BMW Says Europe's Gas Engine Ban 'Can Kill an Industry' (motor1.com)
- Reference: 0179145528
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/25/09/10/210257/bmw-says-europes-gas-engine-ban-can-kill-an-industry
- Source link: https://www.motor1.com/news/771782/bmw-warns-2035-gas-engine-ban-kill-industry/
> BMW watched from the sidelines as Audi, Porsche, Mercedes, Volvo, and others announced lofty EV goals a few years ago, only to backtrack in recent months. Munich never vowed to go fully electric within a set timeframe, instead preferring to give customers the freedom of choice. It projects demand will be evenly split between gas and electric cars by 2030, but Bavaria [1]hasn't committed to a combustion-free future . The company maintains its desire to give people what they want rather than artificially restricting powertrains to EVs, as the European Union plans for 2035. In an interview with Australian magazine [2]CarExpert , Chief Technology Officer Joachim Post argued it should ultimately come down to buyers, not the EU: "Finally, the customer decides."
>
> Provided the ban takes effect in a little over nine years, the board member fears it could have massive repercussions: "If the European Commission is going to say they have a plan to cut the combustion engine in 2035, they're not asking the customers and how [EV charging] infrastructure is coming up, how the energy prices are and all the things there. It's stupid to do that in that way. And you can kill an industry doing it that way."
>
> His concerns are echoed by Mercedes CEO Ola Kallenius, who recently warned the European car industry is "heading at full speed against a wall" and could even "collapse" if the EU doesn't reconsider. The statement came shortly after Stuttgart's boss admitted the company had to make a "course correction" to keep combustion engines longer than initially planned. Mercedes continues to invest in conventional powertrains, and there's even a completely new V-8 from AMG on the way.
The report notes that BMW continues to generate strong profits from its combustion engines, ranging from three-, four-, six-, and eight-cyclinder engines to a Rolls-Royce V-12 -- even supplying rivals like Toyota and possibly soon Mercedes.
In fact, the "M" in BMW stands for "Motoren" (German for "engine").
[1] https://www.motor1.com/news/771782/bmw-warns-2035-gas-engine-ban-kill-industry/
[2] https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-news/bmw-slams-eu-combustion-vehicle-ban-promises-no-unequal-twins-for-ev-and-ice-buyers
Irrelevance? (Score:5, Insightful)
An electric motor is also a motor, so that last line of the summary is hoghwash. But, BMW seems to take a page out of the Trump handbook, 'ICE first!'. Which is, of course, a valid way. Still, as with any choice anyone makes at any given time, the consequences of these choices are your to bear.
And with that choice BMW seems to go in the direction of becoming obsolete by their own hand. I have owned 3 BMW's when living in the Netherlands. Fine cars, each one of them. Enjoyed driving these as well. But if they don't want to play in a changing market, then why would the market care? Their stance only makes the Chinese car industry more relevant, by simply choosing to remain in the technical backwater that is ICE.
ICE is fun and sounds so much better than EV does. Any day of the week and twice on Sundays even. Yet, that doesn't exclude BMW of moving where the market goes. This is why such companies must work on R&D, without CEO's c.ckblocking the required spending to do so. Else you, as a company, simply become irrelevant.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a still a lot of FUD around electric vehicles. I drive a BMW i4 /shrug
Re: (Score:2)
> Yet, that doesn't exclude BMW of moving where the market goes.
BMW wants to continue to build what they are quite aware their customers want. That is how the market is supposed to work.
Re: (Score:2)
> Who gives a damn about how a market is supposed to work if the human race goes extinct?
The human race will likely go extinct one day, but not soon. You should try to enjoy your life, today.
Re: (Score:1)
> The human race will likely go extinct one day
Sure. No need to do so sooner though.
Re: (Score:1)
BMW's headquarters building is a 4-cyl. They can't help it.
I disagree. (Score:2)
Of course the current course can kill the ICE industry. It's the very point of the policy.
However, by "collapse" the likely mean "the Chinese will eat our lunch" will only happen because the European automakers currently refuse to take EVs, even hybrids, seriously. I mean there's Munich auto fair right now, and a big maker like Renault is showing its 6th update of the Clio (the best selling car from the brand), and it's a simple ICE with no electrified version planned.
