Bentley / VOLVO say, no pistons after 2030

[Flakbadger]

Know what really grinds my gears?

That people read a headline about getting rid of internal combustion engines and immediately jump to “Current battery technology isn’t up to the task.”

The thing is, that is correct. Current battery or other “green” technology, and manufacturing levels cannot currently take up the mantle of gasoline/other fossil fuel technology. Everyone knows that replacing fossil fuels entirely is going to be an incredibly complex, difficult, and expensive task.

But here’s the rub.

Just because something is difficult, doesn’t mean it’s not worth doing.

There’s also this argument that new technologies with gasoline-powered vehicles can somehow improve the situation, and that is true on the surface. My wife’s Honda Fit has a 1.5 liter, 100ish horsepower gasoline engine that gets 40+ miles per gallon, versus let’s say the Model T, which according to Wikipedia had a 2.9L 4cyl engine, 20HP, top speed of 45 mph and MPG of ~13-21. Turns out that 100 years of innovation can improve a product greatly.

Thing is, that car is still burning fossil fuel, which is
-Finite
-A source of atmospheric pollution
-The cause of several C A T A S T RO P H I C spills. See the Gulf of Mexico or the Exxon Valdez if you want just two examples.

I also acknowledge that current battery manufacturing in China is one of the worst current environmental catastrophes to take place in the modern world.

But these problems can be overcome, and gasoline will not E V E R be sustainable or infinite.

Finding alternatives is inevitable, and it is time to start finding them; and lots and lots of leading scientists, engineers and various experts will tell you that replacing fossil fuel will be incredibly expensive and resource-intensive.

Thing is, there isn’t an alternative.

[oil pan 4]

They could be switching to rotory.

If oil is a finite resource then the problem will eventually provide it's own solution.

Anything made in china is an environmental catastrophe, even when they recycle stuff they eff up the environment.

[Flakbadger]

OK but switching to rotary is still burning gasoline, and that's not the future. Gasoline is the past and it's far past time to make the switch to pretty much anything else.

We are rapidly approaching CO2 levels that make photosynthesis impossible for many plants; rice and potatoes soon will lose nutritional value from it. And the last time CO2 levels were around this high, we had dinosaurs walking in ANTARCTICA, where it had a similar climate to modern day Washington.

[freebeard]

Pistons don't imply gasoline made from deep, hot abiotic oil. It can also be made from —oh I don't know— compost?

https://cdn.nanalyze.com/uploads/201...ar_Process.jpg

There were palm trees in Antarctica, none in Washington state. But there was forest in Greenland in the last million, maybe 100,000s of years: I've seen palms as far North as Bleugene, OR.

www.uvm.edu: UVM scientists stunned to discover plants beneath mile-deep Greenland ice
Long-lost ice core provides direct evidence that giant ice sheet melted off within the last million years and is highly vulnerable to a warming climate, PNAS study shows

[Isaac Zachary]

Apparently they can make synthetic gasoline from CO2 directly captured from our very own atmosphere. Not that it's cheap to produce, but maybe in some future, internal combustion engines will be a hardcore enthusiast's hobby that requires a very expensive, carbon neutral fuel.

Ya, the whole "it's not currently up to the task" sales pitch is basically the same as saying "innovation has no purpose." I'm not saying the future is definitely electric or that it's going to be synthetic gasoline. But if we don't try to look for better ways of doing things then there's no progress. Maybe the future is neither electric nor internal combustion. Maybe it'll be something else that hasn't even been thought of yet. Or something that's been right there under our noses the whole time.

Personally I think there's too much emphasis on what cars look like and the pride of owning a car, which is really just a tool to get from point A to point B, and not enough emphasis on trying to figure out what would be a beneficial to everything form of transportation or if our insaciable glut for highspeed transportation is even necessary at the scale it is now.

Maybe figure out first where people and goods need and want to be. Offer incentives to make those places as close as possible. Then figure out what would be the best form of transportation between those points, as well as those places not in the usual routine, that not only makes everyone happy but is good for the environment.

[freebeard]

Maybe it'll be something else that hasn't even been thought of yet. Or something that's been right there under our noses the whole time.

It's called, "Staying at home."

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

What bothers me the most are the attempts to set an EV-only policy as if it could work as a one-size-fits-all approach.

Originally Posted by freebeard

Pistons don't imply gasoline made from deep, hot abiotic oil. It can also be made from —oh I don't know— compost?

Considering organic waste will always be around, it makes much more sense to manage it in a way that would lead to some economical benefits. I'm sure using it as a fuel source makes more sense than simply letting the organic matter rot away releasing raw methane and other compounds into the atmosphere, soil and groundwater. And while some sort of "biogasoline" may seem suitable to address the requirements of most folks who take ethanol with a grain of salt, I am still favorable to ethanol, biomethane and biodiesel.

[Piotrsko]

Raise the price of gasoline to the equivalent alternative biofuel in BTU then stand back and watch the panic.

[Hersbird]

Many of the people who defend batteries as being a budding technology, seem to lack the same vision when looking at ways of dealing with CO2 positively as also a new and developing technology. They seem to jump right into the 'ban it is our only option' camp. Sometimes it just seems there are other motives behind things besides the claimed goal. If lower CO2 levels was the only goal then a complete ban on fossil fuel would not be the best solution.

[Isaac Zachary]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

Many of the people who defend batteries as being a budding technology, seem to lack the same vision when looking at ways of dealing with CO2 positively as also a new and developing technology. They seem to jump right into the 'ban it is our only option' camp. Sometimes it just seems there are other motives behind things besides the claimed goal. If lower CO2 levels was the only goal then a complete ban on fossil fuel would not be the best solution.

We all know the real reason companies say things. They say it to make money. Not that they can't try to do good things for the environment too. But they do it and say it so people will but their products.