The S-curve: reason to be optimistic about the energy transition

 The shape of the S-curve is caused by exponential growth.  Something starts off minuscule, but if it grows by, say, 10% a year, it will double every 8 years.  In 16 years it's up four-fold, in 24, eight-fold, in 32 sixteen-fold*.  But at some point, it starts approaching the natural limits set by its environment.  When everyone has a colour TV, the rapid growth from when it started out comes to an end.  

This dynamic produces a sideways S-curve--rapid growth at the beginning succeeded by slower growth later, as the market niche is filled.

Source: ClimateCrocks

Notice how electricity started an S-curve in 1900, but was then interrupted by the 1930s Great Depression and WW2.  Computer penetration has levelled off at 70%, though that prob'ly doesn't include smartphones, where penetration must be close to 95%.  All the same, the pattern is clear: slow gains at first, then an explosion, followed by a levelling off.

From ClimateCrocks

Many people suggest that rates of new product introduction and adoption are speeding up, but is it really, across the board? The answer seems to be yes. An automobile industry trade consultant, for instance, observes that “Today, a typical automotive design cycle is approximately 24 to 36 months, which is much faster than the 60-month life cycle from five years ago.”  The chart below, created by Nicholas Felton of the New York Times, shows how long it took various categories of product, from electricity to the Internet, to achieve different penetration levels in US households.  It took decades for the telephone to reach 50% of households, beginning before 1900.  It took five years or less for cellphones to accomplish the same penetration in 1990.  As you can see from the chart, innovations introduced more recently are being adopted more quickly.  By analogy, firms with competitive advantages in those areas will need to move faster to capture those opportunities that present themselves.

So why is ClimateCrocks optimistic?   Because the global uptake of wind, solar, batteries and EVs shows the classic pattern of the S-curve: rapid compound growth.   At first penetration was tiny, and people said, 'oh, what nonsense, wind/solar/EVs  are less than 1% of the market, how ever could they reach 100%?'   Yet look, for example, at plug-in sales in Germany.  3% in 2019, 13.5% in 2020, a likely 30% this year (2021).  The maths of sustained compound growth is inexorable.  

These technological transformations are fuelled by rapid cost declines (for example, new-build solar going from 3.2 times the cost of new-build coal to 1/3rd the cost in just 11 years) or by greater convenience, or by both.  EVs are a couple of years away from price parity with petrol/diesel vehicles (ICEVs).  New-build wind and solar are cheaper than new-build coal.  In fact, they're cheaper than the cost of digging up coal and burning it, and that's before a carbon tax.  

Whereas in the past we had to rely on  the goodwill of communities to switch to cleaner energy or transport, now we can rely on self-interest.  If we combine goodwill with self-interest, the transition will be irresistible, and fast.

* Solar is growing by 15% per annum, and has been for decades.  That means it doubles every 5 years.  EVs have been growing at 50% a year, which means sales go up 5-fold every 4 years.

Electrifying: EV sales in Australia

From The Driven

Australia’s latest VFACTS and EVC data confirms what we’ve been charting all year: EV sales are multiplying, ICE is slowly losing control of the market, and the power EV dealers are supplying is genuinely electrifying.

China now dominates as the source of those vehicles, while grease and petrol and diesel look so “last century” with every monthly update.

As Tim Minchin might put it, the sun is finally coming out on Australia’s electric age – and this time it’s science, not faith, doing the work.

The May 2026 figures show another big jump for battery electrics.

Tesla’s Model Y has topped the national sales charts, while BYD remains the leading EV brand on year-to-date volumes, and Zeekr has emerged as the fastest-growing new player.

EV sales overall are up more than 110 per cent year-on-year, a doubling that reflects both rising demand and a rapidly widening model mix. Every month, more Australians discover that the supposed compromises of EVs were mostly theatre; the weekend, it turns out, was never really at risk.

Country-of-origin data reinforces the point.

China is now firmly the number-one source of new vehicles in Australia, well ahead of Japan and pulling further away.

A growing share of EVs on Australian roads – and a fair number of hybrids and even some ICE models – are built in Chinese factories, whether they carry BYD, Zeekr, MG, GWM, Volvo or Tesla badges.

