France this week announced a bold plan to ban the sale of all fully-gasoline and diesel fuel vehicles by 2040. Other countries, like India and Norway, have expressed interest in similar plans. But could, or should, the United States implement such a policy?

The answer, experts say, is complicated. One problem is the country's mixed attitude towards climate change. Some early adopters of electric vehicles are buying the cars to be more eco-friendly. But that motivation wouldn't drive the 52% of Americans who don't believe human activity is changing the climate. And at the federal level, President Donald Trump, who recently decided to exit the Paris climate accords, has been cooler towards alternative energy solutions than past presidents.

"When I was serving on a committee studying the obstacles to adoption of electric vehicles at the National Academy of Sciences, we concluded that there was no possibility of even getting a carbon tax passed, and that was under the Obama administration, which had a much more pro-environment stance than our current administration," said Melissa Schilling, a professor of management and organizations at New York University.

Another issue is the country's sheer size and geographic diversity. Fully electric vehicles perform better in some environments than others. A study from Carnegie Mellon University published last year found that some electric cars can produce significantly more emissions than similar hybrid vehicles depending on factors like regional climate, local power generation methods and the amount of highway versus city driving being done. For example, the study found that while the entirely battery-powered Nissan LEAF has a smaller carbon footprint than the gas-electric hybrid Toyota Prius in some areas, the Prius was more eco-friendly in others.

"It's better to target an end goal like emissions reduction rather than the outright banning of a technology because there are certain gas and diesel vehicles that can do a lot towards limiting emissions, whereas electric cars can actually be more damaging," said Jeremy Michalek, co-author of the study and a professor of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon, where he also serves as the director of the school's Vehicle Electrification Group.

Some argue there are good economic reasons to go full speed ahead on electric cars. In May, independent think tank RethinkX published a report predicting a "disruption of transportation and the collapse of the internal combustion vehicle and oil industries" starting as soon as 2030. James Arbib, cofounder of the group, believes the U.S. should support that transition to reap the economic benefits of electric vehicles, which he expects will converge with the development of autonomous driving technology, spurring further growth.

"This is a huge boost of the economy," Arbib told Fortune. "It will lead to more disposable income because people will spend far less on their cars. People will have time freed up which they can use to do productive things that they can't when driving — billions of hours — and less need for parking throughout cities." Arbib added that the federal government could leave a potential ban on gasoline cars up to the states, but that could prove unworkable for interstate road-trippers with gas-powered cars who may find themselves blocked at the border.

Mark Wakefield, managing director and global co-head of the automotive practice at consulting firm AlixPartners, argues that electric vehicles remain too expensive compared to their internal combustion counterparts. For example, the 2017 Nissan LEAF starts at $30,680 compared to $23,475 for a comparable Toyota Prius. That's to say nothing of high-end Teslas, which can cost upwards of $100,000.

Lawmakers worldwide have pushed for ways to bring down the costs of going electric. In the U.S., the federal government and some states offer incentives that can considerably reduce the final price of electric vehicles. But Wakefield argues that hybrid vehicles can be an effective, affordable and eco-friendly stopgap solution without the high costs and other drawbacks of entirely electric cars, like the need to frequently recharge on long trips.

"As far as France pushed their policy, they have also showed a pragmatism that while they are pushing for this, they are also changing their methods to what's most cost-effective," he explained. "It's certainly helping move their industry towards that, they were practical because they saw that hybrids are a much more economic answer."

Wakefield and Michalek both said that electric vehicles will likely become more attractive to consumers as they become more affordable compared to gasoline cars. If and when that happens, Americans could find a ban on internal combustion vehicles could become more palatable. As electric vehicle technology continues to improve and automakers like Tesla and Volvo continue to invest in the field, costs may eventually come down. But for now, an outright ban on gasoline cars on American roads remains unlikely.

