What the future DIDN’T hold – Analysis of a failure

[Written with the help of GPT-5]

In August 2005, the Australian newspaper The Age published an article titled “What the future holds,” (https://www.theage.com.au/national/what-the-future-holds-20050803-ge0mk3.html) which tried to predict the state of automotive technology and consumer habits twenty years into the future. Looking ahead to 2025, the article predicted dramatic shifts in vehicle propulsion, engineering, consumer expectations, and the driving experience itself. The tone was confident and occasionally utopian, assuming that rapid technological innovation — particularly in fuel efficiency, materials science, and automation — would fundamentally reshape the automobile.

Though the article first went to pains to highlight the uncertainty of forecasting the future, it went back on that sentiment by declaring that the sentiments of five experts aligned to such an extent that “a surprisingly clear picture of 2025 emerges.” With hindsight, it’s now clear what a mistake that was. While some predictions were close, most failed, either by overestimating the pace or misjudging the direction of technological development or by misreading consumer preferences and market forces. The following analysis evaluates each of the article’s major claims, which were confidently described as “sure-fire predictions for 2025.”

1. Diesels will account for half of all new vehicles sold.

Wrong. Diesel vehicles account for only about 33% of all new, light vehicles sold in Australia. Furthermore, the segment’s share of new sales looks to be slowly shrinking over time.
https://cleantechnica.com/2025/08/07/electric-vehicle-sales-in-australia-new-zealand-subdued/

2. CVT transmissions will outnumber manuals and automatics combined.

Almost certainly wrong. Among the top ten passenger vehicles sold new in Australia last year, only two (the Toyota Corolla and RAV-4) had continuously variable transmissions. The other eight most popular models had traditional manual or automatic transmissions.
https://www.drive.com.au/news/australian-new-car-sales-in-2024-december/

3. Cars will be 30 per cent lighter and physically smaller on average.

Wrong. The average new Australian passenger vehicle is bigger and heavier now than in 2005, and most of them are SUVs or pickup trucks (“utes”). Additionally, the most popular sedan sold in Australia, the Toyota Corolla, swelled from 2,530 to 2,955 lbs over the last 20 years. Generally speaking, car models have crept upward in weight since 2005.
https://autotalk.com.au/industry-news/rise-rise-australias-emissions-vehicle-weight
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/australians-love-heavy-cars-why-is-that-a-problem/ng94l9gsq

4. Average fuel consumption will be down 50 per cent per vehicle.

Wrong. The average fuel consumption of Australian passenger vehicles hit a lowpoint in 2014, but rose until at least 2018 thanks to the increased popularity of gas-guzzling SUVs and pickup trucks. The government only instituted fuel efficiency requirements in 2024. Post-2018 data are hard to find, but no technological breakthroughs in car engines or hybrid gas-electric engines have happened since 2005 that have doubled fuel efficiency. Returning to the example of the Toyota Corolla, the 2005 model got 26/35 mpg (city/highway driving) and the 2025 model gets 32/41 mpg.
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/d0bd25_9527cdcb01a84440a53308b3b5624320.pdf
https://www.ravim.com.au/fuel-efficiency-still-lagging/

5. Luxury cars will offer light-refracting, colour-changing paint.

Wrong. In 2022, BMW unveiled a concept vehicle called the “IX Flow” that could change the colors and patterns of its body thanks to having an e-ink skin, but the car never went into production.

6. Visual advertising will permeate the cabin and outer skin of cars.

Wrong (mercifully). To be fair, car drivers and passengers in Australia and everywhere else are still permeated with ads while in their vehicles, but from the smartphones they use while riding.

7. Autopilot will still be 20 years off (thankfully).

Probably right. The article defines “autopilot” as a car feature that “takes over driving completely,” so it’s fair to assume they envision it being able to drive safely and efficiently in every circumstance where a human could, not just on an orderly highway with predictable traffic. That said, cars with true “autopilot” technology don’t yet exist, though Tesla just introduced the “Full Self-Driving” car option in Australia last year. I think about 20 more years is a reasonable amount of time required to develop truly autonomous cars.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-09-24/tesla-self-driving-technology-rules-differ-around-australia/105808104

8. We’ll still be complaining about congestion and fuel prices.

Probably right, though where in the world do people living in any metro area NOT complain about traffic congestion and fuel prices? I couldn’t find enough good data to definitely assess this prediction, but the 2024 INRIX Traffic Scorecard ranked Brisbane as having the tenth worst traffic of any city in the world. Melbourne, Sydney and Perth were 21st, 45th, and 103rd, respectively. The Scorecard assessed 945 cities, and the fact that a country with as small a population as Australia’s was consistently high on the list speaks to a problem with urban traffic congestion.

