The EU wants to ban internal combustion engines until 2035
The carbon footprint of electric vehicles depends very much on how the electricity for running the vehicle is produced. With Germany’s current energy mix electric cars produce higher emissions over the whole life cycle of the car than highly efficient internal combustion vehicles. The emissions are just produced somewhere else (e.g. at the coal fired power plant).
I also believe that the development of internal combustion engines went in the wrong direction. in the 1980s I had several VW Beatles, usually with 1200 or 1300 ccm piston displacement and around 35 to 40 hp. The car would top at 120km/h. If I would drive them carefully, not exceeding 100km/h and minimizing fast accelerations, they would consume 7.2l / 100km on average. Nowadays, when I rent a car during my stays in Germany, the cars have somewhere between 200 and 400 hp. They still consume about the same amount of fuel, realistically 6-9 l/100 km despite different statements of the manufacturers. So all the engineers smartness and work went into increasing horsepower while maintaining the fuel consumption. Rather than minimizing fuel consumption and maintaining performance.
Car companies claim that the markets don’t want fuel efficient cars. One example is the 3 liter car (93 miles per imperial gallon) that was promised and developed by VW (Lupo 3L) and Audi (Audi A2 1.2 TDI 3L.), the companies developed two cars that consumed around 3 liters per 100km. They flopped in the markets because supposedly they were too expensive due to the high technology used for saving fuel, had litte comfort and were very small. Others argue that the were ahead of their time. The war, even went further, towards a 1l/100km car:
It went even further with respect to reducing fuel consumption.
“During the period of series production of the Lupo 3L, Volkswagen also presented the 1L Concept, a prototype made with the objective of proving the capability of producing a roadworthy vehicle consuming only 1 litre of fuel per 100 kilometres (235 miles per US gallon).”
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Lupo
So yes, commercially these first 3l cars were not successful. But why? Most of the customers were not aware of the climate crisis yet. Probably now more would considering buying such car. Car companies started to look at SUVs as a revenue source. SUVs are basically crappy, simple utility vehicles that have been made attractive to middle class people, women in particular who feel more save in them, and men because the think SUVs are macho. We bought a Nissan X-trail because I thought I need a vehicle to tow the trailer with out boat, but that car is made dirt cheap and very basic basically plastic fittings around a very simple frame. But margins for car companies are tremendous because cost of production is low because the SUVs are so basic. That’s why the car companies pushed the SUV category. Big profits, huge bonuses for he managers, great returns for the shareholders, all at cost of for the planet and our children’s future.
So much about the car manufacturers motives. What about customers? As pointed out above, 100 km with a gallon is technically feasible. But “In 2022 Chevy’s EV lineup in Detroit, Majoros quickly highlighted the newest version of the Chevy Tahoe, a $53,000, eight-person SUV that averages only 21mpg in the city. Jeep is also coming out with a 2023 version of the Grand Wagoneer L. It will be $90,000 and 19 feet long with an abysmal 14mpg in the city” (Source: PCMag). People are buying this monsters.
Sort of conclusions
Coming back to the beginning of this blog. I believe that forbidding internal combustion engines is the wrong thing to do. There is a lot of potential in that technology, if the development objectives are right.