VW Says Combustion Cars Will Fade Away after 2026

The market is a far better arbitrator of whether a technology is mature enough to be accepted.
Disagree, mostly because those who provide said technology are actively trying to shape the market in a direction they want both good and bad. Tesla tries to convince you that one of their cars is the ultimate in (whatever), meanwhile rewind some years and big auto pushes the idea that SUVs are the ultimate in fun vehicle letting you go off road, explore places you've never been, and ultimately be awesome... net result vehicle fleet efficiency takes a nose dive to levels seen in the 70s, the market was already accepting of more efficient cars, but big auto just convinced the market they don't need it.
 
Disagree, mostly because those who provide said technology are actively trying to shape the market in a direction they want both good and bad. Tesla tries to convince you that one of their cars is the ultimate in (whatever), meanwhile rewind some years and big auto pushes the idea that SUVs are the ultimate in fun vehicle letting you go off road, explore places you've never been, and ultimately be awesome... net result vehicle fleet efficiency takes a nose dive to levels seen in the 70s, the market was already accepting of more efficient cars, but big auto just convinced the market they don't need it.

Advertising (inflated, false, or other claims) is a far different thing than a "law giver" dictating (literally) what cars are allowed to be driven.

Regulation has a place: dictating the market always fails. However, it DOES put money into the target's pocket.
 
The paltry range of electric vehicles makes it feel like we're regressing back to horse and buggy days, where people couldn't venture very far from home.

Electric won't be truly viable until we can realize 500-700 miles range on 1-2 hours of charging time, imo.

Still not sure I could live with a 1-2 hour charging time when compared to 2-3 minutes to fill the tank of my Hybrid with the same range.
 
What VW will do is a small 3 cylinder gas engine will kick in and charge your battery while you drive on electric power. This will eliminate the charging stations completely.

That's a serial hybrid with a range extender, and something I would be interested in if the price was right.

An electric with a 100 mile range, and a 7-10 gallon gas tank connected to a small super efficient motor/generator that can charge the battery.
Should have a driving mode button so you can force the generator to try to keep the battery fully charged, in case you have a 200 mile drive.
 
Disagree, mostly because those who provide said technology are actively trying to shape the market in a direction they want both good and bad. Tesla tries to convince you that one of their cars is the ultimate in (whatever), meanwhile rewind some years and big auto pushes the idea that SUVs are the ultimate in fun vehicle letting you go off road, explore places you've never been, and ultimately be awesome... net result vehicle fleet efficiency takes a nose dive to levels seen in the 70s, the market was already accepting of more efficient cars, but big auto just convinced the market they don't need it.

Most people don't buy SUV's because they saw an ad on TV.
They need room for kids and their stuff, so it's either a SUV or a minivan since station wagons no longer exist.

My next car will likely be a small SUV. I'm getting older and the higher seating is easier to get in and out of, plus you have a better view of the road ahead.
Reason I haven't bought one yet is because of the poor mileage compared to my current hybrid. Luckily there are more hybrids SUV's being release so I'll have a choice of small SUV's with close to the same mileage I currently get.
 
I have my doubts the ev's will have the same pricing as an equivalent ice vehicle by 2026.
The real issue to me is the battery pack and recuperating the cost of retooling. Frankly, BEV are far simpler than ICE from an engineering perspective, while hybrid vehicles are the most complex to engineer and to build.

I have no idea if VW can deliver on those words by 2026 though.
 
2035 sounds a bit more reasonable as to the tipping point where the US is concerned. While BEV's will continue to ramp up in popularity and market share, I can see them fully taking over the market by then and the ICE fade away. Crap, that's only ~16 years from now...
 
Still not sure I could live with a 1-2 hour charging time when compared to 2-3 minutes to fill the tank of my Hybrid with the same range.
Yeah ... until electrical charging is lightning fast and available literally everywhere, it will never be an option for me. I get about 450 miles with my hybrid and it costs roughly 20 bucks to fill up, which makes long road trips very cheap.
 
Get new EV coupes/sedans down to sub-$20K MSRP and you'll see adoption rate skyrocket in areas where electricity is relatively cheap, or reasonably priced solar can be had.

