[true_sedan]

I believe this is one of those half baked articles printed in news-media that create unnecessary rumours and panic among consumers. The 2027 ban if implemented:
1) Will be a ban on selling not on using a diesel car.
2) Will be a ban on providing FC for diesel cars older than 15 years.

My advice to readers is to stop panicking. Buy the diesel car you love because the 2027 ban is just a recommendation. They go through an extensive process of committee reviews and meetings before a plan of action is put in place. And my best guess is that they might be implemented by 2030 and even then the diesel cars will be allowed to run the duration of their fitness certificate ranging anywhere from 10-15 years.

[atluri_rkc]

I noticed that these recommendations usually appear at the beginning of every FY - probably the departments need to submit such headline capturing suggestions to secure funding.

Above optics aside, such probable ban on a particular fuel will have to be accompanied by adjacent policies such as vehicle scrappage, electricity distribution and stringent measures (also read implementable) to avoid a particular segment of vehicles (M&HCV) to continue using diesel due to limitations of EV technology and charging infrastructure. With Covid and the ongoing economic crisis, such major policy rollouts will get deferred by atleast 5 years.

Until the time I see all 2W, and delivery guys (using tempos) move to complete EVs or until the time I see GOI stopping registration of such vehicles in metros, I wouldn't be really worried about diesel SUVs. We really don't have many options for Diesel hatchbacks and sedans these days.

Coupled with all the above, I had the exact ambiguity while selecting between a Diesel Scorpio N and a Gasoline XUV7OO. But having worked in the auto industry for a while on powertrains (most impacted by such policy changes), I know there's a huge gap between announcing a plan and implementing the plan.

Till that time, happy and safe miles for all the diesel fans out there.

[ACM]

1) Very poorly thoughtout suggestions.
2) Can at the most only apply to New vehicles produced after 2027.
3) FE of Heavy Petrol SUV say 6 vs say 12 with Diesel. Is petrol affordable then? Is Diesel more poluting considering this in BS6 trim?
4) Just like the Musical Organs Horn Idea. Half brained.
5) What about the Torque to move heavy vehicles?
6) So If I have a house in a village say 100 kms from Mumbai, can I register my Diesel SUV there and drive around Bombay?
7) Any one check Mahindra and TATA stocks? Didn't notice a dip.
8) So this is to enable Toyota to, itself and via Suzuki sell more Petrol Hybrids at exorbidant prices to us.
9) How will we procure the Diesel for Vintage and Classic Mercs? Ohh! ya trucks will still ply and have 6 plus wheels.
10) Why do half measures. Diesel at least helps the economy by being much more fuel effecient than Petrol. If all vehicles were Petrol the Fuel Import bill would rise substantially.

[shubhsd]

Well my 2 Cents

1. Diesels are going to be BANNED. The writing is on the wall. We cannot choose to ignore it. The engines pollute way TOO much to be allowed in an urban environment. Worldwide there will be a ban on Diesel cars. Arguments like it is not practical etc. are the same arguments that people made when shifting from horses to cars.

2. The argument that EVs are more polluting compared to petrol cars are true. But one point that cannot be refuted is - That EVs SHIFT the pollution from densely populated urban centers to power plants which are away from residential areas. Further since all the pollution occurs at one point it is easier to deploy clean technology to reduce emissions. With the increase of renewable energies this becomes a no brainer.

3. EVs are very nascent currently. They will improve drastically in the next 5 years. So much so that it would be enough not just for our daily commute but also for our long drives. Maybe hybrid drives will emerge as a good alternative.

4. There was an argument about requiring more crude if production of diesel is stopped. Crude is an incredibly flexible chemical. The process can be tweaked to produce other distillates.

