Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation

Honda To Stop Selling Combustion Engines Globally By 2040 (autocar.co.uk) 132

Posted by BeauHD from the sign-of-the-times dept.
Honda will end production of combustion motors by 2040 as it embarks on a wide-reaching drive to achieve total carbon neutrality by 2050 and to advance the development of its zero-emission powertrain solutions. AutoCar reports: Company president Toshihiro Mibe detailed a series of ambitious objectives at a press conference in Japan today, where he solidified the brand's commitment to leading "advancements which will be made in the areas of mobility, the power unit, energy and robotics." By 2050, Honda aims to achieve carbon neutrality across "all products and corporate activities," which will see it shift focus predominantly to developing environmentally friendly powertrains and overhauling its supply chain to ensure products are "made from 100% sustainable materials."

The brand had already confirmed it would offer exclusively electrified passenger cars in Europe by the end of 2022, but is now solidifying its global electrification strategy for the coming years. By 2030, Honda plans for 40% of its sales to be pure-electric or fuel cell (FCEV) vehicles, rising to 80% by 2035 and 100% by 2040. Specific goals for the European market have yet to be fully detailed, but a strategic partnership with General Motors will accelerate electrification efforts in North America, while a total of 10 new Honda-badged EVs will be launched in the Chinese market "within five years" - the first of which will be the production version of the e:prototype shown at Shanghai last week. Honda has also confirmed that in the second half of the decade, it will launch a range of EVs atop its new 'e:Architecture' platform. The models will arrive in the US first, before being rolled out to other regions, likely including Europe.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Honda To Stop Selling Combustion Engines Globally By 2040 More

Honda To Stop Selling Combustion Engines Globally By 2040

Comments Filter:

  • R.I.P. (Score:5, Funny)

    by phalse phace ( 454635 ) on Friday April 23, 2021 @08:01PM (#61307250)

    R.I.P. VTEC

    1983 - 2040

    • VTEC was always pretty overrated. On the early ones the solenoids didn't kick on until the RPMs were so high it hardly mattered, and by the time they smoothed them out in the 21st century pretty much everyone had variable valve timing. The BMW VANOS system did a much better job of doing the same thing. Back in the day I had a mid 90s Integra and an E36 BMW and while the Integra felt faster when you were just driving around like normal because it was so rev happy, the VTEC would pretty much never kick in unl

    • Not so fast ... behold ... e-VTEC.

  • Has industry woken up? Or is it already too late?
    • Well, proposing to have your successor stop doing something long after you retire doesn't seem all that daring to me.

      I can promise that my kids will achieve something in 20 years with no trouble, and not a care in the world. I'll be dead (or at least long retired) by the time the kids break my promise....

      • But if you hand over your kids, a factory of equipment designed to start achieving that thing, chances are they will give it a good try.

        You can go to your kids, I want you to be a millionaire in 20 years. If you just kick them out of your house at 18 years old, chances are they will fail. If you give them 250k worth of stocks and investments, they will have a much better chance.

        • If you give them 250k worth of stocks and investments, they will have a much better chance.

          Do you have kids? That's enough for two weeks of sustained partying, plus bail.

    • Re:Climate Change (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Friday April 23, 2021 @08:42PM (#61307324)

      The issue for the longest time was Electric Cars were slow, limited range, tiny cars. While some of this was due to technology limitation (batteries technology had a lot of improvement over the past few years), mainly it was because Auto makers when making complacence cars and prototypes, they had prosperously put limiters on them (in part to allow them to get the advertised range) to make sure they don't compete with their more profitable cars, also they made just ugly looking cars that would scream to anyone seeing it. Look at me, I am a crazy hippy!

      I have to give this change credit to Tesla, not for being first to make wide market electric car (they aren't), or to make the best electric car out there (they probably aren't that either (but that is more subjective)). But they are making electric cars available for the wide market, that really show off what an Electric Car can do, Fast Acceleration, Attractive Design (for some), Sized like a normal car. If you are not a Car person, and you see a Tesla drive down the road, you probably didn't think twice about it. But also people who are into cars, often like to race Tesla's and find that the Stock Models compete rather well with souped up ICE models.

