cells cycling at urban use rates of 20-70% with over 10k cycles or 4 million kilometers of use. kzhead.info/sun/pbN6ic6bhmihlKc/bejne.html Battery management of temperature in a Tesla gives only a 15% reduction in range at zero degrees C (Recurrent Auto) and all the top (20-80+% new sales) BEV adoption countries are cold European climates. Battery supercharging will give 75 miles of range in the time a gas car takes to fill. Nyland shows 10K km trips are as fast as an ICE car at 10 hrs with usual comfort stops. ICE is DEAD. Ignorance is living.
Are there enough mining being done and are there enough resources on earth for that?
The answer for the first question seems to be yes, at least when you include mines that are in the process of being installed; in fact, it's predicted that for various essential minerals there will be a glut, and corresponding price fall, as production comes on-line before demand rises. For the second question the answer is a resounding yes; the US alone has more lithium in known reserves than the world will need for the next few decades, and it's not even where the largest known reserves are located. The same is true for the other minerals used in making EVs, the known reserves are more than enough to switch every vehicle in the world to EVs, and that even before you take into account that there are alternatives for many of those minerals.
Mining cover the sale of ten million cars a year right now , you think that will change any time soon, especially as electric cars are easier to recycle
You’re missing the viability of traditional infrastructure once electrification hits a tipping point. It’ll suddenly speed up.
Efuels are irrelevant and stupid.. if the transition needs to be made ASAP why waste half the energy making inefficient efuels when maximum efficiency is key especially with the grid
Descentralize and liberalize the production of electricity is the key!
The future is clearly OTHER types of mobility for the vast majority of people - not big bulky cars, regardless of means of propulsion..
And not a word about insurers distancing themselves from EVs because they're 25% more expensive to repair and keep bursting into flames. Premiums going through the roof if you CAN find an insurer.
Maybe in the US where they feel they can rip off everyone at will, a Kia Niro, a big car cost less to ensure than my present ford that is 16 years old in the UK, tesla has a problem , do not put that on other manufacturers, casting half the car and expecting insurance to cover the cost of replacing half the car in even a very small accident was a huge mistake by tesla, they move the cost of manufacturing to the consumer and is why there sales are dropping, that and the latest report on how there suspicions are failing regularly, and they lied that it is because people creep up a kerb like in every other car.
The Peter Campbell guy is delusional, EV’s are the obvious future, and quick, of transportation. I own 2 EV’s, powered by my solar panels, and would never consider buying an oil money pit, ever again.
Battery cars at this time is a fantasy. Cars are too expensive, prone to dangerous fires, high insurance costs and a very short life span if batteries are damaged. Also fast depreciation, too long to charge, lack of charging points and inadequate power grid to cope with it.
All of the above points have been disproved time and time again. I'm afraid this is simply another uninformed post, by someone with zero EV knowledge or experience. Were you even aware that around 300 petrol and diesel cars catch fire each day in Britain? I thought not. Which EV have you attempted to obtain insurance cover for? See what I mean? Commenting about things you have no experience of..... Most people who choose an EV will lease it, thus side stepping any depreciation issues..... The National Grid have stated on numerous occasions that there will be no issues. The Head of the National Grid, along with his Head of Technical Development, have even sat in front of a Parliamentary Committee to field and answer questions regarding this matter. The video of that meeting is here on KZhead, should you wish to see it. In fact, the National Grid were one of the organisations who lobbied the Government to bring *forward* the original 2035 ban on the sale of new ICE cars and vans to 2030. Shell UK were another who campaigned for the ban to be brought forward to 2030..... In fact Shell - in their last business report - outlined plans to cut production of petrol and diesel by up to 40% on the lead up to 2030......
EV's are getting cheaper, with cheaper running cost they will soon be a no brainer. Fires are actually more likely in an ICE car. and new battery tech will make this a moot point. Depends on what you are driving. insurance costs are rising for everyone. Fast depreciation, again depends on what you are driving. A Tesla holds it's value extremely well, some of it's competitors not so much. EV's can be charged in as little as twenty mins, new tech will only make charging far more convenient, especially for those charging at home. EV's will actually play an important role in supporting the grid. EV's at this point are inevitable.
Not only the engine. Your parts will be less available and more expensive.
Unless there is a major battery break through, the ICE engine is nowhere near dead. It will slowly fade out over time.
LOl the fact that existing batteries are able to do enough for 96% proves you are very wrong, battery tech is improving we need it to, but it is acceptable right now.
@@andrewbrown6578 Ok.
