If a technology is truly superior, it doesn’t need subsidies to be adopted.
Believe me, I want there to be a fuel that surpasses oil, but the newcomers are weak in comparison. A real innovation would spread like wildfire on its own. It wouldn’t need laws and eco quotas to push it forward.
The internal combustion engine proved its worth:
• High energy density fuel (≈ 45 MJ/kg vs ≈ 0.9 MJ/kg for today’s lithium batteries)
• Fast refueling in minutes, not hours
• Long range and durability
• Simple global infrastructure that scaled quickly
On those merits, the combustion engine spread worldwide, fueling industry, powering empires, and building nations. Oil could be drilled, refined, and distributed in months.
Electric vehicles, despite massive subsidies, have yet to show anything close to that impact. They rely on heavy batteries with long charging times, shorter ranges, and most importantly a dependence on scarce minerals with bottlenecked supply chains.
EVs will only be for the privileged few, while ICE transports the world.
Requirements of Global Car Ownership:
ICE cars: Feasible. Oil reserves and infrastructure can support billions of vehicles, with fast refueling and proven scalability. already Approx. ICE vehicles in use worldwide (2025): ~1.58 billion.
EV cars: Not feasible. Lithium could cover ~3B cars, cobalt only ~600M, but charging grids and mining can’t scale to 8B people.
True Fuel Successor to ICE
• Energy density: ≥ 46 MJ/kg and 34 MJ/L at ambient conditions
• Refuel: ≤ 3 min for ≥ 800 km range
• Efficiency: ≥ 50% well-to-wheel (vs 20–40% ICE)
• Cost: cheaper per km than ICE without subsidies
• Materials: abundant, non-toxic, no single-country choke points
• Infrastructure: compatible with or cheaper than today’s fuel networks
• Emissions: near-zero local pollutants, ≥ 50% lower life-cycle CO₂
• Safety: stable at ambient temperature and pressure, low flammability risk
• Durability: 500,000 km+ lifespan, long fuel shelf life
• Performance: high power, towing capable, minimal range loss in extreme temps
Synthetic hydrocarbons (E-fuels): Same energy density as gasoline, drop-in ready for current engines, net-zero if made with clean energy.
• Solid-state batteries: Safer, more durable, 2–4× the energy density of today’s lithium-ion, closer to commercialization.
• Lithium-air batteries: Theoretical density near gasoline, could give 1,000 km range, but still experimental and unstable.
• Metal fuels (aluminum/iron powder): High energy density, abundant, recyclable, safe to store and transport; needs new engine tech.