There is still alot of research going into internal combustion engines from the OEM's

Look at the evolution of the Ford Fiesta ST:

2008 - Mark 5 Fiesta ST - 4 Cylinder - 2.0lt Naturally Aspirated - 150bhp / 140lb/ft / 38.2MPG / 177g/km CO2

2013 - Mark 6 Fiesta ST - 4 Cylinder - 1.6lt Turbocharged - 180bhp / 214lb/ft / 47.9mpg / 138g/km CO2

2018 - Mark 7 Fiesta ST - 3 Cylinder - 1.5lt Turbocharged - 197bhp / 214lb/ft / 47.1mpg / 136g/km CO2

2018 - Mark 7 Fiesta ST can actually run on two cylinders whilst driving around town to save fuel. The 2018 model has one cylinder less / 0.5lt less / 47bhp more / 74lb/ft torque more / 9 mpg more and produces 41g/km of CO2 less than the car produced in 2008.

I think this is a great leap forward in 10 years in combustion engine advancements. This isnt the only car, cars such as the ford focus and Nissan Qashqai are running 1.0 and 1.2lt engines where as 10 years previous they would be running 1.6 or 2.0lt engines. The technology has been improving alot over the last 10 years. I think going forward it will continue to develop and be coupled with hybrid electric powertrains.

In my opinion, the Internal Combustion Engines cannot be replaced by alternate options. Consider a Agriculture tractor , is it possible to make it go electric? what about those in the remote areas. Similarly , the Marine Vehicles have to deal with the same problem.

The possible solution is the hybridization (ICE + Electric/Fuel Cell) of the areas where alternate options could fail. It shall also be noted that the ICE are going through a quite good R&D that has increased the performance and lowered the emissions .An example could be downsizing of engines and/or Combustion strategies (HCCI,PCCI,Lean), GDI etc

Thank you Usman Salim for your answer.

I entirely agree with you.

Research into improving the efficiency and reduction in emissions of internal combustion engines should continue to receive support. There is no single solution to the issue of mobility and energy . For example, cars, buses, trucks, plant equipment, ocean going vessels and electricity generators, to name a few. A mix of technologies is required and these technologies will require researchers to keep improving them.

I am very grateful to you for your response Dr. Michael Coyle . As you mentioned IC engines will not stop working because of their various applications, and I am right there with you about the necessity of keeping supports from IC engines in order to boost their efficiency.

By my opinion it is necessary to continue paralelly with both types of engine. Because of next point of view - see the situation during the last heavy frost weather in Chicago. Electro engines on Tesla 3 models had up to 42% range loss.

https://insideevs.com/news/341140/tesla-model-3-range-down-42-in-cold-weather/

Thank you dear Michal Capko for your answer.

As you mentioned the efficiency of battery electric vehicles go into a free-fall in cold temperatures.

And I'm with you about a parallel support, because the example which you noted shows that we still need IC engines while we have to improve Evs to prevent this kind of problems.

Best regards

R&D on the ICE must continue. Why give it up?

It would be foolish to do so.

The increase of renewable has dropped in 2018 over 2017. The Chevy Volt is not longer in production, simply not enough sales.

In 5 to even 10 years the ratio of ICE's to EV's is likely still near 4 to 5 times to one.

Advances in combustion processes are being made. Reducing development would means giving up at a time when we don't even know the future. Just because the propaganda for EV's is huge it does not mean that this outlook is correct. Notice that not engineers but politicians push for EV's. All technological development and advancements in the past were created by engineers and entrepreneurs. Now the politicians want to tell us what is right. That has never happened before.

There are shortages of minerals for battery production and these minerals are true pollutants. The fuel cell is too costly and we have no proof whatsoever that CO2 is bad for the environment. WE need more CO2 for more food corps to feed the world.

Also consider that CO2 is 1.5 times heavier than air. Its volume increase at ground level is 0.0001 (from 300 to 400 ppm) over the last 100 years. How can such a small amount of a weak greenhouse gas cause global warming when we cannot even measure earth's temperature to an accuracy beyond 2 decimals. CO2 would need to be at least 100 to 300 times more effective than water vapor to be in the measurable temperature range, not to mention to have an effect. At high altitude CO2 is of far lower concentration than at ground level.

The question is how would you make steel and aluminum from wind and solar without fossil fuels? The whole Idea of Global Warming and Climate Change to be caused by man or CO2 is totally ridiculous. It is not based on science but politics.

