It’s also interesting to consider the miles driven. The overall mileage of a vehicle is in most countries skewed more towards its early life, with lower distances driven as the cars approach end of life. So those dates when markets reach 50%, and 90% of the fleet electric…will likely see somewhat higher percentage of the total distance traveled by that fleet being electrified. Not sure how big of a difference that makes to overall emissions and consumption?
Yes, I’m sure it’s going to make a difference to the way fleet emissions change but I don’t have numbers in my head to draw that graph and work out how much it matters.
There will be an endgame as facilities including fuel stations and mechanics become hard to find and expensive. This might accelerate the rate of replacement as older are then not necessarily cheaper cars to run.
I think once you get pass a tipping point where the infrastructure to own an ICE vehicle (gas stations, mechanics) gets harder and harder to access, the adoption will accelerate even faster. The autonomous driving capabilities will also accelerate the replacement of old vehicles for new ones and there is a higher probability that these new purchases will be EVs. Finally, the oil companies start shutting down refineries, the cost of operating an ICE vehicles will get higher as you get reverse economies of scale
This is great. Something it makes me consider though is how total emissions over the next 50 years are impacted if the average ICE lifespan is 15 years vs 20 years. Are we better to extend the life of an ICE and replace them with x% EVs, or hasten it's demise and replace with <x% EVs?
Our second car is an ICE and I'm planning on keeping it as long as possible (it's old) as it doesn't do many miles anyway.
This is the question that vexes me. In overall carbon, energy, materials inputs plus emissions calculations, is it better to keep the ICE until the end of its life? Or bump it off early and swap to an EV?
Pretty sure Hannah did a post on this a while back. Depends a bit on how electricity in your country is generated but IIRC in the UK replacing your IC car with a new BEV would take something like 4 years before it was in credit. Would be shorter if you bought a used BEV I guess.
It's a shame plug in hybrids are included, as they muddy the waters and just seem to be a way for the fossil fuel industry (and legacy vehicle makers) to keep their claws in the vehicle market for a bit longer. From what I'm reading, many (the majority of?) people who own a plug in hybrid rarely plug it in and end up carrying around a heavy battery and electric motor on top of a dirty combustion engine.
The logic being that if you have the means to charge at home, you would just buy an EV as it works out so much cheaper.
People buy a PHEV with the idea that they will plug it in and never do. I think people also don't understand that PHEVs don't operate like a 'normal' hybrid, in that the batteries don't charge from the combustion engine. So they are actually less efficient than an ICE car if you don't charge the battery.
I think they were a lower risk stepping stone a few years back when the charging network was still undeveloped. (Also a cheat for low emissions zones).
Now most people know friends and family with EVs, the perceived risk has been lowered. It’s time to phase them out.
I think that's how they were sold for sure. I wouldn't be surprised if the companies selling them knew they wouldn't be used in that way though. Certainly they would have had the data early on to show that the amount of charging being done was minimal.
Their business model has always relied on the expensive maintenance plans and EVs eliminate much of that necessity. Selling a PHEV locks in a failing combustion engine long into the future and can make a customer think they are doing something green.
To me, PHEVs are another 'diesel-gate' style 'scandal' (fraud) in the making. If the companies did know and were continuing to count their emissions based on incorrect data, because it suited their narratives and emissions targets, then it's going to be another big headache down the line.
I completely agree with you, in fact there's a beautiful analysis that ICCT has done on the LCA of different types of cars in which the PHEV overall emission are 50% higher considering the data from the on-board fuel consumption meter. I suggest you to give a look (https://theicct.org/publication/electric-cars-life-cycle-analysis-emissions-europe-jul25/) they used the data from EEA
The sales are flat in the US because the oil companies have had a version of this chart for a long time. Every new ICE car they can get us to buy gives them a 15 year lifeline. It's hard to imagine anyone that callous towards the future of humanity.
Brilliant work as always - be interesting if carbon emissions could be added to the model (although obviously not straight-forward because of different make-up of grid electricity in countries)
It would be interesting to know more about what is happening with petrol/diesel cars in Norway and Denmark
(a) How many people with electric vehicles also have petrol/diesel cars which they retain for longer journeys. I understand this was quite common a few years back, but is this less the case now?
(b) Are we reaching the point where the infrastructure for petrol/diesel cars starts to degrade - eg meaningful numbers of petrol garages starting to close down?