      Tesla had shamed the auto industry into making their ICE cars just seem outdated, But more it showed governments that electric cars are possible, so many mostly in Europe and Asia are making legal requirements. So they are seeing the writing on the wall and moving to Electric as well, because they will not be able to compete in 20 years.

      It is a shame that the Traditional Automakers needed a wake up call from a new startup company. We could be nearly all electric now, if GM kept the EV1 alive, and built electric cars for the past 25 years. It may have fared a lot better during the 2008 crash, as the 4.00 gallon gas was too much for those big pre 2008 cars. As well it may have got other automakers on board, so by now, we wouldn't have a Tesla, but Production Standard cars.

      • Re: Climate Change (Score:4, Funny)

        by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 ) on Friday April 23, 2021 @09:02PM (#61307374)

        If you are not a Car person, and you see a Tesla drive down the road, you probably didn't think twice about it.

        I am not a car guy, but I do notice. Every time I see a Tesla on the road, I think to myself, "There goes one of my betters. If I'm lucky, he'll throw a lit cigarette out the window and a little bit of ash might waft over me, giving me a fleeting bit of second-hand enlightenment and nirvana."

        • My ironic experience with Teslas tends to be that I have to pass them on the highway, because the driver is your typical old fart going 10 MPH under the posted limit. Since this frequently happens while I'm driving my 5.9L gas guzzling work van, their shitty driving causes me to waste a bit of gas when I floor it to pass them. To anyone who thinks this is "aggressive driving": you've clearly never driven a work van - flooring them is pretty much standard procedure when you want them to accelerate AT ALL,

      • The ironic thing is that traditional automakers have the technology. GM's Volt was the only vehicle with a series hybrid system, where the engine wasn't directly connected to the drive train. I wish more automakers would go that route, if only as a "transition" vehicle, between a parallel hybrid like a Prius and a "true" EV, because having the onboard generator gets rid of range anxiety and makes the vehicle usable on back roads, where there are no chargers available.

        I never understand why GM, who was on

        • I'm just hoping American car makers can catch up before not just Tesla, but [...] Mazda, [...] plow them into the dirt,

          I'm not so sure about Mazda. They just announced an electric and hybrid version of their CX-30 SUV (the MX-30) but no mention of range or anything like that.

          That said, I'd be curious what Mazda could do with an electric MX-5...

          • So far I've read that they are planning to use their rotary engine for the range extender module for the MX-30. You are right -- this is an announcement with a paucity on details, but if it is anywhere near what BMW has done with range extenders, it will be an extremely useful thing to have.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        EVs were never really slow. Even the original Leaf had to engage traction control if you floored it from standstill. It was more spacious than a Tesla 3 inside too.

        Tesla made EVs desirable to more people, but really Nissan and Renault were the ones who proved them viable and kicked off that market. They made affordable cars from the very start, good cars that made economic sense and which were practical and fun. They also built the first charging networks, making long distance travel viable.

      • Good batteries have been available for a while. The issue for the longest time has been cost... and that's still an issue.

        Tesla made electric cars "cool" in the luxury segment, but they have always misled the public about the actual cost of their vehicles with their $35K unicorn. Cars aren't the only things that use batteries, and Tesla's (Panasonic's) batteries aren't really special. Traditional car makers have been "shamed" only in the respect that they know they need to turn a profit on the products t

    • They're waking up, because it is clearly too late.

      The good news? If all the ice sheets melt, it's "only" 214ft sea level rise.