For a country that doesn’t build cars, we are being swept along an S-curve largely designed in Shanghai and Shenzhen.

Since the post‑COVID bounce in 2021, petrol and diesel volumes have been sliding on a clear downward trend, punctuated by the familiar EOFY “dead cat” jumps seeking moonlight.

Even those June bounces in 2023 and 2025 only delivered lower plateaus afterwards, as buyers shifted into hybrids, plug‑ins and BEVs. BEV sales are now close to overtaking the combined hybrid sales including PHEVs, as they first tried to do in 2022.

The old oil era is fading into the twilight, even as the solar‑powered sun finally rises over the showroom, tomorrow.

The long-run picture is no summer fling; combustion is in a decidedly not slow fade-out to the horizon.

By contrast, the electrified side of the ledger is all upward motion. Hybrids first inched into the mainstream, then PHEVs began to appear in meaningful numbers, and BEVs have recently shot to one in five sales in market share.

In the last few months, the BEV line on our charts has started to look like those classic S-curve graphs from EV-heavy Europe and China – and Singapore and Indonesia. This is what the steep part of the transition feels like: one record month after another, as more households and fleets decide they’ve had enough of fuel-price roulette.

Policy and geopolitics are both amplifying the trend.

The New Vehicle Efficiency Standard is only in its early stages, but it is already nudging manufacturers to push low- and zero-emission models harder and to clear older, higher-emission stock.

At the same time, the world’s fourth oil crisis has reminded Australians how fragile the “cheap fuel forever” story really is. Each time global tensions flare and servo price boards jump, a few more drivers decide they’re ready to unplug from oil altogether.

That’s why this moment matters.

For decades, petrol and diesel were the unquestioned kings of Australia’s car market. Now, almost quietly, they are becoming the legacy option. ICE-only is still more than half of new sales, but that share is shrinking, and the trend has momentum.

The old soundtrack of the market is fading under the hum and whirr of motors powered from the grid and, increasingly, from rooftop solar.

So yes, Grease is so last century – at least for Australia’s car fleet.

EVs are no longer a sideshow; they’re the main act, stepping into the spotlight as the headliners from the age of oil shuffle offstage.

For all the noise and scare campaigns, the data say, the future turns up slowly, then all at once, like the sun coming out after a long, cloudy morning.

And from what the latest VFACTS data shows, this is one number that’s only going to keep building, key change after key change, as electrified vehicles take over the chorus line.

The chart below shows monthly EV sales, unadjusted for seasonality (blue line), adjusted for seasonality (red line) and smoothed (my seasonal adjustment and smoothing).  Note logarithmic scale. 

 Sales have doubled over the last year; given that EVs now have the same sticker price as petrol/diesel cars, and are much cheaper to run, rapid growth is likely to continue.  As The Driven's article points out--we are in the steeply rising part of the S-curve.  See the lower chart, which is plotted on a linear scale.

Let's start with the cow

From a tweet thread by Tony Seba

Let me start with #insulin. In the 1970s, insulin was extracted from the pancreas of animals. In the 1980s, @Genentech, working with Eli Lilly (@LillyPad), developed insulin using a new technology that I call #PrecisionFermentation. It wasn’t animal insulin. It was human insulin.

The mainstream would say: “health care is slow, it can’t be disrupted.” Well, here’s the S-curve of #PrecisionFermentation human insulin. Human insulin disrupted animal insulin in about 13 years.









#PrecisionFermentation is a concept that I coined in my  @rethink_x report ‘Rethinking Food and Agriculture’ with @CatherineTubb in September 2019.

Think about beer #fermentation. You take a microorganism (a yeast) and feed it sugar, wheat, nitrogen.. and out comes beer.

The difference with #PrecisionFermentation: you genetically modify the yeast, so it can produce the ingredient you want. In this case, a #protein.

The #protein itself cannot be #GeneticallyModified. The yeast is, but there’s no genetic material in proteins. None. Anyone who tells you “#GMOprotein” is lying to you. Proteins have exactly no generic material.

