EV-based road transportation is not viable

[nctnico]

A repair on a modern day diesel car easely undoes the cost saving due to slightly lower fuel prices. So far I have gotten way more mileage from the  Ford Focus on gasoline than with any diesel car I have owned before (which all ended up having engine problems BTW).

The modern diesel with EGR has seriously compromised longevity due to the excessive contaminates the lubrication system must deal with. Even with EGR capable oils the lubrication system is challenged let alone the engine itself having to recirculate all that exhaust muck. If your vehicle tests can't detect it I advise disabling EGR in some manner that won't throw a ECU fault.
Quite simple on older cars, not so much on never ones.

Yeah, one of the first things I did on my previous diesel car besides removing the catalythic converter (which was all clogged up by soot anyway). This resulted in a 5% lower fuel use as well but also a lot of extra NOx and CH output. Not very good for the environment. Nowadays you shouldn't be buying a diesel car.

[themadhippy]

maybe anoother varible to be added
5) those who have  never owned ,nor are likely to own a vehicle ,but will still be impacted by the changes

[CatalinaWOW]

People on both sides of this debate have selected "data" carefully to support their claims.  In many cases the "true" data is currently unknown, contrary to the opinions on both sides.

For example:  The relative costs of manufacture of EVs vs conventional ICU.

True: An ICU and transmission is much more complex than the electric motor(s) and in some cases gearbox of an electric vehicle.  And at comparable manufacturing scale the electric components should be substantially cheaper.  Details such as high power elx in the electric drive train are harder to evaluate, but the answer probably still applies.

But the gas tank and fuel pump in the ICE is far lower in cost than the battery of the BEV.  Currently the difference greatly exceeds the cost difference of the drive trains (either that or the manufacturers of electric vehicles are making insane profits on current production).   Production at scale can be expected to drive costs down, but expectations that they will come down like the costs of semiconductors are unfounded.  Those familiar with production environments will be aware of the concept of a learning curve.  It turns out that most technologies and products follow a trend that says that each doubling of volume reduces the cost by a fixed percentage.  The term learning is often misinterpreted to mean better assembly skills, it in fact incorporates all improvements in production efficiency:  Automation, training, material substitution, redesign for lower cost etc.   In the real world learning curves tend to fall in the 70% to 90% range.   There are arguments for what the learning curve should be for new items like BEV batteries, but they are largely hand waving.  There is little reason to think they will fall outside of the traditional range.  I have had trouble getting numbers for pure EV production in 2022, most sources mix them freely with the poorly defined plug in hybrid category.  But roughly a million vehicles seems a likely estimate.  Five doublings of that number gets you to the quantities to totally replace current ICE sales.  Which then says that when (if) that sales volume occurs the battery price would reduce to about 17% of its current value assuming a very optimistic 70% learning curve, and 59% of its current value assuming the more pessimistic 90% curve.   It requires substantial optimism to believe that the overall drive train costs will be materially less than ICE, and even a moderate amount of optimism to predict price parity.  A pessimist or ICE enthusiast can suggest that the prices will never be comparable.

All other costs of the vehicle (interior, heating and AC, entertainment systems, power brakes and steering, safety systems and so on) should be virtually identical for truly like vehicles, with minor exceptions. 

The learning curve concept has one other impact on this analysis.  If legislative or social initiatives drive ICE sales down something similar to the learning curve works against them.  Operating plants at far below their capacity is expensive, so ICE costs would likely go up substantially in this scenario, quite aside from any tax penalties.  Something like the learning curve works in reverse as you reduce quantities.  This side of the coin is somewhat terrifying to those whose use case is not well fitted to BEV. 

Don't take this brief analysis as support for either side of the discussion.  I am merely pointing out that it is not a simple or inevitable as the proponents on either side make it out to be.  The only compelling answer to this question is to wait and see.  Well, campaigning for your favorite solution is valid also and that is what many here are doing. 

[tom66]

Yeah, one of the first things I did on my previous diesel car besides removing the catalythic converter (which was all clogged up by soot anyway). This resulted in a 5% lower fuel use as well but also a lot of extra NOx and CH output. Not very good for the environment. Nowadays you shouldn't be buying a diesel car.

