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

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

EU gears up CO2 car targets for 2025, 2030

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 08 June 2012

Brussels is poised to set two new carbon emissions targets that all new cars will need to meet by 2025 and 2030, as well as a standard of 95 grams of CO2 emissions per km (g/km) for 2020, according to a draft regulation seen by EurActiv.

The paper, due for release next month, is a statement of intent to the car industry, as the EU inches forward its plans to decarbonise the continent’s economy to between 80-95% of 1990 levels, by 2050.

Passenger cars are currently responsible for about 12% of Europe’s carbon dioxide pollution and EU minds have been focused by figures showing that between 1990 and 2008, road emissions actually increased by 26%.

“At the latest by 31 December 2014,” their draft regulation says, “the Commission shall on the basis of a review and impact assessment, if appropriate, make a proposal… to establish the level of stringency of long-term CO2 emission targets for new passenger cars for 2025 and 2030.”

The news was quickly welcomed in Germany, where ADAC, the largest automobile association in Europe said that urgent action was needed to end Europe’s “prolonged dependency on oil”

“In order to continue to give vehicle manufacturers planning certainty, a binding climate target should be fixed/set beyond 2020,” a statement from the group said.

As well as the 2020 target of 95 g/km for cars and 147 g/km for vans, the draft proposes that niche car makers benefit from a 2020 target which is 45% lower than their average specific emissions in 2007.

An "excess emissions premium" on cars that do not meet the 2020 targets would also be maintained at €95g per vehicle.

Consumers

“We think this is good news for consumers as it will help them to save money on fuel,” said Otmar Lell, a policy advisor for the Federation of German Consumer Organisations (VZBV) told EurActiv.

Petrol prices are currently at record levels in countries such as the UK but a recent study by the former chief of the UK’s Environment Agency, Malcom Fergusson, found that the 95g/km goal could save drivers up to €848 annually by 2030.

A target of 70g/km for 2025 would increase yearly savings to €1,134. 

“Fuel prices have been rising for quite some time,” Lell said, “the increases are becoming more significant, and the intervals between them shorter.”

Tougher CO2 standards equated to greater fuel efficiency and there was “just no alternative”, he said.

Times of austerity

But the news will not be welcomed by some sections of the car industry, which fret about the effects of passing on efficiency investments in the face of tough overseas competition at a time of austerity.

Sigrid de Vries, a spokeswoman for the European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA) told EurActiv that the 95 g/km target remained “very challenging”.

She cited factors including “the required technological transformation, the necessary market-uptake and the wider economic context that forces cost absorption through other channels than product price.”

A report this week by the CARS21 group, which brings together car manufacturers, EU officials and NGOs, found that the development and production costs of meeting the 2020 targets “are lower than in previous estimates”.  

But responding to a question from EurActiv on 6 June, Sergio Marchionne, the president of ACEA and CEO of Fiat, described this as “almost nonsensical”.  

“Not a single member inside our organisation that has deviated from the original cost estimate on delivery and compliance,” said Marchionne, who is also CEO of Fiat.

The CARS21 document “reflects a number of concessions that this industry made with the other participants to facilitate the drafting of the final version,” he explained

Trade union support

Europe’s trades unions though have adopted a more supportive stance to fuel efficiency improvements, which are likely to require more workers in the production process, and more hi-tech training. 

“Our past experience has shown that only strict legal frameworks will push the industry into the right direction,” said Wolf Jäcklein, the policy advisor to the IndustriAll union, which represents over 7 million workers in fields such as metalworking, energy, and mining.

“The process towards de-carbonisation of transport needs to be pursued,” he told EurActiv. “That’s the only way we can ensure a future for Europe’s automotive industry.”

Strong fuel efficiency regulations have given European cars an advantage in the international green car race, but this could be under threat.