How is #PrecisionFermentation going to disrupt #milk? — Milk is almost 90% water. 3.3% of milk is #proteins, and that is the commercially valuable part of #dairy. So, essentially, you disrupt 3% of that milk bottle and the entire dairy industry is gone.

The #PrecisionFermentation disruption of #dairy is a #B2B ingredient #disruption. No consumer behavior change is needed. All the industry needs to do is disrupt protein shakes, protein bars etc. and ⅓ of #dairy industry revenues go away.

This technology has existed for 40 years and they’ve gone through an incredible capability cost curve. #PrecisionFermentation dairy proteins are already in the market (cheese, chocolate, ice cream etc). This is not in the future. This is now.

To give you an idea of the cost curve of #PrecisionFermentation, between 2000 and 2020, the cost per kilo/pound went down by about 10,000x in 20 years from ~$1m to ~$100. That cost curve makes #MooresLaw (computing) look like a straight line into the future.




Over the next ten years, we’re going to experience the #disruption of #food and #agriculture. And I am going to focus on the cow.

Because the cow is — by far — the most inefficient food production technology on the planet.

Every #animal that we use for #livestock is going to be #disrupted. If the cost curve keeps improving the way it has over the last few decades, the cost-per-kilo of #PrecisionFermentation proteins will reach price parity with the cow by ~2025. That’s only three years away.

We know that in #food and #ingredients, #disruptions happen quickly and they happen as S-curves. Think about Pepsi and Coca Cola. In the 1980s, in the United States, they went from all cane sugar to all corn-based sugar in only four years.

This is not a “veggie revolution”.  What is happening today is the ‘Second Domestication of Plants and Animals’. We’re going from domesticating large organisms — cow sheep horse chicken — to microorganisms as a source of food.

#PrecisionFermentation proteins are 5-100x more resource-efficient than the cow. #PFproteins, casein and whey, can be made today using 100x less land than the cow. Think about it. 100x less land.

An Israeli company called @Remilk_Foods announced that they’re going to open the world’s largest facility to create cow-free milk in Denmark. They’re going to make the dairy equivalent of 50,000 cows on 750,000 sq-ft = a standard industrial-size facility. A fermentation farm.

Canada’s dairy industry has about 1 million cows (whole country). Take 20 @Remilk_Foods facilities, i.e. #PrecisionFermentation farms, and they could produce the equivalent of 1m cows. This would take 344 acres and disrupt the whole dairy industry in Canada. That’s it. Gone!

How quickly is this going to happen? — The CEO of @Remilk_Foods says they can produce dairy as cheap as animal protein by 2024, which is within the cost curve that I published 3 years ago. That’s only 3 years away, not 20 or 30 as the mainstream would suggest. We need to prepare.

#FermentationFarms are the new #FoodFarms where we are going to create our proteins. New business model innovations and possibilities will open up, in this case, for example: #FoodAsSoftware.

The #proteins we eat today come from just a few #plants and #animals that we domesticated thousands of years ago. 12 plants and 5 animals account for 75% of food. There are millions of plants & animals on Earth. There’s a huge possibility space out there. #PrecisionFermentation

With #FoodAsSoftware and #PrecisionFermentation, we can make proteins from any animal, from any plant, at speed and scale. The number of possible #proteins mathematically is infinite. I did the numbers. It is larger than the number of atoms in the universe.

And it’s not just about the cow. It’s not even about food. #PrecisionFermentation is disruptive across many sectors. It’s being used for #cosmetics. #Collagen, for instance. #HumanCollagen is being made with precision fermentation. Today!

#SweetProteins are going to be so disruptive! One of those proteins — #brazzein — is ~1000x sweeter than cane sugar. 1 pound of brazzein can sweeten the equivalent of 1000 pounds of sugar. Think about that! Without the #insulin reaction.

The magic #ingredient that makes  @ImpossibleFoods’ meat smell and taste like meat is #heme. Heme is only 2% of their burgers. Think about how  @generalelectric got disrupted with only 2% market penetration of solar, wind & batteries (#SWB). Same thing is happening with #meat.

