No ICE from 2040?!?

[Pica-Pica]

PhantomPH said:

I was thinking about this last night whilst unable to sleep and realised just what an impact this would actually have to a number of 'high worth' brands and their businesses.

Imagine you worked for any of the following...now imagine I have given you 20 years to R&D full non ICE propulsion technology (in a manner that befits the brand ethos and product ethic), retool your entire production facility/facilities and then redesign, replace and relaunch every single model in your lineup...and just to add extra pressure, you are not allowed to bankrupt the company whilst doing so. Ouch!!

Ferrari
Porsche
Bentley
Lamborghini
Aston Martin
Audi
VW
Ford
BMW
...

The more I think about this 'deadline' the more I think it will not happen. 20 years is really not that long when you look at it that way.

Maybe, but 'read the small pint', hybrid vehicles will continue.

[Pica-Pica]

Ares said:

Interestingly, on Sky News last night, they were including Hybrid tech in the 2040 EV-only objective - i.e., doing a Volvo and only banning ICE-only vehicles.

As far as I have read; Volvo will 'offer' hybrid and EV on all new car platforms. A long cry from the medias 'Volvo stopping ICE cars from 2019 (or whenever'

[Ares]

Pica-Pica said:

Ares said:

Interestingly, on Sky News last night, they were including Hybrid tech in the 2040 EV-only objective - i.e., doing a Volvo and only banning ICE-only vehicles.

As far as I have read; Volvo will 'offer' hybrid and EV on all new car platforms. A long cry from the medias 'Volvo stopping ICE cars from 2019 (or whenever'

yes. Exactly.

[J4CKO]

I think Hybrids may be redolent of these in a few years,



We should have a kind of time capsule thread, set a template for predictions on where things will be ten years hence, open it for submissions a week, then close the topic and then see who was the most accurate in 2027 ?

[Pica-Pica]

J4CKO said:

I think Hybrids may be redolent of these in a few years,



We should have a kind of time capsule thread, set a template for predictions on where things will be ten years hence, open it for submissions a week, then close the topic and then see who was the most accurate in 2027 ?

Yes my Sony mini-disc player/HiFi unit gave up the ghost last year, I have a Sony MAPS-1 now (still have the Celestine Ditton 44s). Yes, wrong thread, I guess.

[Gary C]

J4CKO said:

Love all the "There may be a problem, best not bother and carry on as normal" type comments

The IC engine is dying, not yet and it has served well, but it is creaking, new dawn approaching and whether there is enough Lithium, electricity, superchargers etc isnt going to make any difference to the final outcome, that is the bulk of personal and public passenger transport will be electrically powered.

The stakes are too high to ignore, Tesla has come from nowhere and given the old guard a wake up call, like Apple did with the mobile phone, taking existing/new tech, packaging it and marketing it very well.

There will be challenges, but to get to where we are with IC engines, there have been, road building, fuel infrastructure (drive past Stanlow and marvel how much work went into that)

Whoever cracks battery tech to make a charging and capacity leap forward will be very, very rich, the Saudis/Opec income stream is up for grabs and it isnt like the existing stuff isnt working anyway.

With all the new tech developments, they seem obvious once they have happened, LCD screens for example, once they had been developed and could be made at a reasonable cost, the CRT screen, always a bodge in comparison dissapeared in ten years or so, whats the point of making the old tech when nobody wants it any more ? we havent hit that just yet, well maybe we have with Volvos announcement and the 2040 announcement.

I think I may celebrate by nipping to Blockbusters to rent a Jean Claude Van Damme film on VHS !

not disagreeing with you basic point but it's very different from the birth of the IC transport age. Every step was an improvement in mobility, this one 'may' involve a temporary step back.

Much of the tech you mentioned had been known about for many many years before it hit the consumer market, but 3 minute charge 400 mile batteries are still theoretical/experimental (though thought to be close) and will take time, though 20 years may be easily enough to become mature.

But the infrastructure is going to be interesting. 23.5 kv line to every charging station to provide sufficient peak power to charge several 3 minute charge vehicles ?
if we have a system of peak charge demand in the morning (ie mirroring current filling habits) then we will need to massively invest in either greater energy generation or more sensibly, energy storage (more batteries, or the interesting atmosphere liquification plant system) maybe local to the charging stations themselves which in a big city is going to be difficult (expensive) to place.