As long as gas powered cars are cheaper to own, EV adoption rate is going to be slow. Both are becoming a pain in the ass to work on yourself for common maintenance/repair/parts replacement. With that in mind, the cheaper car wins every time.
 
Tl: DR

End the end we will have diesel/ electric hybrids or natural gas/ electric hybrids.
 
I truly feel bad for those who want this earth to survive long long time. Reality is we are going bust one day cuz corporate greed and politics will keep us away from every coming together as world. World is fucked as it is. No amount of electric cars will save it, while I do respect the effort of likes os Musk.

Sad to say it but as the ICE melts we will be more water than earth and we will say a few prayers for one another and get on with our lives until earth is inhabitable. That is the reality we are heading towards.
 
Sad to say it but as the ICE melts we will be more water than earth and we will say a few prayers for one another and get on with our lives until earth is inhabitable. That is the reality we are heading towards.
This isn’t true at all. Most of the land would still be here. Mostly coastal regions would be affected and new shorelines would be formed (except for Florida, which would completely disappear because the entire state is basically at sea level). It isn’t the rising sea levels that would cause the biggest problems, it would be the rising heat: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-seas-ice-melt-new-shoreline-maps/

Also, technically we are already more water than earth. Water makes up 70% of the planet.
 
Yea... That prediction is wrong.

"Largest Oil and Gas Reserves Ever Assessed Found in West Texas"

https://www.breitbart.com/border/20...s-reserves-ever-assessed-found-in-west-texas/
Wow, BrietBart news.... Anyways, it sounds like you may not understand the realities of exponential growth.

The funny thing is if we increase our oil usage at 5 percent a year, the doubling time is far less than twenty years. The interesting part is yet over that time frame, you'll use oil equivalent to all the oil ever used in the history of oil use to date since Rome.

So even if today we found enough oil to constitute a reserve as large as all the oil we've ever used in the entire history of mankind, that only buys you about 12 years. 12 years flies by man..
 
Wow, BrietBart news.... Anyways, it sounds like you may not understand the realities of exponential growth.

The funny thing is if we increase our oil usage at 5 percent a year, the doubling time is far less than twenty years. The interesting part is yet over that time frame, you'll use oil equivalent to all the oil ever used in the history of oil use to date since Rome.

So even if today we found enough oil to constitute a reserve as large as all the oil we've ever used in the entire history of mankind, that only buys you about 12 years. 12 years flies by man..
https://www.yahoo.com/news/not-run-fossil-fuels-op-ed-231243174.html

The problem isn’t running out of fossil fuels anytime soon. The problem is the crap we’ll be doing to the planet if we keep using them.
 
This isn’t true at all. Most of the land would still be here. Mostly coastal regions would be affected and new shorelines would be formed (except for Florida, which would completely disappear because the entire state is basically at sea level). It isn’t the rising sea levels that would cause the biggest problems, it would be the rising heat: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-seas-ice-melt-new-shoreline-maps/

Also, technically we are already more water than earth. Water makes up 70% of the planet.

Did you really think I didn't know we were 70% water lol. I guess I just meant even more water than earth. Ofcourse the coastal towns will be effected. True about the rising sea levels vs heat but they are both damaging. I think over half of the worlds population lives in coastal regions so that is a big big impact and displacement. Yea heat is going to be killer though. My main point was how we let politics rob us of our brains and sanity and while deep inside people know what wrong and right but they are unable to let go of their political bias it seems.
 
https://www.yahoo.com/news/not-run-fossil-fuels-op-ed-231243174.html

The problem isn’t running out of fossil fuels anytime soon. The problem is the crap we’ll be doing to the planet if we keep using them.


THis is true. I think while electrical will help and offset the emissions its the damn coal industry can't die soon enough. All those jobs could have been trained and been place with alternative energy but people buy into political shit. I simply can't believe that this system is so rigged that we would nominate former coal lobbyist for the EPA job. He pretty much hired his old crew all from the coal industry. LOL! They guy pretty much worked for big players in coal industry and after he became EPA head apparently coal industry was so happy they implemented a new action plan.

Heck the more electric we go the better it is as long as we are not burning more coal to make that electricity. I wouldn't mind an even balance between electric and gas, it won't happen for a while and I don't think gas cars are going anywhere anytime soon but every % increase in electric cars is a positive overall as we are finding more effecient ways to generate that electricity and in return less emmissions are produced.
 
