Clean car seeks green (wealthy) driver[fr][de] 

At a debate held at Brussels think-tank Friends of Europe on 18 April 2007, representatives of the European institutions, the auto industry, consumer groups and green NGOs discussed how the Commission's strategy to reduce the environmental impact of motor vehicles can be put into practice in the most cost-efficient and consumer-friendly manner. 

Indeed, cutting vehicles' emissions, decreasing Europe's dependency on imported oil and reducing consumer spending on fuel are universally accepted goals. But the extent to which technology alone can carry the burden of these missions is more hotly contested. 

The motor industry says that the cost of bringing emissions down to 120 g/km will be unbearable, driving many companies out of business and limiting choice for consumers as larger, more powerful cars fail to meet the standards. 

Furthermore, carmakers insist that, unless regulatory measures focusing on supply-side aspects are matched with measures to help guide consumers in the same direction, a "dislocated market" will emerge, in which automakers are forced to design vehicles that comply with strict environmental standards but fail to meet drivers' aspirations. 

It is widely agreed that educating drivers, through better labelling and advertising, as well as through market-based measures such as fiscal incentives and taxes, is essential to engage consumers in the debate. 

But the feasibility of introducing a harmonised taxation system based on CO2 emissions - a measure supported by industry (EurActiv 13/03/07) - was largely doubted. 

In the meantime other measures, such as the use of existing information technologies including GPS systems and the development of public-transport systems in Europe's cities, can contribute to finding a solution. 

"We have the technology available to make major reductions in CO2 emissions. The question is balancing ambition with realism. We do not want to cause significant harm to the motor industry and very large price increases," said Chris Davies MEP, Parliament's rapporteur on the Commission proposal. 

Jean-Claude Fontaine from Peugeot was less optimistic: "We still do not think this is feasible, even in 2012," adding that if such ambitious targets are to be met, "we will have a real problem of affordability… the cost will be very high, also for small cars that are emitting low levels of CO2." 

"Technology is not the only way…There are limits in that respect. So taxation, labelling, eco-driving and biofuels can all play a part. We must analyse all possibilities. There is not one solution, there are several solutions and we have to implement them all together," he added. 

Toyota Europe’s Graham Smith pressed for a harmonised structure of environmental taxation, to give a clear signal to consumers. "Without such incentives, the take-up of environmentally friendly technology will simply not happen, because cost and safety concerns nearly always come first on buyers' list of priorities," he said. 

He added that there was a real risk that the Commission's plan would force manufacturers to lose touch with consumers by forcing them to design vehicles that comply with strict environmental standards but fail to meet drivers' aspirations. "The fastest way for any organisation to go out of business is for it to lose touch with its market," he warned. 

But Reinhard Schulte-Braucks, head of the Commission's automotive industry unit, said that, while tax incentives could be useful at a national level, "one should not and cannot expect any harmonisation". He said that the Commission would rather focus on improving labelling, especially with regard to the size of information on CO2. "This information at present is unsatisfactory in most countries," he said. 

Wil Botman, director general of the Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), said that the Commission's plan was undemocratic and would result in coercing consumers to buy one type of car. Instead, he pleaded for more power to be left to member states, under some sort of quota system. Each member state would receive an annual allowance of emissions and could then choose which measures – fiscal, investing in public transport, information campaigns or regulatory measures – it wishes to apply in order to respect the quota, which could be measured, for instance, by looking at annual fuel consumption in that country. 

Responding to EurActiv's editor, Willy de Backer, who said that addressing fuel economy was "like repairing the plumbing when your house is on fire" and that what is really needed is a change in demand, Aat Peterse of the green NGO T&E (European Federation for Transport & Environment) said: "Driving cars less is a very important contribution, but driving more fuel-efficient cars less is even better." 

He stressed that affordability need not be such a big problem, saying it was a "misconception" that making low-carbon cars requires expensive low-carbon technologies. Instead, he said, there are cheaper and easier solutions, such as building in slightly lower top speeds and acceleration requirements. Such measures can reduce engine size, making cars lighter.