Lots of challenges, and interesting times ahead. At least it will increase the need for electricity which is always going to be good for my pension

However without a marker in the sand would it ever happen.

[Toltec]

oyster said:

The average daily mileage per car in 2013 was 21 miles. This means a full charge on a current EV every 6 or 7 days. Assuming extended range by 2040, you could be looking at only 2-3 million full car charges per day.

This charging happens during the small hours - probably not going to use any more power than all the kettles, TVs and lights operating at 8pm.

If we assume a 30kWh battery - ish - then that would be 75Gwh a night. There is about a 10GW difference in demand from day to night so that does look feasible, though at present it would have to be generated by gas or coal unless the link to France is big enough to buy their nuclear output.

This site http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ is interesting, note the French site too and the difference in the way they generate power.

[98elise]

ZX10R NIN said:

It's kind of misleading because although they're looking to ban the sale of ICE vehicles they aren't going to ban the sale of Hybrids both Petrol & Diesel.

If everyone went to pure EV's then London alone would need two new power stations to cope with demand & given on how long it takes to approve a runway can you imagine how long it would take to get two new nuclear power stations approved.

Does that mean we're getting rid of speed humps as they're outside most peoples homes & are a cause of air pollution.

Edited by ZX10R NIN on Wednesday 26th July 16:40

I'm pretty sure most people have missed the fact its pure ICE that's being banned, not hybrids. I might be wrong but that's what I've heard, and it seems backed up by the BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40726868

BBC article said:

Hybrid vehicles, which combine petrol and electric motors, will not be included in the sales ban.

Getting back to the "we will need 10 Hinkley Points" arguments, that's just not true. The mainstream media just don't understand Energy and Power. Energy is what you fill your battery with, Power is the rate you fill it (or consume it). The only issue we currently have is that when charging at peak hours POWER would need to be throttled, but overnight you would have no issues.

The average driver will need about 7kWh per day. Cars spend most of their time stationary, so lets say there is a period of 10 hours (probably overnight) when most charging will be done. That means you would need a continuous average draw of about 700 watts per car during that period.

700 watts draw (average) per car is easily achievable using the current infrastructure. That's a mid sized garden floodlight. Your hob could be anything up to 9kW, and a single ring would 1.5 to 2kw. If 700 watts will cause us problems in the future, then we are screwed now.

The next step would be to use battery storage to even out the load, and limit the need to throttle at peaks. This is already happening in other countries.

Alternatively you can believe the "news" papers and start worrying where they are going to build those 10 new nuclear powerstations

[Farmboy UK]

The biggest mistake people make when looking at charging is assuming that every EV is charging from empty everyday. Most EV owners I know use 10-40% of their battery a day. Some people may only need 30kWh per week if they have a short, city commute!

[Ali_T]

Why are they so determined to focus on electric cars? We don't have enough lithium, we don't have the electricity infrastructure and we don't have any plans in place to improve either. Why isn't the focus on biofuel and hydrogen? Both can easily be introduced to the current infrastructure, remove the NOx problem and reduce or negate CO2?

[FourWheelDrift]

Ares said:

Interestingly, on Sky News last night, they were including Hybrid tech in the 2040 EV-only objective - i.e., doing a Volvo and only banning ICE-only vehicles.

So no cars will be banned as all ICE cars are hybrids, they use a battery to power systems on the car and an alternator to recharge it. Remove the battery and you won't get far without it, it's an essential part of the ICE/Hybrid power system

[covmutley]

Farmboy UK said:

The biggest mistake people make when looking at charging is assuming that every EV is charging from empty everyday. Most EV owners I know use 10-40% of their battery a day. Some people may only need 30kWh per week if they have a short, city commute!

People are adverse to change and put up barriers. My i3 is on order. my boss said he couldnt be bothered with plugging it in every night. i would sooner do that than queue at a petrol station and get stinking diesel on my hands.

Switch it the other way, if it were diesel cars being introduced:

.. i cant use all the cars power until the engine has warmed up?
... I have to wait 5-10 mins for the cabin to warm up?