@andrewbrown6578 I don't know where you got this 96% from, but you have been lied to. Battery technology is nowhere near acceptable. I drive an EV, and it is a pain in the butt sometimes. Way more than 4 percent of the time. As is the case with the half a dozen or so people I know personally that have one. Maybe acceptable 75% of the time. We all rely on our ICE rigs for travel. Not Worth getting stranded.
@@mcyclonegt Well that depends on the EV you are diving. A Tesla would fit most peoples needs no problem. Price might be an issue, but prices will only fall.
Ethanol is the most environment friendly fuel ever. E-fuel seems to be bulshit when you think in large scale, on the other hand bev's could works well only in central countries, but it isn't the actual scenario. So in my standpoint of view, the best solution is hybrid vehicles equiped with hydrogen, ethanol or both internal combustion engine running at high efficient range.
I didn't know there is such thing as The Great American Road Trip
Until EVs and their battery source of energy which is the most expensive part of the EV together with the EV charging infrastructure becomes broadly available the combustion engine (unfortunately for us & climate) continues to be only reliable and affordable solution for transportation.
i live in Central Ametica, a 8,000 small electric car connected to 110v enough, HAPPY, A car from Bolivia, of course that is the solution for me
Coupling mobility with car ownership won’t solve it, reducing overconsumption will
The same people do not understand the ICE will be around it has been amazing but there is a new time for other technologies. The ICE has served the human race amazingly and now it is time for us to utilize the new, I'm sure people were making the same disagreements about the ICE versus Horses.
Sodium batteries are the future. And maybe also hydrogen (partly).
BEV sales will reach 80% by 2032 at the latest, purely based on economy.
I love watching videos like these, as I look out the window and see all the chemtrails
Check videos from Tony Seba : The INSANE Pace Of EV Disruption EV Cars will cost $5000 by 2030 . You can forget about Combustion Cars or H-Cars forever .
The point is being missed. It doesn't take 1 ton of material to move even a whole family. First off vehicles need to be much smaller . If we moved to small monorail vehicles then the need for batteries would be greatly diminished. Such a system was used at General Motors back in the 80's to move car's and car parts around the plant. I took care of it and it works! It would eliminate accidents, traffic jambs, stoplights, weather related problems and much more. Climb in press your destination and text or read a book, the vehicle will do everything. It's a low energy alternative that could be implemented with off the shelf technology right away. The downside, it's inexpensive, our economy is largely based on automobiles.
Hi Bob. You're right with the "smaller". were working with a conveyor belt system, not a means of personal transportation. Can you imagine the expense of putting a monorail down every second street, or the jams if everyone wanted to move at once? Also, vehicles on rails or tracks have no possibility of being "pushed to the side of the road" or "towed away" when they break down. It'll never happen mate. Cheers, P.R.
@@philliprobinson7724 Monorails could be made from bamboo. Quite easy to also make them switch to different tracks somewhat like railroad tracks, all automatic. As I stated I maintained such a system and I made it work. This was in the mid 80's when computers couldn't do even close to what they can do today. Quite simple programs and we are talking about changing bits not megabits to move people all at once. Actually 29 words per communication point. Each person would take up perhaps 2 meters at the most each? I don't think that would cause much problem. I've seen it and thought it through, I've worked with most of the latest technology, this would be simple.
@@bobm3477 Hi Bob. Bamboo monorails? I guess you mean the vehicles themselves, not the tracks which surely must be made from steel. It might be a possibility in China or South East Asia where bamboo is one of the fastest growing plants. It must surely have a part to play in a green economy. My first reaction to your posting was laughter, but then I remembered the best twin engined fighter-bomber of WW2 was the DH Mosquito, made of plywood and balsa wood. I'm not sure what the rest of your letter is about, so I'll just leave you with my congratulations at being such an "outside the box" thinker. Cheers, P.R.
EV is not expensive.... in China of course. But in Europe, its price got at least double.
We've built cities that demand individual long horizontal transport.
And not a word about manufacturers shutting down EV production because they can't sell EVs
That's because they're not shutting down. That's simply press hype to make you look twice and read the crap they write.
EV sales continue to grow. anyone cutting back on EV production is not because of lack of demand, but the simple fact their EV's do not compete with the likes of Tesla or BYD.
You just wait until all insurers are backing off. Few can afford an increase from £600 to £3500 and some insurers have pulled out altogether. The real demand killer will come with parking restrictions due to fire hazard and increases in building fires.
@@thisisnumber0 insurance is going up for everyone. as for fires new battery tech make this a moot point.
Combustion engine are dirty and needs to alway change engine oil, electric cars less maintenance and more clean.
From Fossil Fuels to Batteries.
No - its the end of EV’s and not the end of the internal combustion engines !
Wishful thinking on your part.......