According to the creatively titled “Report on the Australian petroleum market” from June 2024, the inflation-adjusted price of gasoline (petrol) was about 180 cents per litre in 2005 and was about 195 cents in mid-2024. Given the marginally higher price and the proliferation of gas-guzzling large passenger vehicles, it’s fair to assume Australians are complaining about gas prices about as much now as they were in 2005. https://inrix.com/scorecard/#city-ranking-list
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/jan/08/brisbane-traffic-congestion-ranked-10th-worst-in-world-but-experts-question-black-box-analysis
https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/petrol-quarterly-report-june24.pdf

9. Road safety measures will be education-based and constructive, not punitive.

Wrong. Googling “Australia driving penalties” reveals the country’s state governments still rely on traditional measures like monetary fines and license suspensions to enforce compliance with road safety laws.

10. Some car parts will be assembled atom by atom using nanotechnology.

Wrong. The techniques remain too expensive and finicky to use outside of the lab.

Encapsulating the article’s failure is the fact that one of its experts was an executive at “Holden,” a major Australian car company, and it described a futuristic Holden car from 2025. The company went bankrupt and stopped making cars in 2017. The predictions made no allowance for such structural collapse, they assumed continuity: that carmakers would remain stable; that the business of building cars in Australia would carry on.

The 2025 predictions also conspicuously omit mention of electric cars. According to the latest data from the Electric Vehicle Council (EVC), they accounted for 12.1% of all new-car sales in the first half of 2025, up from 9–10% in 2024.

Instead of lightweight, atom-assembled sedans roaming quiet streets, Australia’s roads in 2025 are filled with heavy SUVs, pickups, and a growing number of electric vehicles — the tastes and technologies that the 2005 piece overlooked. Meanwhile, the local industry, once personified by Holden, has collapsed, undercutting the assumption of continuity and industrial stability.

Taken together, these failures — in technology forecasting, in market predictions, in industry stability — reveal a broader truth: even respected publications and analysts can be spectacularly wrong about the future. As we see, the reality is shaped not just by incremental progress (slightly better engines, modest paint-tech experiments), but by sweeping transformation: electrification, market collapse, and changing tastes.

What my broken down car taught me about the future

When I was in college, my mother bought me a new, cheap car for my 21st birthday. It lasted me for 19 years and 209,000 miles–my companion through two or three chapters of my life–before finally dying of a seized engine last month. Finding a replacement in a hurry plunged me headlong into the world of cars, and a side effect of all the research and car inspections I did before buying a new one was an understanding of how future technology will revolutionize cars and the industries related to them.

Better designs

My old car was a Chevrolet Cobalt. Over the years, I’d learned a lot about it from working on it in my driveway, so it was sensible for me to consider buying a new one, but the model was discontinued in 2010. That led me to consider its successor, the Cruze, which I assumed would share many design elements with the Cobalt. 

The engine bay of a Chevrolet Cruze

Unfortunately, I discovered the Cruze has an average-at-best reputation among compact cars thanks to problems with its engine and some of the components directly attached to it. The use of lower-quality components was the main culprit, and there was also a case to be made that some aspects of the engine design itself were not as well thought-out as they should have been. 

I bet GM’s engineers didn’t know about these problems, or at least didn’t know they would turn out to be so pronounced, until after a million Cruzes had been sold and at least two years had passed so the problems could be exposed through real-world driving conditions. I also doubt the problems would have arisen at all had those engineers had access to the kinds of advanced computer simulations we’ll have in the future. 

Using hyper accurate, 1:1 simulations of materials and physical laws, car designers could test out unfathomably large numbers of potential car designs and experiment with different components and combinations of components until optima were found given parameters like maximum cost and minimum performance. Each simulated car could be “driven” for a million miles under conditions identical to those in the real world, thus revealing any design or material deficiencies before any vehicle was actually built. (These kinds of simulations already exist, but are so expensive to create that they’re only used to model things like nuclear weapons and stealth bombers.)

Thanks to this, cars in the future will be better and more reliable than they are today, and there won’t be such things as specific car models like the Cruze that have bad reputations for unforeseen problems. All vehicles will be optimized and all car companies will use the same tools for designing their products (which I also imagine would lead to many convergences). 

More diligent maintenance

With the Chevy Cruze out of the equation, I considered another compact car, the Nissan Versa. My research quickly led me to discover that Nissan cars have become infamous among owners and mechanics for transmission failures. This is because most Nissans have “continuously variable transmissions” (CVTs) instead of traditional 6-speed automatic transmissions or 5-speed manual transmissions. 

CVTs are cheaper to manufacture than the traditional transmissions and improve the fuel efficiency of the cars they are integrated into. However, CVTs require more maintenance because they get hotter during operation and produce more metal particle debris due to more metal-on-metal contact between moving parts. Replacing the transmission fluid and filter largely solves the problem and should be done every 30,000 miles in a Nissan car with a CVT. 

Old transmission fluid draining out of a car

To put this into perspective, a 2013 Toyota Corolla with a 5-speed automatic transmission only needs the same transmission service every 100,000 miles. Most car owners still expect that kind of maintenance interval in all new vehicles, and this mismatch between expectation and reality explains most of the Nissan Versa’s bad reputation. It doesn’t help that Nissan itself has downplayed the higher maintenance requirements of its CVT vehicles, or that the kinds of cash-strapped people who buy Versas tend to know little about cars or how to take care of them. 

