Electric Vehicles UK has waded into rows over the ZEV mandate and ICE ban, calling for ministers not to include hybrids in plans from 2030 while also urging automakers to axe “confusing” jargon.

The EV lobby group warned of reports that mild hybrid vehicles, along with full hybrids, could be added into the ZEV 2030-35 phase-out period in response to concerns from carmakers – and said that any vehicles without a plug should be banned from the end of the decade.

In the ZEV mandate consultation document, the Government proposes mild hybrid are phased out from 2030 alongside other kinds of car that are reliant on internal combustion engines.

Andy Palmer, founder of Palmer Energy and EVUK advisory board member, said there was “little value” in mild hybrid technology to reduce real-world CO2 and particulates.

He added that hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), where the electric motor can also power the car independently for short distances at low speeds as well as assisting the ICE engine, were a “a better solution but a technology that belongs to the late 1990s”.

Palmer pointed to research commissioned by campaign group Transport & Environment, which found “much higher emissions than advertised from some hybrids” and said they were “a wolf in sheep’s clothing”. T&E has also said that global governments should focus on incentivising the purchase of fully electric vehicles rather than hybrids.

Palmer added that plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) start to move technology forward and are probably “an acceptable bridging technology to 2035” while also having a role in stimulating the continued rollout of charging infrastructure.

But he noted that “sizing” the battery was key as minimum EV range needs to be fixed at c.60 miles.

Echoing concerns for the 2030 ICE phase-out, the Norwegian EV Association has said British politicians should not “even consider the need for hybrids in the mix, especially those without a plug”.

Saying full hybrids were “nothing more than an ICE car with a different name”, Christina Bu, secretary general at the association, added: “In Norway, policies have always been focused on fully electric cars. We can’t meddle around with polluting hybrids any longer, the need to reduce climate emissions is too urgent, as is the need to stop confusing the consumer.”

EVUK has also urged both automakers and the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) to clear up the “alphabet soup of meaningless acronyms associated with hybrid passenger cars” to end consumer confusion.

The lobby group called on the ASA to review the ‘self-charging hybrid’ terminology, which it said had no real meaning and remains a misnomer as it implies models are self-charging electric cars.

Adverts for ‘self-charging hybrids’ have already been banned in Norway – which is at the forefront of the switch to EVs – as being “lies”.

Dan Caesar, CEO of EVUK, went on: “The fact that some carmakers can describe vehicle powertrains with such confusing, and sometimes inaccurate names, needs to be investigated. This ‘consumer confusion’ has a negative impact on consumers making the right choice for their next purchase. We call on the ASA to look into the naming of ‘self-charging hybrids’ and also for the companies that perpetuate this confusion to revisit naming conventions.”

Quentin Willson, founder of FairCharge and EVUK advisory board member, also said the descriptive confusion around hybrid naming was helping “nobody – not least car buyers”.

“Most feel that if the word hybrid is somewhere in the car’s name, then they will be making an environmentally sound choice. But as we know from established research, that’s not always true. Time to drain the hybrid alphabet soup of acronyms and stop misleading consumers.”

EVUK also pointed to a recent report by CBI Economics, commissioned by the ECIU, which found that with a rapid transition to EVs, the UK economy could see a £16.1bn uplift in GVA (gross value add) by 2035.

Conversely, failure by the car industry to make the transition to manufacturing EVs could see its contributions to the UK economy fall by as much as 73%, or £34.1bn, and over 400,000 jobs could be lost.