The UK, and other countries, to ban ICE engines.

[MarrsCars]

(I am writing this specifically seeking information for an article I am writing. If you respond, please know that I may use your words as a quote in the final piece.)

 

Big news today is that the UK is planning to ban gasoline and diesel engines by 2040, which follows earlier announcements of planned bans by countries like France by 2040, Norway by 2025, and Volvo of Sweden has committed to producing only electric cars and hybrids by 2019.

 

For the sake of argument, let's work on the assumption that at the time of these bans, or shortly thereafter, these countries will not only ban new production of ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles, but also no longer allow them on their public roadways. To be clear, this has not been widely proposed, and so far these countries seem more interested in stopping production of new ICE cars rather than rid the roads of current ones.

 

I'd like to know your opinions on what will happen to values of vintage and classic cars once this happens? Will they first lose value in their home country that has a ban in place, but maintain their values in countries that still allow them? Will all values drop as the writing on the wall becomes more evident? How will this affect restorers and parts suppliers? Will collector cars only be driven at sanctioned events, on tracks or private land, or will they become static displays, like a painting or sculpture with no interest in keeping them running and operable? Feel free to extrapolate beyond my questions, I am curious to hear what sort of future for the hobby this paints.

Edited July 26, 2017 by MarrsCars (see edit history)

[joe_padavano]

As you point out, this is a ban on the SALE of NEW ICE vehicles, not a ban on existing ones.  Who would buy a 2039 ICE car if it couldn't be driven the next year? Speculating on what-ifs is a waste of time.  First, until 100% of electricity comes from non-polluting sources, you are just moving the source of the emissions upstream (and introducing transmission loss inefficiencies).  Yeah, I realize it is easier to control and treat emissions at a power plant than at numerous mobile sources, but it still isn't zero.  Also, the electricity distribution grid can't handle the added load of every new car hooking up to charge.  Electric vehicles comprise such a small percentage of the population today that the effects on the grid aren't known yet.  How has that infrastructure improvement been going for the last 50 years?  From a practical standpoint, do you really think the entire diesel trucking industry will disappear by 2040?  Good luck with that.  How about forklifts? Airport tugs? This is wishful thinking that has not been thought out.  I'm not losing any sleep over it.

Edited July 26, 2017 by joe_padavano (see edit history)

[1937hd45]

Please let me know when the price on a restored Type 37A Bugatti drops to $25,000. I also would like to know how the worlds workers will get to work in 2040, the ones that can't afford an electric car? Bob

[MarrsCars]

58 minutes ago, joe_padavano said:

As you point out, this is a ban on the SALE of NEW ICE vehicles, not a ban on existing ones.  Who would buy a 2039 ICE car if it couldn't be driven the next year? Speculating on what-ifs is a waste of time.  First, until 100% of electricity comes from non-polluting sources, you are just moving the source of the emissions upstream (and introducing transmission loss inefficiencies).  Yeah, I realize it is easier to control and treat emissions at a power plant than at numerous mobile sources, but it still isn't zero.  Also, the electricity distribution grid can't handle the added load of every new car hooking up to charge.  Electric vehicles comprise such a small percentage of the population today that the effects on the grid aren't known yet.  How has that infrastructure improvement been going for the last 50 years?  From a practical standpoint, do you really think the entire diesel trucking industry will disappear by 2040?  Good luck with that.  How about forklifts? Airport tugs? This is wishful thinking that has not been thought out.  I'm not losing any sleep over it.

 

I think you may have missed my statement, "For the sake of argument, let's work on the assumption that at the time of these bans, or shortly thereafter, these countries will not only ban new production of ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles, but also no longer allow them on their public roadways. To be clear, this has not been widely proposed, and so far these countries seem more interested in stopping production of new ICE cars rather than rid the roads of current ones."

 

...so working on the assumption that no ICE cars will be allowed, what do you think will happen to collector car values?

 

Personally, yes I do believe the diesel trucking industry will disappear by 2040.