And you may think: “will this fly in x” or “will they eat it in #Texas?” — Yes, they will. I was at the airport in #Houston, and sure enough, they’re selling #ImpossibleNachos & #ImpossibleQuesadillas. And the menu doesn’t even say it’s vegetarian.








This is not just the #disruption of the cow. This is the disruption of all food that comes from animals: pork, fish eggs etc. All of them can be, and will be, disrupted by #PrecisionFermentation and #FoodAsSoftware.

I expect three phases in the “#Disruption of #Food & #Agriculture”. What we’re undergoing now is the first phase, which is #ingredients, #B2B etc.

The second phase, which starts around 2024, is more complex proteins & meats that will be made with #PrecisionFermentation, and later, #CellularAgriculture.

I expect that the animal extraction industry, the livestock-as-food industry, will be gone by 2035. It’s pretty much over. I expect the dairy industry to be bankrupt by 2030 — that’s less than 10 years away — and the whole livestock industry by 2035.

That doesn’t mean you can’t eat a cow after 2035. You can, but it’s going to be a little bit like the horse and the car. You can still ride horses, but it’s not a mainstream form of transportation, and it’s very expensive. Eating cows will be just like owning a horse today


For those of you who think Tony Seba's views are way out there .... you're wrong. He has consistently called it right for at least a decade. He understands that new technologies grow *exponentially*, not linearly.  And given how high emissions from beef, mutton and other meats are, this could save the world.  Because if we're all eating vat meat and vat eggs and drinking vat milk, then all that land freed up by ending animal husbandry will be able to revert to forest.  And that will be the most powerful carbon capture and storage process we could have.

EVs/PHEVs near 20% of total car sales

In this post, I mentioned that I was busy improving my global car sales data.  I've taken a few steps down that road, but I still have a lot of work to do.  To start with, I used data from OICA and Best Selling Cars, but there were plenty of gaps, and I had to estimate some values.  I also added data for all countries where annual car sales exceeded 200,000 units on average for the last 4 years.  My total global car sales do not include countries with annual sales below 200K per annum.  I estimate that these total about 1.8 million cars (using OICA's data) or about 2.5% of global car sales.

My data cover the EU, EFTA, UK, USA, Russia, China, Japan, India, Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Argentina, Colombia, Australia, Indonesia, Israel, Malaysia, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam and South Africa.  I will be improving and deepening these time series over the next few months, allowing me to fill in some gaps, and possibly adding countries where car sales are 100K per annum.

The first chart shows global sales of EVs, smoothed and seasonally adjusted, quarterly, as a percentage of global car sales, smoothed.  Notice the classic S-curve shape.  In Q1/2014, EVs made up just 0.45% of global car sales.  They didn't pass 1% until Q1/2016.   They didn't pass 3% until Q3/2018.  Then came China's big cut to EV-buying incentives, as well as Covid.  2 years were lost as the line curved down.  But then the percentage exceeded 5% in Q4/2020, and it's not looked back since.  In Q2/2022, EVs made up 13% of global car sales, in Q2/2023, 19.4%.   This is a classic S-curve.  For a long time, no one really notices the rise, but then suddenly, once it passes 5% penetration, it explodes.  At this growth rate, EVs will make up 30% of car sales by mid-2024, 45% by mid 2025 and 70% by mid-2026.

OK, this is what the data look like using a log scale.  Notice that they form a straight line, except for the China-removing-incentives/Covid period.  The growth rate has slipped a bit in recent quarters---you can see that from the slightly flatter line---but part of that is ICEV supply chain difficulties improving (this is a relative chart).   

China is now a major exporter of cars, in fact the largest exporter of cars in the world.  One third of these are EVs, another ~10% PHEVs.  Sleepy legacy car manufacturers have only just noticed that their market will disappear within 5 years, and are now agitating for protection from imports, so this may flatten the curve, as China is by far the cheapest EV producer in the world today, and sells a lot into the European market, which subsidises EVs no matter where they are produced.  The US taxes EV imports and only subsidises locally-made EVs.