Be aware that GPF (gasoline particulate filter) and EGR is coming to petrol engines too (not sure about petrol hybrids).

For instance, the VW up! GTI is fitted with a GPF, to meet emissions limits.  I don't know if the filters are any better than the old DPF's which clog all the time if used for shorter journeys.  A friend of mine had a rather interesting experience with a Suzuki diesel (Ignis, I think) which ran after it was parked.  Apparently, a barely-documented feature where if it detects risk of clogging, it will run the engine despite ignition being off for about 15 minutes at reasonably high rpm to purge/regenerate the filter.  You can stop it by turning the car on and then off again, but could be, err, "interesting" for people who park in garages who don't know about these features.

[tautech]

Be aware that GPF (gasoline particulate filter) and EGR is coming to petrol engines too (not sure about petrol hybrids).

You don't turn spanners much do you as our 2002 GM based 3.8L V6 Aussie Commodore had EGR but this is old technology now with much further advanced EFI in the modern car.

Does nobody think ICE manufacturers are not rising to meet the challenge from EV's with tweeks to existing technologies ? 

[nctnico]

Yeah, one of the first things I did on my previous diesel car besides removing the catalythic converter (which was all clogged up by soot anyway). This resulted in a 5% lower fuel use as well but also a lot of extra NOx and CH output. Not very good for the environment. Nowadays you shouldn't be buying a diesel car.

Be aware that GPF (gasoline particulate filter) and EGR is coming to petrol engines too (not sure about petrol hybrids).

For instance, the VW up! GTI is fitted with a GPF, to meet emissions limits.  I don't know if the filters are any better than the old DPF's which clog all the time if used for shorter journeys.  A friend of mine had a rather interesting experience with a Suzuki diesel (Ignis, I think) which ran after it was parked.  Apparently, a barely-documented feature where if it detects risk of clogging, it will run the engine despite ignition being off for about 15 minutes at reasonably high rpm to purge/regenerate the filter.  You can stop it by turning the car on and then off again, but could be, err, "interesting" for people who park in garages who don't know about these features.

AFAIK EGR is already standard on gasoline / petrol engines for a long time. Typically only direct injection gasoline engines are prone to buildup of soot. Mitsubishi GDI comes to mind but the direct injection engines seem to be making a come back. Maybe downsized engines are less prone to problems due to the higher load. Part of maintaining an ICE based car well is letting the engine work very hard every now and then to get of residues and dirt building up.

I strongly doubt that Atkinson cycle engines as found in many hybrids will need particulate filters because the Atkinson cycle runs much cleaner as part of the basic operating principle.

[nctnico]

The learning curve concept has one other impact on this analysis.  If legislative or social initiatives drive ICE sales down something similar to the learning curve works against them.  Operating plants at far below their capacity is expensive, so ICE costs would likely go up substantially in this scenario, quite aside from any tax penalties.  Something like the learning curve works in reverse as you reduce quantities.  This side of the coin is somewhat terrifying to those whose use case is not well fitted to BEV. 

I doubt the latter. My assumption would be that at that point -if that ever happens- BEVs will be more versatile due to very improved batteries and charging infrastructure that can recharge a car to 600km to 800km of range in the same time and at equal costs like you can fill up a regular car with fuel nowadays.

Ofcourse there will always be people that have special needs that will be catered to. For example: Toyota still sells the Hilux with diesel engines but that is about their only model that is available with a diesel engine. It is THE standard for an offroad vehicle.

[eti]

We need more math in this thread.

Yes and no.

1) There are large differences in situation, car use and electricity prices per country which highly influence cost per km and suitability of a BEV.
2) There are several seeking justification of their choice. I bought it, so it must be good. I can't be wrong. Please tell me I'm not an idiot! <-------------- ***
3) There is a group of people that don't really care about how much they spend on a car; it just should look good to show off to the neighbours
4) There are people for whom a car is just a tool and it should be cheap to buy & run.

If you apply math & logic, then you'll largely be catering point 4 and a little bit point 1.

Point #2: Yes, complete honesty is a rarity in people who've made an emotional and proportionally substantial investment in something:

~ They've worked themselves up into a pre-purchase mood of excitement and anticipation regarding the benefits of their (almost definely) imminent purchase.