 

https://electrek.co/2017/04/18/tesla-semi-analyst-electric-truck-disruptive/

 

https://youtu.be/E3993-PczhI?t=1m

 

[MarrsCars]

30 minutes ago, 1937hd45 said:

Please let me know when the price on a restored Type 37A Bugatti drops to $25,000. I also would like to know how the worlds workers will get to work in 2040, the ones that can't afford an electric car? Bob

 

Why would electric cars be out of the price reach for people who could afford ICE cars? Electric car prices are already dropping steadily, like how VCRs used to cost $1,000 then dropped to $100 as soon as mass production began. There's also the factor of job automation displacing human workers en masse, resulting in the talk of a Universal Wage, which is a whole other topic, but none of this really pertains to the values of collector cars question that I originally posed.

[1937hd45]

Get back to me when you find my $25,000 Bugatti, got to put gas in my Ford so I can get to work tomorrow. Bob

[R Walling]

 Of course if you ban the driving of ICE cars it will lower the value of collector cars as most collectors like to drive them.

 That doesn't require much thought. 

[MarrsCars]

2 minutes ago, Roger Walling said:

 Of course if you ban the driving of ICE cars it will lower the value of collector cars as most collectors like to drive them.

 That doesn't require much thought. 

 

Thank you, so continuing on that thought, what do you believe collectors will do with their cars once they see values dropping? What will you personally do, hold on to them for sentimental reasons or otherwise, sell them? Surely some will be among the savvy and cash out before others who still have their heads in the sand.

[auburnseeker]

According to Doc Brown,  We should all be retrofitting our clunkers with Hover conversions and Mr. Fusion to solve all of those pollution and road problems by now.  

Gov't can only regulate to the point the people revolt and relieve them of power. 

Maybe getting out of the whole paris climate accord will keep us and our Gasoline demons together a little longer. 

[Digger914]

I live in a metro area that covers about a third of the county and in the county where I live horse power replaced horses about a hundred years ago and the number of horses in the county has increased steadily over the last hundred years. If the gas burners follow the same path as the hay burners when the electrics finally take their place, we aren't going to have enough gas powered collector cars to fill the demand.

[1912Staver]

English collectors are at this point in time at least , extremely enthusiastic about both I.C. and external combustion machines. From James Watt to the Rolls Royce Merlin to the Flying Scottsman engines and engineers have been a very large part of England's cultural and economic history.

  I know the younger generation  tends to think of anything that dates to before the I phone age as being inexcusably obsolete, and by 2040 a good part of the government will be comprised of people born after the year 2000, a somewhat sobering thought in itself. But I am sure a fair number of that generation will embrace I.C.  heritage . English vintage events whatever the actual machine have a very strong following. What might be seen by some as the worst of all; Vintage racing, is popular in the U.K. to a degree unimaginable here in North America.  And vintage racing eligible cars pricing is robust to say the least. Hard to see that , along with the quite substantial industry that keeps them all running vanishing in a few short decades.

 And please also notify me of any $25,000.00 C or D type Jags that pop up.

 

Greg in Canada

[1937hd45]

1 hour ago, auburnseeker said:

According to Doc Brown,  We should all be retrofitting our clunkers with Hover conversions and Mr. Fusion to solve all of those pollution and road problems by now.  

Gov't can only regulate to the point the people revolt and relieve them of power. 

Maybe getting out of the whole paris climate accord will keep us and our Gasoline demons together a little longer. 

Just checked a real nice Sharps will cost you around $25,000, outdated, maybe, but they'll still get the job done.

[padgett]

.50 cal Sharps ? BTW the ban is apparently only for pure ICE, hybrids are part of the plan and they will need some fossil fuel.

[1912Staver]

I prefer my 38-55 model 94 repeater. It's a bona fide antique, manufactured in 1897. And it's part of the green revolution. That is it will handle the eco friendly "smokeless" cartriges. That old clunker Sharps needs black powder, E.U. rules will soon require them to be fitted with a cat. converter and soot scrubber.  