In the US President Obama’s restructuring of the US car industry in 2009 led to an emissions standard for cars equivalent to 70-80g/km by 2025. If Europe does not follow suit, it risks being left behind

Industry observers say that CO2 reductions up to 60g/km – a likely target for 2025 or 2030 – could be accommodated by increased hybridisation of vehicles.

“Beyond that, we have move to pure electric vehicles and fuel cell vehicles, and that’s where it starts to get interesting,” one analyst told EurActiv.

If sufficient investment in renewable energy and low carbon technologies has been made by this point, it could mark the moment when decarbonisation of Europe’s road transport system becomes technically feasible.

Franziska Achterberg of Greenpeace called for 2025 target to be brought forward “as soon as possible”. 

“This will bring efficient cars out of the motor shows and onto Europe’s roads and help unlock the technologies we need to get off oil altogether,” she said.

Positions: 

Greg Archer, the programme manager at the environmental group T&E said: “Tighter CO2 standards for cars will be welcomed by drivers across Europe who will save €500 per year at the pump on average if this proposal is adopted. But drivers have also been short-changed: tightening the 2020 target to 80g CO2/km would have saved them a further €150 a year.”

He continued: “The biggest problem with this proposal is the absence of a vision for progress beyond 2020.  This is going to erode the leadership the European automotive industry has achieved.  Thanks to new rules put in place by the U.S administration, the typical American car by 2025 will include more advanced technologies for fuel efficiency than the average European vehicle. There is a real danger that Europe is going to lose its competitive edge in low carbon vehicles if suppliers don’t get the investment certainty needed to develop advanced technologies.”   

Leaders of the automotive supply chain industry have also spoken out for indicative targets for 2025 in the past. Reacting to the CARS21 document on 6 June, Peter Tyroller, the president of the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) said:  “The automotive suppliers employ five million people in Europe making it a leading creator of wealth on our continent. By further investing in safety and environmental performance we will strengthen the global technology leadership of the whole industry”.

But Sigrid de Vries, a spokeswoman for the European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA) challenged this view. “The auto industry is awaiting the Commission proposal, expected to be published shortly, and needs to have the full picture with regard to the modalities and the feasibility of achieving the proposed objectives before ACEA can give a first assessment. Reaching a fleet-average target of 95 by 2020 will remain very challenging in view of the required technological transformation, the necessary market-uptake and the wider economic context that forces cost absorption through other channels than product price. Thorough consideration of all relevant factors will be necessary.”

Next steps: 
  • July 2012: European Commission to publish proposals for 2020 CO2 targets for auto-industry
  • 2013: Review of 2020 target expected to wrap up
  • 31 Dec. 2014: EU expected to complete review of targets for 2020 and 2025
  • 1 Jan. 2015: 130 grams of CO2 per km target to be enforced across Europe
  • 2020: 95 grams of CO2 per km target expected to enter force across Europe
  • 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

  • Despite rising CO2 levels, no warming for 15 years. So much for the Greenhouse Gas theory (GHG) / Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW). You may know this only as 'climate change' or 'global warming'.

    Climate has always changed, and always will. It happened before the Industrial Revolution and so man's industrial activities have little to do with any warming or cooling observed.

    People doubting this need only research temperature changes within the 20th century: hot in 1930's, cooling from 1940's until 1970's, then warming again until 1998-ish, and now flat temperatures since then until today (2012). If man's inductrial activities truly caused warming through CO2 emissions, then why did temperatures go down as well as up?

    The most recent and seemingly accurate climate theory suggests the warming/cooling periods relate to solar-electromagnetic modulation (solar wind) of incoming GCRs from space. Google 'svensmark gcr CERN' for more info.

    Corrupt deceivers like Michael Mann are busy trying to rewrite history and pretend that the 'Medieval Warm Period' (MWP) and 'Little Ice Age' (LIA) never happened. Research those terms and you will see what I am referring to.

    Or you might like to read this to get an understanding of what these evil, corrupt deceivers are up to:
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/22/mike-manns-secret-meeting-on-the-medieval-warm-period/

    Over to you Mike...