~ They've spend weeks or months researching, price-matching, asking other *fanatics*, asking/telling friends and family (we see this syndrome play out in shows like "Dragon's Den" - a closed bubble of contacts has validated their decisions, ergo "it MUST be a good idea - GO FOR IT!"

~ They've played through the upsides into a self-confirming bias of delusion, hundreds of times, downplaying the negatives, and exaggerating how "It will improve my life SO much"

~ They've adjusted their finances to accommodate said potential purchase - this may have involved arguments with loved ones, relationship break-ups, financial hardships in other areas being strained even more, all under the unproven imagining  that "It will pay for itself over time", etc, and other such speculations

~ FINALLY it comes to putting their money where their mouth is, (or, more likely, encumbering themselves with years of debt via a loan to pay for this new fandangled toy of theirs) and it's ... TIME TO COMMIT!

So no wonder people have hugely skewed, very heavily biased leanings toward their purchase. A TRULY honest person does not need to "build a case" - they would be completely emotionally detached from said investment, and look at it ONLY on rational, logical, objective basis. Since SO few of this type of person exist, and human ego is involved, never wanting to admit being wrong, well.... there we have it.

Oh, and the fad-wave rider, wanting to validate to all and sundry (like they matter) "How relevant and attuned to modern life I am"

I am sure Mr. Spock, were he real, would have a very clear view on this.

People are VERY predictable, almost amusingly so (In include myself in this closing statement). 

[tom66]

As I've said a number of times I think that ICE is here for some time to stay but it won't be a common choice in vehicles.  Maybe the 2030 date will be hit in the UK, it could be be pushed back, but probably only to 2035 or so.  There are existential problems with ICE that cannot be solved like CO2 emissions, we are not going to solve the problem with synfuels or biofuels any time soon, not at the scale required to support the current fleet at least.  So the best thing to do is retire new models and let the new technologies replace them.

And sure, ICE will definitely improve, I remember my dad talking about his old Mk2 Golf, it used to do "forty-to-a-gallon" (40mpg) on the motorway.  Well that was an 800kg car, with 60-70 hp, cars are obviously heavier nowadays and have more power, yet the 1500kg 1.5 TSI model now does the same or better economy.  So the improvement is pretty clear.  An interesting one to watch is sparkless ignition, I think Mazda are now producing that in some numbers.  And I'm sure a manufacturer or two is experimenting with microwave ignition of petrol.

Mazda have announced they will be making a rotary-range-extended EV.  It appears to be using an 18kWh battery (smaller than the MX-30) with a rotary engine-generator setup.  The engine never drives the wheels, so on fuel it will have a double conversion loss, unlike a typical PHEV where the engine is usually in parallel with the drive motor, but presumably the engine can run at the optimal power point all the time.  I think it's a shame they didn't fit the 30kWh battery as used in the MX-30, 18kWh feels a bit too small.  I wonder if they've fixed the rotary engine's reliability.

[eti]

As I've said a number of times I think that ICE is here for some time to stay but it won't be a common choice in vehicles.  Maybe the 2030 date will be hit in the UK, it could be be pushed back, but probably only to 2035 or so.  There are existential problems with ICE that cannot be solved like CO2 emissions, we are not going to solve the problem with synfuels or biofuels any time soon, not at the scale required to support the current fleet at least.  So the best thing to do is retire new models and let the new technologies replace them.

And sure, ICE will definitely improve, I remember my dad talking about his old Mk2 Golf, it used to do "forty-to-a-gallon" (40mpg) on the motorway.  Well that was an 800kg car, with 60-70 hp, cars are obviously heavier nowadays and have more power, yet the 1500kg 1.5 TSI model now does the same or better economy.  So the improvement is pretty clear.  An interesting one to watch is sparkless ignition, I think Mazda are now producing that in some numbers.  And I'm sure a manufacturer or two is experimenting with microwave ignition of petrol.

