EurActiv Logo
EU news & policy debates
- across languages -
Click here for EU news »
EurActiv.com Network

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

Report: Tough EU fuel economy rules could create 443,000 jobs

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 18 March 2013

Robust fuel efficiency standards for cars could create up to 443,000 new jobs by 2030 and add €16 billion per year to Europe’s GDP, according to the first economic study of the effects of CO2 legislation on the auto-industry.

Implementing the EU’s proposed 2020 auto-standard of 95 grams of CO2 per km (g/km) for automobiles and 147 g/km for vans - as a stand-alone measure - could result in 356,000 new jobs, says the report by Cambridge Econometrics and Ricardo-AEA.

But if the realised target were 90 g/km for cars and 141 g/km for vans with annual 3% (and not 1%) efficiency gains in the following years, the jobs harvest could top 443,000.

“Over-achieving on targets is a plausible scenario, because several automakers have already met their 2015 goals ahead of time,” the report says.

Around one-third of the forecast new jobs would be created in the auto-industry value chain, due to the labour intensity of the low-carbon car manufacturing process. The other two-thirds would result from a shift in spending away from fossil fuels to other areas. 

But the jobs gains would not accrue until 2030, due to the 10-year period it takes for an uptake of new cars to feed through to the economy.

The report also finds that efficiency improvements would add an extra €1,000-€1,100 to the cost of an average car in 2020, but that this would be offset for consumers by fuel savings in the long run.

Fiona Hall, the environment committee member tasked with managing the passage of the EU's legislation through the European Parliament, welcomed the paper.

"Cutting the CO2 emissions from cars not only helps tackle climate change, but it also creates new jobs in auto technology companies and gives a boost to Europe's economy by reducing our spending on expensive oil imports," the British MEP said.

Contradictory estimates

The European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA), though, argues that increased prices of this type encourage customers to buy used high carbon-emitting cars, rather than greener but more expensive vehicles.

"There is no real proof that more stringent regulation leads to new jobs in Europe,” said Cara McLaughlin, a spokeswoman for ACEA. “The spillover effects are questionable and there are a number of contradictory estimates with no clear positive effects on the EU economy.”

The Cambridge Econometrics and Ricardo-AEA report was compiled using data from the auto-industry, models applied by the European Commission, and fuel projections from the International Energy Agency.

Some Industry groups like the European Aluminium Association (EAA) welcomed the paper, for the boost it could give to the use of lighter car manufacturing materials.

“Opting for lightweight solutions not only has a positive climate impact but also a real economic advantage,” said Gerd Götz, the EAA’s director general.

He added that it was “a must in the current economic situation.”

European Parliament vote

The report comes as the European parliament’s industry committee prepares to vote on an opinion of the EU’s proposed 2020 CO2 standard on Tuesday (19 March).  

The MEPs' opinion calls for delaying any decision on auto targets for 2025 and 2030 beyond the EU’s favoured 31 December 2014 deadline.

Several other amendments weakening the Commission’s proposals by widening exemptions and derogations in the legislation’s super-credits clauses have also been tabled by the centre-right European People’s Party.

The key vote on the proposed new legislation will take place on 25 April in the Parliament's environment committee, which has the lead on the legislation.

Positions: 

A statement by Eurobat, the European Storage Battery Manufacturers Association, said: "The intermediate results of this project are already valuable in confirming the economic benefits of increased vehicle hybridisation and electrification for the European automotive supply chain and EU society as a whole.

"EUROBAT considers that full support for Europe’s existing manufacturing base of automotive battery technologies will be essential to capitalise on these important opportunities for European job creation. With batteries of all technologies already improving fuel efficiency across the different levels of e-mobility, continued R&D prioritisation and the promotion of specialised electrochemical skill sets will encourage further innovation and strengthen the international position of our industry."