 

Greg in Canada

Edited July 27, 2017 by 1912Staver (see edit history)

[50jetback]

Straying a little from the question but along similar lines and worth considering!

 

In Australia the car collector/classic car community are currently considering their future not because of proposed future bans on internal combustion engines but an existing ban on product containing asbestos.

 

Australia has a zero tolerance to asbestos importation while the rest of the world seems to accept around 1% content.

 

Recently our Australian Border Protection Force realised that older cars being imported could contain asbestos components and there have been nightmare tales of owners having to remove clutches, brakes, gaskets, insulation from cars which were suspected to contain the material. 

 

The matter has now been considered by the authorities and this is the way our system will now operate!!

 

20170726135050810.pdf

 

That notice was signed 7 days ago ( 20/7/2017 ) and has effectively halted all classic car imports to this country.

 

It is interpreted that if we were to attend an overseas rally shipping a classic car to New Zealand, the UK or USA it will not be able to return to Australia unless it has the required certification that it contains no asbestos product.

 

We are now watching our classic car values but in all likelihood values will rise because the marketplace is restricted to those vehicles currently in Australia.

 

 

 

    

Edited July 27, 2017 by 50jetback (see edit history)

[John_S_in_Penna]

I think the United States is better at adhering to the 

will of the people--the people who constitutionally

control the country--and has less of a chance of 

government officials, servants, trying to impose their will

on the populace.  Such an attempt in the U. S. by elected

officials would produce  major objections.  And if some

international treaty brought other countries into such an 

agreement, the United States would be most likely to retain

its sovereignty and not accede.   Accordingly, the

United States would be less likely to have such an automobile ban.

 

In that case, yes, I believe that cars with gasoline engines

would see less demand in those countries with the ban.

That would diminish the demand there, and with the supply

being constant, the prices should fall noticeably--but only in

those countries with such a ban.

In that case, many collectible American cars that have been

exported to Scandinavia, especially Sweden, would likely

find their way back to the United States. 

Edited July 27, 2017 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[avantey]

Not sure I should jump in this murky pool but I got an interesting mail from a fellow collector the other day on the subject of the grid and charging all those cars.  Not sure if the math or the prices used are accurate but the theory is interesting at least.  Infrastructure may be a big stumbling block for a mass conversion to electric vehicles.  Also here is a nice little math problem on owning/running an EV.  Here is the mail text:

 

At a neighborhood BBQ I was talking to a neighbor, a BC Hydro executive.I asked him how that renewable thing was doing.

He laughed, then got serious.If you really intend to adopt electric vehicles, he pointed out, you had to face certain realities

:

For example, a home charging system for a Tesla "requires 75 amp service

.

"

 

The average house is equipped with 100 amp service. On our small street (approximately 25 homes), the electrical infrastructure would be unable to carry more than 3 houses with a single Tesla, each.  For even half the homes to have electric vehicles, the system would be wildly over-loaded.

 

This is the elephant in the room with electric vehicles ...

Our residential infrastructure cannot bear the load.

 

So as our genius elected officials promote this nonsense, not only are we being urged to buy the damn things and replace our reliable, cheap generating systems with expensive, new windmills and solar cells, but we will also have to renovate our entire delivery system!

 

This latter "investment" will not be revealed until we're so far down this dead-end road that it will be presented with an oops and a shrug.

 

If you want to argue with a green person over cars that are Eco-friendly, just read the following:

 

Note:  If you ARE a green person, read it anyway. Enlightening.

 

Eric test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors...and he writes...For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.

 

Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery.

So, the range including the 9-gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.

 

It will take you 4 1/2 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours.  In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time)would be 20 mph.

 

According to General Motors,the Volt battery holds 16 kwh of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery.The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned so I looked up what I pay for electricity. I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh.

 

16 kwh x $1.16per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery. $18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74per mile to operate the Volt using the battery.

 

Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine that gets only 32 mpg. $3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.

