Are cars with internal combustion engines saved? How much time will they be given?

The photo is taken from the site: https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/images/2708-internal-combustion-engine

From the point of view of an image failure (at least in matters related to the automotive industry), the summit of the UN climate conference COP26 can be considered. The declaration on accelerating the introduction of a ban on the registration of cars with internal combustion engines in 2035 was not signed by the world's largest players in the automotive industry: China, Japan, Germany, the USA and France. Also, such giants as Toyota, Volkswagen, Renault-Nissan and Hyundai-Kia did not join the agreement. Does this mean that internal combustion cars will stay with us longer than we think?

Foreign experts have no illusions that without the support of the countries representing the largest markets and the producers themselves, ambitious climate targets to reduce CO2 emissions will not be achieved before the deadline set for 2050.

However, before proclaiming the victory of the "good old motorization", it is appropriate to give a brief geopolitical sketch. The host of COP26 was the United Kingdom, for which the implementation of climate policy goals would be a great image success. Thus, it can be assumed that, at least in some cases, the "unwillingness" to sign another climate agreement at this point (and place) was aimed at limiting the role of the UK in the international arena. Most of the British press regards Friday's summit as an image failure. However, this does not change the fact that the largest automobile concerns have presented a surprisingly united front here, which - at least officially - also unanimously supports the electrification of transport...

The controversial decision of Germany was explained by Transport Minister Andreas Scheuer. Officially, the obstacle to the agreement was the omission of the important role that alternative fuels can play on the path to transformation. However, contrary to appearance, we are not talking about hydrogen (at least in its pure form), liquefied gas or LNG.

Germany has been working on synthetic fuels for a long time, which would allow some models with internal combustion engines to remain on sale. This applies, for example, to such well-known brands as Porsche, for which the presence of gasoline models, such as the legendary 911, is a very important element of their image. The reason presented by the Germans why our western neighbor decided not to sign the agreement is interesting because synthetic fuels themselves are mainly produced on the basis of hydrogen, and this – at least officially - is censored in Germany.

After all, it's no secret that Volkswagen is actively promoting battery technology at every stage, reminding you that using hydrogen as an energy carrier for electric vehicles with fuel cells (which, for example, Toyota has been betting on for many years) is economically profitable and environmentally unjustified.

According to experts from Wolfsburg, in the case of a car with a purely battery-powered power supply, energy losses during transmission are about 8% before the energy enters the car battery, and another 18% is lost during the conversion of electricity in the engine. This means that the efficiency of a car with a battery is, depending on the model, from 70 to 80%.

Can the hydrogen engine become the future of the automotive industry?

Yes, it combines the advantages of electric vehicles and the convenience of internal combustion vehicles.

For comparison - according to calculations by Volkswagen itself - in cars with a hydrogen engine, losses are much greater: 45% of energy is lost during the production of hydrogen during electrolysis. Of the remaining 55% of primary energy, another 55% disappears when hydrogen is converted into electricity in the car. Thus, the efficiency of the transmission of a hydrogen vehicle is, depending on the model, from 25 to 35%.

However, the calculations used by Volkswagen to promote its electric models do not prevent the German Ministry of Transport from claiming that synthetic fuel is an important link on the way to electric mobility. However, this is not surprising, since the German economy depends on the automotive industry, and whether you like it or not, internal combustion engines predominate in it.

Proponents of synthetic fuels argue that its use, in the end, can lead to much better emissions results without the need to invest in new infrastructure for charging vehicles. In this case, after all, you can use distribution channels that have been used for years, for example, fuel trucks or gas stations. The synthetic fuel itself can also be used in conventional internal combustion engines – vehicle users will not have to agree to any compromises, for example, regarding flight range.

However, there are several serious problems with synthetic fuels. First of all, it takes a lot of energy to produce them. Although it can be obtained from excess renewable energy, the production of synthetic fuels is currently based on hydrogen, which is obtained in the process of electrolysis. Then the hydrogen itself must be liquefied and recycled. So, we are dealing with a similar, if not greater problem, as in the case of fuel cell cars. However, in addition to the environmental and economic aspects of the production of alternative fuels for internal combustion engines, the main problem, at least at the moment, is the problem of scale.

For example, the Austrian company AVL is working on a plant that by 2030 will be able to produce "as much as" 240 million liters of synthetic gasoline, or 0.25 million m3. Taking into account ambitious goals, such as a ban on the registration of internal combustion vehicles from 2035, the addition of synthetic fuels to the agreement will mean the need to invest in technology that can significantly delay the electric revolution in the automotive industry, which, in turn, does not attract environmentalists. The problem is further compounded by the fact that in the European Parliament, the Greens are lobbying for "emissions-free" rather than "climate-neutral" motorization. According to environmentalists, cars should not emit any exhaust gases.

To sum up, the work on the next generation of electric vehicles and the intrusive marketing by manufacturers (which is the result of the method of calculating penalties for CO2 emissions) leave no illusions – the electric revolution in transport cannot be stopped. The surprisingly consistent voice of manufacturers and key countries at COP 26 in terms of production and sales markets allows us to assume, however, that its pace will be somewhat slowed down.