Mazda have announced they will be making a rotary-range-extended EV.  It appears to be using an 18kWh battery (smaller than the MX-30) with a rotary engine-generator setup.  The engine never drives the wheels, so on fuel it will have a double conversion loss, unlike a typical PHEV where the engine is usually in parallel with the drive motor, but presumably the engine can run at the optimal power point all the time.  I think it's a shame they didn't fit the 30kWh battery as used in the MX-30, 18kWh feels a bit too small.  I wonder if they've fixed the rotary engine's reliability.

** Shall we address the elephant in the room, the GLARING in its' absence and omission, topic of shifting the environmental impact (rare earth metals) & emissions (power stations etc) of EVs to another area of their life-cycle? Never mind what may or may not (likely NOT) arrive on the stage in the future, the HERE AND NOW is what matters - and deferring these issues and shooing them away to 2035 (is that supposed to be seen as a "long time and enough for VAST tech advances to be made" or something? Such hubris, as only human ego could exhibit)

You seem to have adopted the same "Pah! Internal combustion - HOW quaint!" air about you, as most EV fans seem to.

[NiHaoMike]

I strongly doubt that Atkinson cycle engines as found in many hybrids will need particulate filters because the Atkinson cycle runs much cleaner as part of the basic operating principle.

More and more cars are making use of Atkinson cycle engines to stay competitive.

I would say that rather than ban gasoline powered cars altogether, have a minimum MPG requirement that increases over time. At some point, it would no longer be practical to meet the requirement, effectively making it a ban.

[CatalinaWOW]

The learning curve concept has one other impact on this analysis.  If legislative or social initiatives drive ICE sales down something similar to the learning curve works against them.  Operating plants at far below their capacity is expensive, so ICE costs would likely go up substantially in this scenario, quite aside from any tax penalties.  Something like the learning curve works in reverse as you reduce quantities.  This side of the coin is somewhat terrifying to those whose use case is not well fitted to BEV. 

I doubt the latter. My assumption would be that at that point -if that ever happens- BEVs will be more versatile due to very improved batteries and charging infrastructure that can recharge a car to 600km to 800km of range in the same time and at equal costs like you can fill up a regular car with fuel nowadays.

Ofcourse there will always be people that have special needs that will be catered to. For example: Toyota still sells the Hilux with diesel engines but that is about their only model that is available with a diesel engine. It is THE standard for an offroad vehicle.

I said those who BEV vehicles do not work for will pay higher costs as production of ICE drops.  You disagreed, and then gave your reason why BEV will work for almost everyone.  Then admitted that some will have special needs.

So what is it that you actually disagree with?

[tautech]

I would say that rather than ban gasoline powered cars altogether, have a minimum MPG requirement that increases over time. At some point, it would no longer be practical to meet the requirement, effectively making it a ban.

Why penalise perfectly good vehicles perfectly suited to particular tasks ?
Sure a small % of the population might be using guzzlers but that is their and only their choice.

Let the marketplace decide what are the best suited to any particular task and manufacturers will adapt just as they have for the last 100 years.
As mentioned before Aholes shining chairs have no place in marketing decisions as they have no money in the game. Leave it to the professional that have done this stuff for decades to decide what will sell and provide the best solution for their valued customers.

Guide manufacturers based on efficiencies and total picture pollution targets with + incentives and leave all well alone to sort this out as it's no 5 minute fix.
As this thread well demonstrates the subject is so polarising neither side can ever be satisfied with the current state of affairs whereas those whom have the greatest investment should sort it out just as they have for decades.

I'm certainly not inclined to invest in emerging technologies at this time but rather in proven technology getting the smallest engine new car we have had in nearly 40 years, a nothing special 2L SUV of some 110KW with better economy than anything we've had in all those years therefore doing my bit in reducing my carbon footprint but with no intention to eliminate it. <---- Impossible pipe dream of idealists.

[eti]

This thread is the gift that keeps on giving by way of the fact of demonstrating how gullible people fall for lies again and again.

Enjoy your fossil fuel cars. They’ll be here for a few more decades yet. The more people have to fervently protest that their new things “are far better”, the more the complete opposite is clearly proven to be.

People are so easily led it’s quite embarrassing for them.


“Look how modern and cutting edge we are”

Schmucks.

[MadScientist]

Let the marketplace decide what are the best suited to any particular task and manufacturers will adapt just as they have for the last 100 years.