 

The gasoline powered car costs about $15,000 while the Volt costs $46,000...

 

So the American and Canadian governments wants loyal citizens not to do the math, but simply pay 3 times as much for a car, that costs more than 7 times as much to run, and takes 3 times longer to drive across the country .....

 

Again I cannot vouch for the accuracy of these exercises but the potential problems are fascinating.  But I am sure wiser heads than I have already considered these issues.....

 

 

[maok]

5 hours ago, joe_padavano said:

  First, until 100% of electricity comes from non-polluting sources, you are just moving the source of the emissions upstream (and introducing transmission loss inefficiencies).  Yeah, I realize it is easier to control and treat emissions at a power plant than at numerous mobile sources, but it still isn't zero.  Also, the electricity distribution grid can't handle the added load of every new car hooking up to charge.  Electric vehicles comprise such a small percentage of the population today that the effects on the grid aren't known yet. 

 

Even with transmission losses, an electric motor is still more energy efficient that an ICE, at least twice if not thrice. An ICE transfers only about 25% (a more modern example maybe up to 33%) of the store energy in the fuel to motion.

 

Don't underestimate the advancement of technology and the progressive nature of young people.

 

The only hurdle holding back renewables is government and their fossil fuel mates.

 

Regarding the absolute ban of ICE, our cars can be retro fitted with electric motors and batteries relatively easily. People are doing it right now. How will that effect the value? I have no idea.

I guess the museum examples will hold their value because they are not driven anyway.

[billorn]

7 hours ago, MarrsCars said:

I'd like to know your opinions on what will happen to values of vintage and classic cars once this happens? Will they first lose value in their home country that has a ban in place, but maintain their values in countries that still allow them? Will all values drop as the writing on the wall becomes more evident? How will this affect restorers and parts suppliers? Will collector cars only be driven at sanctioned events, on tracks or private land, or will they become static displays, like a painting or sculpture with no interest in keeping them running and operable? Feel free to extrapolate beyond my questions, I am curious to hear what sort of future for the hobby this paints.

 

Steam cars still seem pretty popular and valuable.......

[1937hd45]

8 minutes ago, billorn said:

 

Steam cars still seem pretty popular and valuable.......

Very true, but they will be crushing them in Australia due the use of asbestos. Bob

[padgett]

58 minutes ago, avantey said:

I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh.

Wow, guess you don't need AC. After the first 1000kwh I pay 8.349c/kwh plus 4.377c/kwh fuel charge or  12.726 cents/kwh. So in Florida, that 16 kw would be about 2 bucks or about the same as a gallon of gas.

 

However it is not good to discharge any battery below about 25% (50% is better) so I doubt that it would take 16 kwh to charge.

 

My concern is not the cost but rather if our infrastructure could handle a few hundred thousand cars suddenly plugging in around 6pm, more likely there would be incentives to charge between 11pm and 6 am when AC use goes down and cars would be designed to get a full charge in 6 hours or less.

 

Still may require some smoke and mirrors since our electric grid is already near capacity.

 

ps while I remember 60A homes in Indiana (gas heat, stoves, and refrigerators), modern homes around here usually get 150-200A service with a 60A branch just for the AC..

[John348]

3 minutes ago, padgett said:

Wow, guess you don't need AC. After the first 1000kwh I pay 8.349c/kwh plus 4.377c/kwh fuel charge or  12.726 cents/kwh. So in Florida, that 16 kw would be about 2 bucks or about the same as a gallon of gas.

 

However it is not good to discharge any battery below about 25% (50% is better) so I doubt that it would take 16 kwh to charge.

 

My concern is not the cost but rather if our infrastructure could handle a few hundred thousand cars suddenly plugging in around 6pm, more likely there would be incentives to charge between 11pm and 6 am when AC use goes down and cars would be designed to get a full charge in 6 hours or less.

 

Still may require some smoke and mirrors since our electric grid is already near capacity.