More broadly speaking, improper maintenance is something that car mechanics constantly complain about (even if it generates a huge amount of business for them). Most cars die prematurely due to owners ignoring obvious problems and not properly maintaining them. Some “bad” cars like the Versa aren’t actually bad, they just need more maintenance than others to stay functional. However, learning about this through research and then staying mindful of your particular vehicle’s maintenance requirements is too much for most human car owners thanks to a lack of time, energy, and sometimes intelligence. 

Intelligent machines won’t have those same limitations. Future cars will have better self-diagnostic capabilities, and will be maintained by robots that will never skip preventative care. And since machines will work for free unlike today’s human mechanics, the costs of this will be much lower. Even poor people will have enough money to change the transmission fluid in their Nissan Versas. 

Gentler driving

Facebook Marketplace was my primary source for my used car search. In a huge fraction of the ads, the owners wrote their cars had “Salvaged titles” or “Rebuilt titles.” That means the car sustained so much damage that its insurer declared it “totaled,” meaning the cost of fixing it exceeded the resale value of the car in its state. Instead of being scrapped, many cars like this are bought at very low prices by mechanics who fix them themselves and resell them for a profit. Those profits tend to be small because having a Salvaged or Rebuilt title is a scarlet letter in the open market because buyers know such a vehicle was badly damaged at some point, and can’t be sure of the full extent of the problem or of how fully it was remedied. I ignored all the cars without clean titles. 

Why do cars end up with Salvaged or Rebuilt titles? Mostly because they were in serious accidents, floods, or caught on fire. Autonomous vehicles will, once fully developed, drive much more safely than humans and get into far fewer accidents. Eventually, they probably won’t even have steering wheels or pedals, making car thefts and ruinous joyrides impossible. 

As I discussed in my blog Hurricane Harvey and Asimov’s Laws of Robotics, autonomous cars could also avoid floods by keeping watch of their surroundings and driving to higher ground if they were at risk of being submerged. Better monitoring systems would also reduce instances of car fires since the cars would be able to shut down their systems if they sensed they were overheating, or to immediately call the local fire department if they caught on fire. 

More careful driving and avoidance of other hazards will sharply lower the odds of a car having to worry about getting a Salvaged or Rebuilt title. Gentler driving that stayed mindful of the car’s engineering limits and avoided exceeding them would also lengthen vehicle lifespans since components would take longer to wear out. 

Conclusion

In the future, vehicles will drive safer and will last much longer than they do today. They will be designed better and will incorporate more advanced materials like future alloys. Moreover, once battery technology reaches a certain threshold, the vehicle fleet will transform to almost 100% electric in a few decades, and electric vehicles are inherently more robust than gas and diesel vehicles we’re used to because they have fewer parts and systems. 

On a longer timeframe, autonomous driving technology will achieve the same performance as good human drivers, and the average vehicle will become self-driving. Machines will drive much more safely and gently than humans, making it much rarer for cars to be damaged in accidents or by driving behavior that overstresses their components. 

Future technology will also benefit car maintenance. The vehicles themselves will have better inbuilt self-diagnostic capabilities, so they’ll be able to recognize when something is wrong with them and to alert their owners. The proliferation of robot workers of all kinds will also lower the costs of maintaining cars, meaning it will not be so common for owners to skip maintenance due to lack of money. The robot butler who hangs around at your house could work on your car in your driveway for free, or your car could drive itself to a repair shop where machines would service it for low cost. 

Under all these conditions, the average car’s lifespan will be over 500,000 miles in the future (today, it’s about 200,000 miles), being stranded because your car broke down will be much rarer, and personal vehicle transportation will be within the means of poorer people than today. Ultimately, cars might only get totaled due to unavoidable freak accidents, like trees suddenly snapping in the wind and smashing down on one of them, or to deliberate vandalism by humans. Likewise, after humans discover the technologies for medical immortality, we’ll only die from accidents, murder and suicide.  

These technology trends will also upend the used car industry. With machines carefully doing and logging all the daily driving and maintenance, secondhand buyers won’t have to worry that the vehicles they’re looking at have secret problems. With highly accurate data on each car’s condition, haggling would disappear and pricing would reflect the honest value of a used vehicle. 

People in the used car industry who make a living off of information asymmetries (the worst example is a car auctioneer who only lets potential buyers examine a car for a few minutes before deciding whether to buy it) would lose their jobs. In fact, AI and autonomous vehicles would let car manufacturers, fleet owners like rental car companies, and private owners sell their vehicles directly to end users without having to go through any middlemen at all. AIs that work for free would replace human dealers and would talk directly with customers who wanted to buy cars. A personal inspection and test drive could be easily arranged by sending the autonomous car they were interested in to the buyer’s home, no visit to the car lot needed.