      Invest in greenhouses, but choose locations carefully.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by rtb61 ( 674572 )

      Woken up, nay, scared the crap out of by electric automakers in China, brands like https://www.nio.com/ [nio.com] absolutely scared the crap out of Japanese auto makers. Talk about slow to the party by the time they get there you can expect NIO to be producing many more vehicles as only China can. The replaceable battery really neat, compared to everyone else's lame offerings. By the time the NIO get out to the global market, they will have the battery swap down pat and for end users, joining a battery club and doing

      • The battery swap thing is the killer app when it comes to EVs. In a lot of rural areas, there is no way 250 kilowatt chargers will be available, because the power grid can't handle it, and a Mom and Pop store isn't going to make enough money to have people sit for hours while their vehicle charges, compared to the amount of sales happening at gas pumps. However, add a battery changing station, and things are completely different. No worries about range anxiety, no worries about having the right fuel. Ju

        • That's not how BEVs work. You're describing ICE vehicles, and ICE vehicle owners' range anxiety.

          You start every morning with a "full tank" in your BEV. How often would you need to stop for gas if the gas fairy came every night and topped off your tank? That's how BEVs work.

          Unless you're driving hundreds of miles a day, you do not need to stop to charge your BEV. There is no need for widespread 250 kW chargers, because 99% of people driving BEVs don't need to use them. Every small town needs a gas station, b

          • Not everyone has access to a 250 kW Supercharger. In fact, most people in apartments are lucky to have parking for their vehicle at all. So, even though it is a nice thing in practice, only people with their own home and ability to run a circuit have the ability to have their vehicle charge overnight. Some apartments may have charging stations, but that is the exception than the rule, and definitely not enough for everyone.

            BEVs work great, but if you don't have access to a quick charge system, you have t

      • Does look awesome. Killer website too.

  • While I have never been a gearhead, I do enjoy driving my car despite the incompetents around me. Being able to have control of ones car through gear selection, throttle control and of course braking is one small joy in an otherwise aggravating lifetime. Making your car dance to your own tune, understanding how it performs and using that to your advantage in all situations is a pleasure.

    In the not so distant future, the last bit of enjoyment while be wrung out. Instead, people will be passive blobs, pres

    • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

      by Powercntrl ( 458442 )

      In the future, private ownership of a vehicle in and of itself will be a luxury. The majority of Americans are already priced out of a new car today. The only reason we're not already a country where half the citizens don't own a car, is that modern ICE vehicles last a long time and suffer no significant range degradation with age, so there's a healthy second-hand market. Unlike ICE vehicles, EVs will have a floor on their value determined by the recycling/re-purposed value of the battery. Instead of go

      • In the future, private ownership of a vehicle in and of itself will be a luxury.

        Disagree. The wealthy today live in cities, and use public transport and Uber and cabs and bikes to get around. Vehicle ownership is already considered déclassé, something for "the poors" who don't have the money to live in a million dollar condo in The Big CIty near where all the jobs are. Car ownership will fit into the Vimes' Boots Theory of Economic Injustice as yet another way in which being poor is expensive

        • Re:The age of boring driving is upon us (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Kernel Kurtz ( 182424 ) on Friday April 23, 2021 @10:04PM (#61307528)
          The wealthy where you live use public transport and Uber and cabs and bikes to get around?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by trawg ( 308495 )

            Someone at work told me this week that the best cities are the ones where rich people take public transport, and the worst are where poor people drive, and it's stuck in my brain because it matches reality pretty much everywhere I've been

        • and the smart avoid travel to begin with. Takes fucking no brains to not see spending 20 -4 0 hours a week in a car/train/bus/uber/metal box travelling is stupid. There are better ways.

        • So in the future, everyone moves to the cities and the car problem is solved? We just let the rural and suburban areas turn into some post-apocalyptic hellscape? Do we also have teenagers battle each other to the death every few years for entertainment, or is that part optional?

      • If you can't afford to own a car in USA you really need to get a job. In terms of gas prices and taxes, vehicle ownership is one of the cheapest in the world.

        • If you can't afford to own a car in USA you really need to get a job.

