There have been a number of reports that Germany will ban the internal combustion engine (ICE) by the year 2030, i.e. in just 14 years. This has been already voted on by Germany’s Federal Council (Bundesrat).
Although 14 years can be plenty of time to usher in a technical revolution (e.g. think of how much technology changed from 1976 to 1990), it will not be anywhere enough time for Germany to overcome the huge technical and financial obstacles it faces in achieving the lofty target.
Already today leading German media outlets are dumping cold water on the news. For example online flagship national daily Die Welt comments here that the aim is nothing but a “fairy tale”, writing:
The discussed ban of cars with internal combustion engines by 2030 will not come. CSU politicians Seehofer and Dolbrindt are going to see to that.”
Even Germany’s leading Green Party politician Winfried Kretschmann, Minister of the state of Baden Württemberg, home to auto giant Daimler Benz, is opposed to a specific deadline. Die Welt writes that a number of leading politicians are not in favor of any deadline for abolishing ICEs, meaning there is no consensus to drive the ambitious project.
Another obstacle is the EU government in Brussels, which is responsible for regulating automobiles in Europe, thus making a go-it-alone by a single country impossible.
A further obstacle is the total lack of infrastructure for electric cars. According to Stefan Bratzel, Chief of the Center of Automotive Management (CAM):
We first need the necessary infrastructure, the charging stations, and enough power plants to supply clean electricity before cars with internal combustion engines can be replaced. That is not possible by 2030.”
Moreover, these “clean energy power plants” have been facing increasingly fierce opposition lately, as Germany’s landscapes have been spoiled by wind parks and consumers are angered by skyrocketing electricity prices, and industry concerned about an unstable power grid and the prospects of blackouts. It’s a fact that the installation of new wind energy capacity in Germany fell by almost 20% in 2015, from the high set in 2014.
In the ICE ban scheme, the state would not allow the registration of automobiles with internal combustion engines by 2030. The Bundesrat insists that the 2030 deadline is necessary if the country ever hopes to meet the target of a CO2-emissions-free transportation sector by the year 2050.
Minister of Transport: “utter nonsense”
Also Forbes Magazine here quoted Germany’s Minister of Transport, Alexander Dolbrindt, who called the German initiative “utter nonsense”. Forbes comments:
The ICE ban remains a dream of the more rabid among the proponents of all-electric transportation.”
47 responses to “Flagship Daily ‘Die Welt’ Calls Germany’s Ban Of Internal Combustion Engines By 2030 A “Fairy Tale””
With the Atomausstieg Germany removed a substantial source for emission free electricity for these compulsory electric cars.
New cars in 2030 have a pretty high chance of being mostly electric cars.
People with working brains will not try to deny this.
“We first need the necessary infrastructure, the charging stations, and enough power plants to supply clean electricity before cars with internal combustion engines can be replaced. That is not possible by 2030.””
stupid claim. he is talking about 5 meters of electric wire. it is not rocket science.
Five meters? So you figure they are going to run the charging line directly off the wind turbine tower?
“He is talking about 5 meters of electric wire. it is not rocket science”
Once again you completely fail to appreciate the additional sources of electricity (not forgetting the storage for when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining), and the extra distribution systems to get them to all those car charging points.
“People with working brains”
That puts all the greens (including you) out of the discussion…
“Once again you completely fail to appreciate the additional sources of electricity (not forgetting the storage for when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining),”
you are totally wrong.
We wont need any relevant additional electricity to change to electric cars. The increase in demand is small and can be compensated by reducing demand in other sectors 8have you changed to LED already?
and those cars ARE the storage, they do not need additional storage.
Geez, thats even more stupid. Using your limited range electric car for storage drains the battery even further, shortens its life and reduce the range more.
Oh no. Wait. At night with hardly any wind all cars will be drained empty.
So people will need two or more cars to be able to drive to work.
Ans as cars are used for storage can not be used…
So another big green fail.
LED lighting saves only miniscule amounts of power compared the amount required for transport. You are either stupidly lazy or mathematically illiterate. The amount of electricity generated would probably have to double for complete replacement of ICEs if it were possible (which it isn’t when you look at trucks – the storage density of batteries isn’t even remotely close to what is required).
