I wouldn't be so sure about cars going pure BEV.
I think some degree of hybridisation is much more likely.
It really depends on improvements in batteries which seems to be a lot more talk than walk.
You can make a big improvement in efficiency with a HEV and an even bigger one with a PHEV, even a small battery PHRV like the Prius PHEV.
That is where I would put my money for the next 20-30 years.

In their last dying days, the efficiency of ICE will be increased from 20% to 25% to over 50%. It will never reach the 95+% of current e-motors nor the 98+% of future e-motors. They will never be as smooth, low noise, clean as e-motors. Future e-vehicles with 4 electronically controlled in or near wheel e-motors will be superior an cheaper than current ICE equivalent.

That being said, they may find an extended life in heavy vehicles, trains, ships and heavy machinery, at least until such time as larger more efficient FCs and hydrogen are affordable.

"The future of the IC engine is bright and clear"

This is Bunk(er)! The statement infers that the future of alternative energy storage is predetermined. What happens if Li-Air becomes competitive? In that case why would anyone want a noisy, smelly, diesel? The likely energy storage of Li-Air would be the same as gasoline, when combined with the superior efficiency of the electric drive train over the ICE. Fuel cells are a possibility too. But, the main thing is the intensive R&D around the world, which is attempting to replace the ICE. How does Bunker justify his "bright and clear" (to 2030) argument with this R&D uncertainty?

Electricity from dirty coal is another dying technology. It should go the same way as the wood stoves.

I said many time to start selling fuelcell cars and trucks and also fuelcell tractor-trailer trucks, big machineries, trains, airplanes, ships and electric generation power plants, is it clear or not ...
The ice is inneficient and also i already own and operate an ice in my 2005 car, so it must be replaced by something better and cheaper without fuel cost and no pollution and better drivability and breaking power and more adapted for canadian winter with better traction-control on wet, snowwy and icy roads. They already scrap the drivability of ice cars since 2005 approx because they rely on ultra lean operation to save gas and also they tricked the gas pedal with electronic programmation again to save fuel, all that equal to bad drivability and as much as an ice save fuel then as much as the drivability is bad with hiccups on acceleration, uneven acceleration, un-predictive pedal respond, harsh speed shifting, vibrations at low speed, bad traction control, etc.
Fuelcell have none of these drawbacks, cost less, cost less to fuel and do not pollute. Gm, toyota, ford, chrysler, etc are direct petrol resellers and still offer mainly ice vehicle to the consumer to promote gasoline use and they are impeded real progress, now they directly promote again the goo'l old ice. Postpone any ice expenditure till they start selling fuelcell cars and trucks, ships and locomotives(trains).

It's interesting to see this debate going on; I didn't think that BEVs had a chance of entering the mainstream 4 years ago because of the power the Republicans had and used to protect the oil companies and the money Big Oil put into their elections. This is not new news, the war against the middle-class has been going on for thirty years.

We can thank the CEO of Nissan for sticking his neck out and taking the chance to bring his BEV commuter car, The Leaf, to market. Many are correct when they say the future of BEVs is based on improvements and reduced costs of battery technology. Well, there are many variations of battery in the labs right now that promise these improvements; And, many can be moved into production as soon as they are human engineered. Tesla has announced their new sedan model that will go 330 miles, with a one hour recharge; that should allow one to exceed 500 miles of driving in one day.

There are folks that predict that the tipping point for the popularity of BEVs will be as early as 2017. Yes, the "Bought Republicans" can delay the introduction of BEVs; but, they cannot change the people's desire to better their lives through technology and that force will turn dirty ICEs into museum pieces.

I see trucks moving into the hybrid stage as they take advantage of the low speed torque of the electric motor to assist in acceleration and to natgas for cruise power.

I'm sorry, but it's just silly to blame Republicans for the lack of BEVs.

European automakers aren't morons and petro fuels cost significantly more there than in the US, so their market is naturally more supportive than the US. If batteries made cost-effective sense, VW would have every incentive to build them regardless of what US consumers or Republicans demand.

The bulk of today's lithium technologies have been around for 30 years now. Yes, materials science is upgrading many aspects of these batteries, but almost assuredly next gen batteries, such as the lithium-air mentioned in a previous comment, will be required to achieve real mainstreaming.

But, again, it took 30 years for lithium to make its ways into the auto sector and many prominent battery researchers have suggested that it won't be surprising if it takes 30 years for next gen battery technologies to cost-effectively scale into auto production either.

Hopefully, battery science takes an unexpected leap forward, as science sometimes does, but any honest, open-minded person HAS to accept that their is plenty of science to suggest that the battery revolution is going to take decades -- and much of that science has been studied and accepted by the Obama Admin, the EPA, essentially every automotive forecaster, and the bulk of automakers.

2017?