Did you really think I didn't know we were 70% water lol. I guess I just meant even more water than earth. Ofcourse the coastal towns will be effected. True about the rising sea levels vs heat but they are both damaging. I think over half of the worlds population lives in coastal regions so that is a big big impact and displacement. Yea heat is going to be killer though. My main point was how we let politics rob us of our brains and sanity and while deep inside people know what wrong and right but they are unable to let go of their political bias it seems.
Yeah, I figured you knew that already. I was just being nitpicky. You do raise a good point about the massive populations in coastal regions. They would inevitably need to move inward, but at least the whole continent wouldn’t be engulfed. It’s unfortunate that so many people are complacent or simply just don’t care.
 
Yeah, I figured you knew that already. I was just being nitpicky. You do raise a good point about the massive populations in coastal regions. They would inevitably need to move inward, but at least the whole continent wouldn’t be engulfed. It’s unfortunate that so many people are complacent or simply just don’t care.

well on the positive side liberals and conservatives will be closer together and we can all get along better lol.
 
The planet is fine, in 30 years I’ll be 62 and the planet will be exactly the same and we will still all be driving gas powered cars and the majority of our energy will still come from coal.

The seas are not rising.

The Earth is a billion years old, for all we know every 100 million years it gets really hot for 50,000 years. And then 26 million years after that it gets really cold.

People give humanity too much credit, we’ve only been here for 10,000 years intelligently, we have no idea what’s going on.

Sorry to derail the thread but pretending that “climate change” has anything to do with the decisions of a for profit company is also derailing.
 
The planet is fine, in 30 years I’ll be 62 and the planet will be exactly the same and we will still all be driving gas powered cars and the majority of our energy will still come from coal.

The seas are not rising.

The Earth is a billion years old, for all we know every 100 million years it gets really hot for 50,000 years. And then 26 million years after that it gets really cold.

People give humanity too much credit, we’ve only been here for 10,000 years intelligently, we have no idea what’s going on.

Sorry to derail the thread but pretending that “climate change” has anything to do with the decisions of a for profit company is also derailing.
The sea IS rising ... with so much scientific evidence supporting it that refuting it is beyond illogical. The earth may be billions of years old, but human beings are not. And the exponential rate at which we are overpopulating and raping the earth of its resources and destroying its habitats is like no creature the earth has ever had in its 4.5 billion year existence. Choosing to pretend a problem doesn’t exist doesn’t make it not exist. As always ... science > personal feelings: https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
 
Good luck putting up fast charging stations or stations in general to charge. Who can charge a car living in an apartment? No one. Not only are they bullshitting, but they wont have enough time to put a decent network of charging stations together in that period of time. I am talking US only, imagine the rest of the world...

Apartment buildings don't have garages in the US? Sure there probably isn't room for everyone but not everyone has to drive, right? I don't even have a license and get by just fine.

Besides, looking into the future and imagining it the way things are right now, but with this particular change in place, is NOT the way to do it. That's how people who lack vision talk.
 
The sea IS rising ... with so much scientific evidence supporting it that refuting it is beyond illogical. The earth may be billions of years old, but human beings are not. And the exponential rate at which we are overpopulating and raping the earth of its resources and destroying its habitats is like no creature the earth has ever had in its 4.5 billion year existence. Choosing to pretend a problem doesn’t exist doesn’t make it not exist. As always ... science > personal feelings: https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

Being pro climate change gets you paid, scientists aren’t these magical people, they are just people with jobs and bills like everyone else. The seas have risen and fallen a million times over the last billion years, it’s not some adnormal unique thing.

Habitats that exist now, didn’t exist 1,000,000 years ago. The habitats 1,000,000 years ago didn’t exist 1,000,000 years before that. These things are forever changing.

The planet is fine. We are not all gonna die, my house which is 3 miles from the Florida gulf isn’t going anywhere and when we finally move closer to the beach in a few years like we planned, it will still be there by the time I’m 100 years old.

The sky is not falling. You sound like a religious nut that though the world was gonna end in 2012.
 
Being pro climate change gets you paid, scientists aren’t these magical people, they are just people with jobs and bills like everyone else. The seas have risen and fallen a million times over the last billion years, it’s not some adnormal unique thing.

