And so it starts.
The government is expected to water down a manifesto pledge suggesting a complete ban on the sale of new petrol-powered cars by the end of the decade, according to reports.
Labour promised in its election manifesto to end the sale of “new cars with internal combustion engines” by 2030 in a push to reach net-zero targets led by Ed Miliband, Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero.
The written declaration of Labour‘s intentions in government was ambiguous on whether new hybrids – which are powered by petrol or diesel combustion engines, as well as an electric motor – would be among those banned, according to car makers.
These are the arseholes who said that they would roll back Sunak’s watering down. Oh, yes, they were going to have a hard deadline of 2030, despite clear evidence that this was insane. Now they are in power and reality is punching them on the nose. This is just the start. The whole scam will eventually crumble. I’m sticking with my petrol engined Megane. As there is nothing on the market to replace it, I’ll just sit tight and watch the train crash between government, the car industry and reality as the whole farrago implodes.
But The Telegraph now reports that ministers are expected to make clear that while there will be tough rules on “pure petrol” cars, new hybrid sales will still be allowed for a further five years after 2030.
As we get closer, this, too, will become an impossible deadline.
It comes amid reluctance among motorists to switch to electric vehicles (EVs), with concerns over their range, value at resale, and access to charging stations.
Leading horses to water and all that. Remember, they wanted this. Popcorn, I believe, is about to become a rare commodity.
If they connected a dynamo to all the back-pedalling they’re going to be doing, that could power the National Grid for a week or two.
Don’t you just love it when they have to eat their own shit.
Geoff buys cars has been rather effectively demolishing this fantasy. Well worth a look.
It’s like the euro for cars: a nakedly political – and unbelievably damaging in reality – project masquerading as “forward thinking”
And to hell with what is being destroyed of course.
Like you, I will be getting the popcorn in, but I find it hard to forget that many innocent people are going to suffer.
In dealerships, manufacturers, garages etc etc.
While the degenerate ideologues simply don’t even acknowledge the livestock, the industry is equally guilty.
More so it could be argued as they do have power and the have simply refused to use it.
Sanity will return, it has to.
It may well return quicker than expected. I do hope so.
“it could be argued as they do have power and the have simply refused to use it.”
Agreed. If the car companies closed every one of their factories in the UK (and the knock on effect on their component suppliers), refused to import cars from other countries and closed the dealerships then the resulting unemployment and loss of all that lovely tax revenue might get the attention of the numpties in Der Sturmers Oligarchy.
The manufacturers can rightfully claim that they are merely salvaging what they can from the forthcoming inevitable ban and are making a rational decision to protect their companies and equipment.
Why are hybrids considered to be better than ordinary ICE cars? As far as I’m aware they are hardly any more economical and in addition have a nasty polluting battery. I suppose that to the technically challenged they might seem like a step half way towards a full electric car but they really aren’t in reality.
I’ve driven hybrids – hyundai ionic – and they averaged 65mpg which is pretty good.
The battery was only 1.8kw as it’s just for low speeds and around town (I think it could do maybe 30 miles under optimum conditions on the battery if it had to)
Wouldn”t buy one though as the long term for that very complex drive train – what it would cost if it went wrong etc.
And there is a battery that would at some point need replacing.
Infinitely preferable to a milk float of course, but the economy to my mind would not negate these possible uncertainties (however, if they do prove themselves long term I would, of course, be willing to reconsider).
Real cars work, are proven and have served me well for 40 odd years.
Hybrids?
I’m agnostic, but there’s still a deal of persuasion I need.
Not least of which is that if real cars are evil – CO2 is satan – I really can’t see how a 30 mile optimum “tailpipe emission free” range makes any significant difference.
A hybrid is just a sop really.
AFAIK, the only justification for hybrids is the taxation on liquid fuels.
Once you remove the tax from the govt side of the scales, any economic argument is negated by the physical increase in weight from the battery equivalent to having 2 rugby players in the back seat permanently.
Bollocks. The battery pack in my Prius weighs about 100lb. That weight is offset by the absence of a clutch and gearbox from the transmission.
Yes, it would be nice if people realised there are three different sorts of hybrid before mouthing off.
You have a CVT type of gearbox as part of the powertrain. And if your battery only weighs 100lbs as you claim, you have an early Prius which has an incredibly short EV only range. And that is not the type of hybrid that Nessimmersion is referring to.
It was never intended to do long distances in electric mode. The hybrid design allows an Atkinson cycle ICE to generate Otto cycle torque while extracting more useful energy from fuel combustion.
Nessimersion wrote about ‘hybrids’ rather than one specific type.
“while there will be tough rules on ‘pure petrol’ cars, new hybrid sales will still be allowed for a further five years after 2030.”
Oh, thank ‘ee, my lord. Ye be a proper gent, and no mistakin’.