Complaining about infrastructure is not
Re: (Score:2)
> Of course the current course can kill the ICE industry. It's the very point of the policy. However, by "collapse" the likely mean "the Chinese will eat our lunch"
BMW owners don't want cheap Chinese EVs, and BMW is quite capable of building a pretty well regarded (by enthusiasts) BEV (the i4 M50) which is as good as anything from China, as well as being a BMW, except for the pesky problem that it is not what BMW drivers want. Ain't nothing China can do about that either.
Well (Score:1)
> The report notes that BMW continues to generate strong profits from its combustion engines... In fact, the "M" in BMW stands for "Motoren" (German for "engine").
It may surprise you but EVs have engines too.
Re: (Score:2)
>> The report notes that BMW continues to generate strong profits from its combustion engines... In fact, the "M" in BMW stands for "Motoren" (German for "engine").
> It may surprise you but EVs have engines too.
I always thought motoren was German for motors, how could I have been so wrong?
Re: (Score:1)
Motors? EVs have those too!
EVs still cost more upfront (Score:2)
When You've got 60% of your country living paycheck to paycheck upfront is what matters.
Also so far the maintenance benefits haven't really materialized because although you don't need to do oil changes and such the newer parts tend to break down more. Maybe in 10 or 20 years that won't be true but we're talking now.
I think especially in Europe electricity is cheaper than gas but in America if you don't own your own home, which is basically impossible if you're under 40, then you're going to be payi
Re: (Score:2)
> When You've got 60% of your country living paycheck to paycheck upfront is what matters.
That's right but people who live paycheck to paycheck don't purchase BMWs, they don't even purchase new cars. Even if they want a new one, they take the best selling model which right now is sold 13 k€ (it's not a BMW as you can guess). Out of all European makers, BMW is among the least who could complain about the additional price of a battery. Their latest production, presented here 5 days ago, sells for 60 k$ [1]https://hardware.slashdot.org/... [slashdot.org] Their customer base wouldn't care much if a bigger batter
[1] https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/25/09/06/011224/bmw-unveils-new-ix3-ev-with-500-mile-range-ai-enabled-software
Climate destroyers claim they are the good guys (Score:2)
What else is new? The reality is they messed up their strategy and now want to go on polluting longer to keep their profits up. Obviously, these assholes must not be allowed to do that.
Re: (Score:2)
> What else is new? The reality is they messed up their strategy and now want to go on polluting longer to keep their profits up. Obviously, these assholes must not be allowed to do that.
Pretty sure there is a carve out in the EU regulations for e-fuels.
[1]https://www.hemmings.com/stori... [hemmings.com]
Porsche is leading the way on this, but BMW also has an enthusiast customer base. No reason ICE cars can't be pretty clean. EU just needs to focus on the goal and not micromanaging markets. Governments are generally really bad at that.
[1] https://www.hemmings.com/stories/eu-changes-2035-combustion-engine-ban/
Premium automakers have a particular challenge (Score:2)
E-fuels will be so expensive that only supercar owners will be able to afford them. We're talking $20 per gallon or more. Nor do they solve the problem of local air pollution.
Re: (Score:2)
> E-fuels will be so expensive that only supercar owners will be able to afford them. We're talking $20 per gallon or more. Nor do they solve the problem of local air pollution.
I've seen estimates of double current gasoline prices at scale but am too lazy to search, that would certainly be well with in the budget of many people why buy luxury cars. I would certainly pay double in order to continue to buy new ICE cars. Otherwise I'll just continue to use the traditional stuff in whatever my last car will be.
Gas has externalities (Score:1)
If we actually factored in all the downstream cost of gas, including pollution and health care, which are currently uncaptured externalities. Then gas price would go way up, and people would choose EV. ICE is getting a free ride and healthcare is picking up the bill.
Preparing for failure (Score:2)
> ... how [EV charging] infrastructure is coming up ...
Their job is to make compliant cars. They can certainly emphasize the laziness of government means the needed infrastructure isn't getting built. They might even pontificate on the stupidity of demanding a city of EVs that can't get 'fuel' and thus function as street art.
An addition problem will be, the cost of re-tooling means most people can't afford an electric vehicle. That's a price/demand/bankruptcy problem that also requires government intervention.