          You actually have to be making a bit more than the average median income in the USA to afford home ownership and buy a brand new vehicle. The bottom half of income earners need a place to live and a way to get to/from work too (and right now, used vehicles fit the bill). Unless we're just going to replace all those people with robots and drones, I suppose. This is speculation about the future, after all.

      • Sounds like it's time for you to look into fancy bicycles there, slick.

      • good thing the world is only filled with americans.
    • I read essays like this in the 1970s-early '80s, during the Malaise Era, when government demands for safety, fuel economy, and lowered emissions resulted in smaller, depowered, yet heavier vehicles that sucked all the joy out of driving. Many people envisioned a future of driving cramped, impotent little buzzboxes. The joy came back.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Zobeid ( 314469 )

        I would have to point out that the 1980s really was an automotive dark age of ugly, box-on-box designs, woefully underpowered, unreliable and with shoddy construction. Even luxury cars weren't very luxurious, and sporty cars weren't very sporty. Yes, things did eventually get better, but first we had to go through some extended misery.

        Compared with the situation today? I personally resent the trends toward homely, generic, inefficient crossovers, and I even more resent the trend toward gigantic, cartooni

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Zobeid ( 314469 )

      I hope you know that your complaint about boring cars is nothing to do with the BEV powertrain. The most fun-to-drive car that I've ever had is my 2010 Tesla Roadster (yes, the one they built in partnership with Lotus). People have asked me if it can drive itself, and then I have to inform them that it doesn't even have power steering. Meanwhile, have you seen the trends in combustion cars? It's not like most of them are catering to the enthusiast driver these days.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      Yeah, I hear electrics are boring as hell to drive.

      https://youtu.be/kUN2G0gi7hk?t... [youtu.be]

    • In the future, if voice command is ever implemented, it will simply be a matter of, "Take me home, Jeeves" and we'll be passengers complaining how boring it is to drive.

      Agreed. All this talk about self driving makes me cringe. I actually enjoy driving, the last thing I want is a self driving car, or a soulless EV for that matter.

      I'm glad I won't be around for the future age of cars as mere appliances.

  • Because when the summer sun gets intense and I really need the air conditioner, it's gonna be great to switch from my noisy gasoline generator to a quiet, reliable electric Honda generator in my motorhome and yacht!

    So there may be some applications where fossil fuels remain useful until we all get our suitcase sized fusion powerplants.

    • Because when the summer sun gets intense and I really need the air conditioner, it's gonna be great to switch from my noisy gasoline generator to a quiet, reliable electric Honda generator in my motor home and yacht!

      I imagine you'll have some cold, refreshing re-constituted dehydrated water too ...

  • I wish we could get the government out of this and the oil tycoons out of this and anyone making money in oil out of this and just convert every vehicle to hydrogen and get past all of this once and for all. Producing non chemical hydrogen is easy and we will never run out. Continually switching vehicles to batteries is NOT the answer and it will never be able to achieve total carbon neutrality!!! ... and lithium minding is bad for the planet and battery disposal is toxic. Burning hydrogen makes water and t

    • Toyota is (still) investing many millions in hyrogen, so if there's a way to make it work, they may well find it.

      https://global.toyota/en/newsr... [global.toyota]

    • Yeah I'll take one of these. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      Does not advance an agenda though.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Zobeid ( 314469 )

      Wait, wait. . . You want hydrogen *combustion* cars? Hydrogen fuel cell cars already fall far short of BEV efficiency, and combustion cars would only be that much worse.

      Maybe hydrogen will find a role somewhere, for some purpose. Maybe trucks, maybe planes. Maybe in Japan or California, some place where stations are built out, they could get a foothold as short-range city cars. I have no problem with that. I've got to say, though, that I find it impossible to imagine myself wanting a hydrogen fueled c

    • If the energy is there, I've also wondered about other fuels. Something like propane, ethanol, or Audi's synthetic diesel with the carbon pulled from the air would definitely be a start, and is simpler to use and distribute. Even E100, like what Brazil uses, would at least get us off of fossil fuels.