Without fossil fuels and the ICE the whole industrialization, transport and travel will collapse and humanity will be pushed back to the stone age. All because of greedy politicians wanting to control everyone with a socialistic one-world government. Luckily It has been tried before but never succeeded. Lets fight it and defeat this idea again once and for all.

IC engines can use a LOT of different fuels, from gasoline to LPG to methane to alcohol to hidrogen… in WW2, the Germans developed a liquid fuel derived from coal… R&D must REALLY continue….

Internal Combustion Engines can never be totally replaced. especially not in the near future...

EV's or hybrids can make there way to into small cars but they have not yet attained the state which they can replace IC engines.

IC engine vehicles are cheap compared to hybrids and EV's.

and in developing countries it is hard to provide electricity even to the people living for their daily needs, in such a case how can they provide current for the vehicles to charge.

even if they were able to provide electricity, the infrastructure needed for the charging units are hard in rural areas..

considering lot of aspects it is very much an Mission Impossible task for eradicating IC Engines....

Dear Rolf Pfeiffer

Thank you for helping us by providing the information that you had about this issue.

Switching ICE to EV's is a thoroughly complicated procedure that takes a lot of time. I completely agree with you about the limited mineral resources for batteries, but fossil fuels resources are limited as well and as you noted we need fossil fuels for different purposes so it could be considered that battery electric vehicles are just a short-term alternative to moderate the usage of fossil fuels till we find a better alternative for them in urban transportation industry.

On the other hand, it is believed that ICEs have developed amazingly and now they are really high-tech devices which is meaning less to stop using them while have not found a permanent alternative for them and this make this procedure really challenging.

So a parallel support seems the best option.

Kind regards

Dear Sina Jenabi Haghparast

Thank you.

I would like to add that fossil fuels are NOT finite as claimed. The term is a misnomer originating shortly after their discovery. In order to find an explanation why these exist it was thought that the remains of past living creatures must be the source. However, tests have been made to make crude oil from cadavers which were totally unsuccessful.

Hydrocarbon fuels are generated deep below the surface under high heat and pressure. This is also evidenced as old wells fill up again over time.

If you believe somewhat in a creator who wants us to live well and happy, you might accept that fossil fuels have been given to mankind to achieve this goal and the expectations of a 'good life' on earth for all. We will never run out of 'fossil fuels'.

There is still alot of research going into internal combustion engines from the OEM's

Look at the evolution of the Ford Fiesta ST:

2008 - Mark 5 Fiesta ST - 4 Cylinder - 2.0lt Naturally Aspirated - 150bhp / 140lb/ft / 38.2MPG / 177g/km CO2

2013 - Mark 6 Fiesta ST - 4 Cylinder - 1.6lt Turbocharged - 180bhp / 214lb/ft / 47.9mpg / 138g/km CO2

2018 - Mark 7 Fiesta ST - 3 Cylinder - 1.5lt Turbocharged - 197bhp / 214lb/ft / 47.1mpg / 136g/km CO2

2018 - Mark 7 Fiesta ST can actually run on two cylinders whilst driving around town to save fuel. The 2018 model has one cylinder less / 0.5lt less / 47bhp more / 74lb/ft torque more / 9 mpg more and produces 41g/km of CO2 less than the car produced in 2008.

I think this is a great leap forward in 10 years in combustion engine advancements. This isnt the only car, cars such as the ford focus and Nissan Qashqai are running 1.0 and 1.2lt engines where as 10 years previous they would be running 1.6 or 2.0lt engines. The technology has been improving alot over the last 10 years. I think going forward it will continue to develop and be coupled with hybrid electric powertrains.

IC engines are not going to go away for a long time despite technological advances in the alternatives. Thus research should continue in IC engines because any kind of innovation may be applicable not only to IC engines but other related fields as well. That is how science and technology work.

Dear Dr. Martin McKie

Thanks for sharing this relevant information with us, it is really helpful.

Dear Dr. Srini Vasan much obliged for your answer.

I thoroughly agree with your opinion.

It's a good question. Despite of the fact that the ICE will dominate for at least 40 years longer, there is a political low interest for the effort of improvements. It seems to be the opposite attitude in the automotive industry. Our VCR-DCE development, a new engine that combines variable compression rate with double expansion cycle.

Thank you for your response dear Hilberg Karoliussen .

I've just googled VCR-DCE engine and I found it quite interesting.