[landcruiser123]

I read the complete article and he has made a lot of valid points. We can't make blanket statements like "we'll ban IC engines by 2030." The government should show it's commitment by tax breaks, toll-free travel, discounted parking, charging station etc for EVs and once we see adoption cross a threshold- 85 to 90% of the new cars being EVs, we can surely start defining goals to ban IC engines.

With the unique set of challenges India faces, I think we'll not see IC engines banned until 2040.

Originally Posted by driven646

I used to work for Motorola in the in the early 2000's - in 2003....but then the iPhone launched just 4 years later & the rest is history.

We're comparing phones to cars?

Even if the cars become cheap and technology improves in 2 years, many Indians will face problems in charging them.

Originally Posted by airbender

His main problem seems to be why ban IC engines? My answer is because they pollute.

EVs pollute too. Just because you don't see smoke and a tailpipe, do you think it is clean?

India has a lot of electricity produced by coal. We're talking about mining a lot more lithium. Importing batteries and motors.
As of today, EVs in India will pollute more than a IC engine car. But this will improve soon.

[CoolFire]

Rajiv Bajaj does have a point. Forget auto consumers or producers, we got to think about the economy too. One of the biggest employment generator and contributor to economic growth, you can't squeeze auto industry beyond a point. I am not being political, but fact is that enough harm has already been done to the economy. We can't afford another big blunder by killing this engine of the economy.

Let EVs happen. Support it by giving tax breaks and subsidies. But you can't kill the IC industry just too soon. Let it happen organically.

[GrandTourer]

Originally Posted by airbender

My answer is because they pollute. Straight and simple. Two wheeler engines needed to be banned, the question is 2025 or 2030 or 2035.

Originally Posted by Thilak29

EVs are future. Government by force, policy, pursuance or being catalyst can make this happen.Just because Rajiv or his company is not ready with necessary tech will not impact the game. For all we know Ather may anhilate Bajaj just like Mi or Apple did with other incumbent big players.

Originally Posted by sandhyab

We are at a cusp where climate change would wreak havoc in another decade, more specifically India is one of those countries which will be badly hit by Tsunami's, Drought and what not.

Don't be so blind towards your favorite hobby that you start objecting a good thing. India is leading the charge towards becoming green. This is a very good thing for all citizens. I will infact say that government ought to do more to support EV adoption.

It's so amusing that in almost all such discussions about Electric Mobility, people almost always forget about net carbon footprint.
India is currently heavily dependent on Fossil fuels for electricity generation. About 65-70% of our electricity is generated in thermal plants burning coal or the likes. Now we are aiming at 175 GW of renewable energy by 2022. Whether that is possible or not, I do not know, for I have no knowledge in that regard.
But if the above doesn't happen, then the net carbon footprint (well to wheel) would increase with the complete adoption of EVs.

I believe it is more pressing to build the infrastructure, provide EVs at a competitive price without compromising on current features an ICE vehicle offers, than to ban ICE vehicles completely. Like someone mentioned, people adopted smartphones over feature phones naturally, without any policy or mandate. Because smartphones offered everything a feature phone could and more, and they were affordable (if not at the onset, but with time - just like EVs aren't right now, but eventually I'm sure they will be within a common man's reach).

[airbender]

Originally Posted by landcruiser123

EVs pollute too. Just because you don't see smoke and a tailpipe, do you think it is clean?

India has a lot of electricity produced by coal. We're talking about mining a lot more lithium. Importing batteries and motors.
As of today, EVs in India will pollute more than a IC engine car. But this will improve soon.

I was expecting this reply. Read this:

https://www.marketplace.org/2017/08/...tal-emissions/

The emissions that come out of tailpipes and power plants contain more than just carbon dioxide. There’s also ozone, particulate matter and carbon monoxide.

“They’re often called ‘criteria air pollutants,’ and those cause asthma, respiratory disease, heart disease in individuals,..”

So even if all electricity comes from coal, it would be absent these criteria air pollutants. So that a good thing.

We are increasing the percent of renewable energy year by year. That would also help.

I only see the GOVT interested in going green. Neither the industry nor the public.

[AirbusCapt]

If the powers that be, have common sense they would know that one cannot run before learning how to walk. Jumping to full EV before establishing the ancillary industry to produce batteries, controllers, electric drive trains is merely putting money into China's pocket. Moreover allow the EV technology to nature first, government can't expect people to give up mobility and get tied to the power grid. If the objective is pollution, firstly eliminate coal fired powerplants and generate electricity through clean renewable sources. If government wants to reduce oil import costs, push for hybrid vehicles, a 1 liter ic engine powering electric motors will give in excess of 30 kmpl.

[GrandTourer]

Originally Posted by airbender

I was expecting this reply. Read this:

https://www.marketplace.org/2017/08/...tal-emissions/


So even if all electricity comes from coal, it would be absent these criteria air pollutants. So that a good thing.

We are increasing the percent of renewable energy year by year. That would also help.

I only see the GOVT interested in going green. Neither the industry nor the public.