      However, hydrogen is far better than nothing, unless we get some battery technology breakthrough that gets us an energy density 1-2 orders of magnitude close to gasoline with batteries.

    • Are you kidding? I hope this is satire.

      Because what you're describing would require us to build out an entire parallel network to our current gasoline production, distribution, and delivery network. Double all of the gas stations, pipelines, tanker trucks, refineries, etc. How on earth do you think that's a more friendly alternative than going to BEVs where we can recharge anywhere there's power?

      The amount of trucking alone to get all those materials delivered, constructed, and connected would dwarf the ben

  • Their electric replacements will no doubt be better in many ways.

    They just won't have the same feel - the feedback both for enjoyment and for the purposes of riding safely and efficiently - and no, by "safely", I don't mean noisy exhausts, I mean things like knowing where you are in the rev range/power band from audio and vibration feedback.

    It's going to be a steep learning curve for us old farts :-)

    • The power response is instant, you won't even wonder where in the (flat) curve you are

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by quenda ( 644621 )

      I don't mean noisy exhausts, I mean things like knowing where you are in the rev range/power band from audio and vibration feedback.

      bad news: electric motors don't need gearboxes, are not fussy about rev range, and would prefer computer control if there is more than one gear.
      I know some electric motorcycles have manual gears, but it has no real point except customers asking for it. Will not last. It is like still cars having a connector at the front for a crank handle, for some years after electric starters were added.

      It's going to be a steep learning curve for us old farts :-)

      Absence makes the fart go Honda.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dwywit ( 1109409 )

        I know they have a flat response curve (more of a straight line, I guess), and don't need gearboxes. I was referring more to the enjoyment of exercising one's skills and judgement.

        I suppose electric bikes might give you more time to enjoy the scenery.

        And the punchline is "abcess makes the fart go Honda".

    • How old are you now? I am nearing 50. 20 years ago doesn't seem like very long but in 20 years... well things will be different. I'd like to think I'll still be motorcycling, but I've cleaned out a couple older guys selling out of the sport, saying their balance isn't the same any more, and it's time to hang it up.

      I don't think individuals change very much. I think most change comes as old people die and young people with new attitudes replace them.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dwywit ( 1109409 )

        Approaching 60. My oldest bike was made in 1976. The other 2 come from this century. I can still get parts for them all, fortunately.

        You're right about generational change, I can see it in my kids.

        I would like to try an electric bike. I'm sure the thrill will be felt in different ways, but I also think I'll miss the thrill of an ICE v-twin (Moto Guzzi).

        • I am really interested in a Zero DSR as a commuter bike, except they have no dealers in my state. I also think an electric trials bike would be fun to play with in the backyard.

          I really don't see where the technology to replace an ICE enduro or long-range adventure bike will come from, but then again how many gallons of gas do I put through those in a year? For that reason the environmental impact is small. If gas were $7.50 / gallon it wouldn't kill me.

    • If you are old now you as I will be dead by 2040 or too old to ride (a trifling few outliers excepted) and anyone who likes ICE vehicles will have had decades to collect their fleet AND convert it to less or non-polluting fuel (LP will remain available for heating and fuel).

      Anyone serious about riding will adapt easily if they're not pushing daisies by then.

  • I'm skeptical (Score:4, Interesting)

    by RevDisk ( 740008 ) on Friday April 23, 2021 @10:01PM (#61307516) Journal
    If we had the battery tech to replace ICE vehicles today, we'd still be replacing them twenty years from now. Not sure why technical folks always dramatically underestimate the amount of time it takes to replace infrastructure. This neatly ignores all other combustion engine requirements. Generators, pumps, lawn mowers, etc. I don't expect this to happen in first world countries, let alone second or third world with less developed power grids.

