It’s time we get grown-up about EV uptake and allow ICE to survive | Opinion
Much of life is about compromise.
You take the rough with the smooth throughout – school, marriage, parenting or work – and being diplomatic goes a long way.
As 2026 begins, there are green shoots of common sense – compromise – finally descending on EV world.
Let me explain.
Despite best efforts of over-zealous net zero-chasing politicians, the world was not and still is not ready for the enforcement of electric-only car shopping.
READ MORE: Opinion: Why I’ll never buy an EV motorcycle.
READ MORE: European U-turn on 2035 combustion ban! But it’s not all good news for petrol die-hards.
“You can’t bully buyers into cars they don’t want!” goes the social media cry. And, as it transpires, those keyboard warriors have been proved right.
Meanwhile, poor old legacy car brands have been put through the wringer.
They were given little choice but to invest to the tune of billions in full electric platforms and powertrains, all the while pulling the plug on internal combustion development.
From Ford to General Motors, Mercedes-Benz to Volkswagen Group, car giants’ profit plunges were headline fodder throughout 2025.
Not to mention threats of multi-billion-dollar/euro penalties for manufacturers not selling enough “clean” vehicles. Newbie Chinese brands merrily feasted on the carnage.
Cue factory shutdowns, thousands losing their jobs and threats of manufacturing exiting countries.
“Oops!” say the politicians. “Tell you what, how about we move the goalposts again?”
Petrol and diesel ban shelved in Europe
Ignoring Trump’s USA circus (good luck predicting any policy there), the EU has watered down plans for killing off new petrol and diesel cars by 2035.
All new vehicles sold were supposed to be “zero emission” by then, but it’s funny what a collapsing industry and angry auto bosses banging desks can do to make lawmakers breathe in a healthy dose of reality.
Which brings us back to the importance of compromise.
As it now stands, the European Commission’s revised plan is for 90 per cent of new cars to be zero emission by 2035. This will remain a massive challenge for established car makers, but at least now there’s sensible wriggle room.
If ten per cent of new cars are still allowed to burn fossil fuels, just think of the collective sigh of relief from brands including Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Aston Martin and Lotus.
Not only them. Massive players like BMW, Merc, VW, Toyota and Ford can continue making the cars and engines that forged their way into enthusiasts’ hearts.
Even if you’re the most ardent EV preacher, do you really want to live in a world with no combustion Porsche 911? Ford Mustang? VW Golf GTI? Mazda MX-5?
I know I don’t.
But then I’ve always embraced compromise. Which is why I want the majority of vehicles to be EVs in the next decade: they are excellent solutions for clean urban travel.
Let sports and racing cars remain petrol drinkers
There must be some concessions.
It really shouldn’t be – now or in the distant future – completely one-way electric traffic.
As I’ve previously argued, let’s allow and enjoy internal combustion in sports cars, racing cars and motorcycles, and potentially everywhere motoring enthusiasts inhabit.
Otherwise you’re simply pissing off a very vocal and passionate crowd while plunging many car (and bike) makers into financial crisis and potential collapse.
Do you really think Aston Martin, Lamborghini, Lotus or even Porsche and Ferrari will remain relevant as EV-only carmakers in 20 years’ time? It really could be the death of them, as peverse as that may seem.
Look to Porsche’s sales and profit plunges during 2025. Zooming in on Australia, moving to an electric-only Macan was a significant contributor in a 25 per cent overall drop in annual sales.
For those who won’t embrace the idea of a few low-volume cars remaining combustion in the near future, surely climate neutral synthetic e-fuels to power these petrol-sucking nasties would soften your stance?
If, as the quote goes, all war represents a failure of diplomacy, much motoring world chaos can be and must be avoided with a few concessions.
If we picture a future where 90 per cent of vehicles clogging our town and city streets are EVs – hopefully recharged using renewable energy – can’t we mark that down as a mighty win for the greater good?
And if that means tech bros get to keep their V10 supercars, track day enthusiasts their BMW M3s and beardy folk their obnoxiously noisy Harleys, isn’t that probably okay?
It works for me.
What a piece or brain wash from a fossil fuel lover and most probably a “bummer”
No mention of the damage to the environment or to our health! Typical!
I would MUCH rather live in a world without street level pollution than some sort of nostalgic idea that some car brand should survive their poor choices!
Do you think the corrupt fossil fuel industry will be happy to go down to 10% of the market?
They will just keep corrupting our politician’s and the would if we give them a way!
Sure, let people decide if they want ICE or HEV, PHEV or EV – that’s the way it should be.
However, we do need to call out mistruths around all the options so people can make a reasonable choice and not be misled. For me that’s the real issue and where efforts should be directed.
As a cyclist (when not driving my EV), I’ll be glad when I no longer have to breathe in the plumes of toxic gases from ICE vehicles, especially smoky diesels, or be nearly deafened by noisy motorcycles at full noise, or suffer dimwitted revheads who love to give cyclists an extra dose of fumes (coal rolling) by excessively revving their engines as they overtake, often yelling abuse as they do so.
Environmentally, if we care, the era of ICE vehicles should be rapidly coming to an end. I don’t care if the legacy brands and FF producers are losing market share or profits as they go about their FUDing and corruption of lawmakers during the transition to EVs.
I often wonder why people seem so attached to ICE vehicles… is it the indirect support of Putin’s war by buying petrol, the noise they make, the expense of buying petrol or diesel, or the environmental damage they do that keeps them hanging on to ICE?
It’s reading comments like this from holier-than-thou people like you, which makes driving my gas guzzling V8 all the more enjoyable.
Cheers 👍
I’m with you Dave. Leave the EV zealots to believe they’re saving the world. Great article Iain.
Grown up? That’s a laugh. Everyone needs to shoulder their responsibility for climate action, but again and again we hear special pleading. In this case, a suggestion that 10% of the richest car buyers should get a free pass because they like the SOUND and the SMELL of petrol-burning engines, presumably as a result of arrested development, locking in place their boyish fantasies.
No, it’s time to put aside childish things, your boys’ toys are no longer tolerable.
The very bad news is that eradicating the last 10% of cars burning fossil fuels is not the last of it. In fact, we can’t even afford to burn the coal to make the raw materials for EVs, with their front-loaded emissions in the manufacturing stage.
When it comes to the crunch, no doubt the EV fans will also be bleating about their special pleas. The best car is no car. This is bad news for a motoring journalist, who will be out of a job if this idea catches on, so they can’t be trusted to provide objective commentary.
EVs don’t fix the climate crisis, they make it worse. They just do it at a slightly slower pace than ICE cars, which are a bloody nightmare, a monstrosity.
Everyone needs to grow up and stop stamping their feet because mummy said they can’t have Froot Loops for dinner again.