This post is part of a pro & con. Read Patrick Bernau’s argument against the combustion ban here.
The internal combustion engine is a German achievement. Visionary engineers like Nicolaus August Otto and Rudolf Diesel came up with it in the 19th century and thus laid the foundation for the age of individual mobility. Their engineering skill also formed the foundation for the German automotive industry, whose products are still sought after by customers all over the world. And now this: The European Union wants to put an end to the combustion engine by 2035. To protect the climate. This week, the European Parliament voted to ban new cars that emit climate-damaging carbon dioxide from being sold in Europe by the middle of the next decade. The inventions of Otto and Diesel are then ready for the museum.
Anyone who is on the road today may wonder how this is actually supposed to work: Where are enough affordable electric cars supposed to come from? Where does enough clean electricity come from to run your business? And how should a nationwide charging infrastructure be created between Copenhagen and Palermo in good time?
No more time for debates
All of these questions are important and legitimate. They show the magnitude of the challenge facing Europe. But that is precisely why it is right that the course is now being set to say goodbye to the internal combustion engine. This gives companies and governments long-term clarity and planning security. Everyone knows what the goal is and can set about achieving it. The technical and economic problems that need to be solved along the way are enormous – it is all the more important that all forces are mobilized now and no more time is lost in endless debates. Setting a clear end date is the best way to do this.
Paralyzing pessimism that none of this is going to work is inappropriate. Even if the example has been overused: Elon Musk demonstrated with Tesla how even a single company can revolutionize an entire industry. While German car managers have been whining for years that there are not enough charging stations for their electric cars, Musk has long since set up his own charging network and thus created a competitive advantage over the competition. Yes, the German auto industry has to reinvent itself. But in view of climate change, there is no way around it anyway.
Synthetic fuels are not efficient
Opponents of the planned ban criticize that combustion engines can also be operated in a climate-friendly manner if they are fueled with synthetic fuels made from green electricity instead of diesel and petrol. The advantages of synthetic fuel are obvious: Today’s engine technology and the filling station network can continue to be used. So far, however, there are no significant production facilities for such fuels anywhere in the world. Above all, their energy efficiency is much worse than that of the electric drive. The conversion losses in production are large, and much more heat is lost in the internal combustion engine than in the electric drive. Studies show that with the same amount of electricity you can get about five times as far in an electric car as with a combustion vehicle that has been fueled with synthetic fuel.
That wouldn’t be a problem if there were plenty of climate-friendly electricity in the world. But, as is well known, the opposite is the case. Despite all expansion plans, green electricity will remain scarce and valuable for the foreseeable future. It must therefore be used as efficiently as possible. This does not mean that synthetic fuels are not also needed. But they should only be used where there is no other option – for example in existing vehicles with combustion engines, of which many millions will still be on Europe’s roads in 2035. Not to mention Asia, Africa and South America.
At some point there may actually be an abundance of green electricity. But so far there is only a vague hope that sunny and windy countries in the Middle East and South America will export clean energy as synthetic fuel in the enormous quantities needed to Europe. In short, the world is still in its infancy when it comes to manufacturing synthetic fuels on an industrial scale. The time pressure for climate protection is now too great. We cannot afford to rely on such an immature alternative to the electric car.
Here is the other opinion.