“You are either stupidly lazy or mathematically illiterate”
sop is GUILTY on both counts !!
“The amount of electricity generated would probably have to double for complete replacement of ICEs if it were possible”
Please stop making assumptions without any facts.
People have made calculations on this topic. You are simply wrong.
“Additional electricity generation will be required in the European Union to meet the extra energy demand arising from an 80% share of electric vehicles in 2050. The share of Europe’s total electricity consumption from electric vehicles will increase from approximately 0.03% in 2014 to around 4-5% by 2030 and 9.5% by 2050.”
Again, the effect is really really small and can indeed be compared to a switch to LEDs.
“The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates that in 2015, about 404 billion kilowatthours (kWh) of electricity were used for lighting by the residential sector and the commercial sector in the United States. This was about 15% of the total electricity consumed by both of these sectors and about 10% of total U.S. electricity consumption.”
“The share of Europe’s total electricity consumption from electric vehicles will increase from approximately 0.03% in 2014 to around 4-5% by 2030 and 9.5% by 2050.””
Currently one seventh of primary energy consumption in Germany is electricity. One third of primary energy consumption is for transportation. Of course, mostly hdrocarbons. Switching that third to electric would, if caloric consumption stays the same, lead then to a TRIPLING of electricity needs. If caloric consumption per mile traveled drops to a third (assuming higher efficiency of electric motors and not accounting for losses during storage etc. – so – very optimistic scenario) – a complete switchover to EV’s would still increase electricity needs by ca. 60%.
” Switching that third to electric would, if caloric consumption stays the same, lead then to a TRIPLING of electricity needs. If caloric consumption per mile traveled drops to a third (assuming higher efficiency of electric motors and not accounting for losses during storage etc. – so – very optimistic scenario) – a complete switchover to EV’s would still increase electricity needs by ca. 60%.”
No, it would not. You are making up numbers. Real people have done real calculations on this subject, not making up random numbers on the back of an envelop.
Did you read the underlying study?
but even more importantly
Again, the study is only for passenger vehicles and excludes freight which is a major user of fuels for ICEs.
“and those cars ARE the storage, they do not need additional storage.”
Storing a kWh in a Li-Ion battery and retrieving it incurs some losses, and induces wear and tear on the battery. I once calculated the total cost caused by the losses and the proportional cost for battery replacement to be 1 Euro per kWh.
If you absolutely want to store electricity, a Li-Ion battery is about the most expensive way to do it. Lithium batteries are not optimized for cost. They are optimized to be lightweight. If you want to store electricity in batteries cheaply, you use storage hall sized NaS batteries.
Again: The total economic ignorance of the Greens shows. Never let them run a country. Keep them away from ALL responsibilities. Put them in padded rooms.
“I once calculated the total cost caused by the losses and the proportional cost for battery replacement to be 1 Euro per kWh.”
It is great that you are doing such calculations, but they are total garbage.
Again, real scientists are doing this and they come to different results.
The batteries are not build to back up the grid. we are using additional capacity of the batteries to help the grid out.
How often per week do you do those 300 km trips that the new EVs can do?
Academic scientists are doing theoretical calculations showing mathematical feasibility which is then used by think tanks to influence political policy makers.
Engineers then shake their heads when told to try and make it work. Just like with renewable generation (which has caused the problems in the first place which now require battery support).
sod 14. October 2016 at 11:11 PM | Permalink
“It is great that you are doing such calculations, but they are total garbage. ”
Says a person who thinks wind turbines in Germany will have an effect on the climate.
Don’t Count Out the Internal Combustion Engine
“But this assumes that the internal combustion engine is standing still—and it’s not.
In fact, the internal combustion engine is a moving target, and if you assume that we’re going to see future advances in the technology for electric cars, you also have to contend with current and future advances in the technology of the internal combustion engine.”
The big question is, where is the electricity to power the entire nation’s vehicle fleet to come from? It would probably entail a doubling of current capacity. Of course 14 years is just about long enough to put up an narray of nuclear power stations, although financing them might be a problem, but Merkel has already consigned nuclear to the trash can as a knee jerk reaction to Fukushima. Public opposition and increasing instability of the grid will rule out wind farms. Solar power seems unlikely due to Germans wanting to drive after dark. The obvious solution is coal, which is cheap and plentiful. Oh, wait a minute. Won’t put outt more pollution than the ICE powered cars?