The auto industry is extremely regulated and the product you get is now largely dictated by rules and regs. The same process will control the disappearance of ice cars and the rise of the Bev substitute.

This idea free markets fix anything is bunkum

Private transport is a highly regulated and taxed marketplace. That will continue to define private transport priorities into thd next several decades along with the general desire to decarbonise private motoring

[MadScientist]

This thread is the gift that keeps on giving by way of the fact of demonstrating how gullible people fall for lies again and again.

Enjoy your fossil fuel cars. They’ll be here for a few more decades yet. The more people have to fervently protest that their new things “are far better”, the more the complete opposite is clearly proven to be.

People are so easily led it’s quite embarrassing for them.


“Look how modern and cutting edge we are”

Schmucks.

Electric traction is a far better method than the bag of bolts that is an internal combustion engine. The issue is the “ energy store “ as batteries get better that issue begins to fade away and the objectively superior traction motor , that electric is will rise in prominence

This has nothing to do with the green agenda. That agenda has different priorities and will largely drive change through rules , regulations , tax changes and built environment changes. This may result is less than optimum technology solutions but that’s not the goal of this agenda.

Ultimately Ice cars will follow the stream locomotive into obscurity largely because the costs and regulatory environment will make the majority switch and equally manufacturing has already picked the “winning horse   “

This is not about “modernity “ it’s about the public policy to decarbonise private transport and BEV technooogy offers an alternative. Even if today that alternative isn’t ideal. The desire to see decarbonisation implicitly accepts the transition has costs and drawbacks but the goal justifies it.

[JPortici]

Yeah, one of the first things I did on my previous diesel car besides removing the catalythic converter (which was all clogged up by soot anyway). This resulted in a 5% lower fuel use as well but also a lot of extra NOx and CH output. Not very good for the environment. Nowadays you shouldn't be buying a diesel car.

Be aware that GPF (gasoline particulate filter) and EGR is coming to petrol engines too (not sure about petrol hybrids).

For instance, the VW up! GTI is fitted with a GPF, to meet emissions limits.  I don't know if the filters are any better than the old DPF's which clog all the time if used for shorter journeys.  A friend of mine had a rather interesting experience with a Suzuki diesel (Ignis, I think) which ran after it was parked.  Apparently, a barely-documented feature where if it detects risk of clogging, it will run the engine despite ignition being off for about 15 minutes at reasonably high rpm to purge/regenerate the filter.  You can stop it by turning the car on and then off again, but could be, err, "interesting" for people who park in garages who don't know about these features.

It's been about three years since they have been introduced (Euro 6D)
They won't clog as DPF do because the temperature is inherently higher in gasoline engines (clogging effectively begins on a longer full throttle acceleration, regeneration begins the moment you release the throttle and a couple of seconds later is done. Or so say all the data travelling on the bus)
Customers have already lamented about the GPF as the performance/rs/gr version of the car sounds effectively like a diesel (weak sound, changing the exhaust does nothing if you don't bypass the filters) and of course performance curves are worse if you compare the same car before/after they fitted the filter.

Too bad these don't do anything for particulate emission, as with euro 5 already the particulate emissions from the engine was lower than the particulate from wheels and brakes. It seems that Euro 7 will FINALLY introduce a limit on those, it was about time. It depends on where you leve but here (pianura padana) the weather, the alps blocking the perturbations from the north, the high humidity factors, we live inside a permanent fog, whenever it rains the day after i have regained 2/20 of vision, the air is so clear. And cars are not entirely to blame, certainly not diesel engines.

Which, by the way, i intend to keep using and buying. Going gasoline simply doesn't make sense for me and most people around here, real fuel consumption is still too high, hibrids that would offset the fuel cost by going on battery during work-home commute have too high initial cost to consider unless you don't need it, there is basically no public transport unless you go to bigger cities. I am trying to find a new house so i can switch to riding a bike to work most days (which i try already to do during summer) and keep the gas guzzler for the nights out and weekends and holidays, but real estate is currently a disaster. half your paycheck to pay for a single room apartment, in small towns, like it was the centre of Milan.
And next car is probably going to be a Van. My octavia is already a microcamper

