Driving forces could be interpreted as wrong, but they’re probably correct about orders and outcome:
Step 1 is policy/goal for California [1].
Step 2 decades old policy in Europe (and recently canceled in Canada?), as vehicle carbon tax. There’s also EV tax credits of course, which are practically identical, from the purchasing perspective - “If I buy ice, I pay this much more in taxes”.
Driving forces could be interpreted as wrong, but they’re probably correct about orders and outcome:
Step 1 is policy/goal for California [1].
Step 2 decades old policy in Europe (and recently canceled in Canada?), as vehicle carbon tax. There’s also EV tax credits of course, which are practically identical, from the purchasing perspective - “If I buy ice, I pay this much more in taxes”.
Step 3 is a potential market driven eventuality.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/california-sets-goal-...
2035 in the EU, if nothing changes, will be the end of sale of new ICE passenger cars. It's not that far.
(Technically they will not be banned, there will only be a huge fine for the manufacturer for each one sold.)
Sure, but this has precisely nothing to do with steer by wire.
What do you mean? Many places are already banning or heavily taxing new ICE vehicles.