“The big question is, where is the electricity to power the entire nation’s vehicle fleet to come from? It would probably entail a doubling of current capacity.”
That guess is wrong. here is an oil guy doing the calculation. He ends at about 30% increase for a FULL CHANGE of the entire fleet.
And he is ignoring the electric demand for refining the fuel.
again, the real effect on demand will be very small.
Even for eine Wassermelone, you’re unusually dishonest. I’ll summarize by quoting the link’s conclusion:
“Which means electric vehicles are a pretty crummy way to reduce CO2 emissions, given the current US power mix. “
“Even for eine Wassermelone, you’re unusually dishonest.”
please check the source. This guy hates electric cars!
“Ryan Carlyle, BSChE, engineer at an oil company”
He also only calculates for gasoline/petrol ICE’s as he rightly states that battery-electric drivetrains are not a practical option for heavy vehicles and this is where most transport diesel is consumed (in the USA).
If the transport diesel was factored in (were storage density was to improve about 100 fold), the electricity increase would be far more than “just” 30%.
“He also only calculates for gasoline/petrol ICE’s as he rightly states that battery-electric drivetrains are not a practical option for heavy vehicles and this is where most transport diesel is consumed (in the USA).”
That is false again. you can easily spot this by looking at Deutsche Post, which just started to build their own electric car for the transport business.
There also is a simple way to transport heavy stuff, it is called freight train (and is mostly electric theses days).
“That is false again. you can easily spot this by looking at Deutsche Post, which just started to build their own electric car for the transport business. ”
Well their delivery vehicles start and stop all day. It’s news only to a complete ignoramus that electric or hybrid cars perform well under these particular conditions.
“Well their delivery vehicles start and stop all day. It’s news only to a complete ignoramus that electric or hybrid cars perform well under these particular conditions.”
“complete ignoramus “, you call it?
Deutsche Post was willing to buy these vehicles from all german car companies and none was willing to build tghem. That is the reason, why they are building them now in their own company.
Read the operational usage
This is a tiny percentage of road freight. You aren’t going to see a car hauler loaded up with EVs being towed by an EV prime mover.
That’s green wishful thinking and on stilts….oh STILTS er wait….!
Why would Germans want to get rid of their efficient fossil fuel powered cars and replace them with inefficient fossil fuel power automobiles, the reasoning is beyond logic.
Meanwhile, here in the UK, the nutters of green wish not only to rid themselves of the combustion engine but also move every domestic gas using household in the UK… onto electric. Now that really is insanity of the first order.
The most shocking is that no one calls this a Totalitarian plan.
Yes. Germans are apathetic. I talk to people. They might debate technical aspects but have no concept of rights.
Big problem with any utterance by “conservative” CDU/CSU politicians is: They say the right things, then their government in a heartbeat turns around and decrees a totalitarian decision that is worse than what the social-democrats would have done.
Does this sound like the CDU/CSU is infiltrated and controlled by leftist brain-leeches? Yes it does.
In my opinion the CDU/CSU needs to be removed from power. They are much worse than useless. They are as a matter of fact greener than the greens and more leftist than the socialdemocrats.
By their fruit ye shall know them. I mean, that’s a “conservative” government that installed a minimum wage, killed existing electricity providers, drove in 100,000’s of illegal immigrants in night trains, forces all municipalities to house them, pumped up renewables subsidies by 15% a year now to 35 bn EUR a year, do you think these people will do something as crazy as outlawing combustion engines?
Well they don’t even know what a combustion engine IS! OF COURSE THEY’LL DO IT! Right after telling you they won’t! Do you TRUST these people? HAVEN’T YOU PAYED ATTENTION?
The EU homogenizes political parties, in Britain we think we have a choice between Labour and Tory when this is not true because whosoever you vote for, the same policies are maintained and that means Brussels, we name it: elective dictatorship.
It’s based on the German model, where barring AfD, all political parties are differing shades of crimson.
CDU is “Christian democratic union”, present in all Bundeslaender except Bavaria; CSU is “Christian Social Union”, present ONLY in Bavaria. CSU is still somewhat conservative and often criticizes the leftist policies of Merkel.
