FISITA’s CTO Martin Kahl considers the theme of this year’s FISITA Summit, and some of the topics likely to be raised by the event’s speakers and panellists
To EV, or not to EV? It’s such a simple question, but its simplicity belies the vast complexity of the quest for cleaner mobility.
The challenge is not to choose one of two mutually exclusive outcomes, but rather to navigate two potentially synergistic ways of reducing greenhouse gases and CO2 emissions from transportation.
On the understanding that EVing is something we can do, the question is, should we, or not?
Despite rapid advances in EV product and technology over the 15 or so years since the current generation of battery EVs hit the market, EV drivers are still seen as “early adopters.” For everyone else, the transition to EV is a considerable consideration.
Yet in that quest for cleaner mobility, EV is the assumed champion. Why, then, is the choice so complex?
To EV…
Let’s look at the first part: To EV.
Aside from any environmental consideration, EVs are typically highly compelling products, boasting high end technology and attractive design features. They offer instant torque, reduced dependence on fossil fuels, zero tailpipe emissions, quiet driving, regenerative braking, and often lower cost driving. To EV could mean never going back to the filling station thanks (for some) to home charging—and with the right set-up, even vehicle-to-grid charging. And above all else, we’re talking about some very cool tech here: what’s not to like?
To EV wins hands down. Game over.
Well. There’s no denying that EVing involves overcoming issues which, whether based on perception or reality, are indeed barriers to adoption.
There’s the issue of affordability, and the fact that despite lower running costs, for many people, the upfront cost to EV means switching up—often significantly.
Competing with affordability as a barrier to adoption is the question—perceived or otherwise—of poor infrastructure availability.
In the quest for cleaner mobility, EV is the assumed champion. Why, then, is the choice so complex?
Talking of which, there’s also what happens when an EV driver interacts with that infrastructure. Most EV owners are mostly happy with public charging infrastructure; the rest typically bemoan the poor customer experience when charging out in the wild.
And the customer experience must be about more than charging—it needs to include what happens if something happens; that is, more-than-adequate expertise in maintenance and repair, supported by a joined-up approach to warranty and insurance.
Look further into the challenges, and we can point to fragile global supply chains, poorly thought-out end-of-life vehicle handling strategies, the slow development of battery recycling, and the oft-cited absence of joined up national or regional automotive industrial strategies. The customer often doesn’t care about any of this, but these issues take on new significance when misinformation aligns EV advocacy or opposition with “passionate” political affiliation.
…or not to EV?
Alternatively, what about not to EV? On the understanding that “not to EV” nonetheless entails a desire for cleaner mobility, the assumption must be that transport emissions can be reduced without a mass transition to EVs.
The first challenge is conceptual: mandating technologies—whether outright or de facto—can limit as much as create possibilities. Encouraging a portfolio of solutions—”the right technology for the right application”—combined with a comprehensive industrial strategy, can arguably help reduce overall emissions more effectively than by pursuing one single technology.
Just give us cleaner fuels, say the ICE proponents, who point to the fuel as the problem, rather than the process of combustion, while nodding to the development of increasingly efficient combustion engines. And, they add, give us clean drop-in fuels that can keep existing ICEs on the road for longer.
Give us more plug-in hybrid (PHEV) solutions, say the automakers to the suppliers, as their earlier laser focus on pure EVs fades into a mix of solutions in the face of a slower-than-expected BEV transition. Long seen as the bridging technology that will take us from the ICE age to notable if not mass adoption of EVs, many had expected the PHEV step to be skipped in the rush for EVs—and maybe that will happen, but right now, the automakers, we hear, need more PHEV support.
Encouraging a portfolio of solutions—"the right technology for the right application"—combined with a comprehensive industrial strategy, can arguably help reduce overall emissions more effectively than by pursuing one single technology
There’s very little talk these days of fuel cell vehicles, but there is still some; and the flame hasn’t gone out yet on hydrogen combustion engine technology.
So…To EV, or not to EV?
With 150 years invested in ICE technology, and just a couple of decades in modern EV technology, it should come as little surprise that there are still kinks to iron out; it should come as little surprise that the infrastructure is less well developed than the one supporting internal combustion engines; and it should come as little surprise that consumers find are often confused, suspicious, and unconvinced when it comes to EVs.
In short, it’s time to make the EV experience look and feel as much like the combustion engine experience as possible, targeting cost parity, equalling perceived and real differences in convenience, improving or even exceeding the customer experience, eliminating misinformation, improving customer understanding, and generally promoting the benefits of the EV age over the downsides of the ICE age.
Given that one can quickly and easily find compelling evidence to prove that EV is the cleanest form of mobility, and equally compelling evidence to prove that it’s not, perhaps it’s time to add in the notion that even cleaner than either is no car at all, with mobility provided by public transport operators.
Which raises the question for the PTOs: To EV, or not to EV?
***
The 2024 FISITA World Mobility Summit will take place at the General Motors Technical Center in Warren, Michigan, on 13 and 14 November 2024. The speaker line-up and agenda have been carefully selected to address the theme, “To EV, or not to EV?” For more information, or to register for the event, visit the FISITA website.