Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Electric Vehicles

Reports of the Death of EVs Are Greatly Exaggerated

Uptake of electric vehicles may have slowed, but internal combustion is still fading.

•
Clean and dirty energy in 2035.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

We know it’s going to be a tough year for fully electric vehicles. 2026 brings with it the absence of tax credits that helped to make EVs cost-competitive with combustion cars and cheap oil to demotivate drivers from switching away from gasoline, factors that have cast a gloom over the upcoming year. And according to one of the world’s biggest automotive suppliers, it’s going to be a tough decade.

Bosch, the German industrial colossus, makes components for both gas and electric cars while also selling refrigerators, power drills, and parts for just about every kind of machine in your life. At CES in Las Vegas earlier this month, the company delivered an ugly prognosis for pure EVs. It predicts that by 2035, 70% of the vehicles sold in the United States still will come with a combustion engine of some kind.

A lot of wiggle room lives within that statement. It did not say, for instance, that seven of 10 cars sold in 2035 will still be gas-guzzling SUVs and trucks that barely top 20 miles per gallon on the highway. Instead, the wording allows for a variety of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and extended-range electric vehicles (EREVs) — the kind whose on-board gas engine is there to recharge the battery that sends power to the electric motors — that are more climate-friendly than traditional internal combustion engines.

Even so, the Bosch declaration turns the electric optimism of the recent past on its head. Not so long ago, 2035 was the date by which both the state of California and the European Union were to ban the sale of gas cars entirely. Both places are reconsidering their stances as the 2030s approach and EVs face political and economic headwinds. Automakers are adjusting to the new reality in turn by scaling back their electrification goals. For America’s enormous market of full-size pickups, for example, EREVs have become the new hot topic as expensive, fully electric trucks failed to make a big dent.

Thus the negative forecast. But there’s reason to believe the future won’t, in fact, be quite so combustion-dependent, and that the reality of 2035 lies somewhere between Bosch’s prediction and the broken dream of complete electrification.

Here in California, that 30/70 split is the stuff of the present, not the future. The state hit a record in the third quarter of 2025, with 29.1% of new car sales being zero emissions vehicles. That number carries some caveats, most importantly that it coincided with America’s rush to buy EVs before the expiration of the federal tax credit, which pushed EV sales to new heights. (EV sales sank, predictably, at the end of last year once the same slate of vehicles effectively cost $7,500 more overnight.)

Still, as America’s biggest automotive market, the car-mad Golden State traditionally has tremendous pull in deciding the direction of the industry in America — one big reason the Trump administration has launched legal attacks against its pollution rules that push carmakers toward more efficient vehicles. And even with the sour narrative for EVs in 2026, the electric market here isn’t going anywhere, not when gas prices remain among the nation’s highest and the pervasiveness of electric cars has long since pushed EVs past the unfamiliarity barrier that makes people distrust a new technology. Thriving markets abroad and in pockets of the U.S. mean the legacy automakers won’t turn away from EVs entirely, not even as Detroit giants GM and Ford anticipate billions of dollars of losses from resetting their business plans to keep up with Trump’s fossil fuels love affair.

In addition, the conditions of today aren’t the conditions of tomorrow (and I’m not just talking about the possibility that a different regime will come to power in America sometime in the next decade). The death of the EV tax credit felt like a huge blow given that electric cars have long struggled with affordability. As we’ve noted, however, this year marks the arrival of many new models in the $30,000 range that come close to competing directly with gas. If battery production costs continue to shrink, dragging EV prices down with them, then those trends will push back against the economic factors that are pushing down EV adoption.

A lot can change with charging in a decade, too. When I bought my Tesla Model 3 seven years ago, it was really the only choice — Tesla’s already-decent Supercharger network made it possible to own its EV as our only vehicle, something I couldn’t say for anything else on the market. In 2026, electric vehicles by a variety of manufacturers come with Tesla’s NACS plug as their native standard, giving them access to a host of Tesla charging stations. Charging depots of all kinds continue to pop up even with the Trump administration's attempts to kill funding for them. The potential anxiety for new drivers continues to drop, and will be even lower by 2035 as the charger map fills in.