 

ps while I remember 60A homes in Indiana (gas heat, stoves, and refrigerators), modern homes around here usually get 150-200A service with a 60A branch just for the AC..

 

The load on the electric grid has been getting lowered every year by a lot. The use of LED Lights is a main contributor to that. Some of the high rise office building I maintained in NYC had real noticeable lesser loads. There are large federal incentives for commercial property owners to go this way by a certain date. Besides certain incandescent and fluorescent lamps are no longer in production forcing the hand even more. The incidents picked up on the annual infrared test was way less. Most of the damage was from heat due to excessive constant loads mostly lighting panels. 

Every modern home has to have a 200A service according to NFTB NEC with central a/c. At peak use with the a/c running the most most house will draw is maybe 60-70 amps total per phase  with the oven and dryer on also. Electric provisions for a charging station is now code in new house construction, I think has been for a few years. I never did residential, just large commercial.  

[capngrog]

There has already been an extensive discussion on this topic on this thread:

 

  

Volvo to Phase out Combustion Engines by 2019

By Mark Gregory, July 5 in General Discussion

 

Cheers,

Grog

[mike6024]

I pay 20 cents per KWH baseline. So if I use more and go over my baseline my rate would go up. But the $1.16 per KWH quoted above is way off base, unrealistically high.

 

But another interesting way to look at this would to to figure how much electrical generating capacity (power plants, solar, etc.) would be needed to replace the gasoline burned. You can do this by converting the energy in a gallon of gas into kilowatt-hours and multiplying by the number of gallons burned in a day (in the US or in your home state or whatever) then dividing by 24 hours in a day to get the total kilowatts of generating capacity that would need to be added to the electrical system. it would be huge.

 

One gallon of gas burned gives 33.70 KWH. You would need 33.7 KWH of electrical energy to replace that gallon of gas you do not burn. Slightly less if you figure the electric motor in the electric car is more efficient.

 

One gallon of gas has 115,000 BTU's of energy. And 1 BTU equals 0.000293 KWH. Or you could say 1 KWH = 3,412 BTU's.

 

And with solar it's much worse because a 5 KW home solar system does not give you 5 KW for the 24 hours in a day. It can only put out 5 KW for about 6 hours on a sunny day, making it effectively about only a 1.25 KW system.

Edited July 27, 2017 by mike6024 (see edit history)

[maok]

@mike6024 You also need to divide the 115,000 by 4 (at best divide by 3) to allow for the ICE inefficiencies.

 

Also, home battery storage is being deployed like solar was 10 years ago in mass. It wouldn't be a surprise if residential power is all produce in house in the next 20 years.

[Mark Gregory]

I think a lot of old cars might become Trailer Queens . Towed to a show and displayed and not driven .

 

In Quebec , Canada they are making it law that all new houses built be able to have the power for a charging system .

 

http://www.cantechletter.com/2016/04/every-new-house-built-quebec-mandatory-240v-electric-vehicle-charging-station/

[JV Puleo]

Go back 20 years and read some of the predictions of what the world of 2020 will be like... or better still, read some 1950 predictions of 1975 or 1975 predictions of 2000. Virtually all of them are wildly off. If you want a real hoot read Looking Backward by Edward Bellamy. Published in 1887, it describes the world of 2000 and was so popular in its day that it spawned a political movement. According to "science" the world was supposed to have run out of food long before 2,000 (see the wildly popular book The Population Bomb by Paul Erlich...) I remember my parents discussing this and how, by 2000, there would only be something like 3 square feet of space on earth for each person!

 

All of these predictions are based on wild speculation and a near religious faith in the power of "technology." Virtually none of the people who make these predictions have any historical context beyond their own lifetimes... know virtually nothing about the history of technology and simply presume that all the attendant problems can be solved by the superior wisdom and intelligence of the present day. That is rubbish. Our predecessors were just as intelligent and often more inventive. The youth of the past were just as absorbed in their every day concerns and presumed theirs was the greatest or the most challenging of times. The Romans felt the same way.