Anyway, our permanent fog is composed mostly of PM10 from heating, industry/electricity, burning of wood residue from trimming and only then cars. PM10 in cars is ridiculously low already, yet they are blamed, blame the person who can't do better instead of providing the alternative (bike lane on ALL main roads between cities and towns would be a good start, more effective public transport would be nice too. It would take me 1h30 and three bus changes to go to work instead of 15-20m by car or 30-35 by bike. Bus are used almost exclusively by students going to school and coming home)
But it's wood burning is what really gets me, it's the most stupid thing anyone could do in this day and age. Not talking about burning wood for home heating (sill.. Though we do have a stove, but it's a new one, it meets the newest emission standards, and we will start using our own wood that we planted for the purpose so the cycle should become self sustained) but burning residue while instead you could chop it and use it as a fertilizer, or compost leaves, that is just insane, but it's impossible to change people's mind. You get dead birds in your lawn as a warning if you don't mind your own business. Freaking old people with their old ways. And not many years ago wood residue burning would emit more particulate than cars over a year. Cars have only become better at it

[MadScientist]

The point is a workable solution to many usage patterns of private ice cars exists. Therefore given its very low pollution profile it makes sense to encourage that section of users to change to Bev. Currently that sector here IS embracing BEV usage. Others are waiting to see

That’s the nature of change , as the range of Bev models increases with better range and differences in buying price coupled with carbon taxes and increased owning costs on ice cars we shall see the current changeover rate dramatically increase. The signs are already there. The private roadside fast charger network is dramatically expanding to cope with demand so the changeover pattern is establishing

[tautech]

Private transport is a highly regulated and taxed marketplace. That will continue to define private transport priorities into thd next several decades along with the general desire to decarbonise private motoring

General ? In who's view ?
Not mine or much of any population.

Reduce I have no problem with nor would most I imagine but to decarbonise ?
Lets compare the carbon footprint of an EV shall we from production to EOL.
AFAIK ICE still wins.

[nctnico]

I strongly doubt that Atkinson cycle engines as found in many hybrids will need particulate filters because the Atkinson cycle runs much cleaner as part of the basic operating principle.

More and more cars are making use of Atkinson cycle engines to stay competitive.

I would say that rather than ban gasoline powered cars altogether, have a minimum MPG requirement that increases over time. At some point, it would no longer be practical to meet the requirement, effectively making it a ban.

The latter is exactly what the EU is doing! The 'nice' thing is that it is left to the market to come up with solutions rather than forcing a particular solution that may turn out not be a good fit after all.

[nctnico]

The learning curve concept has one other impact on this analysis.  If legislative or social initiatives drive ICE sales down something similar to the learning curve works against them.  Operating plants at far below their capacity is expensive, so ICE costs would likely go up substantially in this scenario, quite aside from any tax penalties.  Something like the learning curve works in reverse as you reduce quantities.  This side of the coin is somewhat terrifying to those whose use case is not well fitted to BEV. 

I doubt the latter. My assumption would be that at that point -if that ever happens- BEVs will be more versatile due to very improved batteries and charging infrastructure that can recharge a car to 600km to 800km of range in the same time and at equal costs like you can fill up a regular car with fuel nowadays.

Ofcourse there will always be people that have special needs that will be catered to. For example: Toyota still sells the Hilux with diesel engines but that is about their only model that is available with a diesel engine. It is THE standard for an offroad vehicle.

I said those who BEV vehicles do not work for will pay higher costs as production of ICE drops.  You disagreed, and then gave your reason why BEV will work for almost everyone.  Then admitted that some will have special needs.

So what is it that you actually disagree with?

I don't really disagree. I just think that in the long run -if batteries and charging infrastructure improve a lot- there will be an extremely small number of people needing non-BEV vehicles. These people are likely to needing specialised vehicles anyway in their current situation.

[MadScientist]

The learning curve concept has one other impact on this analysis.  If legislative or social initiatives drive ICE sales down something similar to the learning curve works against them.  Operating plants at far below their capacity is expensive, so ICE costs would likely go up substantially in this scenario, quite aside from any tax penalties.  Something like the learning curve works in reverse as you reduce quantities.  This side of the coin is somewhat terrifying to those whose use case is not well fitted to BEV. 

