Norway bans gas cars in 2025 but trends point toward 100%EV sales as early April
electrek.co
electrek.co
Quotes from the article: "This has led Norway to have the earliest target for the phaseout of new gas vehicle sales in the world – 2025" ... "(which, to be clear, is not a legal requirement yet, more of a soft target agreed upon by Norway’s government)" ... "Norway might even allow limited numbers of gas car sales to continue past 2025"
So Norway isn't banning gas cars in 2025. Norway also likely isn't banning sales of new gas cars in 2025, they're incentivizing people to buy electric. But Electrek's gotta get those clicks.
Mostly single-speed transmissions but not exclusively: https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a28903274/porsche-taycan-t...
A single speed transmission can only really be called a transmission in a universe where cows are spherical.
Yes, it's a textbook correct terminology but completely irrelevant anywhere else (hence my comment about spherical cows)
I'm still waiting for the ultimate EV that's got 4 in-hub direct drive motors. Until then, we're stuck with transmissions.
Total aside, I know, but man would that would be awesome.
And as you hint, cobalt's damage is a political problem, not a "we don't have enough of it" problem. With proper regulations, the battery industry could clean up what has been a long-accepted human rights nightmare. But nobody seems to complain about it unless they can use it as an excuse to continue fossil fuel use.
Same known reserves were 4.5M tons in 2000. (https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prd-wret/assets/palladium...).
Despite all the extraction that happened during those 20 years, we now have more known reserves than before, because unsurprisingly, the more you look for something, the more of it you find.
I don't understand your skepticism about mechanics being able to service electric vehicles though. Why the doubt?
Are you aware of someone with a machine shop having fixed a battery made of exotic minerals? I’m not.
This one. Lithium and cobalt are slightly less abundant in the oceans and Earth's crust than nitrogen and there's more of it than lead or boron, which are produced at much greater scale than lithium or cobalt [1].
The problem isn't the amount it's the concentration of the elements in economically extractable ore. That's rapidly changing as various extraction methods reach economies of scale.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_elements_in_Earth...
It takes time to spin up production to 10 million tons per year - which is the scale of boron or silicon production according to the wiki - but now that lithium is worth something, it's just a matter of time and incentives.
[2] https://www.riotinto.com/en/news/releases/2021/Rio-Tinto-ach...
Yes. That’s my point.
If you look at EV growth, projected growth, the plans of major automobile manufacturers and the economy of building new engine manufacturing, it is pretty safe to say your assumptions are wrong.
The internet of today was possible to build in 2000. Replacing billions of vehicles and industrial equipment with batteries and solar panels or something in 20 years is not. You’ve observed a market response to legislation and central planning.
The average lifetime of a car is about 12 years.
(As for Toyota, they are actually notable for being laggards, having dragged their feet, wasted time on dead-end hydrogen technology)
What you are seeing is the foot of an S-curve. It isn't unusual for people who don't look at what goes on in industries to miss that.
People missed that for the Internet for nearly a decade. And then it permeated most of their life.
Once a tipping point is reached, most new homes will have the ability to charge cars, and old ones retrofitted, so people mostly charge at home. And gas stations will begin to dry up, making gas cars less desirable.
That same pattern should follow in every country, so it will be useful to have Norway as a data point on what actually happens.
Anecdotally, I agree with your assessment that EVs will cause more purchases.
The point of those stores is to get in and get out quickly. It's the exact opposite of an EV charging station. In fact, most 7/11 in my area enforce the 'no loitering' rule.
I don't even think that 7/11 managers want you there for more than 5 minutes.
Restaurants or shopping malls I'll stay for 2 hours regularly, and a few level 2 chargers can actually get me 50 miles of charge in that time. That's where the EV chargers should be.
I’ve traveled through most of the western (ie west of the Rockies) United States and North east as well. It’s possible I’ve seen a 7-11 gas station and just don’t remember.
Dunkin doughnuts vs Starbucks, Hardee’s vs Carl’s Jr., etc.
In the Seattle area, it looks like 33/100 of the 7-11s have gas. For LA, it was 1/100. For Toledo Ohio, 1/10. For Dallas Texas, 50/100 it looks like.
Will they though? I was under the impression "gas stations" make very little from the gas itself, and instead make most from the store (food/drinks etc.)
Recently they replaced a very simple and old gas station in my town with a completely new station featuring a robust store. The volume of business to that station has probably increased 10x.
Often the primary draw of gas stations is the gas, not the store, for which there are better alternatives. And since operating an EV-Charger is pretty easy & cheap compared to gas, there will be many stores adding EV-Chargers in the parking lot.
Here in germany, there are already a few supermarket chains (primarily ALDI) that have EV-Chargers on their parking lots.
https://www.google.com/search?q=japanese+vending+machine+lar...
Alternatively, these might be replaced by restaurants with chargers, for drivers to take their lunch breaks while charging their cars on longer trips. Restaurants, or any popular activity you might want to do on the go (a tourist attraction, though the novelty might wear out, cinemas, spas, etc).
