What Does ICE Stand For?

Mike Magee

America has always loved its’ cars – specifically “ICE Cars.”

ICE – as in “internal combustion engine.”

The engine has many names associated with its’ emergence in the mid-19th century in Europe and the United States. One of the earliest figures stateside was born just 26 miles southeast of where I live, in Hebron, CT, on October 23, 1762. But he was 64 by the time he was awarded a U.S. patent for the “Gas and Vapor Engine.” Using alcohol or turpentine, he demonstrated how to ignite the mixture in a “controlled explosion that drove a piston.” His name was Samuel Morey and the year was 1826. John Quincy Adams was then our President – the country’s 6th President.

Little could Adams have imagined that his distant Presidential successor two centuries later would make such a mess of things or that ICE (the engine, not the masked terrorizing private police force) would be at the explosive center of a worldwide energy war.

Let’s begin with the words of George Washington University historian, Matthew Dallek: “Governing via conspiracy theories, personal whim and wish-casting, Trump has taken his place as the most consistently inept president of this century. At home and abroad, in many cabinet and sub-cabinet agencies, the administration’s culture is dominated by incompetence.”

This is not the first U.S. President to drop into a Middle-East sinkhole from which there is no easy escape. That would be our 39th President, Jimmy Carter. Though humiliated by Iran at the time, this “one-termer” was lauded by future Presidents and the Nobel Committee which awarded him the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize two decades later “for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development.”

President Carter learned his lesson well with Iran. When Trump called off a retaliatory strike on Iran in 2019, Carter applauded stating, “I agree with President Trump on his decision not to take military action against Iran. I had a lot of problems with Iran when I was in office.”

Trump was less than generous in return, stating on the campaign trail in the lead up to his defeat in 2020 defeat, “He’s a nice man. He was a terrible President. He’s been trashed within his own party. He’s been trashed.”

Carter died peacefully at age 100 on December 29, 2024. But he’s back in the news thanks to $4 a gallon gasoline and gas lines fueled by a 2026 mismatch between supply and demand of oil which carries Trump’s fingerprints – specifically months of reckless tariffs and his role in triggering a war for no particular reason other than his coveting fossil fuels.

The year before Trump succeeded in winning a second term as President, alternate energy was all the rage, including  the U.S. EV auto effort which was on a tear. In a single year, sales in the U.S. had risen from 490,000 to over 800,000. “Interest” was turning into “adoption” with a long range (350 miles on a single charge) electric S.U.V. just months from release. Ford called their three tier offering a “personal bullet train.” But then, as Trump approached office, the entire industry became risk-averse and got cold feet, and with good reason.

Overnight the $7,500 consumer tax credit for EV purchases was gone along with continued federal investment in charging station infrastructure. The Big Three “about face” closed EV auto and battery plants nationwide and cost thousands their jobs, while globally demand for EV’s continued to explode with 1 in 4 vehicles worldwide battery powered by 2025. Analysts predicted that this number would exceed 50% and that ICE autos would be in the minority globally by 2035. Oh, and by the way, 75% of the EV autos sold in 2026 will be China built.

This is quite startling, when we consider that the U.S. (ICE auto) industry in 1965 manufactured and sold 9 out of every 10 cars in the world. That number  is now down to 1 in 3 with a minority of them being EV autos. We are, according to auto economist Susan Helper a ”shrinking island of ICE.” As for EV sales domestically in the U.S. – they are 10% of all auto sales compared to Norway’s 97%.

When it comes to supply and demand in automobiles, China has played their cards well during the Trump Iran war. With Trump about to assume office in 2020, China’s economy was blinking orange warning lights. They had heavily over-invested in real estate and were experiencing a serious downturn. In response they upped investment in electric vehicles, lithium-ion batteries, and solar power. By 2025, exports from China had increased by 18% over the prior year. This included over 1 million EVs imported into the E.U.

Commitment to EV vehicles have proven to be a high worth strategy as Trump has stumbled into a endless war with Iran. Closure of the Strait of Hormuz resulted in an immediate shortage of 10 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil. The loss of supply, and resultant demand driven escalation in price, has been mitigated by a number of factors. First, the U.S. opened its reserves with a surge of 3.5 million bpd into the global market. Second, China tightened its consumption overnight dropping 3.6 million bpd (made possible in part because of their extensive use of EVs. And third, Japan, South Korea, and India mirrored China and collectively cut consumption of 3.6 million bpd.

These moves effectively held the cost of a barrel below $100, when otherwise it would have exceeded $120 per barrel by now. But these are only temporary fixes. The U.S. reserves which were 413 million barrels before Trump’s misstep now hover at 241 million barrels. 

China is in somewhat better shape to withstand the shock. Why?

1. Most of the energy they require to manage their productions is produced domestically. Only 18% is imported.
2. Their fleets of EVs don’t require gas.
3. They has a strategic oil reserve of 1.4 billion barrels, enough to last at least 3 months.
4. Their Iranian sourced import accounts for only 13% of their total oil imports, and through various means, a portion of this continues to flow.

China is not entirely immune to risk. Much of its financed refining infrastructure is vulnerable to attack including “ports, power and desalination plants, refineries and petrochemical operations, and airport infrastructure across Qatar, Oman, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Israel.” So for the time being they are in the mood to be helpful. 

But China plays the long game. And when it comes to strategy, at least for the moment, Xi is a lot smarter than “know-it-all” Trump. He understands the interconnective nature of industries and supply chains, and avoids “sink-holes.” 

Economist Stephen Ezell, commenting on EV investment, recently made this very point: “Today, China can get a new E.V. from blueprint to launch about 33 percent faster than a U.S. company, give or take. But that will accelerate, right? The speed of innovation, the speed of the production cycles at these foreign companies, is just going to get faster and faster. And at some point, the gap will get pretty close to fully impossible for American automakers to close.”

Can you imagine Trump’s response? I could care less.

But Ezell with an eye toward past history of the US romance with ICE vehicles (let alone dead end wars), would suggest he should care more – much more. His cautionary lesson: “When you think about it, it (the ICE auto) was the original American start-up. I mean, look at what it unleashed in our society: The Interstate highway system, the rise of the suburbs and so on. That’s the coming-of-age story of our entire country.”

Problem is, our President never grew up and likely never heard of “The Carter Doctrine.” On January 23, 1980, during the State of the Union Address, he immortalized timeless advice when it came to managing American oil interests in the Middle East.

“This situation demands careful thought, steady nerves, and resolute action. It demands the participation of all those who rely on oil from the Middle East and who are concerned with global peace and stability. And it demands consultation and close cooperation with countries in the area which might be threatened.”