By 2017, under 50% of new cars will use conventional gas engines

[C-MAX Hybrid Guide]

By 2017, under 50% of new cars will use conventional gas engines

 

The reign of the traditional, internal combustion engine might be rapidly ending, depending on your definition. In its report Automotive Fuel Efficiency Technologies, Navigant Research predicts that by 2017 "conventional gasoline-powered vehicles" are going to be less than half of the market for new autos worldwide.

 

READ MORE HERE

[drdiesel1]

With all the advanced technology, I would hope so. Solar is the next big oil and EV is the future  :happy feet: 

[SPL Tech]

I dont believe that article for a second. Less than 0.5% of the vehicles on the road do not use gasoline or diesel right now. The technology for electric is not sufficient yet. People need to be able to drive cross country, and electric vehicles do not allow that. There is CNG, LPG and biodiesel, but again same problem as electric, it's hard to drive cross country.

 

I suspect in 2017 still less than 3% of the vehicles out there will not use gasoline or diesel. Gas is going to be around for a very long time as it is the ONLY energy source out there right now that provides sufficient HP, reasonable cost, and allows you to drive anywhere anytime without hunting around for some type of special fuel.

Edited January 6, 2015 by SPL Tech

[plus 3 golfer]

I dont believe that article for a second. Less than 0.5% of the vehicles on the road do not use gasoline or diesel right now. The technology for electric is not sufficient yet. People need to be able to drive cross country, and electric vehicles do not allow that. There is CNG, LPG and biodiesel, but again same problem as electric, it's hard to drive cross country.

 

I suspect in 2017 still less than 3% of the vehicles out there will not use gasoline or diesel. Gas is going to be around for a very long time as it is the ONLY energy source out there right now that provides sufficient HP, reasonable cost, and allows you to drive anywhere anytime without hunting around for some type of special fuel.

The title of Navigant's press release: Conventional Gasoline Models are Expected to Represent Less Than Half of Vehicles Sold Worldwide by 2017 is very misleading.  The operative word is "Conventional."

 

The article is not about EV, CNG, LPG or biodiesel new vehicle sales (non-gasoline vehicles) surpassing sales of vehicles using gasoline by 2017.  It's about changes to the "conventional" or "traditional" gas vehicle such that by 2017 less than 1/2 of new vehicle sales will be a traditional gas vehicle.  Navigant considers practically any technology beyond old-school, naturally aspirated power to be outside its narrowly defined traditional category.  So, a gas vehicle equipped with an engine start / stop feature would be considered a non-traditional gas vehicle and excluded from traditional gasoline sales by Navigant.

 

So until, one knows what is considered "conventional", it's hard to dismiss the article per se.  Of course one can buy the full research document and probably find out how Navigant came up with their misleading title. :)  

Edited January 6, 2015 by Plus 3 Golfer

[mtb9153]

Gas supplies aren't going to last for ever.  There's only so many dinosaur deposits available.

[scottwood2]

I take this as stating that anything that is gasoline only with no start/stop tech vs anything else.  It also states sales in 2017 so the cars already on the road are not part of this percentage.  With so many vehicles coming out with some kind of tech, I think this could happen.  But then again with gas under $2 a gallon, that could change sales too.  

[fotomoto]

Yes "conventional" is a little misleading but newer, higher CAFE standards mean there will be fewer and fewer conventional ICE vehicles every year.

 

Given the market's current path, I don't think the hybrid market will grow much more* due to the encroachment of better "conventional" ICE vehicles (start/stop, 40+hwy, etc) on one side attracting "conventional" customers and PHEV/BEV's with their MUCH higher fuel economy on the other side attracting the "green crowd".  

 

 

 

 

*Unless gas prices explode due to a Saudi Arabia vs ISIS (possibly secretly supported by Russia) war or similar scenario.

[plus 3 golfer]

I take this as stating that anything that is gasoline only with no start/stop tech vs anything else.  It also states sales in 2017 so the cars already on the road are not part of this percentage.  With so many vehicles coming out with some kind of tech, I think this could happen.  But then again with gas under $2 a gallon, that could change sales too.  

I agree that $2 gas will likely change some(many) consumers' buying decisions.   But what will the price of gas be in 2017 is the question.   Also, automakers have to meet CAFE requirements in 2017.  I believe these are the current requirements for passenger cars:

 

TABLE I–3—MINIMUM STANDARD FOR DOMESTICALLY MANUFACTURED PASSENGER CARS (MPG)

 

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

36.7 -38.0 -39.4- 40.9 42.7- 44.7- 46.8- 49.0- 51.3 

 

So, unless new standards are adopted, manufacturers will have to meet these numbers irrespective of the price of gas.

[Smiling Jack]

Does anyone know how the EPA treats PHEVs in the CAFE requirement test?

 

They test in charge sustaining (Hybrid) mode and in charge depleting (EV) mode. How do they combine these for CAFE calculations?

[Adrian_L]

I take this as stating that anything that is gasoline only with no start/stop tech vs anything else.  It also states sales in 2017 so the cars already on the road are not part of this percentage.  With so many vehicles coming out with some kind of tech, I think this could happen.  But then again with gas under $2 a gallon, that could change sales too.  