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • For those taking an interest in this subject, you can find interesting historical evidence from astronomical / meteorological observers such as William Herschel from the 17th century (1600's), where he noted the apparent correlation between numbers of observed sunspots and wheat prices:

    William Herschel On Sunspots And Wheat Prices In The 17th Century:
    http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2011/07/01/william-herschel-on-sunspots-and-wheat-prices-in-the-17th-century/

    and

    William Herschel, Adam Smith, Sunspots and Wheat Prices:
    http://longstreet.typepad.com/thesciencebookstore/2012/02/william-herschel-adam-smith-sunspots-and-wheat.html

    Write to your local MEP and complain about EU's anti-science stance on CO2.

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • Somebody once noted that empty vessels make the most noise, the previous two posts seem to demonstrate this.

    By :
    I
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • Hasn't Europe experienced enough harm from this idiotic attack on the building block of the biosphere ? Isn't the contribution of the watermelons' profoundly stupid nonscience dumping resources into non-economic wind and solar to bankruptcies of Greece and Spain enough already ?

    By :
    Bob Armstrong
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • @I:
    Prove it's noise. And if you can't then you know what you can do. I is Mike Parr, as he took a heavy hit recently and is still smarting ;-)

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • @Bob Armstrong:
    Hear, hear!

    The watermelons are trying to destroy capitalism because it's against their ideology of communism.

    No doubt I/Mike Parr is one of them. They should go and live in Russia if they love communism so much.

    Watermelons don't understand science or the fact the CO2 is required for making the food they eat.

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • Here's the reply given to Mike Parr's nasty comments in this article (http://www.euractiv.com/infosociety/commission-launches-identity-ini-news-513104) - his comments are preceded by '>' and my reply to him follows on from his comments:

    @Mike Parr:

    > Part of the democratic process is public criticism and having the courage to attached ones real name to ones views (regardless of their popularity).

    Well, if you think it wise to use one's own name on a public political website, you are entitled to your own opinion, of course.
    But please don't assume that everyone shares, or should share, your opinion.

    A quick look at a selection of public website comments sections, though, would seem to confirm that your view is certainly in the minority.
    For example, here's a typical Guardian Environment article comments section:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2012/jun/02/jarvis-cocker-arctic-oil-environment?commentpage=last#end-of-comments

    Could you tell me the proportion of commenters there using their real name?
    It's an extremely small minority, for good reason.

    So, in political terms, you go against the consensus view in this choice of using your own name.
    Anyway, that's your choice, and this is mine. Let's agree to disagree on this point, although it would appear that my choice of anonymity clearly irks you. Funny.

    Personally, I feel the name a commenter chooses to use is irrelevant, as surely the point the commenter makes is of far more importance than their 'handle', or name, if you like?

    > Those that want to know who I am need only look at the FT archives...

    This person:
    http://www.pwr.co.uk/contact.html

    "Custom Studies (IT & Climate Change)
    In the area of market studies, PWR only produces custom reports focused on European markets.
    Custom studies allow PWR to supply client with exactly what they want."

    LOL, I bet the European Commission get exactly what they want. :)

    http://www.macmillanpr.eu/en/index.php?

    "Macmillan Public Affairs is a specialist Brussels-based European public affairs company skilled in serving the communications requirements of business and governments in Central and Eastern Europe."

    So you make your money by telling European institutions to increase their use of renewable energy to combat the bogeyman of 'climate change'.
    Now I understand your need to rattle your drum on these pages, and rubbish those naughty, deluded 'sceptics' or do you prefer the term 'denier'?
    I suppose it makes cents, ooops sense, I mean.

    > ... and the 16 or so letters I have had published in that "august organ".

    http://www.google.com/search?q="august+organ"+"mike+parr"
    9 results

    Seems like you like to sound important. Perhaps it helps with the PRopaganda, ooops sorry, 'Public Relations' for Macmillan PR / PWR when peddling your wares?

