[David70]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

In other news, Porsche is developing synthetic fuels to keep ice alive.

Studying a new idea is interesting but I think unlikely to become commercially viable. Past studies had us making fuel from algae, corn husks, grass and waste products. Maybe someday. I think another issue is the ICE is about 30-40% efficient (turning fuel into energy) so whatever the fuel you have this to deal with. Electric has been proven to work.

Originally Posted by zx10guy

I can say from a marine aspect at least for sailboats, if a boat has been converted to electric auxiliary power, it will be worth substantially less than the same boat with a diesel; even less than one with a gasoline engine. I don't know if electric power will ever catch on in this application as there are tons of challenges and perceptions (justified or unjustified).

Boats seem to be one of the worst applications for electric. Most need a lot of fuel to run and reason my car is a good application is 99% of the time I park it at the end of the day for at least 10 hours at a place to plug it in. 99% of the time a battery can power me through the complete day and worst case is I can stop somewhere in the middle of the trip to plug it in. I also have the room to put the battery I need in the car.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by David70

Boats seem to be one of the worst applications for electric.

This is where it becomes helpful to think of EV as a family of technologies. The two big ones right now are BEV and FCEV. The latter begins to make economic sense (relatively speaking) when we talk about keeping something in motion for days or weeks. Incidentally, hydrogen is just one type of fuel cell. Others exist too, and that might be part of the conversation in the future as well.

[Alfisti]

All i keep seeing is range, that is not the issue, charging times and charging infrastructure is the issue and the two are related. If it takes twice as long to charge as it does to gas up, ypu need more ev stations than we have gas stations right now.

People are not thinking this through.

[heavyD^2]

I feel for established mechanical engineers that have spent their careers designing engines for automakers. Not exactly sure what some of these people will do seeing that motors and batteries are a bit of a 90 degree change in required electrical expertise. I guess there's still differentials and stuff but it won't be the same for sure.

[chassis]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

I feel for established mechanical engineers that have spent their careers designing engines for automakers. Not exactly sure what some of these people will do seeing that motors and batteries are a bit of a 90 degree change in required electrical expertise. I guess there's still differentials and stuff but it won't be the same for sure.

I know many people in the auto industry. One of them - company revenue will vanish by 50% because of EVs. The other is involved in manufacturing crankshafts, this will vanish at some point.

The question is when will the vanishing act happen? No one knows exactly.

It's not all doom and gloom. Design and production jobs are being created in the hardware and software EVs require. I have first hand knowledge of these developments.

I do think it's a net reduction of jobs. Alot will be via attrition. Some will be via layoff/termination. It's how it is.

[Higgs Boson]

There has also been a large reduction in farrier services since the 1700's.

[David70]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

I feel for established mechanical engineers that have spent their careers designing engines for automakers. Not exactly sure what some of these people will do seeing that motors and batteries are a bit of a 90 degree change in required electrical expertise. I guess there's still differentials and stuff but it won't be the same for sure.

Lots of people are affected by any major change. Without saying exactly what I do, company I work for manufactures equipment for the transportation of gas and diesel. Luckily for me I am at a part of my career that I can find something else in transportation. If you work at one of our plants the long term prospects are likely a lot worse than the mechanical engineer building engines.

[jkoral]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

BMW announced some time back that the current engine lineup is the last.

All over the interwebs today are articles about BMW CEO's saying they have no plans to stop developing ICE:

https://www.thedrive.com/news/39828/...ustion-engines

[hdahman]

I don't see EV mainstream in next 20 years. I am enjoying my ICE till then

[Mavus]

Originally Posted by hdahman

I don't see EV mainstream in next 20 years. I am enjoying my ICE till then

absolutely!

all these ev coming on the market are experiments only and in most scenarios more inconvenient than ice cars. once there is solid state battery it will get more interesting but that's in 10+ years.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

In other news, Porsche is developing synthetic fuels to keep ice alive.

Germany was doing that about 80 years ago...

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

All i keep seeing is range, that is not the issue, charging times and charging infrastructure is the issue and the two are related. If it takes twice as long to charge as it does to gas up, ypu need more ev stations than we have gas stations right now.

People are not thinking this through, especially dumb ass governments.

For the vast majority of people, their car sits somewhere most of the day and is used a few times. Possibly a little more on say the odd weekend or something, but even then, it probably sits more than it's being used, giving ample time for charging. Infrastructure is at least partially present, as more and more cars are being offered, it is steadily being improved in most places...maybe not Texas, lol. But the thing about electric is that there IS infrastructure and most people can charge at night and in off-peak times, which is generally a win all around.