I’m in Norway now on a PHEV cruise ship with 2 x 23 tonne batteries! My entirely unscientific observation would be IC cars firmly in the minority in the cities, but up in the western fjords still lots of IC vehicles and fuel station infrastructure. Have been on two car ferries today that are BEVs.
Have seen reports of fuel stations closing in Norway. Needs context however as there’s a trend towards fewer larger stations in many countries so numbers of stations might be expected to decline a bit anyway. Still as road fuel sales were declining it seems like ICE infrastructure decline probably already began in Norway.
NewAutomotive did some analysis for the UK suggesting fuel stations likely begin to stop offering diesel at some locations as early as 2030 in London and from 2035 more widely across the Uk as the diesel fleet declines in numbers.
There is already good evidence to show that the average EV is covering more miles per year than the average ICE car, though there may be an age skew there
From a whole of economy perspective, making ANY driving easier is arguably bad: more congestion slowing movement, less fitness with all its associated morbidity and mortality costs. Also, a car,( EV or ICE) still uses a lot of energy and resources to create, and increasing EV use should (according to models anyway) raise the demand and therefore cost of electricity to everyone. EVs are not the solution. They are an improvement but not more than that, imo.
Equally relevant is what fraction of the electricity used by these cars is fossil fuel generated and what fraction is from renewables. Any analysis of this?
The US according to VW prefer “full hybrids”. Also known as ICE fossil fuel cars with modern fuel efficiency measures. If it don’t plug in it don’t use renewable energy!
They will just have to catch up later than the rest.
It’s also interesting to consider the miles driven. The overall mileage of a vehicle is in most countries skewed more towards its early life, with lower distances driven as the cars approach end of life. So those dates when markets reach 50%, and 90% of the fleet electric…will likely see somewhat higher percentage of the total distance traveled by that fleet being electrified. Not sure how big of a difference that makes to overall emissions and consumption?
Came here to say the same.
Cars may now last 16 years on average, but for their last few years, many are kept as "reserve cars". All the daily driving is done in newer cars.
Yes, I’m sure it’s going to make a difference to the way fleet emissions change but I don’t have numbers in my head to draw that graph and work out how much it matters.
A crude assumption: cars do half their mileage in the first 5 years. Therefore assume for the model that cars are replaced after 10 years?
The other point: Some people need an EV because they do high mileage. But some people won't buy an EV because they do high mileage.
Yeah that could work, we can get a pretty good estimate by shortening the projected lifetime of the cars to reflect use profile better.
There will be an endgame as facilities including fuel stations and mechanics become hard to find and expensive. This might accelerate the rate of replacement as older are then not necessarily cheaper cars to run.
I think once you get pass a tipping point where the infrastructure to own an ICE vehicle (gas stations, mechanics) gets harder and harder to access, the adoption will accelerate even faster. The autonomous driving capabilities will also accelerate the replacement of old vehicles for new ones and there is a higher probability that these new purchases will be EVs. Finally, the oil companies start shutting down refineries, the cost of operating an ICE vehicles will get higher as you get reverse economies of scale
This is great. Something it makes me consider though is how total emissions over the next 50 years are impacted if the average ICE lifespan is 15 years vs 20 years. Are we better to extend the life of an ICE and replace them with x% EVs, or hasten it's demise and replace with <x% EVs?
Our second car is an ICE and I'm planning on keeping it as long as possible (it's old) as it doesn't do many miles anyway.
This is the question that vexes me. In overall carbon, energy, materials inputs plus emissions calculations, is it better to keep the ICE until the end of its life? Or bump it off early and swap to an EV?
Pretty sure Hannah did a post on this a while back. Depends a bit on how electricity in your country is generated but IIRC in the UK replacing your IC car with a new BEV would take something like 4 years before it was in credit. Would be shorter if you bought a used BEV I guess.
It's a shame plug in hybrids are included, as they muddy the waters and just seem to be a way for the fossil fuel industry (and legacy vehicle makers) to keep their claws in the vehicle market for a bit longer. From what I'm reading, many (the majority of?) people who own a plug in hybrid rarely plug it in and end up carrying around a heavy battery and electric motor on top of a dirty combustion engine.
The logic being that if you have the means to charge at home, you would just buy an EV as it works out so much cheaper.
