this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2026
-92 points (8.2% liked)

Technology

85791 readers
4205 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

While EVs dominate efficiency, internal combustion engines (ICE) remain unmatched in energy density, thermal mastery, and mechanical artistry. Discover why ICE still outperforms EVs where physics matters most.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] finalarbiter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Don't dismiss this as another nostalgic rant from a gearhead refusing to embrace the 'future'. It’s just physics.

Too bad that's exactly what this article is, with garbage takes and poor justification under a thin veil of 'science' that they don't actually understand.

No shit internal combustion engines are more 'advanced', we've been working on improving ICE for over a century. In contrast, EV powertrains are a nascent technology (ignoring the very early electric vehicles we saw in the beginning days of automobiles which are not really comparable to modern EV tech) that have already improved rapidly over the last decade.

They're also correct that gasoline is more energy dense than current battery technology, but this again discounts that the field is rapidly expanding the energy density, storage efficiency, and charging speed of batteries, as well as the fact that the relatively unoptimised EV powertrains are already significantly more efficient.

The author also confuses complexity as a justification for retaining ICE. The relative simplicity of EV powertrains is a good thing, it doesn't need to operate under the intense mechanical and thermal conditions of a combustion engine. I really don't understand how the author can look at the insane complexity of ICE technology and see that as a win. The simplicity of EVs also means that the maintenance burden is significantly lower on consumers, the supply chain for production and operation is shorter and more resilient, and in terms of carbon emissions, we get a one-time fee during production (that are largely recyclable too) instead of ongoing emissions over the course of each vehicle's lifetime.

What a bunch of copium.