4. Other arguments like increase share of Rail, Renewable Energy etc. are already made.

The objective is to reduce pollution in urban areas. Our children are growing up in an atmosphere which cannot sustain a healthy body. Further green house gases are frankly, killing our planet. The number of days with extreme weather will go up drastically in Indian Cities in the next 5 years. Once the wet bulb temperature hits 35-40 deg C, our bodies cannot naturally cool themselves. Leading to devastation and death. Air pollution needs to go!

[PazhazziRaja]

Originally Posted by qaqa

Conceptually, I think we need to move away from regulations focusing on a particular technology or fuel, and instead set out key parameters which vehicles need to meet - CO2, NOx etc, all based on RDE methodology. There should be a sliding scale of disincentives based on the overall emissions of a vehicle. After all, no single ICE technology is clearly superior to another in emissions - the higher particulate emissions of diesels are paired with better CO2 /km numbers for instance.

I couldn't agree more. In my opinion, the governments role isn't to define what technology should come up but to lay the boundaries which any technology should meet and to derive & implement robust test cases for ensuring these boundaries are met. Coming up with solutions to meet that boundaries should be the job of the OEMs. And any solution, that meets this boundaries should be saleable. The numbers then would be purely decided customer preferences based on financials and performance different solutions offers.
Another point, we have been constantly taking over the regulations from Europe with minimal adjustments for India. The authorities have all the data they require to draft a strong regulation for emission pollutants for India. Can they once do it?

[d.j]

Everything has to coexist in socio-economic structure like ours, this won’t pass not for the year 27 at least. The diesel ecosystem is deep knitted, and we are not a country of few millions alike the ones those who have got straight sighted EV plans.

It's unwise on part of any committee to give such recommendations, this surely hasn't been thought to the last details, something which touches millions of people cannot be as blunt as what they seem to have thought around, think about the billions flowing in various directions, car companies, fleet operators, goods transporters, investors, consumer etc etc.

Stop gap plans do not objectively resolve the problems in long run, the plan or recommendation should be more towards on how to make EV’s (if they really do good to us) more desirable to the manufacturer and the consumer.

DJ

[wooka]

Trying to wrap my head around:

1. Diesel efficiency in towing (trucks, heavy vehicles?). I'll have fits the day I see electric JCBs.

2. Lithium battery fires are increasing since more EVs = more fires with India being a cost-sensitive country, with extreme temps and unique challenges WRT power density and the likes. Look, I park outside lots with EVs parked in them. Call me nuts, I simply don't trust QC processes here.

3. What is green power generation? Windmills, solar panels, coal plants all have issues. Where are we - are we a power excess nation? Are we decommissioning old power lines?

4. Banning diesel BS 6.2 vehicles when they're cleaner than BS4 petrol cars and 2 stroke engines?

5. Won't stop stubble burning which is a genocide in the making, but the car lobbyists are having a field day meanwhile.

6. We're in the middle of a financial crisis but we must fork with our over-taxed incomes to buy over-taxed vehicles with increasing power rates.

7. The vehicles I drive will return 1/2 the mileage on petrol Thar and Scorpio - good luck going petrol. Consuming 2x the fuel is going to make a lot of sense.

8. Have we yet got our CNG infra in place 20 years hence? The less said the better about these ambitious schemes.

9. Welcome range anxiety with petrol- how many Ferry cans to Nubra valley? Let's not forget petrol in Jerry cans = dangerous. Diesel doesn't ignite as easily.

10. More petrol vehicle fires since we know the math here.

11. Current GDI engines have valve fouling issues since this is just how petrol engines with direct ignition work. Correct me if I am wrong.

12. Why pay a ridiculous amount of money for BS 6.2 transformations/ vehicles only to

13. Why not mandate biofuel mixing in diesel and call it a day? What IOCL is doing with their 'green' diesel is a great move.

14. Consuming more petrol won't make petrol any more affordable now, will it?

15. Is our dependence on China for EV parts waning? Or increasing? Are we not in eternal conflict with them/ourselves?

When our transport ministers speak of using sitar and harmonium sounds for ambulances in a country that could care less if someone is dying in traffic, this out-of-touch-with-reality attitude DOES make me think I should just get away from all of this!

[kaulsays]

So, here's the URL to read the article behind paywall: https://*******.com/3u532rbe

The header of the article looks more of a click-bait.

According to the committee: "The committee recommended setting up a group of ministers from the ministries supervising energy supply, such as petroleum, coal, power and renewables, and a larger committee of secretaries that would also include members from the ministries overseeing energy consumption."

In a nutshell, they have just got together and thought let's do something "Toofani" (pun intended) and came up with this idea.

However, further in the article, they themselves acknowledge that this is difficult to achieve.

Think of it as more of an opinionated white paper than anything concrete

[Adsc0230]

Hello,

Having read through this thread and the various new articles, I understand it is too early to determine whether the panel recommendation is for banning new sales or for banning existing diesel vehicles as well by 2027. I also read an article today stating the recommendations are not final, however such articles definitely create unnecessary panic as they leave things for guess work and lead to ambiguity.

I don’t mind buying a new diesel private 4-wheeler today (given 2027 is 4-5 years away) but what I would like to know is banning of diesel vehicles (if that’s inevitable - no matter whether it happens in 2027 or by 2030 or slightly later), what does that do to car’s depreciation and to resale value?

For example, if I am buying a luxury diesel car and spending 50-60 lacs today, what resale value can I expect after let’s say 8-10 years from now if diesel ban comes into effect? If no diesel cars would be allowed to be sold, does that mean even the used diesel car market would be affected?

I am new to the forum, and would appreciate if someone could guide me please.

Cheers!

[furyrider]

Originally Posted by shubhsd

1. Diesels are going to be BANNED. The writing is on the wall.

Diesels will eventually be banned world over. A sudden ban might work for western countries, but for a nation like ours, the diesel connection is just too deep to cut ties with. If Diesel does get banned by 2027 by the government or NGT taking the committees report into consideration, commodity prices will shoot through the roof? Commercial EVs are still pricey and someone has to pay for the new vehicles. Guess who will bear the brunt.

But one point that cannot be refuted is - That EVs SHIFT the pollution from densely populated urban centers to power plants which are away from residential areas.

Okay, so EVs are equally polluting as ICEs, it's just that they pollute somewhere else. I think the emphasis should be on pollution. What difference does it make if the pollution happens in the city or somewhere else? The planet is still getting polluted. It's the same logic as stubble burning. Some farmer burns stubble in his field and Delhi has to suffer every year. But nope, we should blame ICEs instead.

EVs are very nascent currently. They will improve drastically in the next 5 years.

Agreed. The key word here is nascent. The most polluting aspect of EVs is the battery. As things stand today, manufacturing or safely disposing them off/recycling is not exactly green. It's not like we have an unlimited supply of the minerals that go into the batteries either. I won't go into the arguments about the fuel used by the power plant. That has already been discussed in detail elsewhere.

Maybe hybrid drives will emerge as a good alternative.

This is one aspect that should be looked into at least as a stop gap. Hybrids are fuel efficient in areas where the regular ICEs suffer - city traffic; and have smaller batteries compared to EVs. Less fuel burned = less pollution.

Air pollution needs to go!

Can't deny that. However, instead of demonizing ICEs, especially Diesels, the focus should also be on areas where air pollution can be minimized first. For example, whenever I pass a dumping yard, I cannot help but notice smoke emanating from burning of trash. Why can't the government take measures towards proper recycling? After all, we pay swach bharath cess, right?

I am all in favor of stricter pollution norms and all. But at what cost? Collecting millions in taxes for 15 years in advance from innocent people who purchased a vehicle that is legally on sale in the country and then leaving them at the mercy of committees such as the one which authored this report or NGT's pointless decision on banning vehicles in Delhi does not exactly instill confidence on any government. If a decision impacts millions of people, the implications should be considered, which unfortunately seems to be wishful thinking looking at the way things are headed.

