El Niño 'supersizing' before our eyes

 From The Guardian

The El Niño climate phenomenon is “supersizing before our eyes”, the UN has said. The event is near certain to shatter temperature records, according to the latest forecasts.

The El Niño is likely to be the largest in at least 1,000 years and will pile extra heat into an atmosphere where temperatures are already rising rapidly due to global heating. The combination means 2027 is set to “blow apart” the record and be the hottest year ever recorded.

The rising heat from the El Niño is already having impacts, from worsening wildfires in Indonesia to the weakening of vital monsoon rains in India. The impacts will spread globally, from greater fire risk in Australia to more intense floods in South America. The World Food Programme said in August that the El Niño was likely to push about 50 million people into acute hunger.

The climate crisis, caused by pollution from fossil fuels, is already supercharging extreme weather and killing people, with the most extreme heatwave ever recorded hitting Europe this summer and leading to at least 35,000 deaths. The El Niño will ratchet up the impacts even further, with the scale of the event having been described as “truly mind-blowing” and a “Godzilla-level” event.

El Niño is a natural climate cycle where wind changes over the Pacific lead to rising ocean temperatures and the transfer of huge amounts of heat to the atmosphere. The most recent data, from Monday, shows the temperature of the ocean at the heart of El Niño at 2.6C above the 30-year average. That is already close to the highest anomaly ever recorded in the satellite data era, 3.1C in 2015, with months to go before the peak is expected.

That peak is forecast to reach about 4C in November, according to the average of 14 different models. Data from analysis of corals, tree rings and historical documents suggest no El Niño has reached this level in the last millennium, said Zeke Hausfather, a climate analyst. Any temperature anomaly above 0.5C is classed as an El Niño.

A further concern is that recent research shows global heating is now intensifying El Niño cycles, which then in turn intensify the impacts of the climate crisis.

“El Niño is being supersized before our eyes,” said UN secretary general António Guterres. “The science leaves no room for doubt: the planet is in uncharted waters, and those waters are heating up. The world is in the danger zone of extreme weather. The race now is between rising risks and our commitment to take climate action and protect people. We must win that race.”

The WMO El Niño updates are the world’s most authoritative forecasts and are based on a consensus of models from climate prediction centres around the world. The latest update, published on Thursday, said the El Niño was firmly established and would intensify into a “very strong event” in the coming months, with “big impacts” including floods, drought and extreme heat continuing well into 2027.

In some areas, subsurface ocean temperatures were an extraordinary 8C above average during July and early August.

Chris Jaccarini, of the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit in the UK, said: “Extreme [weather] around the world has driven up food prices, hitting the poorest hardest. This is not just the food we import, but also what we grow at home.

“After five heatwaves and widespread drought, British arable farmers are now facing the worst harvest on record in 2026. And yet, without action, these could be the good years. Unless we rapidly cut emissions and strengthen resilience, climate change impact will continue to worsen with El Niño turbocharging the trend every few years.”

Yet governments are not 'supersizing' their efforts to slash emissions.

We could, for example, ban the import/production of pure petrol/diesel vehicles, allowing only hybrids and EVs.  After five years we would also ban hybrids, except for EREV*s. 

We could give electricity utilities a renewable energy target (RET), starting at the current average for the industry, for example, 40%, and upping it each year by 10%.  Utilities which don't reach this rising annual target each year would be required to buy surplus credits from those which have reached it, or from the government.  

We could ban new oil and gas heating for buildings, and subsidise heat pumps.  Together, all these steps could cut emissions by ~60%.   

But, paralysed by fossil fuel company funding and lobbyists, governments take none of these steps, even though the vast majority of their citizens are terrified of climate collapse and want something to be done.

Unless we act, we face catastrophe.

Extended-range EVs vs plug-in hybrids

In this piece, I mentioned that T&E research shows that plug-in hybrids produce almost as much CO2 emissions as petrol/diesel cars.

The Driven has also covered this report, but it added some detail about EREVs (extended-range electric vehicles) 

Extended-range electric vehicles (EREVs), like PHEVs, also rely on a combustion engine for their extended range, though they use a series configuration, which means that the combustion engine only ever recharges the battery and never provides power to the wheels directly.

According to T&E, EREVs usually have larger batteries than PHEVs and can therefore provide a longer electric-only range. This means that the combustion engine used for generating electricity is smaller than that found in a PHEV, since it does not need to provide power to the wheels.

However, even though EREVs can drive up to 900 kilometres, they are nevertheless still consuming 6.7 [6.4] litres of fuel per 100 kilometres when in combustion mode – similar to some European petrol SUVs.

One would expect a car running on a petrol engine to use almost as much fuel whether it's charging a battery or driving the wheels directly, so the fact that in combustion mode EREVs are still consuming 6.4 litres per 100 kilometres (45 mpg in the UK) isn't surprising, nor is it an argument against EREVs.  The critical number is how often the petrol engine has to run, in proportion to all the kilometres driven.  An ICEV would use petrol for every kilometre, plug-in hybrids, it turns out, use petrol most of the time, but EREVs only use petrol 30% of the time.