> ... keep combustion engines ...
If government doesn't honour their side of the
well, yes obviously (Score:2)
That's the point.
Horseshit. (Score:3, Insightful)
> BMW wants customers to have the freedom to choose between engines and batteries.
Their rationale is total horseshit and it's plain to see. Everything about this screams, "but our profit margins!" and an endless stream of crocodile tears.
I say, "fuck 'em" because they had the option to develop this technology sooner and reduce the pain of transition. However, instead of being reasonable, they decided against any investments in EVs because they were too busy rolling in piles of cash that papered over the 250M bodies of the people that will die from climate change by 2100.
Re: (Score:1)
A lot of people say the same thing about the EU.
Non sequitur. (Score:3)
Without making any particular point, you are merely throwing out a non sequitur.
Climate change is real, everyone (sane) knows that it is real and that we need to reduce emissions as fast as possible if the future is going to anything but an unmitigated disaster.
Re: (Score:3)
> we need to reduce emissions as fast as possible
There is zero evidence of any real urgency. We are "reducing emissions" as fast as is profitable. This article is about something that may or may not happen ten years from now. Which applies to most of the emissions reduction efforts. Because no one can make a profit from reducing emissions.
They can make a profit from producing lower emission alternatives which may slow the growth in emissions but doesn't really reduce them. Natural gas power plants being a classic example. Fewer emissions than coal, but t
Re: (Score:2)
> There is zero evidence of any real urgency.
You absolute fool. Climate change isn't something that can be stopped like someone who stops walking, it's more like a freight train that takes miles to stop. On top of that, we aren't even feeling the full effect of current emissions because there is a five year lag.
By the time there is "real urgency", it will be far too late and a total ecological collapse will be unavoidable. How can you be so shortsighted despite all the warnings?
> Because no one can make a profit from reducing emissions.
Exactly why it needs to be made unprofitable to emit pollution rather than
Re: (Score:1)
> Climate change is real, everyone (sane) knows that it is real and that we need to reduce emissions as fast as possible if the future is going to anything but an unmitigated disaster.
Do we have enough mining and manufacturing capacity to sell enough BEVs to replace the hydrocarbon burners before they all wear out or global warming is the disaster you fear? Is there enough electric generation capacity built quickly enough to charge these BEVs and keep the lights on?
That's not an argument to keep burning fossil fuels. That is a reminder of some very important logistics that need to be solved before any ban on internal combustion engines can be banned. In order to relieve some of the st
Re: (Score:2)
"A lot of people say fuck the EU because the EU had the option to develop this technology sooner and reduce the pain of transition. However, instead of being reasonable, the EU decided against any investments in EVs because the EU were too busy rolling in piles of cash that papered over the 250M bodies of the people that will die from climate change by 2100." Do they? Do they really?
Re: (Score:2)
I like that you say 2100 now. Good tactic. The 5, 10, and 12 year future doomsdays always end up embarrassing enviro-grifters, at least that's what muh computer models are telling me...today...and stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
May you reap what you sow.
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks brother. Before I sow I always throw a few virgins, infants and some carbon credits in the local volcano and grease the palms of the shamans so my crops are good next year and the rain gods are happy. Good on you, I hear there can be mega buck grants from the politicos for tweaking those computer models depending on the administration. Have you considered starting a megachurch like Osteen? Local boys making good. Right on!
I just plant trees and rely on the Krebbs Cycle...not much money in that tho...
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. They are part of the problem, nothing else.
Re: (Score:2)
It's funny because ilk like you are always the first to cry for help the second that their own shitty choices come back to haunt them.
Re: (Score:1)
> Their rationale is total horseshit and it's plain to see. Everything about this screams, "but our profit margins!" and an endless stream of crocodile tears.
As I see it there's nothing stopping a competitor to put an end to BMW's profits by offering BEVs that make anything with an internal combustion engine look like expensive junk. Putting a government thumb on the scale to favor BEV makers is restricting fair competition, that is the government picking who makes a profit and so is open to all kinds of corruption.
I also seen nothing restricting BEV ownership. Quite the opposite as I can recall all kinds of incentives like tax breaks, better parking spots, an