 

In reality... technological progress always hits roadblocks. Depending on the area, It will advance rapidly for a period and then slow to a crawl, often for a century or more. For instance, the Battle of Waterloo (1815) was fought with flintlock muskets essentially unchanged for more than 100 years. World War I, almost exactly 100 years later, saw the use of small caliber, repeating small arms, machine guns and high explosive artillery. That technology has hardly changed since then and many of the conflicts that afflict the world today are being fought with tools that are now 100 years old. There are some very simple items of every day life that literally haven't changed for 1,000 years. We can add to this the unrealistic (I would say idiotic) credence given to numerous well known figures. Expertise or success in one area does not equate with universal knowledge or prescience and politicians, very few of whom can see beyond the next election much less 20 years into the future, are probably the last people whose opinions should be taken seriously.

Edited July 27, 2017 by JV Puleo
double word (see edit history)

[padgett]

Agree: some technology is taking quantum leaps (probably the greatest invention of the 20th century was cold light), while others are moving slowly (computer technology is limited by lithography). And then we have dislocations that no-one can predict.

 

We have a number of homes being built here with solar, is a double benefit: reduces the energy required from the grid and reduces the heat load on the roof so less AC is needed. Since most new developments just level the ground first there are no pesky trees to block the sun.

 

You mentioned 20 years. That is about the life span of a current monocrystalline solar panel (I like better than poly) and after 10 years they start to degrade. Has that been figured in or "here a miracle happens" ?

 

For me the lighting cost is incidental, have been using fluorescents for years, The biggie is the AC though have an 18 SEER unit, I know of some ($$$) that have over 20.

 

But as mentioned, fossil fuel is both very "energy dense" and the price per BTU is an order of magnitude lower than anything else available today.

 

Doubt that I'll see a solar refrigerator, the gas absorption cycle is just not very efficient.

[Xander Wildeisen]

I think values of classic/collector cars will be impacted based on the reason a person collects them. If a person has a large collection that is displayed, and not driven. The values will not change much. If a person buys a classic/collector car for the purpose of putting it into service. Then the value will change. Who would buy a car that you could not drive. People will always buy/collect anything that has interest/value. To the plus side, maybe some great American classics will be shipped back here.   

[MarrsCars]

Here's some pertinent news today, and not from a smaller maker like Volvo but one of the biggest boys in the game, Toyota.

"the new technology promises to yield recharge times of “just a few minutes,”

http://jalopnik.com/toyota-is-developing-new-solid-state-batteries-for-elec-1797294724

 

@1912Staver @maok @John348 @50jetback

Thank you for your thoughtful replies, I find them very interesting to see the split between those who believe "well, we've always done it this way so we're always gonna do it this way" and those who consider the reality of petrol-consumption, electric vehicle production, application of technology, the will of the younger generation to change the old system, and governmental future plans, and how these factors are already guiding energy policy here and abroad. You were also among the few who captured the nuance of my question so thank you for addressing the matter of how this may affect collector car values, that was what I was after. 

 

@capngrog

"There has already been an extensive discussion on this topic on this thread:Volvo to Phase out Combustion Engines by 2019"

I did see that earlier discussion, thank you, but it is more about the policies, which we did veer off into here, but my original post was purely to ask about how this would affect collector car values specifically which that post did not address. 

 

@JV Puleo

Technology no longer stagnates as it has historically, since the advent of computing technology it has actually done quite the opposite by expanding exponentially every few years at ever-decreasing intervals. 

 

@padgett @John_S_in_Penna @avantey @mike6024 @Xander Wildeisen

Thanks much to you and anyone else I missed who replied with considered and intelligent opinions.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 27, 2017 by MarrsCars (see edit history)

[R W Burgess]

A power connection for an electric automobile? You have to be kidding. My new home will go where ever the taxes are the least. If it gets too hot I will travel to the mountains. Was in northern PA/New York last week on tour, beautiful cool weather while my family almost dies from heat in Virginia.

 

Never, Ever, believe anything a study group tells you.

