By Paul Homewood
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45899580
A bit more detail on that new report from the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy committee, which recommends banning all sales of new petrol and diesel cars by 2032.
One of their complaints about current government policy is its vagueness. As I pointed out when Michael Gove made the original announcement about a 2040 target, there was much confusion, not least within the government itself, as to whether hybrids would be included in the ban.
The BEIS committee is quite clear about its own recommendations:
We recommend that the Government aim for zero emissions, in line with its longstanding 2050 target, and phase out non-plug-in and all but the cleanest plug-in hybrid vehicles. This should include more stringent zero emission range requirements for plug-in hybrids to ensure that vehicles deliver on targeted emissions reductions.
Zero should mean zero. We recommend that the Government prioritise overarching policy goals on climate change and air quality over sectoral interests, and bring forwards a clear, precise target for new sales of cars and vans to be truly zero emission by 2032.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmbeis/383/38304.htm
[“Cleanest hybrids” refer to cars with a long distance battery capability]
Currently non-plug hybrids account for 60% of EV sales, and would be included in the proposed ban.
True zero emission cars, as defined above, only account for 2.3% of total car sales so far this year.
This indicates just what a revolutionary change will be needed in the space of effectively a decade. Given that change is not going to happen overnight, and that EVs would need to be dominating market share well before 2032, we are arguably looking at little more than five years.
Five years in which the UK car industry is expected to wind down existing car production, and build EV capacity from about 50,000 a year to 2.6 million.
Is this really feasible?
Let’s examine some of the obstacles facing the car manufacturers.
If the 2032 target is applied now, all further investment in new conventional models would likely cease immediately. After all, such investment is based around a long term cycle, so where would be the point on spending hundreds of millions on a new model, when it will soon have to be phased out.
As a result of this withdrawal of investment, UK built cars will quickly become uncompetitive against imported models, leading to loss of market share, production cutbacks and financial losses.
In theory, of course, increased EV sales should balance these losses. But will they in the short or even medium term?
This would presuppose that millions of drivers are happy and willing to switch to EVs in the next few years. But what will have changed between now and, say, 2025?
Nearly half of all households have no off street parking, and therefore cannot readily charge up at night.
And even those that can are unwilling to risk travelling on long runs. It is all very well having batteries that can give you 200 miles, but what do you do when you get to your destination? How can you be sure there will be somewhere you can recharge there?
These are all the sorts of dilemmas facing ordinary motorists, who have voted with their feet and carried on buying proper cars.
The government talks about installing thousands of new charging points, but with potentially tens of millions of EVs on the road, that frankly is spitting in the wind. It is easy to see a scenario where cars are queuing up for hours, waiting for their turn at the charger.
We are also faced with a chicken and egg situation – motorists will not buy EVs until they see a comprehensive charging network, but who will invest in the latter when there is no demand?
All of this could lead to car manufacturers facing a cliff edge, where they have lost traditional sales, invested billions in building EV capability, but only seeing a slow take up of demand.
It is true that many drivers may opt instead for plug-in hybrids, but this raises the question as to whether they will simply continue to fill up with petrol, instead of plugging in. If so, it rather defeats the objective of the government’s policy.
Two other items of note:
1) The committee notes that the National Grid projects that the increase in peak demand from EVs is likely to be in the region of 8 to 11 GW by 2040.
This will, of course, have to be both low carbon and dispatchable, meaning effectively nuclear. Much of this extra capacity will need to be in place by 2030 if the 2032 objective is to be met.
Given that even Hinkley Point still leaves us short of dispatchable capacity on current demand, it is not clear where this extra 11 GW will come from.
2) Real concern was expressed to the committee that the EV transition could plausibly lead China to dominate global car manufacturing in the longer term.
Effectively the UK and EU car makers would be giving up their long won technological advantage in the internal combustion engine, and instead be starting from a level playing field with battery powered cars.
I suspect that battle will only have one ending.
Above all, the committee has produced a lot of hot air and lists of demands for things that the government should be doing. But nowhere have they attempted to put a cost on any of it.
Subsidising millions of EVs, loss of fuel duty, expenditure on charging networks and grid upgrades. Do they think money grows on trees?
via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
October 20, 2018 at 10:00AM
Iowa Climate Science Education 