The chart below shows T&E's analysis.

With battery costs plunging, EREVs will be a short-term (5 year?) solution to low EV range and too few chargers.   If you live outside a major city in a big country (USA, Australia, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, India, South Africa, for example), EV range, except on the most expensive cars, just isn't enough for longer journeys.  In Europe, with its huge network of chargers, EREVs are prolly a distraction, as T&E maintain.  Elsewhere, while PHEVs are not a solution, EREVs are. 

Plug-in hybrids almost as bad as ICEVs

 From The Guardian

Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) pump out nearly five times more planet-heating pollution than official figures show, a report has found.

The cars, which can run on electric batteries as well as combustion engines, have been promoted by European carmakers as a way to cover long distances in a single drive – unlike fully electric cars – while still reducing emissions.

Data shows PHEVs emit just 19% less CO2 than petrol and diesel cars, an analysis by the non-profit advocacy group Transport and Environment found on Thursday. Under laboratory tests, they were assumed to be 75% less polluting.

The researchers analysed data from the onboard fuel consumption meters of 800,000 cars registered in Europe between 2021 and 2023. They found real-world carbon dioxide emissions from PHEVs in 2023 were 4.9 times greater than those from standardised laboratory tests, having risen from being 3.5 times greater in 2021.

“Real-world emissions are going up, while official emissions are going down,” said Sofía Navas Gohlke, a researcher at Transport and Environment and the co-author of the report. “This is the gap that is getting worse and it is a real problem. As a result, PHEVs pollute almost as much as petrol cars.”

The researchers attributed most of the gap to overestimates of the “utility factor” – the ratio of miles travelled in electric mode to the total miles travelled – finding that 27% of driving was done in electric mode even though official estimates assumed 84%. The European Commission has announced two corrections to the utility factor ratio that will narrow the gap but not close it entirely, according to the analysis.

Even when the cars were driven in electric mode, the analysis found that levels of pollution were well above official estimates. The researchers said this was because electric motors were not strong enough to operate alone, with their engines burning fossil fuels for almost one-third of the distance travelled in electric mode.

Patrick Plötz, head of energy economics at the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research, who was not involved in the study, said it was a “very useful contribution” after years in which parts of the automotive industry argued there was too little data to accurately assess real-world emissions.

“The results demonstrate, beyond any doubt, that the gap between official and real-world PHEV fuel consumption and CO2 emissions is much, much larger than for gasoline or diesel cars,” said Plötz, who has published research on the topic. “Any policy changes with respect to PHEVs should be made with utmost care and in the light of that data.”

Hybrid cars have been drawn back into the political debate as carmakers have pressed the EU to weaken CO2 targets. A ban on new combustion engine cars in 2035 has been subject to heavy lobbying from the automotive industry and opposition from member states with large car industries.

“There must not be a drastic cut in 2035,” the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said after a summit last week with the country’s struggling automobile industry, promising to do “everything in [his] power” to achieve that. Other senior German politicians have floated plug-in hybrids as one example of possible “flexibilities” they could introduce to the legislation.

Have European car companies learnt nothing from Volkswagen's diesel emissions scandal?  They're still lying to us.   Plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) do not use 75% less petrol per kilometre, compared to petrol/diesel cars.  No.  They use just 20% less.  People who bought PHEVs assuming they were doing something about the climate were deceived, deliberately.  Governments were deceived and lied to.  I supported plug-in hybrids because we were told they used 80% less petrol than ICEVs.  And that was a lie.

This is a good point to talk about EREVs:  extended range electric vehicles.  Like hybrids, they have a petrol and an electric motor.  Unlike hybrids, the petrol motor is not connected to the wheels.  Instead, it charges the battery, but only when the battery is nearing empty.  Normally, you would charge your EREV overnight, perhaps, ready for your daytime commute, or over the day from your solar panels.   The 60 or 80 or 100 km range from the battery will be enough for 90% of the time, since most journeys are relatively short.  Only occasionally do you need much more range.  For example, I live in a provincial town.  I rarely drive more than 20 km a day.  However, every 3 months or so, I drive to the big city, which is 180 km away.  Most of the EVs I could afford, don't have enough range to get there, drive around, and get back without recharging.   And many I've spoken to in the town cite this as a reason not to buy an EV.  For us, right now, an EREV would be a good option.  

The Chevrolet Volt was an EREV, and it used the petrol engine so rarely that GM's engineers had to put in an override which forced the petrol engine to turn on every three months, just to keep it working properly.  In their case, the claim that it reduced petrol consumption by 80% was completely plausible.

The authorities should immediately withdraw subsidies for plug-in hybrids, but extend those for EREVs.  In a few years, batteries will be so cheap that range-extenders will not be necessary.  Until then, EREVS  fill a niche.