    I expect there to be a 0% chance we can replace every combustion engine by 2040. Honda's shareholders would absolutely can the every last Honda executives if they followed through on this declaration. I expect electric cars to ramp up, but still be the minority until about two decades after we get lithium air batteries sorted out. THAT will be the turning point. If you wonder why, look up the energy density of gasoline, lithium ion batteries and lithium air batteries.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      The bottom will drop out of the market for combustion engines. They will only be used in specialist applications, with batteries everywhere else. It just won't be worth Honda making them and continuing to invest in their development anymore.

      Since many European nations are planning to ban most sales of ICE vehicles by 2030-2040 you can be sure that EVs will be the bulk by then. In fact they are already the majority of sales in some countries.

      • Maybe if you consider driving a long distance quickly, or making electricity, or cutting down a tree, or clearing snow a specialist application.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Bjorn Nyland does 1000km tests in Norway. He tested a PHEV as a baseline, i.e. a fossil fuelled car. Hopefully this link works:

          https://docs.google.com/spread... [google.com]

          Basically it's only 25 minutes faster than the quickest EVs, over a 10 hour trip.

          We have had battery powered powertools for years.

          • But battery powered generators and snow blowers? Maybe a battery works in a chainsaw for light duty but you will be charging an awful lot if you have a forest to cut down.

    • Empty promises are easy to make and break. It's just virtue signaling.

      I would be pleased to have practical electric vehicles in 20 years but I also said that 20 years ago and still do not.

      I got an electric chainsaw this year - finally something practical in the segment. I'll probably get an 80's pickup next, while I wait for the market to mature.

    • If we had the battery tech to replace ICE vehicles today, we'd still be replacing them twenty years from now.

      The average age of cars on the road in America generally bounces around 10-12 years. If we had that tech today, likely all we'd be dealing with in twenty years is the trailing edge of the bell curve/leading edge of the "long tail".
      In fact, at that point it's likely that repair shops and gasoline infrastructure would be on the verge of becoming no longer economically viable and vanishing all

  • Twnety years? That's not a plan, that's a wish (Score:3)

    by MacMann ( 7518492 ) on Friday April 23, 2021 @10:22PM (#61307580)

    In 20 years the people that made this announcement are unlikely to be in office to see it happen. I see this from politicians too, with a 10 year plan when they know full well that they are term limited to 8 years.

    Don't give me bullshit announcements on what you wish your successors to do. Tell me what your plans are for the next year, the year after that, and maybe out to 4 or 5 years. After 5 years it may as well be next century.

    Getting rid of internal combustion engines in 20 years is not likely. Hydrocarbons are simply amazing fuels, and the internal combustion engine a far simpler device to manufacture than batteries, fuel cells, or whatever else they have dreamed up. We will likely see more hybrid vehicles. And the internal combustion engine becoming integrated with a motor/generator unit and simplified transmission.

    An automobile manufacturer that is interested in lowering the CO2 produced from their vehicles would be far better served partnering with a company that was working on synthesized fuels. That won't grab headlines like a 20 year plan to utopia though.

    The future passenger vehicles will likely be dominated by hybrids. They will have enough battery for the weekday commute, and an ICE for the monthly visit out to Grandma's house. Light trucks would likely be similarly equipped. Heavier trucks will likely be bi-fuel/dual-fuel in that they can run on diesel, natural gas, or a mix of the two. They could be equipped with some hybrid technology to have better acceleration, no idling at stop lights ("golf car mode"), and other tricks that are shared with hybrids.

    This is more unserious announcements by unserious people hoping to "green wash" their image, and perhaps get some government subsidies. So long at they keep bringing out fuel cell prototype cars to photo ops with senators and prime ministers they can keep making dinosaur burners for another election cycle.

    We will still be driving cars with internal combustion engines for another thirty years. They might have some new tricks with electric hybrid power plants, and some other gadgetry. We could be burning synthesized fuels in thirty years though, that will bring us to carbon neutral transportation.