[John_S_in_Penna]

1 hour ago, MarrsCars said:

Thank you for your thoughtful replies, I find them very interesting to see the split between those who believe "well, we've always done it this way so we're always gonna do it this way" and those who consider the reality...

 

Mr. Marrs, we wish you the best in your research, but please

don't be like many of today's newsmen, who approach an article

with a preliminary conclusion already drawn, and who seek to

find data primarily to corroborate their own thoughts.

Journalism never used to be like that. 

 

The comment above about those who prefer gasoline engines,

contrasted with the other view that you call "reality," shows that you

may have a conclusion already in mind.

 

Your article will be much more interesting if you give equally valid 

time to both sides of the discussion.  Please be gracious and fair.  

Edited July 27, 2017 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[John_S_in_Penna]

1 hour ago, R W Burgess said:

A power connection for an electric automobile? You have to be kidding. My new home will go where ever the taxes are the least. If it gets too hot I will travel to the mountains. Was in northern PA/New York last week on tour, beautiful cool weather while my family almost dies from heat in Virginia.

Never, Ever, believe anything a study group tells you.

 

 

I grew up in northern Pennsylvania, and you're right, Wayne,

it's comparatively cool there.  Though there are plenty of 

days with highs in the 80's, and maybe 3 days where the

temperature reaches 90 or 92, the typical high is about 79.

There's a tremendous amount of woods and open space,

some attractive small towns, and the area is very affordable too!

 

Staying on topic, I'll point out that Pennsylvania's electric rates

are reasonable, since we can shop around for an electricity supplier.

I currently pay 10.2 cents total per kilowatt-hour.

 

An electric car such as the Volt would be interesting, but I want it

to be my choice, not someone making the choice for me.

[Mark Gregory]

According to an news article that in Quebec , Canada the province ( state ) is demanding quotas on the car dealerships to sell electric cars .

 

http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebecs-electric-car-quota-is-a-disguised-tax-on-dealerships-consumers-groups?google_editors_picks=true

[MarrsCars]

5 hours ago, John_S_in_Penna said:

 

Mr. Marrs, we wish you the best in your research, but please

don't be like many of today's newsmen, who approach an article

with a preliminary conclusion already drawn, and who seek to

find data primarily to corroborate their own thoughts.

Journalism never used to be like that. 

 

The comment above about those who prefer gasoline engines,

contrasted with the other view that you call "reality," shows that you

may have a conclusion already in mind.

 

Your article will be much more interesting if you give equally valid 

time to both sides of the discussion.  Please be gracious and fair.  

 

Hi John, I will say the story largely depends on if we are doing a straight news piece where, in such a case, your words are completely valid that impartiality be achieved and I must absolutely follow the tenets of journalism, or if it is an opinion piece, wherein I seek info from both (or all) sides of a topic in an effort to understand why a certain segment of the population feels a certain way and present their viewpoint even if it contrary to my own, but I need to understand them first to do so. 

 

Those who follow my writing know that I am someone who is unafraid to challenge long-held, traditional, or institutionalized views. (I doubt you're surprised by that.) I am also infinitely open-minded and malleable so long as logic and facts are involved. I will say that even when I am writing an opinion piece where I am seeking views opposed to mine, it's important to try to understand why those opinions differ. Sometimes simply posing the question at all reveals a great amount about some people's thinking, such as in this case where a couple of the first replies seemed to veer wildly away from the question actually asked, even tho those individuals chose to reply of their own free will in the first place. Why? What is their motivation? So I prod a bit more, keep the conversation going. There's an element of human psychology there that is fascinating. That's just as valuable to me.

 

To be clear, I don't yet know what type of article this will be, news or opinion, so I am covering all my bases at present. Thank you again for your response. 

[MarrsCars]

5 hours ago, Mark Gregory said:

According to an news article that in Quebec , Canada the province ( state ) is demanding quotas on the car dealerships to sell electric cars .