Given that it it probably easier to create a new charging station than a new gas station, a lot more competition might appear, and we might see "charging hubs", with basically facilities centered around a fast-charging station, for people to take a break while their cars recharge.
It could also disappear once actual fast-charging is a thing.
EDIT: With some searching I found they already launched trials.
After living and driving in Sweden for seven years, I'm fairly certain this isn't true.
Oh, that's just "the poors", they can drive to a gas station 10 miles a way, I suppose.
If people are actually concerned about the poor, the conversation should be about good public transit, pedestrian and bike infrastructure-things that actually make a difference for people with less means.
I’m not saying it’s not a matter of concern at all, it’s just that here in the US we’ve absolutely hamstrung all other modes of transportation besides cars, which is not helpful for poor people, not to mention all of the many other policies we have that adversely effect the poor.
It’s just in this one discussion that people come out of the woodwork suddenly proclaiming how terrible anti ice policies are for the poor, and never with any suggestion for compromise eg “if we do this, it would have an adverse effect on the poor, we could mitigate that with X”.
Therefore it’s hard to read it as anything other than disingenuous.
Yes, we've got ourselves up a tree without a ladder on this issue.
Visiting America, I was completely flummoxed by attendants and tipping and other antiquated things.
This was coined “bullshit jobs” recently.
I think Norway probably points at where the rest of the world is slowly going to go.
Sweden is even further ahead. I have to think hard to recall any Swedish stations near me of any brand that isn’t self service or has a shop. There are still some shops with statoil in Sweden, which is Norwegian… but so is ST1, which is entirely unmanned.
My guess is that their daytime customers are people dropping by for a quick bite when parking at a grocery store is too much effort. Stores aren't allowed to be open for the night, so the gas station doesn't have any competition for nighttime customers.
[1] https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2017/3/20/cars-and-s...
https://www.ben-evans.com/benedictevans/2017/3/20/cars-and-s...
If EV sales in Norway continue to trend at 100% past April, Norway can pull forward its ban to "immediately." They could also accelerate petroleum station phase outs as it would not impact the EV fleet.
Why would they need to do that?
If EV sales trend at ~100% nearly continuously then there is no reason to ban anything unless the goal of the ban is symbolic chest thumping or pandering.
EDIT: @throwaway0a5e, the approach does not need to "fly" everywhere, just enough jurisdictions where automakers have no choice but to make EVs because the combustion market is no longer large enough to be a sustainable business, just as California sets emissions standards for the US [1] (as automakers don't want to build "California" and "non-California" vehicles). Combustion vehicle bans at scale [2] get us to a combustion vehicle manufacturing death spiral faster.
It is clear that cities and countries find value in combustion vehicle bans based on them being announced, codified into law, etc [1].
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/04/2...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-out_of_fossil_fuel_vehic...
If statistically nobody's doing it and there's statistically no harm coming from it there's no reason to ban it.
Your approach might fly in singapore but western nations generally think of themselves as free nations where everything is allowed unless there's a good reason for it not to be.
> you'll have consumers who might buy combustion vehicles, price be damned.
Those people would just track down a used vehicle.
>just enough jurisdictions where automakers have no choice but to make EVs
But if the consumers are already buying exclusively EVs and the OEMs are catering to those consumers what's the point of the ban? Nobody will be making gas cars if nobody is selling gas cars. A ban serves no end other than pandering to authoritarians at that point since the thing we wanted to get rid of is already gone.
I'm not alone: https://electrek.co/2021/09/23/norway-bans-gas-cars-in-2025-...
It seems they have already won in the market: "14 of the top 15 cars in Norway are all-electric"
> because they are never going to actually force a sizeable population to give up their cars
This ban doesn't affect current vehicles, only new sales.
By gas cars being taxes to death. You can call that a "market" if you want.
As opposed to being allowed to externalize their emissions to the death of the rest of us? I agree that current taxing of ICE vehicles is not optimal, what should happen is that gasoline is forced to be carbon neutral and pollution costs associated with lubricants and other fluids are built into the prices of those too, but the present situation near universally has been the opposite extreme where ICE costs aren't internalized one bit, and in fact often actively subsidized.
>You can call that a "market" if you want.
I will, since I know what a "market" actually is. Free markets are creations of government and tools of society, ultra scalable economic optimization algorithms. They require being reasonably far along the spectrum of things like cost internalization and information symmetry, the core point is that the price embodies all the costs as well as any floors society desires. That way each individual purchaser can allocate their own resources in as optimal way as possible.
The current anthropogenic global warming mess is precisely because we don't have a Free Market in vehicles, electricity, etc since they're allowed to dump an enormous amount of their costs onto everyone with no reflection in the sticker price. The result being trillions and trillions of dollars/euros all of us are and will have to pay to deal with the mess. And of course some of the damage will be irreversible at any price.