    For the benefit of people here whose first language is not English:
    august [aw-guhst]
    adjective
    1. inspiring reverence or admiration; of supreme dignity or grandeur; majestic: an august performance of a religious drama.
    2. venerable; eminent: an august personage.

    > In the case of "J" clearly the man (or woman) has something to hide if he/she/it only identifies itself by a letter...

    You have lost your credibility completely now.

    > Pathetic.

    Are you trying to bring in the infamous use of ad-hominem attacks here?
    Tut tut, at your age you should know better that debates should be conducted on the basis of facts & opinions, and not through use of ad-hominem attacks.

    > Still that just about sums up such people - shouting as they do from the sidelines.

    What are you talking about? Please elaborate.
    Judging by your choice of words, you are clearly an angry, irked and rattled old man. Take it easy, anger is not good for the blood pressure.
    I understand that science is slowly but surely supplanting 'science' in the public's eye, and that is bad for your business, but please stay calm, and try to be objective.

    > Don't like what's going on - join a political party - hell form one if you cannot find one you like.

    You mean join a socialist or communist-based party to use 'science', politics (IPCC/Greenpeace/WWF/RS/UEA CRU/Mann/Jones variety) to attack science, facts and reason?

    No thanks, I prefer to use my intellect and critical-thinking capabilities to differentiate between facts and 'facts'.
    Good try though ;-)

    Finally Mike, let me again remind you that there is a comment that requires your counter-reply on European aviation CO2 taxes here:
    http://www.euractiv.com/climate-environment/europe-airline-ceos-blast-crazy-news-512975

    Normally, it would appear that you are quite opinionated, so I'm surprised that you don't feel a need to 'rebut' my comment at that URL.
    Or is this question a bit tricky? Using your words.

    Perhaps you will 'lose your courage' again, and not reply?

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • @Mike Parr:
    Why do you like organs so much?

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • You know you're rattling the watermelons when they snipe at you - bring it on!

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • For the benefit of those not understanding the term 'watermelon':
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watermelon_%28politics%29

    "Eco-socialism, green socialism or socialist ecology is an ideology merging aspects of Marxism, socialism, green politics, ecology and alter-globalization. Eco-socialists generally believe that the expansion of the capitalist system is the cause of social exclusion, poverty, war and environmental degradation through globalization and imperialism, under the supervision of repressive states and transnational structures.[1]

    Eco-socialists advocate the dismantling of capitalism and the state, focusing on common ownership of the means of production by freely associated producers and restoration of the commons."

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • Watermelon:
    "green on the outside and red on the inside"

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • For anyone interested to see how watermelons have caused disastrous energy policy in Germany, to the point where they risk the lights going out, have fun reading this great website written by a German resident, but written in English:

    http://notrickszone.com

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."

    George Orwell

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    08/06/2012
  • Alabama bans UN Agenda 21 / 'Sustainable Development':

    http://thegwpf.org/international-news/5922-alabama-adopts-first-official-state-ban-on-un-agenda-21.html
    http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/1/post/2012/06/winning-the-fight.html
    http://www.offthegridnews.com/2012/06/07/alabama-takes-lead-by-banning-united-nations-agenda-21/
    http://townhall.com/columnists/townhallcomstaff/2012/05/31/alabama_fights_a_un_landgrab/page/full/

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    10/06/2012
  • See what people think of UN Agenda 21 here - the comments are quite interesting indeed!

    http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/06/07/peter-foster-no-bravo-for-rio20/

    By :
    J
    - Posted on :
    10/06/2012
Background: 

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

In 2007, the EU proposed legislation setting emission performance standards for new cars, which was adopted in 2009 by the European Parliament and the EU Council of Ministers. Today it 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 grams CO2/km.

The much-anticipated White Paper on Transport, presented by the Commission in February 2011, flagged 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

Video General News

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Transport Promoted videos

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Advertising

Advertising