Habitats that exist now, didn’t exist 1,000,000 years ago. The habitats 1,000,000 years ago didn’t exist 1,000,000 years before that. These things are forever changing.

The planet is fine. We are not all gonna die, my house which is 3 miles from the Florida gulf isn’t going anywhere and when we finally move closer to the beach in a few years like we planned, it will still be there by the time I’m 100 years old.

The sky is not falling. You sound like a religious nut that though the world was gonna end in 2012.
It’s rising very slowly. Of course it’s not going to affect you when you’re 100. The concern is for future generations. If you’re equating current scientifically-based, peer-reviewed evidence with cultish religiosity, that’s entirely on you, not me. I base my thoughts on current scientific evidence, not because some political force is trying to convince me of their agenda. Not giving a fuck because it doesn’t affect you now so that future generations can worry about it later is exactly why we’re in this predicament. But it certainly doesn’t make you sound clever.
 
It’s rising very slowly. Of course it’s not going to affect you when you’re 100. The concern is for future generations. If you’re equating current scientifically-based, peer-reviewed evidence with cultish religiosity, that’s entirely on you, not me. I base my thoughts on current scientific evidence, not because some political force is trying to convince me of their agenda. Not giving a fuck because it doesn’t affect you now so that future generations can worry about it later is exactly why we’re in this predicament. But it certainly doesn’t make you sound clever.

Quite a burden for you to put the future generations in 100+ years on your back. I’m sure they will be thanking you since that’s how human beings work... totally

Also I suggest some self awareness when it comes to “political force” influencing people. (cough its you cough)
 
Quite a burden for you to put the future generations in 100+ years on your back. I’m sure they will be thanking you since that’s how human beings work... totally

Also I suggest some self awareness when it comes to “political force” influencing people. (cough its you cough)
You’re not offering counterpoints of any substance worthy of an intelligible discussion. Just flinging baseless rhetoric to make yourself feel important. If you want to counter the existing research with something other than your opinions, I’m all ears. Until then, this is going nowhere. :confused:
 
  • Like
Reactions: WhoMe
like this
You’re not offering counterpoints of any substance worthy of an intelligible discussion. Just flinging baseless rhetoric to make yourself feel important. If you want to counter the existing research with something other than your opinions, I’m all ears. Until then, this is going nowhere. :confused:

Peer Review is defective science. Google it’s flaws.

Climate change science is based on computer models that are constantly changing, you can’t have a control that constantly changing when using the scientific method. Especially when the computer model can be interpreted anyway it wants because it’s a made up model to begin with.

Quick question: in 2010 Al Gore bought an 8 million dollar mansion on the coast, why did he do this if the seas are rising? Please be specific in your answer.
 
It’s rising very slowly.
At the same trend (for each particular site) that it did 100-150 years ago, before the massive increase in CO2 emissions of the last 50 years.

8518750_meantrend.png

9414290_meantrend.png

8720218_meantrend.png

1612340_meantrend.png
 
The Earth is a billion years old....

People give humanity too much credit, we’ve only been here for 10,000 years intelligently
So much is wrong with your post. Even if we say the earth is a billion years old, time for the destruction of an eco system can have very very little to do with how long it has existed.

Take some gasoline canisters and douse an old growth tree that's been around for 600 years and go to a new tree farm and douse it in gasoline. They'll both burn. The 600 years old tree can be destroyed in an hour.

A human whose been around for 60 years can die in a day from very harmful biological agents like severe ebola or hermoragic fever.

How long an entity has existed has no correlation to its ability to resist destructive forces. 9 billion people is a lot. Do you think 100 million years ago there were 9 billion people? Or 26 million for that matter?
 
Quick question: in 2010 Al Gore bought an 8 million dollar mansion on the coast, why did he do this if the seas are rising? Please be specific in your answer.

I'll take this one. He's 70 years old and will be dead within ten years. You might not know this but you can't take money with you to beyond the grave. If you had millions and years to live, you might be spending it too too enjoy your final years on a nice beach front property.

He's not predicting the coast is going to flood tommorow. The general message is thinking about the next next generation. Your grandchildren. The whole "I'll be dead so what do I care about the next generation? Lololololol" thinking is both short sighted and selfish.
 
