[mytailorisrich]

Frankly, from the outside Germany looks like a strategic policy disaster since at least Merkel became Chancellor (energy, immigration, etc) but with hindsight, and without following closely, I'd say since Schroeder.

This ban on new ICEs in 2035 is not very realistic and is harmful to European industry, at least without a massive investment plan that does not seem to materialise anywhere. That's why there's pushback.

But there is worse: the UK has set the date for the ban at 2030 (because of course we can do better than the EU now that we are free..) and is doing even less to prevent that ticking timebomb from blowing up in everybody's face.

[dkjaudyeqooe]

I think you're confusing politics in 2023 and politics in 2035.

The point of the ban is to focus people's minds (in particular car manufacturers) on transitioning to BEV vehicles, inducing a synchronized movement in that direction and promoting economies of scale. It gives companies building charging infrastructure and supply chains some confidence there will be a large market going forward.

In the event that it isn't practical, or is economically damaging, to ban ICE cars in 2035, of course the ban would be delayed or modified. It's not like the EU is going to damage its industry or economy in blind pursuit of a commitment in 2023. They say a week is a long time in politics; never mind 12 years.

Now that is not to say that it won't happen, quite the opposite. I think people will lose interest in ICE cars much earlier than 2035. What is overlooked in the debate today is that BEV cars will be much cheaper than ICE cars i the long run.

ICE cars are very complicated mechanical machines. BEV cars are much simpler to build and use less parts, and the parts that remain are more likely to be standardised and built at enormous scales, pushing prices down. It's quite likely, at least for the lower end of the market, that there will be a standard drive train (battery + motors + management systems) around which a variety of car shells are built.

People point to the high costs of BEV cars, and inputs like lithium, but they only help the transition. It's much harder to invest in building products that are cheap than those that are expensive. High prices promote investment and new players and in the future it creates more production which brings prices down.

It's handy to think about the BEV industry like you think about the technology industry, it's got a lot more in common with that than the ICE car industry. In 2035 ICE cars will be dismissed as obsolete by 99% of people and buying one would be like installing a spinning hard disk as your main drive instead of NVMe.

[TheLoafOfBread]

Product's construction complexity is irrelevant and always was. What matter is usability convenience of the end product.

Apple's products are selling not because it is easy to make them, but because it is easy to use them.

As an owner of BEV, this is massive PITA of current generation of electric vehicles.

* They are more expensive than ICE

* If you can't charge at home, EV's are massively inconvenient to own, especially when you need to fight with half-assed applications to control charging. Why am I using Another Stupid App (tm) to charge, when I need NO app to get gas?

* Charging takes ludicrous amount time compared to taking gas.

* If you are forced to charge on fast DC chargers, EV's are also more expensive to run than ICE

[schiffern]

>Product's construction complexity is irrelevant and always was.

From the post you replied to:

"What is overlooked in the debate today is that BEV cars will be much cheaper than ICE cars in the long run."

It's relevant because it relates to cost, which is your very first bullet point.

In the USA we're already moving toward mandating a simple credit card tap/swipe for payment. This should be done globally.

Your other issues are solved by adding more charging points, which we need anyway. If you have L2 chargers at your curbside/work/grocery store/movie theater/etc (where your car is parked anyway), the less you need to rely on costly and time-consuming L3 charging.

[TheLoafOfBread]

> It's relevant because it relates to cost, which is your very first bullet point.

This would hold water only if BEVs would be actually cheaper, they are more expensive than complex ICEs. So your whole thesis goes out of the window.

[schiffern]

>> BEV cars will be much cheaper

> they are more expensive

Present tense vs. future tense. Please read more closely!

The (Wright's Law) trend of EV cost is quite clearly dropping below ICE vehicles. At their recent investor day, Tesla unveiled the first plausible engineering pathway to a $25k vehicle, ie equivalent to a $17k ICE car.

It's no great secret that currently the biggest problem with EVs is upfront cost. That's why the serious players are focused on precisely this problem.

[lelanthran]

> BEV cars are much simpler to build and use less parts,

While this is true, I think it's irrelevant to the consumer that doesn't buy bottom-of-the-range cars.

The major reliability pain-points are in the turbo, the automatic transmission and the 4WD, all of which are optional in an ICE car.

Yet, the consumers are opting for the more complicated and less reliable cars which have turbo and auto transmissions (and, for SUVs, 4WD). If the consumers cared at all about the complexity and lack of reliability they wouldn't be choosing these options.

That consumers have, for ICE cars, chosen the less reliable and more complex drivetrain options, indicates, to me, that the simplicity of a full electric drivetrain is not a selling point.

> and the parts that remain are more likely to be standardised and built at enormous scales, pushing prices down. It's quite likely, at least for the lower end of the market, that there will be a standard drive train (battery + motors + management systems) around which a variety of car shells are built.

There's nothing about ICE engines that make them any less standardisable than EV drivetrains. If there was any advantage to manufacturers standardising on drivetrains, they would have done so by now. They haven't.

Drivetrain standardisation is first prize but it's not going to happen. Right now with ICE vehicles manufacturers are switching to a subscription for things like heated seats, remote-start keyfobs, etc. There's no way in hell that Toyota, BMW, et all are going to use a drivetrain that can be swapped out by the consumer for a non-Toyota/BMW/etc drivetrain.

It's in the consumers' best interest that the drivetrains be standardised, but it's in the manufacturers worst interest that the consumer have options.

[mytailorisrich]

I think it's a bit naive to announce a ban and then to expect that everything will adjust itself.

There are huge supply chain challenges.

There are also huge infrastructure challenges. Charging stations, the whole grid, the whole electricity production capability that has to ramp up.

There must be tens of billions worth of investment driven by the state for all this to happen.

[mqus]

The car makers already announced that they will adjust. Just look up the plans of VW for example. They probably aren't as opposed as you might think.

[mytailorisrich]

That's only one part of the equation, as explained.