BMW CEO says Europe's ICE engine ban is "no longer realistic"

[Germanauto]

For all the flack we give BMW [deservedly so], I'll give them credit for being pragmatic about EVs. While the rest of the industry hopped on the EV bandwagon in an effort to boost their stock price and spin positive PR, BMW [and Toyota] have been proponents of keeping ICE alive.

The economics of EVs just don't add up; from battery costs, rapid depreciation, geopolitical issues with supply chain (i.e. dependence on China), loss of jobs in the automotive sector, etc.

EVs will certainly continue to increase in popularity but it will take a long time and they will not work for all consumers. ICE bans were a political stunt. The future is EV AND ICE/hybrid.

[NickyC]

Reality remains undefeated.

[JJacksonIII]

Originally Posted by jackaleyess

Yes Mr. Obvious. Even if we produce big displacement based on today’s numbers. The earth will still stood the same even at our great grand child time. So yeah. Cut the crap and push on for big displacement.

No clue what this means

[JJacksonIII]

China disrupted the market with it's mass production of slow charging, low range but super cheap electric vehicles. If they stayed out of the game everything would progress as they had planned.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by JJacksonIII

No clue what this means

Let me try to translate.

"Even if we force all cars to small displacements or EVs, the Earth will still be essentially the same when our great grandchildren are living on it. So build large engines that buyers want and don't worry about it"


I don't entirely agree, but I do agree that even the most optimistic estimates for what switching everyone over to EVs essentially don't even make a dent in the climate issue. The goal of something like the Paris Accords was to "slow the acceleration of the rate of change" of climate change. To put it in car terms, the goal was to do all this stuff to make the car lose steam at the top end of the powerband.

We know that earth has been warming for millenia before we were using hydrocarbons. We know that earths climate has changed dramatically just in our known history. We know that in our history, entire sections of land have plunged under the ocean, fertile areas have turned to arid deserts, and major cities have sunk into the ocean - all before we discovered oil.

Earth is a constantly changing ecosystem. While we are having an effect on it, it's the ultimate hubris of man to think that it would be static if not for us, and that we can do a damn thing about it.

As a species we would be FAR better off taking the money and time we are spending on "green" stuff and spending it on things that will help us when the climate changes more.

[cfm56d7b]

Arbitrary milestones are what they are - entirely arbitrary and designed to influence the electorate as opposed to achieve a meaningful change. So the modus operandi of corporate leaders is the same: when the arbitrary milestones 15 years ahead are announced, say nothing after the announcement and work behind the scenes to extend the milestones, wait for political winds to change, extend again, rinse and repeat.

I don't think BMW CEO is wrong. He is just countering less-than-credible rhetoric about 2035 milestone with a practical approach to weaken it, extend it, and when the time is right influence a regulatory change.