By the end of this year, petrol (gasoline) sales will be falling by 2% per annum, as a result of the expansion of EV/PHEV sales.  By 2026 they'll be falling by ~5% per annum; by 2028 by ~10% per annum.  This alone will be cutting total global emissions, ceteris paribus, by 2% a year (20% of global CO2 emissions come from land transport).  Expect a last convulsive gasp of special pleading from oil companies and legacy carmakers as that happens.  But it's hard to see how this revolution will be stopped.  Battery costs keep on falling, and the pressure to cut emissions keeps on rising. 

Frankly, it will be a pleasure not to have to kowtow to bloodstained petro states any more, and to breathe clean air.

EVs 7.3% of the European car market

From The Driven:

European electric car registration figures for July show the EV category (comprising hybrid, plug-in hybrid and full-battery EVs reaching a new high of 7.4% [actually 7.3%] of all new vehicle registrations.

The total EV segment nearly broke the 100,000 mark with 96,600 units in an overall July market of 1,325,600 units. (For comparison, the Australian market is around 1,100,000 units a year).

Whilst the overall vehicle market saw a small rise over July 2018 (+1.2%), the year-to-date figure is still down (-2.5%) as compared to last year.

Much of the BEV registrations increase was due to Tesla’s Model 3 – but it was not the top selling BEV in July. That honour went to the Renault Zoe: up 103% and lifting the Zoe to top selling BEV model.

I remember a lecturer at U.C.T.'s (the University of Cape Town) business school showing us examples of where a new technology starts out with a tiny market share and start to rise, with the rise accelerating each year.  When it crosses 5%, the eventual rise to 100% is certain, in the familiar technology S-curve adoption pattern.   Two examples quoted (as I remember) were the replacement of the great clippers by steamships and the replacement of black and white TV by colour.

 EV/PHEV/HEV vehicle sales have passed the 5% mark in Europe.  They will move inexorably to 100%, and the S-curve may be much steeper than most commentators and analysts now expect.

Half the world's electricity to come from solar by 2035

 I've talked about the S-curve before.  At first, the new technology has a tiny market share.  But let's say it grows by 15% a year.  The market share will rise four-fold in 10 years, and 66-fold in 30.   At a 20% growth rate, market share will rise 6-fold in 10 years, 237-fold in 30 years.   Naturally, as market share gets closer to 100%, growth rates slow.  Hence the S-curve.

From The Electric Viking:

After COP30, what now?

Image by Sujalparab via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)

 From East Anglia Bylines

Author Kurt Vonnegut described this as one of his shapes of story. Of Cinderella, the most popular story ever and translated into 700 languages, he said: “People love that story.”

It’s Rags to Riches. We all recognise this shape of story in our own hopes.

Now we’re all in a climate and nature hole.

The physics of heat are relentless. Rising seas, more moisture in the air, droughts then heavier rain, stronger wind and storm, melting glaciers. The cause is simple. Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases capturing heat in the atmosphere. The source is clear too. It’s fossil fuels. Coal, oil, gas.

This much is known. The hole is hot and the future dark.

So it seems.

The 30^th COP (United Nations Conference of the Parties) has just concluded in the Amazonian city of Belém. COPs are good. They bring people together. They bring along activists and thinkers and academics and citizens’ groups. People meet, talk, share. Little advances happen.

But there are two problems

Groups of countries can easily be blockers. Key text disappears from the declaration as everyone tries to get to at least some kind of agreement. In the COP30 agreement, there’s no mention of fossil fuels. Blockers won.

Second, even when a declaration emerges at a time of common purpose and gentle politics, such as in Paris 2015, it still needs to be implemented.

We all hoped the Paris agreement would hold global temperatures to below +1.5°C (above pre-industrial baseline). But in ten years, carbon dioxide levels have leapt, and temperatures followed. The breaching of +1.5°C is inevitable.

And yet, COPs are wondrous

There’s common purpose. They point at the deniers and the selfish. They provide an energy to social and political change. They’re talked about.

For we have much to share. Remarkably, things are happening with renewables. They are reaching a scale where costs are falling and businesses, households and whole communities start to look daft in not adopting.