Next steps: 
  • 24 April 2013: European Parliament’s environment committee to vote on CO2 in cars proposals
  • May 2013: European Parliament committee vote on CO2 in Vans
  • 2014: Proposed deadline for EU decision on 2025/2030 targets
  • 2015: 130 grams of CO2 per km target to be enforced across Europe
  • 2020: Proposed deadline for 95g/km target for cars
  • 2025: European Commission could impose another milestone on the road to decarbonsiation by 2050
  • 2030: European Commission could impose another milestone on the road to decarbonsiation by 2050
Arthur Neslen

COMMENTS

  • I just wonder where those new jobs will be created? 200,000 in Germany, 100,000 in France and the rest in the Eastern EU block no doubt.

    By :
    Philip royle
    - Posted on :
    18/03/2013
  • I hope that the new jobs would be created within the EU because it is there that is currently the hardest hit economically. Also, as was shown at the Detroit Motor Show, the German Schaeffler Group have already come up with a car based on the Suzuki Swift, which is currently being promoted in India, which has all the componants necessary to meet CAFE standards for 2020, plus the promise of more advanced componants at a later date to comply with the 2030 standards. As I understand it, new vehicles meeting these standards will cost an extra € 1,000 each but this would be recoverable with a fuel saving of around € 400 a year. My big worry is, what about companies that change their vehicles on a more regular basis and how will this will affect the cost of living and inflation ?

    By :
    Nigel Hudson
    - Posted on :
    19/03/2013
  • What a lot of nonsense!
    The "Background" column states that:
    "Passenger cars alone are responsible for around 12% of total EU emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas."
    So in fact 88% of the emissions of CO2 stems from other sources!
    And CO2 is by the IPCC recognized as the second or third most important greenhouse gas. Depending on what you want to describe.

    When in fact real world observations, measurements and science is piling up evidence that added CO2 to our atmosphere does NOT pose a threat to humans nor other life on Earth. Actually it seems added CO2 is on it's way to prevent the biosphere from starving to death.
    We should do a lot better tossing all the climate alarmists and their peddlers of scare, shame, guilt and symbolic actions out of politics!

    By :
    Mats Jangdal
    - Posted on :
    19/03/2013
  • I do agree with you Mats Jangdal, but surely this is a step forward in the right directon. Regardless of what the scientists say, you only have to spend a few hours breathing in all the toxic fumes produed by inner city traffic to know that your body is telling you it's no good for you. What the ultimate solution is - well maybe the likes of Schaeffler, Continental and BMW, all who are actively seeking ways to make cars/componants that use less fuel, ( surely this is essential until we have another reliable source )and give out less emissions can only be a good thing.

    By :
    Nigel Hudson
    - Posted on :
    20/03/2013
  • This is probably a bit off topic but do you know how the 'authorities' get their fuel economy statistics from?
    Well, what happens is petrol or car manufactures get a load of cars. Some new some old, maybe 3 or 4 years old. They put their instrumentation in the car or the fuel their testing and then send the cars out on the road in the middle of the night when there is no traffic about. The drivers are given a route and a speed they must try and adhere to at all times. Of course in the middle of the night this is quite easy. They also test the cars on test tracks again set speed set stop's and distance.
    After the test they produce the result and every thing is 'Green' The truth is that no driver drives like the test car drivers so most of the data is totally useless in the real world.

    By :
    Philip royle
    - Posted on :
    20/03/2013
  • Nigel, the proposed rules are for fuel consumption, not for exhaust. Most (almost all) of the harmful components in exhaust gases are trapped. Any big city subway station has a lot more harmful particles in the air from the electrically powered trains, than the streets above ground with cars on them.

    Pilip, the cars are tested indoors on a "automobile treadmill" where computer set loads are applied in a standardized manner. The results are sometimes far from real world driving, yet other times not misrepresenting the real world so badly.
    The big problem is that all government agencies, taxation and other measures are set from mean values and calculated averages, with no consideration taken for how the owners use their cars.