Get real. Check out Deloitte's latest BEV consumer study for a dose of reality. Consumers want 300+ miles, full charges in less than 2 hours, and they don't want to pay a premium. That means a Volt needs to cost about the same as a Cruze, and outside of a miracle that is not going to happen by 2017.

I'm a huge plug-in fan and will make a plug-in my next car, but if one is serious about global warming or foreign oil dependence, then it has to be accepted that plug-ins are not yet the critical technology and waiting for plug-ins to become the critical technology is counter-productive.

Much can be, and should be, done until batteries hit their sweet spot in the market. The legacy effect of the billion + and growing fleet of vehicles already on the world's roads demands it.

Liquid fuels are just too frigging convenient--energy dense, quick refueling, simple storage, etc. Drop in replacement synthetic fuels are going to be very attractive as a way to convert renewables/nuclear energy into transportation.

People who buy BEVs or ICEs don't care about the well to wheel efficiency. They care about the performance of their own vehicle. That's what drives the market, not some conservation policy of the EPA or DOE. So if Li-Air or some other technology gives equivalent milage and other performance, people and companies will buy them instead of gas or diesel ICEs. Where the electricity comes from and whether or not a battery has stored energy or work is irrelevant.

Actual products and markets for BEVs already exist and lots of R&D mean a promising future for them. In addition, the cost per mile for BEVs is much lower than for ICEs, and this mitigates lower range or cost of battery storage. Maintenance costs should be lower considering BEV motors have only one moving part compared to 250 in ICEs. Range isn't the only factor, but I believe there is a big market for 100-200 mile range BEVs at competitive cost.

ai_vin...power plants mix varies a lot from country to country or region to region. Ours is currently 96% hydro, 2% nuclear and 2% wind. Nuclear may go down to zero soon (old CANDU reactor may be de-activated) and wind may go up to 4+% by 2015/2017. By 2030 or so we may be close to 80% Hydro and 20% wind. I doubt very much if we ever go back to coal fired power plants.

It is hilarious to see the eco-nitwits braying at a EPA worker saying the ICE will exist for the foreseeable future.

If the Volt is too expensive, you can take your half million dollar fuel cells, and firmly plant them in your imaginations because that is where they will stay. Nobody can afford them.

The qualitative scientific hypothesis of CAGW has been pretty much been proved false by the quantitative science of the 21st century. Further it has been confirmed by real life. The eco-loon Jimmy Hansen wanted us to go back to the caves in 1988. He and loony friends predicted the world would still warm much more than it has, even so. He was a loon then, and remains one, but his prophecies are tarnished today. the North and South American continents produce no NET CO2. So their is no need to address the so-called problem in America at all. we have sacrificed an created more than enough bio-sequestration sites already, even if we commonly call them National Parks.

There has been no warming for going on 16 years after a 19 year period of minutely escalating temperatures.

Meanwhile the increase atmospheric content of a trace gas CO2, is greening the Planet as reported by the NASA satellites. That is wholly benign, and Mankind is repairing the Planet for the true eco-catastrophe that the Planet's Flora did, by consuming the atmospheric CO2 to starvation and stunting levels for them.

Efficiency is biting too. The search for substitutes has succeeded. It took some forty years, but the answers are becoming available.

US Oil demand is down to 18 million barrels per day from over 21. That is a decrease of 3 parts in 18, or 16%, and the decline is accelerating. Meanwhile US domestic Oil production is up, due to new technology, and approaching the high point reached in the mid 1970s. We have also created a synthetic fuel industry producing 15% of our demand.

Dis you ever expect a non-signee the USA would be the only country to achieve the Kyoto treaty targets? But the US emissions are down to mid-1990s levels already, just a little way to its targeted 1990 level.

Together our imported Oil demand is therefor way, way down. Energy independence is now actually feasible. Our Oil finds are pushing the time before we exhaust supplies to a thousand years or more. So much for the Peakist idiots.

The ITER Fusion reactor in France is half built in its 10 year construction cycle. It does not have any electric generators in its construction plan. But if it did it would be more reliably produce power than any Solar or Wind installation; and it would also produce more electricity then any so called renewable plant, in the world.

The next Fusion reactor after the ITER experiment, WILL add power to the grid, and solve in perpetuity the need for energy. The wait for clean and inexhaustible Fusion is drawing to a close, finally. But of course the eco-nitwits don't know, or want to know that.

Of course, the future of the ICE is bright and clear. Even though PHEV's are becoming more and more practical within the next few years, a highly-efficient and down-sized ICE is still vital as range extender and for winter use, for which purpose, the fuel efficiency can approach 100%, depending on how efficiently waste heat is recuperated for cabin heating, when the engine run on a "heat-lead" mode just to produce waste heat for cabin heating and wind-shield defrosting.

The only Fusion reactors that I can foresee are those made by Ford, available in 4, 6 cylinders and also hybrid electric.