Maybe you didn't get my point of view above. I'm not saying ICEs don't cause problems. Since all the earlier points were made around environmental damage alone, I was merely pointing out that complete adoption of EVs is not the solution. I believe the infrastructure has to lead from the front and then products to follow, and not the other way around.

And yes, I agree that the situation with net carbon footprint would improve over time. But whether 6 years is that time? I feel not, though it's not backed by facts. It's just a hunch based on how things move along in our nation.


Would I but an EV next year? No. Not unless I have complete piece of mind that I'm not going to be stranded in the middle of nowhere. Until that day I'll continue with a petrol car (no diesel for me - personally as well as for the environmental reasons).

But if the govt is able to provide that infra, I would happily switch to EV.

Even in Norway, country with the highest number of EVs per capita, has 58% market share for EVs. And they did not achieve this by banning ICE. They made EVs irresistible by providing incentives and tax exemptions and most importantly, the supporting infrastructure. People naturally turned to electric for mobility solutions rather than fossil fuels. Norway does have a goal of zero emission for all new vehicles by 2025 too, but it's a goal not a mandate.

Originally Posted by GrandTourer

I believe it is more pressing to build the infrastructure, provide EVs at a competitive price without compromising on current features an ICE vehicle offers, than to ban ICE vehicles completely. Like someone mentioned, people adopted smartphones over feature phones naturally, without any policy or mandate. Because smartphones offered everything a feature phone could and more, and they were affordable (if not at the onset, but with time - just like EVs aren't right now, but eventually I'm sure they will be within a common man's reach).

[JishD]

I was at the holy grail of industrial manufacturing Hannover Messe this year - many German automotive experts feel that EV is just an interim step and hydrogen fuel cell is the future of automotive. All the major investments are being made in that direction...no wonder we have so few EV from German OEM despite limitless resources

[pganapathy]

Electric vehicles will be a major problem unless there is a proper charging infra-structure in place. The other big problem is electricity supply across India.

I currently have cars in three places in India, and none of them are very conducive to electric cars.

One is in Bombay, where I have street parking only. Therefore, I don't have a fixed parking slot and even if I wanted to, I couldn't charge my car while it was parked.

The second is Bangalore, in my apartment. Unfortunately, we don't have fixed parking slots. However, this is a place where we could get electric points installed in the parking lot, albeit at a cost, but that requires time, money and a large enough number of owners to have electric vehicles before we can make the change.

Finally, we have a car in Coorg. Now, being a rural area, electricity supply is always a problem. I can't remember a single day in the past ten years when we have had electricity for 24 hours continuously. However, because it is a house and not an apartment, the possibility of installing solar panels, or other renewable energy, makes charging an electric car the most practical.

The other big problem with electric cars is simple and quick charging infrastructure outside cities. For example, I regularly drive from Bangalore to Coorg and vice-versa. A distance of 200 odd kilometres and refuelling is very easy. At least this distance might be within the range of an EV. However, I also drive from Bangalore/Coorg to Bombay. That is a distance of 1,000 km, and no vehicle (IC or EV) can make it without recharging. Filling petrol is very easy today. Only when electric vehicles reach that stage, will people adopt it in large numbers

[haisaikat]

At this point we think so (that EVs are the future) since the only viable option seems to be EV known to human through present research outcomes and production capabilities and related practicalities. And we are hoping that Hyundai Kona that costs 25 lakhs at present will be available at the price of a Baleno in near future.

In reality I think we should be open to more generic fossil fuel alternatives that do not pollute the environment and will not easily deplete from Earth and let that be EVs if they come out victorious.

Originally Posted by airbender

His main problem seems to be why ban ICE's? My answer is BCOZ they pollute. Straight and simple.

But will not EVs be polluting the environment too? In our country where majority of electricity is produced by burning coal so that more coal need to be burnt in order to produce higher need for electricity? Moreover the batteries when disposed at end of life will be another headache. We are not solving the actual problem this way, rather we are just passing on the problem from one bucket to another. I think more than the pollution it's the depleting source and political situation around fossil fuel that will drive looking for alternatives

Originally Posted by Thermodynamics

moral: Before you drive the crowd build the course.

Very well said. In my opinion we should look at gradual shift that is easy for all to adapt slowly, CNG and LPG are still not available in all petrol pumps, a change initiated a decade back. Commercial vehicles pollute more and that is why they may be targetted first but that is not just a technology change but lot of policy changes too.

[GutsyGibbon]

I am not an economist, and I am not a auto industry expert. But I am a EV owner, and have opinions that are not inline with yours.

Originally Posted by SmartCat

EVs have more negatives than positives when compared to petrol/diesel vehicles.

The ICE makers have been feeding the public this info for decades. More so with hybrids. How can carrying a dead battery while on gas, and a dead engine while on battery be efficient? Electric motor allows for a much better fine grain control of power, much better at managing wear and tear, can use already established electric distribution network, is quieter, is cleaner. When you couple EV with Solar power that the consumer can produce, it makes it an ICE killer for sure.