A quiz question. What links these seven countries: Iceland, Norway, Albania, Bhutan, Costa Rica, Paraguay and Uruguay?

It is this: their electricity supply systems are 100% renewable. A mix of wind, solar, hydro and geothermal has saved them huge sums of money by not having to purchase fossil fuels. These countries did this not by accident, but by intent. Governments chose.

Another question. When you spend capital on renewable energy infrastructure, what are the running costs of producing energy?

This is easy. It’s virtually zero. You get electricity for nothing, for 25, 30, 35 years. And there are no clean up costs. No air pollution to damage health. No greenhouse gases.

Countries are saving money; so are households

Typically, adoption follows an S-curve. For a long period, slow growth, then the exponential steep part, then a flattening. But after 80% of adoption, you don’t need to worry about the last bit. We know that systems then tip.

Life on the S-curve is something staggering, as Bill McKibben writes in his new book, “Here Comes the Sun.”

In 2004, it took the world one year to install 1GW (gigawatt) of solar generation. In 2016, it took one week; in 2023 one day; in 2024 just 18 hours.

This is happening fast.

Here’s the example of electric vehicles (EVs), as Tim Lenton shows in “Positive Tipping Points.”

In 2010, there were 3,000 EVs in the whole world. By 2022, there were 10 million; in 2024, 40 million. Doubling times for adoption are one and a half years. In four more doubling periods, a total of six years, there will be 640 million EVs worldwide. One more doubling period, and all fossil fuel vehicles will be gone. They’ll be stranded assets, along with ships burning oil to move oil, and petrol stations and domestic tankers.

In China, EV car companies are now offering 600,000-mile warranties, so confident are they in the technology. It’s going to take a lot of years for most people to drive that far.

A small change in policy can help

All countries across Europe are suffering higher gas prices since the invasion of Ukraine. Germany has just deregulated the installation of solar PV on balconies and roofs of flats. 1.5 million people have acted. Solar panels are suddenly everywhere. Their energy costs have fallen. The country is safer too. Now the same in Italy, Poland and Spain.

Solar panels are, after all, now cheaper than garden fences.

In Pakistan, national electricity demand fell by 10% last year. Households, farmers, businesses are buying cheap solar panels from China, installing them on every roof and spare patch of land. In six months last year, people installed 30% of national grid power. Diesel sales fell across the country by 30%.

The UK is good-bad

The first country to have a legally binding Climate Change Act. The first country deliberately to remove coal from all electricity generation: the last plant closed in late 2024. Yet oddly hesitating over renewables.

Let’s put this in perspective. Sizewell is the UK’s next nuclear power station. It’s going to take a long time to build; it’ll be late (they all are); we’ll pay more (we always do). And at the end, it’ll produce a meagre 3GW per year.

Don’t laugh. This is true. In Wyoming this year, legislators filed a Bill entitled “Make Carbon Dioxide Great Again.”

Yet in the Dakotas, 85% of electricity is now from renewable sources. Tiny Vermont is saving $2 billion per year by not paying to import fossil fuels into the state. Some get it, some don’t.

So what’s our story now?

We’re still in a hole.

Anyone born before 1990 has lived through the good times, and then the fast slide into the hole. 1990 was the last safe year, when carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was at 350 ppm (parts per million). Today it’s 427, and rising. Very unsafe.

Anyone born after 2010 has only seen the bottom of the hole. They’re going to be the first generation to experience the single direction of upward movement. It’s going to feel very good indeed.

COPs are important. They stop forgetfulness.

COPS are flawed. Agreements are hard, and blockers love to do their thing.

Here we are then. In a decade when systems will flip, costs and pollution fall. When countries will find that green growth brings new jobs, better health and lower energy costs.

As Nick Stern recently wrote, “When some step back, others step forward.” The arc of history is being revealed.

We do still have choices.

Like Greta Thunberg, I think the COP process is now useless, so I disagree with the conclusions of this article.  All the same, there is lots of good news in it, so I posted it.