 

http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebecs-electric-car-quota-is-a-disguised-tax-on-dealerships-consumers-groups?google_editors_picks=true

 

Nice find! It reads to me somewhat like the fuel economy standards for auto companies, wherein they can also buy credits to offset their carbon footprint, which is exactly why Aston Martin made the Cygnet, based on a Toyota iQ, because of the proportionately huge differences in fuel economy from the rest of their fleet. Most other manufacturers of hulking, heavyweight cars simply buy credits from those with excess. 

 

Here is that odd little car:

[trimacar]

It's been touched on in this thread, but let me just make it clear, from my viewpoint.

 

Anyone who thinks electric cars are the answer, and want to ban ICE engines, doesn't understand energy.

 

A lot of people, seriously, think electric is "green", well, gee, you just plug in a wire, what could be greener/eco friendly?

 

That electric, obvious to some people, comes from somewhere.  Coal fired, gas fired, hydro,  nuclear....and by the way, Germany says it's one of the "greenest" countries, yet it buys a huge amount of nuclear generated power from France.

 

Seriously, ICE's will be around for a while.  The danger to the old car hobby is, like the famous novelist's demise, greatly exaggerated ....

[Mark Gregory]

Even Rolls Royce is getting to the act of gasoline been banned in some areas . 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/cars/article-4736878/Rolls-Royce-Phantom-revealed-world-s-silent-car.html

[MarrsCars]

29 minutes ago, Mark Gregory said:

Even Rolls Royce is getting to the act of gasoline been banned in some areas . 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/cars/article-4736878/Rolls-Royce-Phantom-revealed-world-s-silent-car.html

 

I like it! Tho a bit too similar to the former Phantom design, it does advance the series well. The exchange rate prices it at $475,000 USD! I especially like the taller, ensconced grille treatment tho I much prefer the one on the bespoke "Swepttail" Rolls-Royce which closer matches the traditional style. Someone earlier in this thread mentioned coach building on future electric cars, which I touched on when I wrote about the Swepttail, and that's another element that I plan to explore, the revival of that trade in many ways making a comeback with the advent of electric vehicles. 

 

This was a rather interesting sidebar presented on that link:

 

What about an electric Rolls-Royce? 

With all eyes on electric cars right now, Rolls fans should note that the flexible chassis means it can develop an all-electric Rolls-Royce. In 2011, Rolls-Royce built a one-off working prototype all-electric Rolls-Royce Phantom codenamed 102EX. This was followed in 2016 by an all-electric driverless concept car codenamed 103EX.

Earlier this month, Rolls-Royce chief executive Torsten Müller-Otvös said he would introduce battery technology when it is sufficiently developed to power an ’all-electric’ car.

Speaking at the Goodwood Festival of Speed, to Autocar magazine, he said: ‘Electrification is the way forward – and there will be no in between steps for us like hybridisation.'

‘It is the propulsion system for the future, make no error. There is a time - nobody can predict when - when there will be no combustion engines.’ 

Edited July 27, 2017 by MarrsCars (see edit history)

[1912Staver]

Since your original question specified  vintage car values vs the evolution of non I.C. alternate fuel vehicles in general, I would suggest the biggest influence on collector car values is demand.  And demand is a complex condition that is influenced by many variables, not just the energy source of transport devices.  

  From my point of view the biggest potential influence on demand is the apparent disengagement of a fair number of younger people from "car culture".  This may lead to a glut of lesser collector cars on the market as their current owners age out of the hobby.  I doubt the big ticket collector cars will feel the effect of this trend should it become the new reality in a decade or two.  But yes I can see where relatively ordinary collector cars will see a price decline, in fact quite a few astute market watchers think it has already started. Already several statistics point to a younger generation that seem to be much less concerned with motor vehicles as transportation. This trend has a good chance of continuing with this generation as they age. If so the most likely outcome is that there will be a reduced demand for collector cars in general and probably lower end collector cars in particular.

 

Greg in Canada

Edited July 27, 2017 by 1912Staver (see edit history)