I feel like this is some marketing/publicity hoopla. Ford said something similar recently if I recall correctly. Not sure what their angle is. Maybe they are hoping to public will go for it, or maybe they are looking to image their brand in a new way. I don't see the oil companies letting this happen in 8 years time. I also don't see the technology and infrastructure being mature enough to handle it any time soon. Electric motors can be efficient and powerful. But battery and charging technology isn't there.
 
"t 2026 will mark the beginning of the end for combustion vehicles. "

Oh, so they expect it not to take hours to charge your car, even with high-speed chargers? Electric cars and really long trips still don't mix, even with Tesla superchargers.

Are they going to wait until the power grids start collapsing before they realize there is a problem with goin to electric vehicles? I suppose they also have no plans to go autonomous as pure electric cars will not be viable for autonomous support, unless you consider 5 miles a reasonable distance before needing to be charged.

A friend of ours bought one of the new BMW i3's and, after two months, regret the decision. They say it would be fine for a secondary vehicle, but as a primary, it sucks. You have to carefully plan trips from the house as you never know if you are going to be able to charge it. They went to the grocery store one day, where a chargning station is, but a Tesla was hooked up and they had to wait for and hour to use the station, in 100 degree heat with no A/C as the car had shut it down because the charge got too low. Reality is a cold mistress.
 
Are they going to wait until the power grids start collapsing before they realize there is a problem with goin to electric vehicles? I suppose they also have no plans to go autonomous as pure electric cars will not be viable for autonomous support, unless you consider 5 miles a reasonable distance before needing to be charged.

A friend of ours bought one of the new BMW i3's and, after two months, regret the decision. They say it would be fine for a secondary vehicle, but as a primary, it sucks. You have to carefully plan trips from the house as you never know if you are going to be able to charge it. They went to the grocery store one day, where a chargning station is, but a Tesla was hooked up and they had to wait for and hour to use the station, in 100 degree heat with no A/C as the car had shut it down because the charge got too low. Reality is a cold mistress.

Maybe we should be upgrading our power grid instead of wasting money on other useless things like walls.
Infrastructure investment would certainly help make America great again.

And they should have picked the i3 with the range extender :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: WhoMe
like this
The charging stations are the primary issue to me. You cant charge your chevy at a tesla station. The charging components need to be standardized amongst all vehicle manufacturers inorder for it to work. Also they need to be widespread across the nation or else youd be limited on your trips.
 
Get new EV coupes/sedans down to sub-$20K MSRP and you'll see adoption rate skyrocket in areas where electricity is relatively cheap, or reasonably priced solar can be had.

As long as gas powered cars are cheaper to own, EV adoption rate is going to be slow. Both are becoming a pain in the ass to work on yourself for common maintenance/repair/parts replacement. With that in mind, the cheaper car wins every time.

The other side of that sword is just as sharp: when a whole mess of cheap EV's are being connected to a power grid because they are 100% dependent on it, the cheap electricity will cease being cheap.
 
Instead of giving billions in tax cuts to rich corporations we could have used that to boost infrastructure. We need to make the transition to renewables faster than we are now.

VW is completely off on the time line but it will happen eventually I just hope for my children’s sake its soon enough.
 
Says the company that less than 30 years ago could barely make an inline 5-cylinder diesel engine that would not grenade itself. More PR BS from VW.
 
Says the company that less than 30 years ago could barely make an inline 5-cylinder diesel engine that would not grenade itself. More PR BS from VW.

And ~50 years ago they built the engine in my dune buggy that is pretty much rock fucking solid to this day with one rebuild to my knowledge. History can paint a funny picture depending what angle you look at it with. (which honestly I thought more people would bring up the emissions scandal)
 
Maybe we should be upgrading our power grid instead of wasting money on other useless things like walls.
Infrastructure investment would certainly help make America great again.

And they should have picked the i3 with the range extender :D


Does not really address the issue. The impediment to the electric car is the length of time to charge it. Until they can get charging time to 5 minutes for 200 miles, it is not going to work as a wide spread deployment.

Are you willing to wait hours to get a charge? Put enough of them on the road and that is a realistic probability.

Right now, I can pull into a gas station, nearly on empty, and fill up in less than 3 minutes and drive 425 miles before I have to do it again.
 
Back
Top