    Thirty years ago fuel cell cars were twenty years away. Fuel cell cars will always be twenty years away. That is until we figure out that fuel cells are a stupid idea for a commuter car.

    • The brand had already confirmed it would offer exclusively electrified passenger cars in Europe by the end of 2022, but is now solidifying its global electrification strategy for the coming years.

      It's clearly a plan that is already well underway. Despite the bleating of idiots like you.

    • Re:Twnety years? That's not a plan, that's a wish (Score:4, Interesting)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Saturday April 24, 2021 @03:47AM (#61308024) Homepage Journal

      This is how Japanese companies work, they set long term goals rather than just looking at next quarter's profits.

      The result will be that divisions within Honda start looking at how they can transition their products away from fossil fuels. Some will do it more quickly than others. They already have a very good electric car. It directs R&D and signals to their suppliers that they should do the same, rather than investing in developing things like hybrid drivetrains or new gearboxes.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by thegarbz ( 1787294 )

      In 20 years the people that made this announcement are unlikely to be in office to see it happen.

      Spotted the MBA! You're absolutely right. The only thing any company should focus on is short term goals and getting next month's share price up far enough for the CEO to jump ship and move on to "improving" the next company. Long term vision shouldn't be part of business, it's for street preachers.

  • As all the materials for electric motors and batteries must be gouged from the earth. But thatâ(TM)s ok because carbon.

    That or they know fossil fuels apart from coal are likely done by 2040.

  • This is all bullshit. Just some CEO trying to prop the stock price up.

    In 20 years, they won't have a choice. So congrats on nothing! You'lll be a dead company by then if you don't move to non internal combustion engines. So who cares!

  • The really jarring news here is that this is Honda. Honda isn't a car company. They are an engine company. I don't have a Honda car, but I have a Honda engine in my boat, my lawnmower, my hedge trimmer, my generator, ...

    I will bet a Marsbar that this distinction wasn't understood in TFA and that Honda very much will continue to make combustion engines, just not ICE passenger vehicles.

  • Good thing the grid will be all -encompassing and never fail by then.

  • Honda should offer a plug-in electric hybrid on their larger vehicles, now. If Ford, freaking FORD, can develop a hybrid F150, where is my hybrid Ridgeline? Seriously, this would offer so much flexibility to so many families if a hybrid powertrain were available. Living in a smaller city not connected to an interstate highway or freeway, charging stations are going to be really, really slow to be available. Like broadband internet for rural families. I have this ongoing fantasy about not using the ICE for

  • If Honda doesn't make a strong move into EVs by 2025 at the latest I agree: they won't be selling ICE vehicles by 2040. Because they will have returned to their roots as a motorcycle-only company. (having used a battery electric lawnmower for the last year I can report even that ICE business will be gone).

  • Since every other car maker have given somewhere between 2025 and 2035 to stop their own.

  • I was talking to a friend who is involved in a chemicals company and he reckons that li-ion is about done. They're spending huge money over the next decade just to get 20% more capacity.

    But I think what people should always consider is that it's often not about a better version of something existing, but something else that solves our problems. Like governments thought supersonic flight was worth investing in, as people would want to get to meetings quicker, but what happened instead was that cheaper teleco

  • Pretty sure they'll have stopped selling ICE by 2030. Probably sooner. That's just how all this is going to play out.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by ebvwfbw ( 864834 )

      Pretty sure they'll have stopped selling ICE by 2030. Probably sooner. That's just how all this is going to play out.

      LOL, Keep predicting the end of the ICE and eventually you'll get it right. I remember when 1980 was the last year. Then 1985, Then 1990. No way we'll get by 2010. We're heading into an ice age. No more ice in the Artic by 2012. LOL. Yet people still believe this crap. Still believe man is causing global warming when science clearly says CO2 is a symptom due to increased activity, not the cause.

Slashdot Top Deals

Business is a good game -- lots of competition and minimum of rules. You keep score with money. -- Nolan Bushnell, founder of Atari

Close