Originally Posted by SmartCat

- None of the EV makers are profitable.
- EVs are still 2x to 5x more expensive than petrol/diesel vehicles.
More importantly, it does not solve the issue of India's dependence on imports. .

These are not negatives of EVs. Perhaps companies like Tesla. Making cars depends on economies of scale. If manufacturers like Tesla sit on their current products, and ride the normal product lifecycle, they can be profitable. They can ride that wave for a good 5 years. Or, invest a small percentage on R&D. For better or worse, Tesla is not run like a typical automaker. It is run like a tech giant, like Amazon. If you remember, in the late 90s we used to ask, will online retailers ever be profitable. Amazon lost money continually, and we wondered how can these guys offer free shipping and be profitable?

The existing auto majors are conflicted, they do not want to cannibalize their existing product line, and switch to the new thing. So they make ugly ducklings, and try to portray EVs as something in the distant future, or something that is very limited (in range, size). There is no reason why Toyota cannot make a Corolla that is a simple EV, with less focus on all the tech touted by EVs. EVs need not be luxury cars. Instead, they tout their hybrid as unlimited range.

In terms of dependence on imports AFAIK, India not a leading producer in any of the metals that are largely used for EVs (batteries). Copper, Lithium, Nickel, and Cobalt. Instead of dwelling on that, we could step up our game in terms of automotive tech. V2V, V2I - tech related to automation. Produce finished parts needed for automation, instead of mining for raw materials. Companies like Bosch, produce tech/parts for pretty much all major auto brands from India, even though the raw materials are not from India. It is and always will be a global supply chain, unless every country starts to close doors and let the protectionists make all the calls. If the Govt scales the electricity production from renewables, there would be no need to import petrol/diesel. Fortunately we are blessed to be a tropical country with 12hours of sunlight throughout the year. (not Alaska)

As a country we need to consider the cost of all the health issues that need to be addressed as a result of air pollution caused by ICE engines. Before you start talking about using coal for electricity, Yes, we need to address that as well immediately.

Originally Posted by landcruiser123

EVs pollute too. Just because you don't see smoke and a tailpipe, do you think it is clean?

If you are talking about the battery disposal, there are enough plans to repurpose batteries as large power storage facilities. Nobody needs to be dumping batteries in landfills. If you were talking about other types of pollution from EVs, please bring me up to speed on that.

[neofromcapone]

The first thing change meets, is resistance.

And change is coming, how it will be, in what exact form.
I don't know, I am only being open minded to hear it come
The old oligarchs have been naysayer's till they are able to exploit that change.

[Sebring]

That's not true. My neighbour works for the plastics industry and they have a 10-year-old plant, outside Bangalore, spread over 100 Acres. The complete area has received solar panels by the management, at an investment cost of 25 crores. There are big savings to be made as the system recovers the cost back in 5 years. Thereon, its just profit all the way. India is embracing solar in a big way.

Originally Posted by airbender

I only see the GOVT interested in going green. Neither the industry nor the public.

[hellmet]

Question: How does the government plan to make up for the huge revenue loss as a result of people switching to EVs? We pay high taxes on every drop of fuel. Govt will have to make up for this by taxing us elsewhere, but where?

[padmrajravi]

The argument of power generation in our country being based on fossil fuels is not a valid one. Power generation techniques will evolve . Today it may be fossil fuel , tomorrow it may be nuclear or solar or fuel cell or anything invented at that point of time. The best entity to change the power generation method is government and the whole point of building an EV infrastructure is to enable them to do that without interrupting millions of people. Government has deep pockets . When new power generation mechanims evolve they will change it. Electricty is the medium of transmission and I don't think that will change for the forseeable future. Generating power at the point of usage is not efficient and is messy because changing that will require interrupting so many things like we are facing now in this change of ICE to EV.

[locusjag]

Originally Posted by hellmet

Question: How does the government plan to make up for the huge revenue loss as a result of people switching to EVs? We pay high taxes on every drop of fuel. Govt will have to make up for this by taxing us elsewhere, but where?

Gold and Oil are the two commodities which gives the Indian government jitters. Let's ignore Gold upon acknowledging that both Gold and Oil imports hurts the nation's coffers. High import bills on both these accounts hurts our fiscal condition and widens our trade deficit.

With Oil, there's also the added threat of greenhouse gas emissions which look set to upend the globe's status quo. Scenarios being spoken of include submerged Eastern and Western Coastal cities and a massive refugee influx from a completely inundated Bangladesh.

The government will gain on the fiscal front by reducing oil dependency, hence letting go of taxes on fossil fuel can be sustained. But the global warming thing is scarier still, and I laud the government for sticking to their guns on this one.

I also wanted to mention the inherent risk and diplomatic pressures that all non Middle Eastern governments have to face by being forced to sit down at the table with risky Middle Eastern governments and by having to deal with self-serving Oil cartels. There's just no telling how much terrorism has been sponsored by petroleum over the decades.