Bavaria is our Texas.
“… the state would not allow the registration of automobiles with internal combustion engines by 2030.”
Does this mean all or new ones?
If all, then stop building them now.
Whatever. This would be one of the greatest wealth destruction activities in the history of the world. And self inflicted too!
The “backpedaling” now sounds like, oh no , we would never OUTLAW combustion engines, we just will FORCE people to buy electric cars by means of taxation and subsidies.
“Levermann implores that climate is a non-chaotic system” – from article
Levermann is an idiot.
How much easier it will be to track people when they have all electric vehicles? Governments will love such an idea!
Oops, my response belongs to another article. Sorry.
American Green presidential candidate Stein demands command economy as in WW2 to wage total war von Global Warming.
this is the other way around. Indeed, history shows many instances where technological development took place in a short time. However there are many other cases where innovation did not take place for a long time. Innovation cannot be forced, it happens. Also gasoline powered vehicles are superior in many ways to electric vehicles. Forcing RE will likely result in return to a feudal system so typical for energy poverty: some very rich people and many poor: their servants.
Finally: in spite of all rhetorics there is no energy transition = storage transition. These “new” energy supplies are nowhere to be seen.
The RE world’s basis is unscientific, more religious of nature. So many decisions were made without scientific basis. Future motor fuel is uncertain. Likely it will be ammonia or diethyl ethers, not hydroxen or batteries.
“Have you changed to LED already?”
Actually I replaced most of the lighting in our house with fluorescent fittings over 35 years ago – long before “your lot” were shouting about saving the world. I wonder how much “carbon” (and money) I’ve saved in that time? And those old tech fittings use simple wire wound ballasts which last forever, along with easily replaceable tubes, rather than having to throw away complete CFL’s with integral electronic ballasts, or the supposedly “50,000 hour” LED bulbs which will never reach that, because the electronic driver circuits will fail long before the actual LED chips do…
“Actually I replaced most of the lighting in our house with fluorescent fittings over 35 years ago –”
again, switch to LEDs. Just better.
Look at the plans of VW alone:
“At the Paris show, which closes October 16, VW unveiled its ID concept car and said its own-name brand would be selling one million electric vehicles (EV) a year by 2025. The Volkswagen group target is for 30 new EV models by 2025 and annual sales of between two and three million by then”
“Concepts” and “Plans” often fail
“said its own-name brand would be selling one million electric vehicles (EV) a year by 2025”
Well sod. Again the SAME lesson about supply and demand for you that refuses to find its way into your brain. No demand – no sales. Pay 40k EUR for a car that is as good as a 10k EUR gasoline car? No thanks.
So politicians will force us, the taxpayers to gift the buyers of the electic cars 30k EUR per car.
This will also misdirect the surplus gained in the entire economy into a useless orgy of waste – because EXPENSIVE products (even if subsidized into existence) mean MORE energy wasted in production (the ROI drops into the negative for ALL subsidized enterprises. Otherwise no subsidation would take place to begin with.)
If you people would be HONESTLY tryin to “save the planet” you would NOT promote 1-person-luxury limos like the Tesla: You would promote light rails, electric trains, and promote outlawing individual traffic altogether. But you don’t do that.
BTW just to show you that *I* am *MORE* green than you for simply *MONETARY* reasons: I don’t *OWN* a car and travel 60k km a year. As a car is currently used just 3% of its lifetime, it is inherently a waste. Not that I care. It is currently just CHEAPER for me to travel by rail (I do count the opportunity cost of the gained time as a monetary gain)
There is one endlessly unnerving thing about the Greens, sod, and the ultra-Green CDU government: That all of their favorite technologies can only exist through subsidation and government force. Without that, NOBODY would tolerate a 200m high wind turbine 500 m from his home.
The Greem movement exists only through totalitarianism. They’re free to build any old thing they like, I don’t care. Just don’t expect me to buy it when it performs worse than existing technologies. I like efficiency. I hate waste. The subsidized Green technologies are all frivolous waste.
Sod keeps telling us that wind turbines are cheaper and more efficient than any other form of electricity. Yet these things keep getting subsidized – and worse, depend on government force to even get building permits.
The Green movement is a parasitical leech movement feeding on money stolen from productive people by a Green government.