People buy a PHEV with the idea that they will plug it in and never do. I think people also don't understand that PHEVs don't operate like a 'normal' hybrid, in that the batteries don't charge from the combustion engine. So they are actually less efficient than an ICE car if you don't charge the battery.
I think they were a lower risk stepping stone a few years back when the charging network was still undeveloped. (Also a cheat for low emissions zones).
Now most people know friends and family with EVs, the perceived risk has been lowered. It’s time to phase them out.
I think that's how they were sold for sure. I wouldn't be surprised if the companies selling them knew they wouldn't be used in that way though. Certainly they would have had the data early on to show that the amount of charging being done was minimal.
Their business model has always relied on the expensive maintenance plans and EVs eliminate much of that necessity. Selling a PHEV locks in a failing combustion engine long into the future and can make a customer think they are doing something green.
To me, PHEVs are another 'diesel-gate' style 'scandal' (fraud) in the making. If the companies did know and were continuing to count their emissions based on incorrect data, because it suited their narratives and emissions targets, then it's going to be another big headache down the line.
I completely agree with you, in fact there's a beautiful analysis that ICCT has done on the LCA of different types of cars in which the PHEV overall emission are 50% higher considering the data from the on-board fuel consumption meter. I suggest you to give a look (https://theicct.org/publication/electric-cars-life-cycle-analysis-emissions-europe-jul25/) they used the data from EEA
The sales are flat in the US because the oil companies have had a version of this chart for a long time. Every new ICE car they can get us to buy gives them a 15 year lifeline. It's hard to imagine anyone that callous towards the future of humanity.
Brilliant work as always - be interesting if carbon emissions could be added to the model (although obviously not straight-forward because of different make-up of grid electricity in countries)
It would be interesting to know more about what is happening with petrol/diesel cars in Norway and Denmark
(a) How many people with electric vehicles also have petrol/diesel cars which they retain for longer journeys. I understand this was quite common a few years back, but is this less the case now?
(b) Are we reaching the point where the infrastructure for petrol/diesel cars starts to degrade - eg meaningful numbers of petrol garages starting to close down?
I’m in Norway now on a PHEV cruise ship with 2 x 23 tonne batteries! My entirely unscientific observation would be IC cars firmly in the minority in the cities, but up in the western fjords still lots of IC vehicles and fuel station infrastructure. Have been on two car ferries today that are BEVs.
Have seen reports of fuel stations closing in Norway. Needs context however as there’s a trend towards fewer larger stations in many countries so numbers of stations might be expected to decline a bit anyway. Still as road fuel sales were declining it seems like ICE infrastructure decline probably already began in Norway.
NewAutomotive did some analysis for the UK suggesting fuel stations likely begin to stop offering diesel at some locations as early as 2030 in London and from 2035 more widely across the Uk as the diesel fleet declines in numbers.
Thank you
Aside from the fact that new cars do more mileage than old cars (covered below),
Do electric cars do more mileage than petrol cars?
- Yes, because running it is cheap, and it's so much easier for short trips.
- No, because people who want to do long journeya will be driving petrol, or diesel.
As a 2 car family, I can say our petrol car stays in the garage and is only used as "second resort". Though - that may be because it is much older.
Also, many couples have a "his car" and "her car" arrangement. Alternatively, the one doing the fewer miles uses the old (or new) banger.
Our “in case petrol car” was used so infrequently that it grew moss.
Then we got rid of it.
There is already good evidence to show that the average EV is covering more miles per year than the average ICE car, though there may be an age skew there
From a whole of economy perspective, making ANY driving easier is arguably bad: more congestion slowing movement, less fitness with all its associated morbidity and mortality costs. Also, a car,( EV or ICE) still uses a lot of energy and resources to create, and increasing EV use should (according to models anyway) raise the demand and therefore cost of electricity to everyone. EVs are not the solution. They are an improvement but not more than that, imo.
Equally relevant is what fraction of the electricity used by these cars is fossil fuel generated and what fraction is from renewables. Any analysis of this?
Yes! An important question! In NZ our electricity is increasingly renewable. Up to 94% apparently thanks to people installing more solar.
The US according to VW prefer “full hybrids”. Also known as ICE fossil fuel cars with modern fuel efficiency measures. If it don’t plug in it don’t use renewable energy!
They will just have to catch up later than the rest.