IEA's useless renewables forecasts

The IEA (International Energy Agency) was founded in 1974 after the first oil crisis, and its initial remit was to help Western economies respond to oil shortages.  Whether its initial focus on fossil fuels is an explanation of its incredibly poor forecasts for the take-up of wind and solar, I don't know.  Unfortunately its forecasts have real world consequences.  Its continuous underestimation of just how much renewables would grow meant that it made the task of de-carbonising the world economy seem futile and encouraged policy makers to place their faith in nuclear.  The IEA has been spectacularly wrong, again and again.  The graphs below, from BNEF, show just how much. 

New technologies tend to exponential ("S"-curve) take-up rates.  And in my opinion we are far from the upper flex point in the "S" curve with both these technologies.  Costs will continue to decline, leading to ongoing acceleration in demand, as renewables get steadily cheaper than their competitors.

So I think the IEA's forecasts will continue to be wrong.  Which is why I'm more inclined to believe BNEF's forecasts (last chart below) than the IEA's.

China's oil demand to fall

In this piece, I talked about how it had taken 15 years for plug-ins to reach 10 million total sales in China, and about how this year, another 10 million would be sold.   The S-Curve in action. The chart below, from Our World in Data, shows the percentage of plug-in (EV and PHEV) cars on the road in China, but it only goes to the end of 2023.  Let's assume, conservatively, that the percentage rose again by 3% during 2024.  This means that plug-in share of the car fleet reached 11% at the end of 2024, and will rise to 22% at the end of 2025.  That means that the demand for oil in China to fuel cars will fall by 11% this year.  That is not the only end-use of China's local and imported oil, because oil is used in petro-chemical manufacture, for heavy-duty vehicles, and for shipping, domestic and foreign.   I don't know how much these are, but at the very least, Chinese oil demand has probably stopped growing.  China contributed much of the growth in global oil demand in the previous 20 years.

This is the impact just in China.  But plug-ins outside the USA have reached price parity with ICEVs.  As they fall in price, their sales will grow faster and faster.   For the world as a whole, plug-ins reached 3% of the car fleet at the end of 2023, so perhaps it reached 4 or 4.5% by end 2024.  It's an S-curve, and will continue to rise exponentially.   

Global oil demand has peaked.  Initially, the decline will be small--1% a year for vehicle fuel, which is about 40% of total oil demand -- but it is likely to accelerate every year thereafter.

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]

Norway nears 50% EV market share

4 years ago, plug-ins (PHEVs as well EVs) made up just 15% of Norway's new car market.  This percentage rose steadily.  In September, the ratio of plug-ins to all car sales reached 48%.

Now, there's been no change in the incentives Norway provides to buyers of plug-ins since 2014.  So what's changed?  Awareness, the spread of chargers, familiarity--and the reduction of incentives to buy EVs starting in January 2018.  Even if recent sales have been brought forward to take advantage of current generous incentives, it nevertheless still goes to show just how rapidly EVs and PHEVs will rise once the initial barriers of unfamiliarity and strangeness wear off.

Do not be misled by the low ratio of plug-ins to ICEVs (1.8%) in world car and light truck sales of today.  In 2012, plug-ins in Norway were just 3% of total car sales.  Now they make up nearly 50%.  Yes, the incentives in Norway to buy plug-ins are substantial.  But so was the cost differential between EVs/PHEVs and ICEVs when Norway started with its program to de-carbonise transport. And that cost differential is narrowing: within 5 or 6 years, EVs will cost pretty much the same as ICEVs.

There is every chance that world EV sales could rise very fast too.  Not as rapidly, because Norway is a single jurisdiction, and it's a small country in population terms, so new technologies and new ideas spread fast.  But California, already at 5%, could move very quickly (5 years) to 50%, even if the rest of the USA lags.  Sweden is already at 5%.  Other European countries are close to the flex point of the S curve, and plan future bans on ICEV sales.  And as always, China, 1/3rd of world auto output and sales, is determined to replace ICEVs with plug-ins to reduce pollution, and simultaneously grab for itself an even bigger chunk of the global car market.

Ironically, in Norway itself, the growth rate is likely to slow, in a typical "S"-curve way, as incentives to buy EVs are gradually reduced, starting next year.


[Read more here and here and here]

Source