Still, there’s little doubt that some drivers who would have or could have chosen a fully electric vehicle in the coming years will settle for some kind of hybrid instead, especially if they perceive the cost math to be easier on the combustion side. That still counts for something, especially if that hybrid purchase displaces a pure fossil fuel-burner. But the advantages of driving electric will become more familiar to millions of Americans as more of their friends and neighbors opt in.

As for EV drivers themselves, more than 90% say they’ll never return to gas-burning cars after experiencing the EV life. Add it all up and there’s every reason to believe that, while EVs won’t take over America by 2035, they won’t quit at a 30% share, either.

Green

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe to access Heatmap's exclusive climate and energy polling, award-winning journalism, and subscriber-only events. Save $57 on an annual subscription, just $156 $99/year.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Daily Briefing

Think Congress Is Slow? Meet the Power Sector.

BAAJA would likely help speed up the U.S. transmission buildout, but there’s a chance we’re undercounting the benefits.

Power lines.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

This is Heatmap Daily, a weekday digest written by our executive editor. Subscribe here.

As you may have seen, my colleague Emily Pontecorvo and I got the first look at the Rhodium Group’s analysis of what the bipartisan permitting bill will do to emissions.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
AM Briefing

Neutral, at Worst

On Chinese hydrogen, Fermi upheaval, and British offshore wind

Smokestacks.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: The Pineapple Express, an atmospheric river originating in the Pacific near Hawaii, is arriving in the Southwest laden with heavy rain that’s set to flood the region • Indonesia has the worst air quality in the world as forest fires rage along Sumatra’s southern coast • A cross-country storm will soak much of the United States on Tuesday’s Election Day.


THE TOP FIVE

1. Permitting bill’s worst-case climate scenario is still carbon neutral

The Senate’s grand compromise to simplify federal permitting on energy projects would likely drop emissions slightly as the benefits to accelerating deployments of clean energy infrastructure outweigh the boost the legislation could give to fossil fuels. Even under the worst-case scenario, emissions remain on the same trajectory as today. That’s according to a hotly anticipated new analysis by the Rhodium Group, the consultancy whose U.S. emissions estimates are among the most widely cited in American politics. The report, shared first with my colleague Emily Pontecorvo, found that provisions in the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act largely counteract each other on climate. The bill makes building transmission lines much easier, a key step to patching more renewables onto the grid. But it also makes new gas pipelines simpler to permit, clearing the way for a buildout of the infrastructure for the fossil fuel already dominating U.S. electricity and heating systems. Still, under the best-case scenario, the legislation could cut U.S. economy-wide emissions by 5% below where they would otherwise go in 2040. The bill could also slash energy bills by $78 per year and support construction of more than 200 gigawatts of clean energy capacity, as compared to a world where it didn’t pass. The Rhodium report is at least the second analysis yet to find that the bill could modestly lower emissions. The first, as I reported last week, came from the think tank Resources for the Future, which saw a slight drop in power-sector emissions relative to a world without BAAJA.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Energy

Exclusive: New Modeling Finds Permitting Bill Would Likely Cut Emissions

Even in the worst-case scenario, BAAJA wouldn’t increase emissions, an analysis by the Rhodium Group concludes.

Pollution and the Capitol.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The bipartisan permitting reform bill is likely to slightly cut greenhouse gas emissions and lower electricity bills by 2040 — or at worst leave emissions on the same trajectory that they are on today — as compared to the status quo, according to a new analysis of many of its provisions by the Rhodium Group, an independent research firm.

The analysis examines the policies in the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act, or BAAJA, that would have the most-clear cut effects on climate pollution and the energy system. It is the most comprehensive account of the bill’s effects on emissions so far, although it does not examine all of its provisions.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue