The climate benefits of retiring an operational combustion engine vehicle • Hacker News Board

Re: The climate benefits of retiring an operational combustion engine vehicle

#91

Post by coderenegade » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 10:31 PM UTC

FabCH wrote: post #81

coderenegade wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what the person that I was responding to wrote, and it's objectively wrong: >Hybrids are the worst of both worlds when it comes to maintenance. They have their benefits and are key to fighting climate change, but mechanically you inherit all the problems from both sides. Also, much more complex is a value judgement. Complex in what way? High voltage electronics isn't exactly "not complex", and the coolant loo…

I don’t think that a single-moving-piece gas turbine powered cars are currently on the market? And how many are single piston? Go carts and motorcycles maybe, but cars? And I was using complex as a shorthand for „more things to maintain“.

A few companies have tried small APU range extenders, but there wasn't really a market for it at the time. The point was more that complexity is relative and not necessarily a given, and it's not necessarily a bad thing if it's required. A door is simpler than a bed, but I'd still rather sleep on a bed.

Maintenance is a function of usage. BEVs still have coolant and lubricants, which means they also have pumps. They have a HVAC system which also means filters and refrigerant. Yes, you don't have to replace spark plugs and a timing belt, but both of those are infrequent and generally easy. You might have to replace brake pads less, but hybrids share that same feature. Hell, hybrids don't even have fan belts, alternators, ignition motors, and transmissions these days. They share nearly all of their underlying foundation with BEVs, for most of the same reasons you would want to go BEV in the first place.

Re: The climate benefits of retiring an operational combustion engine vehicle

#92

Post by coderenegade » Mon, Aug 10, 2026, 11:57 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #82

coderenegade wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fossil fuels contribute to climate change. Methanol is likely to power global shipping in the coming decades, and there's zero reason it can't also run cars. The reality is that hybrid vehicles have all of the same advantages that BEVs have, but they can also be refueled quickly without heavy reliance on centralized infrastructure. Aside from being the reason that we're all driving ICEVs in the first place, it's a co…

If you would like bet how many methanol vs battery electric cars will be on the road in 2030, 2035, and 2040, I am happy to take the battery electric side of a Long Bet [1], with $10k to the winner's choice of 501c3 charity. Let me know. If battery electric vehicles are already 1/4th of global annual light vehicle sales, and there is ~20M-30M of battery electric vehicle manufacturing capacity globally, with no methan…

I must be hallucinating all of those hybrid BYDs I keep seeing on the roads, then. You say 'EV', but the distinction that matters is battery electric versus high voltage hybrid, and low voltage hybrid. And hybrids, which are uncontroversially ICEs, will be with us for decades. Yes, even the non-plugin kind.

The world is not running out of fuels any time soon. If petrol goes away, I'll convert my cars to LPG. If that goes away, I'll convert them to ethanol or methanol. The whole reason ICEVs became a thing in the first place is because they don't require centralized infrastructure to be useful. Incidentally, this is the same thing holding BEVs back: until you solve the street parking situation the way China has, the market will be reluctant to switch.

As for your bet, I'll make you a promise instead: I'll put a few extra miles on my car today just for you. And who knows? If this becomes a social movement, maybe we could see new refineries open to meet the demand.

Re: The climate benefits of retiring an operational combustion engine vehicle

#93

Post by LargoLasskhyfv » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 1:51 AM UTC

roryirvine wrote: post #79

joak wrote: post #78

There is an element I haven't seen in this conversation: as the number of combustion engine cars goes down the number of gas stations also goes down. At some point, combustion engine drivers will start feeling range anxiety. So when you get rid of your fossil-fuel-burner vehicle, you are pushing others to do so. The full calculus of CO2 emissions reduction should also include the reduction induced in others.

That process has likely already started, with the long term trend towards consolidation having accelerated over the past five years. In the UK, for example, the number of petrol stations has fallen by around 75% in the past 50 years and drivers now have to travel twice as far on average to fill up. I'd expect the remaining sites in city centres to have entirely vanished by 2035. Out of town, they'll last a little lon…

Depends on country maybe? In Germany they make more by being small supermarkets, selling snacks, energy drinks, tobacco/vapes, alcohol, at insane prices, 24/7. In the USA similar, with even wider range of stuff, except alcohol, though that may depend on the state, or even county also.