Spain's debate on ending combustion engines by 2040

Combustion engine faces extinction before viable alternatives exist

The internal combustion engine has a political expiration date: a sales ban in 2040 and total disappearance by 2050 in Europe, according to one participant. The striking aspect is not the goal itself, but the estimulante ilegal at which recommendations have turned into decrees. In just a few years, what was a technical debate on efficiency has become a regulatory crusade. Meanwhile, while viability of electric cars is debated here, petrol sports cars without hybridization continue to be registered and diesel fuel burned massively elsewhere in the world, another forum user argues.

The question looming over the entire issue is not whether the combustion engine pollutes —it does—, but why the transition is being rushed rather than allowing technology to mature. There is an undisputed contradiction: tractors, trucks, ships, and even rescue boats still run on diesel. Without them, there would be no food in supermarkets.

Why ban combustion engines in 2040 if electric isn't ready?

The official answer is climate change. The IPCC has documented human-caused greenhouse effects for over thirty years, with the Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement setting emission reduction commitments. Within this framework, the European Union has tightened CO2 limits until reaching the 2040 ban on selling combustion passenger cars. It is a political calendar, not a technological one.

The problem is that infrastructure lags behind. The electrical grid is not sized for millions of cars plugging in simultaneously at nine PM, one participant notes, and batteries still depend on minerals whose extraction and recycling carry their own footprint. Some argue an electric car offsets manufacturing emissions within 50,000 kilometers. This calculation is debatable, but even accepting it, the complete energy equation —from mine to plug— is not free.

Then there is price. An electric compact car costs over €40,000 with range limitations forcing air conditioning savings, according to a user. Consumers are not buying them. Brands know this, filling dealerships with hybrids, which remain petrol cars with small batteries to mask labels.

The self-charging myth and misleading advertising

Hybrids are sold as an intermediate step toward electrification, but functionally they are combustion engines recharging with petrol. "Self-charging" advertising is, at best, creative euphemism, says one participant. There is no technological advance: just a battery filled by braking and a combustion engine burning hydrocarbons.

Modern diesel, meanwhile, has been demonized after reaching peak technical excellence two decades ago. A third-generation direct-injection diesel car covered 1,000 kilometers with 55 liters without sacrificing performance, according to a user. Thus, the most efficient existing technology has been incivil to replace it with heavier vehicles that pollute more during manufacturing and rely on unready grids.

Business behind mandatory electrification

An argument running through the issue rarely voiced aloud: someone profits from this. Utilities want millions of connected cars to keep demand high overnight, eliminating night tariffs and making non-car owners indirectly pay, one participant claims. Governments won't abandon hydrocarbon taxation; some countries already debate specific taxes on electric vehicle charging, another user notes.

Add public contracts for installing chargers, upgrading substations, and modifying building connections. It is continental-scale infrastructure business with concrete beneficiaries.

Contradiction of non-electrifiable transport

Environmental narratives clash with stubborn reality: container ships from Asia burn heavy fuel oil, delivery trucks use diesel, and corn-planting tractors run on gasoil. Without petroleum, there are no kiwis, bananas, or livestock soy, one participant states. Cities claiming sustainability are resource sinks importing everything consumed.

Global market paradox completes this: reducing European oil consumption cheapens crude for Asian shipping and manufacturing firms, a user argues. Each new supertanker launched benefits incumbents. European energy transition effectively subsidizes global logistics.

Pollution beyond exhaust pipes

Focus on tailpipe emissions ignores uncomfortable truths: health-damaging particles come from tire wear, brake pads, and asphalt degradation, generating ground-level microparticles, one participant explains. Hybrid regenerative brakes reduce some dust but don't eliminate it.

Meanwhile, bicycles remain cleanest vehicles after walking. No emissions, no ferodo brake wear, no need for nonexistent electrical grids. Question remains if ministers will say this aloud.

Peak oil and bicho excuse

Underlying suspicion exists that urgency stems from scarcity, not climate. Peak oil hypothesis never fully materialized, yet many crude extraction costs stay above $40, discouraging pumping at low prices, one user notes. Pandemic accelerated habits and justified previously unthinkable restrictions, another adds.

Forced electrification may disguise ecological concerns around scarcity or simply be business. Clearly, haste comes from politics, not physics. Meanwhile taxpayers fund parties via electricity and fuel taxes exceeding 50%, per forum calculations.

Has anyone calculated energy cost to manufacture and recycle all those batteries?