Plus, a gas station is a giant hole in the ground, precautions to make sure it doesn't leak into the ground, tanks, pumps, cashiers, inspections, refills, samples and testing, and all sorts of other stuff. An EV "station" is about 1000x simpler and can be almost anywhere.

[Bongoxxx]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

All i keep seeing is range, that is not the issue, charging times and charging infrastructure is the issue and the two are related. If it takes twice as long to charge as it does to gas up, ypu need more ev stations than we have gas stations right now.

People are not thinking this through, especially dumb ass governments.

It doesn’t actually require a whole lot of thinking. One argument against EVs is ICE is more convenient as there are gas stations everywhere and you don’t have to “plan” to fill up.

I’m pretty sure that every single gas station has electricity - whether they are independently owned or owned by one of the big oil companies, they could easily install chargers at every single gas station.

They are just choosing not to at this point, but as demands change you will more starting to install them.

[Alfisti]

Right but someone has got to build them AND someone has to replace them after a few years when new chargers are better/faster/cleaner. There's also the issue of charging time, it needs to get under 10 mins for a full charge.

Saying folks can charge when at work or home is not solving the doubt in people's mind that for a trip outside their routine they need infrastructure, hence you see a lot of EV are "2nd cars" because of this doubt.

I seriously see a market 1/3rd EV, gas and hybrid.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by jkoral

All over the interwebs today are articles about BMW CEO's saying they have no plans to stop developing ICE:

https://www.thedrive.com/news/39828/...ustion-engines

Yep. But neither does Audi, right?

Read the OP. They aren't developing *new* engines. But they will continue to adapt the existing ones. This will go on as long as necessary just as it will at BMW. Of course, since VW's stock is soaring right now on the back of their commitment to EV, competitors have to react with headlines of their own.

All of this is marketing double speak. When you need to make a statement about your commitment to electric, you talk up the ICE wind-down. When you need to make a statement about not abandoning your existing customers, you talk up maintaining the status quo. None of it is news, particularly. It's more about leveraging the press to manipulate valuation.

I'll try to dig up the interviews and/or press material from 2019-ish where BMW heads talk about not investing in new engine families...

[jkoral]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Read the OP. They aren't developing *new* engines. But they will continue to adapt the existing ones....

All of this is marketing double speak...

...it's more about leveraging the press to manipulate valuation.

Yes, fully understood.

I just thought it was curious that the tweet from a journalist regarding BMW's CEO statement generated all the press/articles as a purported "response" to Audi's statement.

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Read the OP. They aren't developing *new* engines.

To avoid possible confusion, I now added emphasis on "new" in the OP.

Originally Posted by Artemis

"The EU plans for an even stricter Euro 7 emissions standard are a huge technical challenge and at the same time have little benefit for the environment. That extremely restricts the combustion engine," Duesmann told Automobilwoche. "We will no longer develop a new internal combustion engine, but will adapt our existing internal combustion engines to new emission guidelines."
(source: here + reported here, here and here).

[Dog Face Pony Soldier]

Originally Posted by Artemis

"The EU plans for an even stricter Euro 7 emissions standard are a huge technical challenge and at the same time have little benefit for the environment. That extremely restricts the combustion engine," Duesmann told Automobilwoche.

My favorite part is Duesmann calling out the pointlessness of it all.

[Germanauto]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

All i keep seeing is range, that is not the issue, charging times and charging infrastructure is the issue and the two are related. If it takes twice as long to charge as it does to gas up, ypu need more ev stations than we have gas stations right now.

People are not thinking this through.

"Twice as long?"

Even a supercharger takes 12x as long.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by Germanauto

"Twice as long?"

Even a supercharger takes 12x as long.

That's my point.

[BMWILUVU]

Everyone on the forums know EV and autonomous vehicles are the future. None like it but we don't make the decisions and they do not listen anyway. Also, that is a Ferrari engine inside that model Audi.

[David70]

Part of the "continue to develop ICE" is what this really means. When the 2.0T in the new model now comes with 5 additional hp, they technically continued to develop it but how many truly new ICE's has BMW had in the last 5 years? M's used to come with their own engines, that ended, V-10 went away, highly unlikely a new V8 will ever be made, I have real doubts about a new I6, just keep "developing it" (with minimal cost), maybe they come out with a new I3 or I4 but a completely new one seems unlikely.

I think BMW saying they will keep "developing" it is a great way to cater to what their customers want to hear and then Audi says they won't "develop a NEW combustion engine" - I think you will still see minor updates to existing engines and likely the wording is different but reality is close to the same. I doubt BMW or Audi will come out with all new engines but both will continue to update them with minimal cost to do it.