I doubt the latter. My assumption would be that at that point -if that ever happens- BEVs will be more versatile due to very improved batteries and charging infrastructure that can recharge a car to 600km to 800km of range in the same time and at equal costs like you can fill up a regular car with fuel nowadays.

Ofcourse there will always be people that have special needs that will be catered to. For example: Toyota still sells the Hilux with diesel engines but that is about their only model that is available with a diesel engine. It is THE standard for an offroad vehicle.

I said those who BEV vehicles do not work for will pay higher costs as production of ICE drops.  You disagreed, and then gave your reason why BEV will work for almost everyone.  Then admitted that some will have special needs.

So what is it that you actually disagree with?

I don't really disagree. I just think that in the long run -if batteries and charging infrastructure improve a lot- there will be an extremely small number of people needing non-BEV vehicles. These people are likely to needing specialised vehicles anyway in their current situation.

I agree entirely. In fact for non specialised general purpose private motoring ( shopping,  visiting grandma , running the kids to ballet classes etc. the current range of BEVs is entirely adequate. The next iteration will encompasses more and more usage patterns leaving a very small group needing ice outside of commercial users. Those private ice users will pay more and more to stay with an ice choice , that’s already happening today as annual taxes are heavily biased towards ice and annual running costs are considerably higher

[tom66]

The latter is exactly what the EU is doing! The 'nice' thing is that it is left to the market to come up with solutions rather than forcing a particular solution that may turn out not be a good fit after all.

Yes - if hydrogen is the best solution or if some other solution as yet to be seen emerges it deserves to succeed.

Currently it doesn't look like the future will be anything other than mostly electric vehicles powered by batteries but it could change.  There would have to be a significant change to make me consider using a hydrogen vehicle, like hydrogen becoming dirt cheap and the cars becoming a lot more accessible and widely used. 

[NiHaoMike]

Why penalise perfectly good vehicles perfectly suited to particular tasks ?
Sure a small % of the population might be using guzzlers but that is their and only their choice.

Existing cars would not be affected by that measure, only new cars. Commercial vehicles are also excluded.

Also note that efficient cars don't have to be tiny.
https://www.toyota.com/sienna/

[MadScientist]

The latter is exactly what the EU is doing! The 'nice' thing is that it is left to the market to come up with solutions rather than forcing a particular solution that may turn out not be a good fit after all.

Yes - if hydrogen is the best solution or if some other solution as yet to be seen emerges it deserves to succeed.

Currently it doesn't look like the future will be anything other than mostly electric vehicles powered by batteries but it could change.  There would have to be a significant change to make me consider using a hydrogen vehicle, like hydrogen becoming dirt cheap and the cars becoming a lot more accessible and widely used.

If you read distribution experts they say creating a safe and secure hydrogen distribution network is a very sizeable task. Secondly car companies have largely decide on Bev over hydrogen. You can’t buy what isvt made

BEVs are very simple cars to make and most of the car industry now has manufacturing experience of Bev production

Hence this isn’t about user choice per se. It’s about a combination of consumer preference , legislative and tax positions and manufacturing Options.

A manufacturer facing a future of increasing legal , technical and fiscal restrictions on their product. Is going to “ pivot” away to a product where more freedom is present. Ice production gets more and more regulated and costs to the user are continuously rising  as governments make owning and using ice ) and private cars ) more expensive

Manufactures see the  writing  on the wall and several major car companies have already committed to a majority BEV future   In the end you can only buy what’s practical to be manufacturered.

The other issue is in many countries is the changing societal values around private cars. Restrictions on usage ,  changes to roads to make car usage more difficult   Conjestion limits. Urban speed limits coupled with ever increasing taxes and other regulations.

The net result is the motorist is arriving at a confluence of situations. Firstly frivolous car ownership will be increasing expensive Bev or ICE secondly societal attitudes are changing , the green agenda continua to gain traction in many developed oconomies

Increasing the “ petrol head” view is seen as anti environment and socially irrresponsible or seen as high taxes on engine capacity ( here owning a big engine is very expensive )

This confluence of events means that the whole survival of thd sector is reliant on change. That change is increasing seen in the industry’s as electric vehicles.