EV's at this point are inevitable.
Hi. End of ICE's? Not a chance! Ony an ICE powered aircraft can carry enough fuel to reach an alternative airport if the destination isn't available due to tornados. Also, we recently had a major earthquake and the only vehicles on the road delivering aid were ICE powered because the electric grid was down for days. We average Joes will go electric by compulsion, but the really important vehicles like ambulances, fire engines, delivery trucks, and the military and cops will ALWAYS be ICE because it's no problem to store enough gas to keep them running for weeks. Cheers, P.R.
But to do all that you need oil. What happens when oil runs dry? Because one day it will.......
@@Brian-om2hh Hi Brian. Quite right, we'll run out of MINERAL oil, but synthetic oils have been on the market for years. The early I.C.E.'s used castor oil, especially for racing. Any vegetable oil like olive oil can be chemically modified, and some diesels even use peanut oil for fuel. Used engine oil is recycled even in tiny NZ, so oil for I.C.E.'s isn't a problem. It's burning the valuable stuff as FUEL that's a wicked waste. Cheers, P.R.
EV’s are far superior to Dino burners. Anyone that says different has never driven a modern EV
lol
As electricity has CO2 footprint as well, guess who drives greener: compact hybrid vs large EV SUV
_"Its is not the engine [internal combustion] which is the problem, it is the fuel that is the problems"_ *What nonsense!* 80% of the fuel in the tank is *wasted.* It is a highly inefficient engine.
size matters. batteries don't scale.
BYD is starting to sell their cars here in philippines. Mind you we have no EV charging insfrastructure like the US. Thats how aggressive the chinese are .
Aren't BYD cars often exploding in China?
@@Sergi762 im not defending BYD but the company started as a battery manufacturing company supplying tesla. But with regards to safety standards western companies are superior.
Yeah... Not gonna happen any time soon
Happening now, with increasing speed..and good job too.
@@kiae-nirodiariesencore4270 Not really. Even in Los Angeles I don't see the adoption rate anywhere near what they hope. The problem is simple the cost of the battery. Half the price of the Mach-e base model is its battery. That makes it very expensive for most normal people to rationally buy a used electric vehicle. Until the battery cost is solved, it's going to be a long while to full adoption. Not to mention that forcing poor minority people out of their ICE vehicles is just going to come off as racist and inequitable.
I believe more in Hydrogen/EV hybrids. Imagine if there is a massive power-outage, what will you do? Also the charging infrastructure for charging a lot of EVs at the same time is quite high to complete, and how do you produce that electricity? EVs might sound great on paper, but if you still produce "less than green" power to feed into those EVs then you have basically just shifted the problem.
solar, wind other energy generation...solar will replace almost everything but wind and others will be a backup for overcast days.
Hydrogen is an expensive fool's errand re passenger cars. Much too energy intensive/expensive to produce,store,ship etc. Already failed in US. Gas stations already don't work in power outages (maybe temp w/ generators)... and can't fuel anyone when their tanks run out, eg in storm panics. EVs can charge from any electricity, even a wall outlet (slow in 120V USA, but) Charging lots of EVs at home or at work, on level2 240v AC, is not that much different than big A/C home/office loads. Grid can already handle it, or need slight build up, just as the grid did with the expansion of air conditioning. The improvement really needed here is easy solutions for folks in apartments or w/o garages who can't charge at home, eg work or streetlight etc charging. DC Fast Charging does need bigger grid infrastructure, but- that is primarily for road trips, not every car on the road. Still also cheaper than gas fueling, usually. Many studies have shown, even with the worst / dirtiest electric power source (eastern Europe coal), EVs are cleaner than gas cars... and with every country already greening up their power generation, or even just homeowners adopting rooftop solar... NO emissions.
I have 2 evs with solar and powerwalls (battery backup system)
Hydrogen has no future on our roads (for many reasons) As for the electricity it can come from many sources. The UKs grid is now around 40% renewable and growing. EV's are not green, they are greener, which is the point.
Agreed completely, cars or transport will always have some form of pollution from mining minerals or metals to the factories building them, but ev's are around 99.999% less polluting than an ice car after purchase and that is the point and what naysayers ignore all the time, ask them to suck on an exhaust for 5 seconds, and to find a way pollution from an ev car can kill you as quickly.@@thewatcher5822
We can keep it if we run it on hydrogen or sustainable fuels.
Cars that fart will unfortunately be around for a while yet. I was driving cheap & nasty cars for my first 40 years. Cheap upfront cost cars will be key for young drivers.
The wave of new BEV sales is now moving into the 2nd market, so purchase costs are coming down as supply catches up with demand. There is still a premium for BEVs on the 2nd market but the gap is closing. The running costs of BEVs is much lower to total cost of ownership is already cheaper.