[soupdragon1]

Do people actually 'care' what will happen to companies like Ferrari, Aston Martin etc....?

They need to either innovate or shut up shop, simple as that. You've gotta think they'll innovate though....the potential to get huge acceleration from a battery is already there....give them 20 years and these Ferraris will literally be able to strip the tears from your eyeballs

[J4CKO]

Gary C said:

J4CKO said:

Love all the "There may be a problem, best not bother and carry on as normal" type comments

The IC engine is dying, not yet and it has served well, but it is creaking, new dawn approaching and whether there is enough Lithium, electricity, superchargers etc isnt going to make any difference to the final outcome, that is the bulk of personal and public passenger transport will be electrically powered.

The stakes are too high to ignore, Tesla has come from nowhere and given the old guard a wake up call, like Apple did with the mobile phone, taking existing/new tech, packaging it and marketing it very well.

There will be challenges, but to get to where we are with IC engines, there have been, road building, fuel infrastructure (drive past Stanlow and marvel how much work went into that)

Whoever cracks battery tech to make a charging and capacity leap forward will be very, very rich, the Saudis/Opec income stream is up for grabs and it isnt like the existing stuff isnt working anyway.

With all the new tech developments, they seem obvious once they have happened, LCD screens for example, once they had been developed and could be made at a reasonable cost, the CRT screen, always a bodge in comparison dissapeared in ten years or so, whats the point of making the old tech when nobody wants it any more ? we havent hit that just yet, well maybe we have with Volvos announcement and the 2040 announcement.

I think I may celebrate by nipping to Blockbusters to rent a Jean Claude Van Damme film on VHS !

not disagreeing with you basic point but it's very different from the birth of the IC transport age. Every step was an improvement in mobility, this one 'may' involve a temporary step back.

Much of the tech you mentioned had been known about for many many years before it hit the consumer market, but 3 minute charge 400 mile batteries are still theoretical/experimental (though thought to be close) and will take time, though 20 years may be easily enough to become mature.

But the infrastructure is going to be interesting. 23.5 kv line to every charging station to provide sufficient peak power to charge several 3 minute charge vehicles ?
if we have a system of peak charge demand in the morning (ie mirroring current filling habits) then we will need to massively invest in either greater energy generation or more sensibly, energy storage (more batteries, or the interesting atmosphere liquification plant system) maybe local to the charging stations themselves which in a big city is going to be difficult (expensive) to place.

Lots of challenges, and interesting times ahead. At least it will increase the need for electricity which is always going to be good for my pension

However without a marker in the sand would it ever happen.

Production batteries that had 400 miles range in 3 minutes would be the death knell for IC, the watershed moment that they get dropped like a stone.

There are perhaps parallels with the Internet, near as makes no odds to 20 years ago when I moved in to this house I had a US Robotics 33,600 modem, so a theoretical 33 kilobits or so a second, usually much less, that was an upgrade from a 28k and before that a 14k, plus an even slower one before that but I cant remember the speed. Anyway 56k came out not long after I got my 33k one.

So, we were told at the time that 56k was the fastest we could ever get, the infrastructure wouldn't support any more but 20 years later, on a standard line we have an actual 75 mb/sec.

Twenty years hence we can stream high quality video, we dont need to own CD's any more, look at your Android/Iphone vs the Nokia, Motorola or Sony you had in 1995, look at how the mobile networks have evolved to carry data at 4g speeds.

If the demand is there, if the potential profits are there investments are made and stuff gets done, 22 years is a long time, I suspect most will have gone electric and there will be little fanfare.

When that watershed moment happens, be prepared for a massive glut of very nice, cheap, secondhand IC engined cars to flood the market, could make for some interesting deals for motorings bottom feeders like me

Edited by J4CKO on Thursday 27th July 13:40

[Ares]

FourWheelDrift said:

Ares said:

Interestingly, on Sky News last night, they were including Hybrid tech in the 2040 EV-only objective - i.e., doing a Volvo and only banning ICE-only vehicles.

