It promotes investing into electric cars tight now. Without the bans, some investors might be hopeful to still profit beyond the 30s. But with the ban, it’s clear for all investors to invest in electric cars.
A polly knows they will likely not be in power when they set the target so when time comes their party can say ‘see we had a plan but you voted us out of office so we couldn’t act on it and the people you voted in didn’t follow through with our plan.’
I can see how hybrids will probably be a thing for a very long time, for people in very cold and remote places.
But yeah, the EV revolution is a fact. For any country that has proper electric infrastructure and who doesn’t have protections for legacy car manufacturers, EV’s are cheaper and have lower operating/maintenance costs.
In Canada, the gas model is ~$20,000 the hybrid is ~$30,000 and the electric model is ~$40,000. I keep hearing that EVs are supposed to be cheaper, but I haven’t seen it yet.
Because you don’t take the money saved over time into consideration and if you look at the Niro it’s closer to 6k each step (the aren’t a ton of models that offer each variations either so your comment is kinda misinformation).
I’m talking about the Hyundai Kona, I think. I definitely agree that they are cheaper to run. I’ve heard before too that they are cheaper to produce, but haven’t seen any evidence of it so far.
the main hurdle, other than the obvious one that the more performance drive trains require conflict minerals, is one of upsell. customers expect evs to be more expensive, so lower trim levels are not available for the electric version.
the peugeot e308 has the same price increase.
also, engineering a car for multiple drive trains is more expensive to begin with.
Long term planning is for letting the industry change before a ban is necessary.
It’s working just fine. Manufacturers are changing to EVs to avoid being caught in a future ban. Like OP said, there won’t be anything left to ban, because the politic is successful.
A shorter scope wouldn’t be as successful. If they banned fossil cars tomorrow, people would still drive them and the police couldn’t do anything but fine people all day long. It would also result in a massive opposition potentially postponing the decision indefinitely. It would probably also be in conflict with other laws in several countries. An immediate ban might infringe on the right to property or such.
Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t mean a distant 2080 target means the fleet won’t shift - I just meant it’s a sign of political cowardice which doesn’t really benefit anyone, not least because, as you say, manufacturers need a stable predictable environment
The target doesn’t mean nothing happens until then. Car dealerships in the UK have a maximum quota of ICE cars they can sell before being hit with additional costs. That quota is decreasing over time until we reach the “ban” date.
Its sounds odd for me that some countries plan banning fuel-powered cars in ~30 years.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think there is much left to ban by then.
It promotes investing into electric cars tight now. Without the bans, some investors might be hopeful to still profit beyond the 30s. But with the ban, it’s clear for all investors to invest in electric cars.
True, but why set a limit in 30-40 years?
Thats a whole generation, most people that work today will be retired by then (hopefully).
30 to 40 years ago, lead-free fuel, catalytic converters, airbags, and ABS became more common and started to become standard.
Because it is a useless gesture.
A polly knows they will likely not be in power when they set the target so when time comes their party can say ‘see we had a plan but you voted us out of office so we couldn’t act on it and the people you voted in didn’t follow through with our plan.’
I can see how hybrids will probably be a thing for a very long time, for people in very cold and remote places.
But yeah, the EV revolution is a fact. For any country that has proper electric infrastructure and who doesn’t have protections for legacy car manufacturers, EV’s are cheaper and have lower operating/maintenance costs.
In Canada, the gas model is ~$20,000 the hybrid is ~$30,000 and the electric model is ~$40,000. I keep hearing that EVs are supposed to be cheaper, but I haven’t seen it yet.
Due to protection against cheap Chinese cars.
In China, you can get an EV below $10K.
For countries without domestic car manufacturers,.Chinese EV’s are by far the cheapest cars to import.
Because you don’t take the money saved over time into consideration and if you look at the Niro it’s closer to 6k each step (the aren’t a ton of models that offer each variations either so your comment is kinda misinformation).
I’m talking about the Hyundai Kona, I think. I definitely agree that they are cheaper to run. I’ve heard before too that they are cheaper to produce, but haven’t seen any evidence of it so far.
the main hurdle, other than the obvious one that the more performance drive trains require conflict minerals, is one of upsell. customers expect evs to be more expensive, so lower trim levels are not available for the electric version.
the peugeot e308 has the same price increase.
also, engineering a car for multiple drive trains is more expensive to begin with.
A target that is more than 2 election cycles away isn’t a serious target - it’s a way of looking like they’re doing something without doing so
Long term planning is for letting the industry change before a ban is necessary.
It’s working just fine. Manufacturers are changing to EVs to avoid being caught in a future ban. Like OP said, there won’t be anything left to ban, because the politic is successful.
A shorter scope wouldn’t be as successful. If they banned fossil cars tomorrow, people would still drive them and the police couldn’t do anything but fine people all day long. It would also result in a massive opposition potentially postponing the decision indefinitely. It would probably also be in conflict with other laws in several countries. An immediate ban might infringe on the right to property or such.
Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t mean a distant 2080 target means the fleet won’t shift - I just meant it’s a sign of political cowardice which doesn’t really benefit anyone, not least because, as you say, manufacturers need a stable predictable environment
The target doesn’t mean nothing happens until then. Car dealerships in the UK have a maximum quota of ICE cars they can sell before being hit with additional costs. That quota is decreasing over time until we reach the “ban” date.