Ok, so current EV's are expensive, because combustion engines have decades of a head start, but we shouldn't give up on this promise of carbon free transportation. Yet somehow, synthetic fuels are expensive, because it's a new industry, but we should already give up on it because Chinese EV's have decades of a head start? Pick a lane. Should we fund new carbon-free technologies, or should we let the market decide. Because you're advocating for both, depending on whether it fits your ideological prejudices.
Totally. Personally I think we should let the market decide which technology is best (depending on the application different techs can win, for instance long haul transportation is a no go for full battery electrification, synfuels will most likely play a key role there).
@@tomasfontes3616 In the end the market will decide but there are, from a purely factual basis, I think there are major disadvantages to synfuels. Firstly, they are way, way behind on energy efficency so unless there is some amazing breakthough that drastically improves that or a way to effectively harness waste energy for the purpose, it will take a lot of time and research for the technology to improve to the point were it is cheaper. On the flipside EVs and battery technology have massive development focus currently so the technology is more mature and progressing much faster and still has a lot of room to grow and improve. Those improvements may easily reach the point were issues like long haul transportation are no longer an issue. Synfuels are starting a race way behind and are already at a disadvantage due to the nature of production. Currently their only real advantage is existing transportation and distribution infrustructure. That said, it isn't impossible that some breakthrough could drastically shift the balance one way or the other.
The issue with "green" synthetic fuels is that they use electricity as an input, and due to the lower efficiencies of both the process of synthesizing the fuel and its usage in cars you waste most of it. For synthetic fuels to be competitive with electricity it would need renewable electricity generation to fall in price to almost zero, electricity distribution costs to remain high, and for the cost of distributing fuel to fall; that is a very unlikely combination, more so when you think about what adding renewable electricity generation and storage to homes will do to transmission and distribution costs.
@@FabioCapela not necessarily. Have you heard of high temperature nuclear reactors? More than half of the energy of a reactor is heat which could be directly harnessed to produce those fuels.
@@tomasfontes3616 The process that produces hydrogen using heat is steam reforming, where you use methane reacting with water at high temperatures to produce hydrogen. The issue is, this process has a large carbon footprint; using hydrogen produced using this process for energy - including in making synthetic fuels - is environmentally worse than just using gasoline, or even burning coal. In fact, one of the main uses for green hydrogen is exactly replacing the highly polluting brown hydrogen, as the hydrogen made using that heat-based reaction is known. If you want green hydrogen - which is the only one that isn't environmentally bad - then you need to use electricity to make it.
The ICE wil NEVER disappear.
Of course it is up
Hope so... (combustion engines for much more decades)
NEW internal combustion engine vehicles will be irrelevant by ~2030. 13% of new cars sold are fully electric already here in 2023, more than 3x their market share compared to 2020. EVs are going to be very cheap as they are still riding down the cost curve. Auke Hoekstra, Prof. David Bailey, and Julia Poliscanova (except for the dumb climate change comments at the beginning) are spot on: China will take massive market share in the shift to EVs, Julia's discussion about how much simpler EVs are/the cost declines we will see, the joke of synthetic fuels (absolutely), the NONSENSE virtue signaling from politicians about "CliMaTe ChANgE" when EVs are inevitable, and most importantly the comments from 7:44-7:55 about how an ICE ban is irrelevant. Politicians need to stop the nonsense. Private industry has made EVs inevitable. Nobody will be manufacturing ICE at scale beyond 2030, so no need to ban anything. Also, the "climate change agenda" is completely idiotic. It has nothing to do with this discussion.
Plus, one liter of gasoline need around 1,5 kWh worth of electricity (from grid or local generators burning oil products) from well to tank. A 60 liter tank is therefore also ”containing” 90 kWh of electricity. Even if that number is half that, all ICEs are also electric, on top of all pollution!! E-fuels are even worse in kWh, as the ICE is so uber inefficient!
But ice cars are not so polluting said so many, yet suck on a tailpipe for a few seconds and your dead.
I.C.E. vs EV from Canada Comparison using 180,000 km ICE (internal combustion engine) 8 litres per 100km. @$1.60 per litre fuel cost 14,400 litres of fuel at $1.60 per litre $23,000 fuel cost for ICE vehicle 22 oil changes at $100per = $2200 Total costs to run an ICE vehicle for 180,000km. $25,200 plus plus EV Unknown?
Not even close.
Of course the combustion engine is very close to the end, because everyone is looking forward to waiting in the charging station for 30 minutes just to get the additional 10% of electricity into their EV's batteries.