 

Gas hit $6 a gallon up here in Canada a couple of years ago.   When it hit $5/gallon the local news media started interviewing people at gas stations:  "will you change your driving habits? etc. etc".  Alot of folks said they would drive less.  

 

The reality was that there was an increase in cars on the road, people didn't change their driving habits and there seemed to be just as many silly behemoths (Escalade, Denali, Navigator, Armada) that were there before.

 

If the theory is that high gas prices fuel hybrid or economy car sales, it sure isn't being proven here.

[SPL Tech]

 

 

 

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

36.7 -38.0 -39.4- 40.9 42.7- 44.7- 46.8- 49.0- 51.3 

 

So, unless new standards are adopted, manufacturers will have to meet these numbers irrespective of the price of gas.

 

According to what law? That's completely unrealistic. There is no V6 or above engine out there that can come anywhere close to those numbers, and larger engines are a staple of performance cars. Every luxury and sports car manufacturer in existence would go out of business if they had to get their cars to obtain 37 MPG highway by 2017.

[plus 3 golfer]

According to what law? That's completely unrealistic. There is no V6 or above engine out there that can come anywhere close to those numbers, and larger engines are a staple of performance cars. Every luxury and sports car manufacturer in existence would go out of business if they had to get their cars to obtain 37 MPG highway by 2017.

Please read my post above again.  It clearly states the source. ;)  I suggest you look up CAFE and read / understand it. Manufacturers have to pay penalties if they choose not to meet the standards and of course the requirements can change. 

 

cafe_fines-07-2014 (1).pdf

[SnowStorm]

Could be a challenge but its not as unrealistic as it might seem.  Luxury/sports cars won't need to get 37 mpg.  Here are some of the reasons (it gets rather interesting):

1. The MPG "required" is a weighted fleet average (Coporate Average Fuel Econoy).  A company can build 100,000 cars that get 38 mpg and 1000 that get 5 mpg and meet the standard (36.7).
2. The CAFE number is not the same as the EPA numbers on window stickers - its a lot higher, like 30%.
3. The standard varies with vehicle size and type.  For 2017 it goes from 44 mpg for "small" cars to 19 mpg for "large" light trucks.  Remeber, those are not "window sticker" numbers.  (Size comes from "footprint" which is wheelbase times track width so we can expect ever decreasing ride comfort as manufacturers shorten wheelbases! ;) )
4. "Light trucks" are about half the population - they have lower standards.
5. "Light trucks" include trucks, vans and SUVs!
6. Vehicles above certain GVWRs are excluded.
7. Alternate fuel vehicles (E85 or PHEVs) get a boost in the alternate fuel mpg rating by 6.67X which gets averaged with the gasoline rating.  (But there is a 1.2 mpg limit that can be applied to the final CAFE.)
8. Electric vehicles get the same boost with no limit on final CAFE improvement.  So, I suppose, a 100mpge electric car gets a rating of 667 mpg!  That means that one electric car counts for like 15 or 20 gasoline cars! :happy feet:
9. As +3 points out, if car makers don't meet CAFE, they just pay a penalty and keep going.  One value I saw was that Mercedes paid, IIRC, $122 per car.  That won't stop anyone from buying that E-Class!
10. Instead of penalties they can also use "credits".  If they beat the number one year, they can apply it up to 3 years previous or 5 years after - a virtual time machine.  They can also "trade" credits in various ways.

So, plenty of details in which the devils can hide.  (Disclaimer - all the above subject to correction!)

Edited February 26, 2015 by SnowStorm

[Adrian_L]

In 2017, you'll still be able to buy a V12 supercar getting 12 MPG, flaunting your disdain for global warning and humanity with a deft rush down the block.  But increasingly there will be environmental taxes that make it less desirable to own these things. 

 

Personally, I'm more excited about high performance electric technology, although I'd still give my left pinkie for a gas-gulping vintage Jaguar. 

[Smiling Jack]

At the moment 33-1/3 % of my cars are plug-in hybrid - counting my '79 Eldorado "hobby car" which has not run in quite a while.

 

I do find that after driving EV, I have become less interested in fixing the old Eldo.  The Eldo was a class ride in its day, but the C-max has more cargo space and better acceleration at street speeds.  If I ever come to grips with reality and get rid of the Eldo, I will be at 50% - possibly even before 2017.

 

So, I seem to be right on track with this reported trend.

 

Of course, several of our friends on this forum are already at 100% for their family fleets.

 

The move from 50% to 100% for us would require my wife wanting to replace her Cadillac STS with something less conventional.  Her first take on the C-max Energi was that when she stepped on the gas she expected to hear the engine "roar," not go "woosh," but she's starting to get used to the quiet of electric driving; so, maybe we'll see her in an ELR one day.  She has less than 30,000 miles on the STS, and she tends to keep her cars for decades; so, - who knows? - maybe in another 10 or 12 years a used 2013 ELR will actually be cheap enough to fit the budget.