[mtk]

Pretty sure this ban will NOT be implemented from 2027 for 4-wheelers. Even if they do, they'll probably BAN only the new sales. That itself is a stretch.

What this news might do is increase the fear in the mind of customers while deciding between Petrol/Diesel. I won't be surprised if the second-hand rates of Diesels start to diminish even more now. Probably a good time to buy a used Diesel car for a competitive price.

[Mustang Sammy]

Quixotic recommendation, to put it mildly.
In their current BS6 avatar, don't diesels emit a LOT less pollution than before?
And what about the higher efficiency of diesel engines especially for heavier vehicles: Doesn't that affect the total amount of pollutants spewed into the air over the lifetime of the vehicle?

IMHO India has laws a-plenty. The ENFORCEMENT of those laws is where we fall woefully short. The law-abiding public pays the price, while Trucks and buses with badly maintained engines belch copious amounts of black smoke with zero consequences.

[mayukh42]

Originally Posted by Safari Persona

If you need to replace the battery sooner than that, that's a different calculation altogether and it will look much worse for the EV car

There is also the issue of battery recycling, which has only recently been taken up.

https://www.science.org/content/arti...dead-batteries

Originally Posted by Altocumulus

When it comes to PM2.5 particles, DPF traps 95-99% of it.

It is really sad that the industry is moving towards "the next big thing" that can bring more profits, rather than utilising years of research that will now go to waste. Stage 6 could not get enough traction to prove itself.

[Wason4699]

The sole problem of our country lies with the policy makers, some sort of Jokers running the show. The idea with their policy formulation is to create Havoc and restlessness among citizens of the country while they sit back and enjoy in their AC cabins.

Banned Diesel vehicles will cause turmoil in public transport and Carriage prices and Fares which will increase the prices of day to day commodities by many fold. The mango people will be there to Suffer. And you never know the masterstroke like Lockdown in Covid this also might be implemented in haste by our worthy policy makers.

[shubhsd]

I think the ban will be limited to private vehicles and only extended to commercial vehicles when there are good alternatives. Having diesel private vehicles or cabs or buses make very little sense from an environmental perspective. Commercial Diesel Vehicles can be regulated or restricted to outside of city limits. Thus improving the city air quality.

Originally Posted by furyrider

What difference does it make if the pollution happens in the city or somewhere else? The planet is still getting polluted.

There is a BIG difference.
1. Instead of having millions of polluting engines close to residences we have single source (away from cities) to manage. This makes applying clean tech to the emissions much easier. We can apply tech which may not be possible in a car, example electrostatic precipitators. Or for that matter any new emerging tech is that much simpler to roll out and implement. Just upgrade the power plant.
2. Also, by moving the pollution away from cities we improve the ambient air quality where people are living and breathing. Improve overall public health.
3. As the share of renewables increase the pollution decreases. We don't have vehicular pollution to deal with in addition to pollution from Industries and Power Plants.

Originally Posted by furyrider

As things stand today, manufacturing or safely disposing them off/recycling is not exactly green. It's not like we have an unlimited supply of the minerals that go into the batteries either.

Agreed. Hope is that things will improve as more and more money is channeled into this tech.

Originally Posted by furyrider

For example, whenever I pass a dumping yard, I cannot help but notice smoke emanating from burning of trash. Why can't the government take measures towards proper recycling?

Agreed, all measures should be taken to reduce air pollution. And moving away from Diesel as a fuel is also one of them.

Originally Posted by furyrider

If a decision impacts millions of people, the implications should be considered, which unfortunately seems to be wishful thinking looking at the way things are headed.

You are right, the common man's hard earned money is at stake here. However I believe that it is a sacrifice all of us needs to make in order to have a better world for our children (I understand this is lofty and idealistic). But unfortunately this is how it has to be. The common man is a soldier who bears the economic brunt.