BMW CEO warns against electric-only strategy
Following on from Toyota’s warning about the rush to electric cars, now the CEO of BMW issues a similar warning.
BMW Chief Executive Officer Oliver Zipse said companies must be careful not to become too dependent on a select few countries by focusing only on electric vehicles, adding that there was still a market for combustion-engine cars.
“When you look at the technology coming out, the EV push, we must be careful because at the same time, you increase dependency on very few countries,” Zipse said at a roundtable in New York, highlighting that the supply of raw materials for batteries is controlled mostly by China.
“If someone cannot buy an EV for some reason but needs a car, would you rather propose he continues to drive his old car forever? If you are not selling combustion engines anymore, someone else will,” said Zipse.
He has long advocated against all-out bans on combustion engine car sales in the face of rising pressure from regulators on the auto industry to curb its ‘carbon emissions’ and environmental impact.
Offering more fuel-efficient combustion engine cars was key both from a profit perspective and an environmental perspective, Zipse argued, pointing to gaps in charging infrastructure and the high price of electric vehicles.
Companies also needed to plan for energy prices and raw materials to remain high by being more efficient in their production and stepping up recycling efforts to keep costs down, he said.
“We have a peak now, they might not stay at the peak, but they will not go back to former prices,” he said. “How much energy you need and use, and circularity, is important — for environmental reasons but even more for economic reasons.”
See more here: driving.ca
Header image: BMW Blog
Bold emphasis added
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Russ D
| #
EVs, however, are not green. A half million pounds of earth has to be dug up for just one battery pack which must be moved for processing in huge (diesel-powered) trucks, crushed and then wildly-toxic chemicals used to extract the ores — specifically lithium, cobalt, nickel, copper and others. None of this occurs with a traditional vehicle. The packs are not economically recyclable and requiring them to be will wildly escalate their costs further. Charging said vehicle is approximately equal to running your electric clothes dryer all night long, and the cost of power when you’re not at home is roughly double to triple when you use a “supercharger” or similar; this makes the cost on a per-mile basis higher than that of a gas car in many cases.
We do not have the electrical capacity nor is there any way to generate it using so-called “green” methods to charge these vehicles if a material percentage of the fleet converts. Without power you own a $50,000 brick and being “out” means not going anywhere. What’s worse is that the existing fueling stations are used by a vehicle for about 5 minutes; conservatively it requires 30 minutes to get usable range from an EV, so contemplate where you’re going to get six times the land you have for each fuel station now, plus you will need to place them twice as close together as the average EV range is half or less that of a gasoline vehicle.
The truth is that modern automobile gasoline engines are about as efficient as can be achieved. CO2, which is the only primary emission of modern closed-loop gasoline engines, is not a pollutant — it is plant food and emitted by every animal as well. Simply put your gasoline car is far greener, all-in, than is your EV. Sorry, facts are facts folks and we don’t use liquid hydrocarbons because we’re pigs. We use them because nobody has come up with an actual workable and cost-effective alternative.
Mandating the impossible is a recipe for societal collapse. Secretary Pete has never put forward any facts, figures and computations to show how such a “transition” can take place. That’s because he knows he’s 100% full of **** and what he is cheering on and part of is impossible.
I don’t care if you feel this is a good thing or not. That which you feel must yield to physics.
Always.
Now the question: Will you force the so-called “politicians” to cut this crap out — no matter what you have to do make them stop it — or will you simply lay down at their command and die?
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=245556
Reply
Alcheminister
| #
Current (lithium) EV is merely another (advancement of) monopolizing artificial scarcity (just like demonizing and trying to control co2). Industry relies on homogenization and starndarization for monopolization.
I mean, 300-400 co2 vs 999700 other totally irrelevant things with absolutely no thermal capacity, transfer or equalization effects whatsoever. How many carbons per co2? So that carbon is called “The problem” and needs to be “controlled”. Do people understand that relating to artificial scarcity?
People might want to consider the prevalence and importance (or rather, lack of) of things like carbon, phosphorus, nitrogen relating to life and why it tends to be near the surface or is atmospheric.
So, considering that carbon is at around 200ppm in the crust…and there’s attempted control of that, the peddling of lithium is essentially an advancement of similar sort of undustrial homogenous monopolizing artificial scarcity tactics, as lithium is at around 20ppm. And the less there is of something, the easier it is to control, so there are significant attempts to exploit that for control, reliance, exploitation purposes.
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-most-abundant-elements-in-the-earth-s-crust.html
http://www.knowledgedoor.com/2/elements_handbook/element_abundances_in_ocean_water.html
Just saying, there should probably be focus on the more abundant elements.
Reply
Saighdear
| #
Well, according to german tv news yesterday: BMW to lay off 9000 (?) from a plant requiring wiring harnesses and other parts from Ukraine. Great thing, this debacle over there: saves cars from being produced: Save the Planet ! ( ? ) Maybe the Greens really ARE involved.. you know, Green on the outside, RED on the inside.
Reply
John Alexander
| #
It is absolute lunacy this EV desire. It is a virtue signaling tool , no different from a solar panel on the roof. These tools are used by Pseudo Moralists to impress their friends, families and neighbours.
Jordan Peterson – some people adopt pseudo-moralistic stances on large scale social issues in order to look good to their friends and neighbours.
This is a perfect example.
Reply
Andy
| #
Yes, I totally agree John.
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Former U.N. employee and intellectual Zionist fraud Peterson, knows who pulls his chain. Watch what happens when Peterson is caught off guard and is called on to speak the real truth.
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
video for related comment on Jordan Peterson:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/kLQ0XFkc3zGy/
Reply
Rob
| #
I purchased an EV and put solar panels on my roof after doing a cost benefit analysis. My decision was not affected by my neighbours or any other social issue…it was an investment. An investment that sees me reducing my fuel costs from $6800.00 a year to $328.00 per year. Where I live 99% of the electricity is from renewable , sustainable hydro electric.
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Hello Rob:
For some people in some circumstances elec. vehicles may be cost effective in their particular application. Thats fine. The problem is that it is not the government’s business to use fake science to determine energy types used. This social engineering will have devastating consequences to individual freedom as we are now witnessing (and everyone should have known from the beginning) when fake science is used to create the belief in a fake virus resulting in targeting the livestock with blood toxin injections. Of course all of this enhances the power of those at the top who want you to know, “we’re from the government, and we’re here to help you.”
Reply