    By :
    Mats Jangdal
    - Posted on :
    20/03/2013
  • Mats jangdal. With the greatest of respect open road testing is how most of it is done I know because I, at one time, was employed to do it. So I have first hand knowledge.
    I would concede that some of the testing is done on rolling roads in labatory conditions but not all. As I say I have done it. But as you say, both indoor and out door testing is at best misleading. and bares no resemblance to the real world.

    By :
    Philip royle
    - Posted on :
    20/03/2013
  • Philip, the manufacturers own testing is of course done in a variety of ways. But testing done for official numbers to be recognized by governments for official consumer information and for taxation must be done in a fashion that measures the same cycle the same way every time. This is done in labs with computers.

    By :
    Mats Jangdal
    - Posted on :
    20/03/2013
  • Hi Mats, Well all I can say is that I spent many a boring night with 6 other drivers in a convoy travelling the roads of North West England with a fixed route and strict driving conditions. And I spent equally boring days driving round a test track, again in the North West of the Uk driving under written and timed instruction on braking acceleration and distance and speed. If as you say the official EU stats come from new cars tested in labatorys then the whole thing is a sham and not worth the paper it's written on.

    By :
    Philip royle
    - Posted on :
    20/03/2013
  • Phil, we agree perfectly on the sham.

    By :
    Mats Jangdal
    - Posted on :
    20/03/2013
  • Thanks Mats, Slightly off topic but, I am finding increasingly difficult to believe that the car manufactures, petrol companies, manufacturing bases and intellectual institutions around the world haven't already come up with an workable alternative to the internal combustion engine. Am I alone in thinking that this is one of the biggest coverups in the world? Or am I just thinking to deeply?

    By :
    Philip royle
    - Posted on :
    20/03/2013
  • Phil,
    No, I can't see the ghosts. Remember that external combustion engine (steam) had 200 years of ever rising glory until the internal engine caught up 20-50 years after it's inception. Also in competition with electric engines.
    The internal combustion engine is approaching 100 years and should have at least 50 years of refinement left.
    The best runner up so far is the fuel cell, a transportable external electricity generator that can be used in combination with one or more electric engines. That technology may be an economically viable option in 50 years.

    But today, nothing beats gasoline and diesel.

    By :
    Mats Jangdal
    - Posted on :
    20/03/2013
  • I know what you mean Mats, but I just can't help thinking in this day and age some break through hasn't already been made. You talk of the transition from steam to petrol. But think about the scientific knowledge available back then to what we have now. It's the difference between the sun and the moon.
    I just think that in a bank vault some where there are plans to a mode of transport that works as good as petrol without the polluting side effects. The only reason it's not in the public domain is because, well could you imagine if petrol became obsolete over night!
    I'm not normally prone to flights of fancy, or conspiracy theories, bit I have been thinking about this for a while. Maybe I've got to much time on my hands lol!

    By :
    Philip royle
    - Posted on :
    20/03/2013
  • I somehow think that the issues have been partly surpassed here.
    ""Robust fuel efficiency standards for cars could create up to 443,000 new jobs by 2030 and add €16 billion per year to Europe’s GDP, according to the first economic study of the effects of CO2 legislation on the auto-industry.
    Implementing the EU’s proposed 2020 auto-standard of 95 grams of CO2 per km (g/km) for automobiles and 147 g/km for vans - as a stand-alone measure - could result in 356,000 new jobs, says the report by Cambridge Econometrics and Ricardo-AEA.""

    Making Biofuels from Wastes is going to do this at a stroke and surpass this number easily.