上周，法国宣布了一项十分激进的计划：在2040年全面禁止销售完全以汽油或柴油为动力的车辆。其他国家，像印度和挪威，也有意实施类似计划。然而，美国是否有能力或应不应该实施这样的政策？

专家说，这个问题回答起来很复杂。其中一个问题在于，美国民众对于气候变化有着不同的看法。一些很早就已接受电动汽车的人群通过购买电动汽车来减轻环境负担。然而，有52%的美国人认为人类活动与气候变化无关，因此环保愿景对于他们来说没有说服力。在联邦层面，最近决定退出《巴黎气候协定》的美国总统唐纳德·特朗普在替代能源方面的热情显然不及前几任总统。

纽约大学管理与机构学教授梅丽莎·奇林表示，“我曾经在美国国家科学院的一个委员会工作过，研究电动汽车推广所面临的障碍。我们认为连碳税都无法通过，而且那时候还是奥巴马执政时期。那一届政府比现任政府更注重环保。”

另一个问题在于美国巨大的国土面积和地理环境的多样性。纯电动汽车的表现在某些环境下要优于其他动力的交通工具。卡耐基梅隆大学去年发布的调查显示，如果考虑区域气候、当地发电方式以及高速公路与市区内行驶里程等因素，一些电动汽车的碳排放量可能要比类似混合动力的车大得多。例如，该研究发现，尽管纯电动汽车日产LEAF的碳印记在某些地区要低于电油混合动力的丰田普锐斯，但普锐斯在其他地区则更环保。

该调查的联席作者、卡耐基梅隆大学工程与公共政策教授杰瑞米·米克拉克说：“相对于直接禁止某项技术，我们莫不如制定一个最终目标，例如减排目标，因为某些汽油和柴油车在减排方面还有很多潜力可挖，而电动汽车在这些领域反而更具破坏力。”杰瑞米·米克拉克还担任该校汽车电动化集团的董事。

有些人认为，全力推动电动汽车的发展有其合理的经济因素考量。5月，独立智囊团RethinkX发布了一篇报道，预测“运输领域的革命以及内燃机交通工具和石油行业的崩塌”即将于2030年开始。集团联合创始人詹姆斯·艾比布认为，美国应支持这一转型，以获取电动汽车的经济效益。他预计，无人驾驶技术将与电动汽车齐头并进，进一步推动经济的增长。

艾比布对《财富》说：“这对经济是一个巨大的提振。此举会增加可支配收入，因为人们在车方面的花费会大大降低。人们开车耗费的时间达到了数十亿个小时，他们可以利用节省出来的时间做一些富有成效的事情，而这在开车时是做不到的，同时还不用为市区停车而发愁。”艾比布还指出，联邦政府可能会让各州自行决定是否禁止使用燃油动力车。然而，这对于驾驶燃油动力车进行跨州旅行的人来说是不切实际的，他们可能会在边境上被拦住。

咨询公司AlixPartners的董事总经理兼汽车业务全球负责人马克·维克菲尔德认为，与内燃机汽车的竞争对手相比，电动汽车的价格依然过于昂贵。例如，2017年日产LEAF的起步价位30680美元，而丰田普锐斯的价格为23475美元，更不用说高端的特斯拉，它的最高价格达到了近10万美元。

全球的立法者们想出了多种办法来降低使用电动汽车的成本。在美国，联邦政府和一些州政府所提供的一些鼓励政策大幅降低了电动汽车的最终价格。然而，维克菲尔德认为，混合动力汽车可以成为一个有效、经济、环保的权宜之计，同时还不用担心纯电动车的高成本问题和其他缺点，例如无需在长途旅行中频繁充电。

他解释说：“虽然法国已经迈出了这一步，但他们也表现出了务实的一面。尽管法国正在推行这一政策，但他们也在转而使用最具效益的方法。很显然，法国正在帮助其工业向这一方面转型，同时他们也很务实，因为他们注意到混合动力是一个更加经济的选择。”

维克菲尔德和米克拉克都表示，随着电动汽车价格的日渐实惠（与燃油动力车相比），电动汽车会变得越来越有吸引力。一旦出现这种情况，美国人便会发现，内燃机车辆禁令并非是难以接受。随着电动汽车技术的继续发展，以及像特斯拉、沃尔沃这样的汽车制造商继续投资这一领域，其成本最终会下降。但是就现在看来，在美国全面禁止燃油动力汽车仍是不可行的。（财富中文网）

译者：冯丰

审稿：夏林