So no cars will be banned as all ICE cars are hybrids, they use a battery to power systems on the car and an alternator to recharge it. Remove the battery and you won't get far without it, it's an essential part of the ICE/Hybrid power system

I think even our politicians will be able to differentiate....

[SuperVM]

I don't think they'll need to be worried about banning the sale of petrol and diesel cars by 2040, demand for them will have long since disappeared. I'm massively into cars and love V8s, but that doesn't mean I think I couldn't love a car without an ICE. Unfortunately, I think the future for anyone who wants to actually drive is pretty bleak. I see the future as:

• Five years from now we have several affordable, compelling electric cars. The Chevy Bolt is one such example that already exists, though admittedly still a bit expensive for what it does.
• There will be a tipping point at which these electric vehicles make more sense to the average motorist than the average ICE car, I think this will be fairly soon, probably five to ten years.
• Cars will eventually be self-driving all the time and as a result anyone wishing to drive his/her own car manually will find insurance premiums completely unaffordable.
• Electric cars will eventually offer better performance in all regards, power, economy, cost and even handling (at the moment there is more weight, but batteries will continue to develop and they sit so low in the chassis anyway).
• Eventually human drivers completely banned from the roads, hopefully we can carry on at track days.
• Car ownership models change so very few of us actually own them, but instead just arrange regular collection and drop-off for school runs, etc. (for those who say you are too rural for this to work, you'll just pay more as the car will have to come further from the depot to get you)
• Maintaining ICE cars full stop will be very difficult, as parts will be hard to get hold of.

I just can't see how electric cars won't completely take over and from that how we will even continue to drive. Even now the range isn't an issue for most of us on 95% of our trips. The complexity of an electric car is just so much less and it is an amazing achievement that IC engines work as well as they do. Choosing to control many little explosions a second to propel something when you have the option of a much simpler system seems odd.

[98elise]

Ali_T said:

Why are they so determined to focus on electric cars? We don't have enough lithium, we don't have the electricity infrastructure and we don't have any plans in place to improve either. Why isn't the focus on biofuel and hydrogen? Both can easily be introduced to the current infrastructure, remove the NOx problem and reduce or negate CO2?

How can Hydrogen be easily introduced to the current infrastructure? Its needs an entirely new production, distribution, and storage infrastructure and is very very inefficient to create. Its a bh to store, and need to be kept at somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 psi! Its also very good at leaking.

BEV just needs a socket....pretty much any socket.

[skinnyman]

I currently drive a V8, as I like my noise, but when I decide to be a bit more sensible in 5-10yrs I'd more than happily have an EV. The range wouldn't be an issue for 99% of my journies, and hopefully pricing will become more sensible once more manufacturers get involved. At the minute the base spec Tesla 3 is rumoured to be around £30k, whereas look at something like the new Insignia, the top of the range model is mid 20's. If pricing gets sensible, I'd happily have one.

[Ares]

skinnyman said:

I currently drive a V8, as I like my noise, but when I decide to be a bit more sensible in 5-10yrs I'd more than happily have an EV. The range wouldn't be an issue for 99% of my journies, and hopefully pricing will become more sensible once more manufacturers get involved. At the minute the base spec Tesla 3 is rumoured to be around £30k, whereas look at something like the new Insignia, the top of the range model is mid 20's. If pricing gets sensible, I'd happily have one.

You probably share an opinion with the majority of car buyers.

I've tried to talk Mrs Ares into an i3, unsuccessfully so far. But it would suit her perfectly, never drives more than 50miles in one go, mostly town driving.

I looked at a Tesla S, came very close but didn't quite grab me enough as a drive.....and the pull of a 500bhp Italian was too great. This time. Next time?...who knows. The P95/P100 would fit my lifestyle easily.

[Superflow]

skinnyman said:

I currently drive a V8, as I like my noise, but when I decide to be a bit more sensible in 5-10yrs I'd more than happily have an EV. The range wouldn't be an issue for 99% of my journies, and hopefully pricing will become more sensible once more manufacturers get involved. At the minute the base spec Tesla 3 is rumoured to be around £30k, whereas look at something like the new Insignia, the top of the range model is mid 20's. If pricing gets sensible, I'd happily have one.

5-10 years sensible?so I'm guessing your in your mid fifties now yes.