China Set To Add 62-Mile Minimums For PHEV Range

The great EV shift: 90% by 2030

 From EVCurveFuturist

What if I told you that even with political setbacks, EVs will dominate car sales by 2030? That’s right—despite recent challenges, the road to mass BEV adoption is still clear. Back in 2019, I projected that global BEV (Battery Electric Vehicle) sales would reach between 90-95% of total vehicle sales by 2030. This forecast was based on several critical factors: technological improvements, cost reductions, increasing consumer acceptance, and strong policy support from major economies.

However, as we move into 2025, new developments have prompted a reassessment of these projections. While my 2024 forecast was accurate—missing the actual NEV (New Energy Vehicle) final sales figure by just 100,000 units—I have now factored in the ‘Trump effect’ when updating my 2025-2030 outlook.

The ‘Trump effect’—including a 25% tariff on imported EV batteries, reduced federal tax credits, and emissions regulation rollbacks—could raise U.S. EV prices by 10% and slow sales growth by 5%. As the U.S. remains a major automotive market, this impacts global adoption, lowering my projection from 95% to 90% by 2030. However, state initiatives like California’s zero-emission mandates and New York’s infrastructure investments may mitigate these setbacks. Local policies can counteract federal headwinds, keeping the BEV transition on track.

Despite the potential challenges posed by the ‘Trump effect’, strong consumer demand, rapid battery innovation, and international momentum for EV adoption persist. Europe and Asia are doubling down on their commitments to electric mobility, driven by emissions regulations and aggressive electrification targets.

Technological advancements continue to lower the cost of ownership, with new battery technologies like LFP and sodium-ion promising even greater affordability and efficiency. Recent insights from ARK Invest suggest that EV adoption is surpassing traditional S-curve dynamics, indicating a more rapid and expansive growth trajectory. As battery costs decline, EVs become accessible to new consumer segments, sparking fresh waves of adoption. ARK’s analysis highlights that, rather than plateauing, EV adoption is accelerating, driven by overlapping adoption cycles as cost reductions make BEVs increasingly attractive to budget-conscious buyers. According to BloombergNEF, battery costs have fallen from $132/kWh in 2022 to $89/kWh today, with LFP batteries already at $50/kWh in China. Coupled with 500KW global fast chargers expected by 2025 (IEA), the cost and convenience of BEVs are set to dominate new car sales.

Emerging markets like Latin America, India, and Africa face challenges with charging infrastructure, but affordable EVs from brands like BYD and sodium-ion battery tech offer potential solutions. A major driving force here is the desire of everyday people to break free from oil dependency and escape the cycle of petrol price gouging. The economic motivation for energy independence is especially strong in developing regions, where fuel costs can take a significant portion of household income. By transitioning to cheap renewables and EVs, these communities can reduce reliance on volatile oil, coal and gas markets, making electric mobility not just a technological shift but a social and economic liberation. These regions, with their growing demand and focus on cost-effective solutions, could have an edge in reaching 90% adoption by 2030 if infrastructure gaps are addressed.

While the consensus often lands around 50% BEV sales by 2030, I project 90% based on the S-curve formula used to model adoption in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden. Key factors include battery cost reductions, technological advancements, and the collapse of ICE supply chains. I also foresee that from 2027 onwards, global PHEV sales will begin collapsing. PHEVs have long been viewed as a transitional technology—providing a safety net for those wary of limited range or charging availability. However, advancements in battery density, particularly with LFP and sodium-ion technologies, are rapidly making PHEVs obsolete. As costs drop and range extends, the onboard petrol generator loses its appeal, especially when BEVs offer lower maintenance, running costs, and a simpler powertrain.

From 2027 to 2030, the growth of BEVs will be exceptionally strong for several reasons. First, the maturity of next-gen battery technologies will push prices well below parity with ICE vehicles, making BEVs the obvious financial choice. Second, legacy automakers, facing increasing pressure to electrify, will accelerate their BEV lineups while phasing out hybrids. Lastly, consumer preferences will continue to shift toward pure electric as charging networks expand and EV infrastructure becomes more ubiquitous, reinforcing the idea that hybrids were merely a temporary stepping stone. I wrote more in depth on this subject in Why PHEVs Are Losing Their Shine.

 

[Read more here]

China EV sales stagnant

 August data for China's EV/PHEV/EREV* sales are flat.  That's mostly due to weak overall car registrations (down 9% YoY in August).  But the percentage is also declining, though the latest month shows a tiny uptick.  I seasonally adjust these time series, but because Chinese new year can sometimes be in January and sometimes in February, it's tricky to get entirely reliable seasonal factors.  This has been complicated by multiple Covid lockdowns.   Sometimes the NBS (National Bureau of Statistics) publishes data for one month, sometimes an average for both January and February, and sometimes no data at all for those two months.  I might actually just default to fitting a centred 12-month moving average to the data.  In the meantime, for what it's worth, here are the charts.

*EREV = extended range electric vehicle.  A petrol motor drives a generator which charges the battery when it is empty.  These produce fewer emissions than plug-in hybrids, because plug-in hybrids from some manufacturers use both the electric and the petrol engine to get better performance out of the PHEV.