    By implementing a proposal I have just seen written down and presented to our Investment Bank a company has highlighted to us that within the EU it is proposing to make headways to intercept the Municipal Solid Waste and Other sources of Waste to make the Biofuels for road transport. You will know that in this journal some two years ago there was a real statement made that from the 300 Million tonnes of MSW currently unaccounted for in treatment and from the 1000 Million tonnes of discarded agricultural/farming wastes also available that it will be possible to make enough biofuels to avoid using 30 to 40% of all the oil used in transportation. (And the use of Oil-derived fuels in the EU is a very large source of usage.) This would also reduce the emissions from Municipal Solid Waste to the atmosphere. So in saying this the issue is that these fuels - essentially Butanol - will reduce the EU's dependency on Oil use y around 1000 Million barrels minimum per year saving the EU €80 Billion at the rate of US$100 per barrel.

    Three projects, that are part of a tranche of over 140 identified for a start by 2018/2020, are about to start - Malta, Holland, UK - where by 2015 the production of Biofuels as Butanol will be made from the discarded biomass recovered from Municipal Solid Wastes and Agricultural Wastes and these will be large projects. The first in Malta for €102.6 Million will convert 290,000 tonnes a year of biomass to make over 50 Million litres of Butanol with the aim of expanding this within 2 years to 400,000 tonnes of biomass and 85 Million litres of Butanol. This will employ directly 140 people from 2015/2016 and a further 100 from 2017 and we must not omit the servicing jobs in the parallel arena of the equivalent of a further 500 jobs. The project in Holland to convert 200,000 tonnes a year of biomass to make over 40 Million litres of Butanol is also about to start and at €80 Million will be in production during 2014 as CNG followed by Butanol in 2015/2016. Again this will have a directly employed personnel of 120 + and generate service employment of over 300 people. The project in the UK (Yorkshire) is again €100+Million and will be converting 300,000 tonnes a year of biomass to make over 50 Million litres of Butanol and it will be starting within the next two months and be employing over 160 directly employed personnel with a further 400 in service industries. The estimate prepared by a major Company suggests that the employment issues here will be at least 200,000 extra direct jobs and three times that number in upstream and down stream areas. Now multiply this by 50 and you can see how these figures really stack up.

    It is not known whether the EU takes any notice of such an initiative but it should for the benefits in such works are very important to the EU.

    By :
    Victoria
    - Posted on :
    23/03/2013
  • Victoria,You are way off the mark with that scheme!
    Making fuel from waste is fine if do it to reduce the volume waste stored at the dump site. I creates some jobs and tidies the place up.
    But it's not a profitable way of making fuel. Not if you're going to compete with oil and natural gas. So, if you do not need to make the fuel from waste in order to minimize emissions for climate reasons, which you don't, then it's a process that needs funding. It needs money commanded to the project. We all know that is going to come from the taxpayers, one way or another, subsidies, law, tax or otherwise.

    We do not want pay extra for something that is not needed and only makes those people rich who we don't want to give money to.

    By :
    Mats Jangdal
    - Posted on :
    23/03/2013
  • Enormous information in one blog post, I just love it. I must appreciate and mention that you completely know how to keep connected reader to blog post even if it is little long. Very good job.

    increase mileage

    By :
    increase mileage
    - Posted on :
    18/04/2013
Background: 

Passenger cars alone are responsible for around 12% of total EU emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas.

The EU proposed legislation, back in 2007, setting emission performance standards for new passenger cars. That legislation, adopted in 2009 by the European Parliament and the Council, is the cornerstone of the EU's strategy to improve the fuel economy of cars and ensure that average emissions from new passenger cars in the EU do not exceed 120 g CO2/km.

The much-anticipated White Paper on Transport, presented by the Commission in February 2011, flags measures to raise the €1.8 trillion which the EU says is needed for infrastructure investment in the next 20 years to build a competitive transport system that will increase mobility, remove major barriers in key areas and fuel growth and employment.

At the same time, the Commission said its proposals will dramatically reduce Europe's dependence on imported oil and cut carbon emissions in transport by 60% by 2050.

More on this topic

More in this section

Advertising

Sponsors

Videos

Energy Efficiency News

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Energy Efficiency Promoted

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Advertising

Advertising