Are regulators focusing too much on selling EVs and not enough on phasing out ICE vehicles?

Global EV sales are steadily rising thanks to regulatory support, but that doesn’t matter unless existing petrol and diesel vehicles are phased out soon, a new study argues.

“Low fleet rotation speeds present a real barrier to significant decarbonisation,” the researchers said. new book About the energy transition ( Axios).

The researchers compared emissions policies, such as the UK’s plan to end sales of new petrol and diesel cars in 2030, to the average car lifespan. They found that there is a significant “roll lag” between the start of the new regulations and the elimination of internal combustion engine vehicles.

To align the share of zero-emission vehicles with 1.5C, phase out sales of non-zero-emission vehicles (mainly petrol and diesel vehicles) in 2025 (left y-axis) *, *that It turns out that the average should be reduced. Current 16 to 9 lifetime (x-axis). 8/13 pic.twitter.com/Rpzmj8meRw

— Emil Dimanchev (@EmilDimanchev) July 20, 2022

Therefore, to achieve significant emission reductions sufficient to curb climate change, it is necessary to “rapidly phase out the sale of exhaust-emitting vehicles and significantly accelerate vehicle turnover.” You need both,” explains Emil Dimanchev, one of the book’s authors. twitter thread Paper details.

Limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (a goal in line with the Paris Agreement) requires phasing out sales of internal combustion engine vehicles by 2025, but also shortening the lifespan of these vehicles from 16 years. It should be nine years from the current US average, Dimanchev argues.

This is due to the slow turnover rate of the fleet, Transitioning to EVs will take time without policy intervention. It also raises many questions.

Cash for Clunkers trade-ins: Mercury Sable and Toyota Camry

Should automakers shorten the lifespans of current petrol and diesel vehicles to avoid exceeding the expected transition to EVs? This will allow fleets to turn faster. but it also means a lot of waste. It’s a throwback to the automotive industry’s planned obsolescence heyday in the 1950s. At the time, consumers were encouraged to trade in their cars each year to keep up with changing styles.

This also raises the question of whether incentives should be focused on phasing out internal combustion engines rather than buying new EVs. It’s not unprecedented. 2009’scache for clunkers“The program eliminated older cars with less stringent emissions standards.

A new program specifically for gasolinesuperuser” Might be a good place to start. California is “total polluter” Retirement program, possibly to be reorganized and expanded.State wants to end sales of new internal combustion vehicles by 2035Before that, should we retire existing gasoline vehicles?

https://ift.tt/T1WRCZ5 Are regulators focusing too much on selling EVs and not enough on phasing out ICE vehicles?

The post Are regulators focusing too much on selling EVs and not enough on phasing out ICE vehicles? appeared first on Autobala.

Auto Updates