And you can redefine a market all you want. The original poster almost certainly meant it as "winning on its own merit". Yeah a regulator can arbitrary ban a competitor and then you can claim that it is still the market because you think the market is what the regulators say the market is, but it certainly doesn't fit "winning on its own merit".
No, it does not. But they definitely don't have any of the same externalities when it comes to AGW, which is the biggest environmental threat we're facing. And it's not clear they have any significant unique ones vs ICE cars. You'll need to quantify the environmental impact of manufacturing batteries vs crude oil extraction, transport (including oil spills), and refining for example. Internalizing carbon emissions in gasoline/diesel only covers a hard eyed AGW focus. Things like tire wear causing particulate pollution apply to both too. And EVs use far less consumable fluids and have fewer parts.
>And you can redefine a market all you want. The original poster almost certainly meant it as "winning on its own merit".
No, it is you who are attempting to redefine what a "market" is. A product "winning on its own merit" can only be said to be true if all externalities (or at least all significant ones) are accounted for. If the price doesn't include those, the product is not competing on its own merits either. This is econ 101. ICE cars have literally not competed solely on their own merits even once in their entire history. We are seeing at best a very, very slow and halting ultra late correction when the market is already shifting for other reasons because BEVs are just that much better even with ICE cars massively subsidized.
The taxes are an attempt to correct a failed market.
> This is a lot earlier than their 2025 target (which, to be clear, is not a legal requirement yet, more of a soft target agreed upon by Norway’s government).
In short, I'd say you're missing the mark.
Edit: source is elbil.no
Initially, petrol stations will see declining sales but still be profitable. But at some point, there will be few enough miles being driven in petrol-powerd cars that it will be come unprofitable. They will either need to find a new way of making money or close.
This will rapidly turn the tables and range anxiety will become a feature of petrol cars - where on the trip can I find a filling station? There might be a period of substantially increased petrol prices to keep the stations afloat. This will result in petrol-powered automobiles becoming stranded assets.
While this ideally happens slowly enough that most vehicles are used for their full useful lives, it seems more likely that this will be more of a step-change transition — and a lot of people will be left with big expensive lawn ornaments when the music stops.
The other big question is when this will occur. The Norwegians are likely very well off in this regard, as I presume that they can still sell their petrol cars to other areas in the EU. But what about when these charts apply to entire markets like the EU or North America?
Any insights?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_produ...
Norway is part of EU Emissions Trading System that is becoming very effective. The best way to cut CO2 emissions would be to make coal expensive.
This can be done by requiring that all cars must be 100% carbon neutral. To be able to sell gas, companies have to buy carbon permits and hurt coal production. (100% carbon neutral might not be the endpoint. Requirement can grow to 200% or to any arbitrary number). Those who need gas cars could still use them.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/20/poland-vows-to...
A ban is like a giant tax, whose amount is set by fines and jail time in addition to the black-market cost of procuring the thing in the first place (which includes the cost of evading the police and paying for the violence that comes with crime).
PS: we don't tax crime and genocides, do we?
I usually starts with starters, then main course and finally dessert, even if I intend to eat my dinner whole.
I’m very much a fan of taxing all carbon equally, but whenever I discuss the idea with other Norwegians, this reaction seems almost instinctive. In my opinion, there are better, more direct ways to redistribute income if you think that some people have less than they are entitled to (e.g. progressive taxation), but no one seems to convinced by this.
Often the best policy is simple and straight forward but the mechanism of action is something that people don't understand or refuse to believe.
Clickbait-y title aside (other comments were pretty helpful to point this out), this sounds pretty positive.
As for the trend saying that there will be zero new ICE car registrations by April next year; well take that with a large pinch of salt.
AIUI there's no expectation that selling a used combustion car will become illegal. But people don't have confidence that they'll get a high price (not even for the export market).
And while I'm sure there are some people who need a true off road vehicle, I see people happily drive their Model S and X on small gravel roads to their mountain cabins all the time.
We have a BMW i3 94Ah model. When it's not cold we get about 230km range.
When it's fairly cold, -10C or below, that drops significantly. Not helped by my SO's requirement to not feel cold. Reported range is about 160km at worst (cold batteries).
Still, we live in the city and it's been just fine for us. We just leave it connected in the garage over night and set the planned departure time in the morning. That way it's ready with heated batteries, which helps a lot.
It hasn't bothered us so far. We knew the limitations going in, so we just plan a bit. Every now and then we get an extra 10-20 minute charging stop on our way back, meh.
Being able to fill the tank at home, so to speak, is great though. So is the lack of engine noise when driving slow or in traffic. It quickly became clear that our next vehicle would definitely be another EV.
If the engine goes on my 300zx though I might do an EV conversion. It'd feel like a shame doing that to a manual though. Maybe I'd just sell it and get an automatic to do that to since nobody wants those anyway.
Edit: apparently only a ban on sales, but everything car-related is obscenely expensive over there anyway.