Fuel and carbon savings vs jobs? European Parliament votes on CO2 targets for cars

The environment committee (ENVI) of the European Parliament yesterday voted in favour of the 95 g/km CO2 emissions target for 2020, including the use of controversial ‘super-credits’, i.e. having sub-50 g/km vehicles count multiple times towards reaching the target. They also voted in favour of a setting a ‘corridor’ target of 68 to 78 g/km by 2025.

At an MEP briefing at the European Parliament organised by the FIA and BEUC (European Consumers’ Organisation) the day before, a number of organisations presented their case for and against the proposals, including topics such as super-credits and the 2025 target. Participants saw contributions from the FIA, BEUC, European Commission, CLEPA (European Association of Automotive Suppliers), Transport & Environment, vzbz (a German consumer organisation), ACEA (the European vehicle manufacturers association), the Dutch automobile club ANWB and the ICCT (International Council on Clean Transportation).

Unsurprisingly, there were two camps: environmental and consumer organisations one the one hand, and industry on the other. The former advocated an abolition of the super-credits system and tighter long-term goals because this would benefit the environment and consumers. Consumers would recoup the extra cost per vehicle (c.€300–€1,000) within a couple of years through far cheaper running costs. Representatives from the automotive industry, on the other hand, argued that the proposals and tight long-term targets would require impossibly high investments from a sector that is already feeling the pain. It also said it doesn’t make sense to set any kind of post-2020 target because there is no sound scientific basis for doing so.

While it is true that industry would have to invest (possibly quite heavily) now, it would recoup the money at later stage because the extra costs per vehicle would be passed on consumers. And it is also the case that there is an increasing scientific basis for setting post-2020 targets: not least our report Powering Ahead by Ricardo-AEA which was co-funded by the UK Petroleum Industry Association.

Rest assured that the battle will continue.

Read Full Post »

No longer a taxing matter – Company Car Tax rate for ultra-low-emission vehicles introduced #Budget2013 #EVs

Following concerns expressed by the automotive industry, the Chancellor has reintroduced tax incentives for ultra-low-emission company cars by creating two tax bands for vehicles with tailpipe CO₂ emissions of 0-50 g/km and 51-75 g/km. Even better, this means that they will not be directed at a particular technology (electric vehicles) as they were previously, but be technology-neutral.

Furthermore, he has announced that Company Car Tax rates will be announced three years in advance. This is great news for fleet operators since the average length of ownership of company cars is 3 to 4 years; under the new regime, operators will therefore have longer-term certainty when making vehicle purchasing decisions.

This is the relevant section in Budget 2013:

2.152 Company Car Tax (CCT): ultra low emission vehicles (ULEVs) – From April 2015, two new CCT bands will be introduced at 0-50 grams/kilometre of carbon dioxide (g/km CO2) and 51-75 g/km CO2. (Finance Bill 2013)

2.153 The appropriate percentage of the list price subject to tax for the 0-50 g/km CO2 band will be 5 per cent in 2015-16, and 7 per cent in 2016-17. The appropriate percentage of the list price subject to tax for the 51-75 g/km CO2 band will be 9 per cent in 2015-16 and 11 per cent in 2016-17. In 2017-18 there will be a 3 percentage point differential between the 0-50 and 51-75 g/km CO2 bands, and between the 51-75 and 76-94 g/km CO2 band. In 2018-19 and 2019-20 there will be a 2 percentage point differential between the 0-50 and 51-75 g/km CO2 bands and between the 51-75 and 76-94 g/km CO2 bands. (Finance Bill 2013 and future finance bills) (57)

2.154 In future years CCT rates will be announced three years in advance. The Government will review these incentives for ULEVs in light of market developments at Budget 2016, to inform decisions on CCT from 2020-21 onwards.

Read Full Post »

Charging Ahead: DfT investment in electric vehicle charging points

This week the Secretary of State for Transport, Patrick McLoughlin, announced a new £37 million package of measures for the roll-out of electric vehicle charging points. This includes:

• £13.5 million for a 75% grant for UK homeowners wishing to have a domestic charging point installed;
• £11 million for a fund for local authorities in England to: (a) install on-street charging points in their localities, covering up to 75% of the cost, and (b) provide up to 75% of the cost of installing rapid charging points in their areas around the Strategic Road Network;
• £9 million for funding for the installation of charging points at railway stations;
• £3 million to support the installation of charging points on government/public estates by April 2015; and
• a commitment to review government buying standards to lower fleet CO2 emissions and promote the take-up of plug-in vehicles in central government.

Investment in electric vehicles, particularly charging points, remains a bone of contention. Some would argue that providing charging points en masse overcomes the chicken-and-egg problem of mass-market uptake: you need to put in place the infrastructure before people use electric vehicles. Others would say that this is money ill spent, as they think the government is wasting its money on a technology that is surrounded by uncertainties about expensive batteries and limited overall utility, notably limited range.

Leaving that discussion aside, it is necessary to understand where and when charging points make sense.

It is, in short, where people can (and in practice actually do) park for extended periods of time – at least several hours in the case of slow charging points and around 30 minutes in the case of rapid charging points. In other words, they make sense where there is little or no immediate competition for parking spaces. This effectively means, in order of preference: homes with off-street parking, workplaces with off-street parking facilities, and car parks, including those at shopping centres, park-and-ride and railway stations.

Charging points do not make sense where the above criteria are not met, that is, where people usually do not park for longer periods of time and there is thus competition for parking spaces. Essentially this includes most on-street charging points, particularly in city and town centres and especially if they are slow chargers.

With this in mind, most of the grants seem sensible. If people are lucky enough to have access to off-street parking they will now be able to receive a grant of the order of £750 since a typical domestic charging point installation costs about £1,000, perhaps a bit more. (Perhaps a weatherproof outdoor plug would do it though!) But providing £11 million to local authorities for the provision of on-street charging points seems like a lot of money to be spending on trying to give people mere psychological reassurance.

Read Full Post »

Electric cars. Will they be the death of us?

This (below) from Hansard. Interesting, but not necessarily illuminating. Just because an electric vehicle was involved in an accident doesn’t mean that the cause of the accident was related to that ‘electricness’. Worth noting that there are about 28,000,000 cars in the UK. Of these about 100,000 are hybrids and around 2,600 fully electric.

Electric Vehicles

Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what estimate he has made of the number of persons who were (a) killed, (b) seriously injured and (c) slightly injured by plug-in electric and hybrid electric vehicles when operating in electric mode in each of the last two years; and if he will make a statement. [124191]

Stephen Hammond: The number of casualties in reported personal injury road accidents known to involve electric and hybrid electric vehicles for the years 2010 and 2011 were as follows:

Electric vehicles

Two deaths, 10 serious injuries, and 59 slight injuries in 2010; and one death, 10 serious injuries and 56 slight injuries in 2011.

Hybrid electric vehicles

10 deaths, 72 serious injuries and 576 slight injuries in 2010; and five deaths, 61 serious injuries and 761 slight injuries in 2011.

In both years the number of casualties known to involve electric or hybrid electric vehicles accounted for less than 0.5% of the total number of casualties in reported road accidents in Britain.

The Department refers to DVLA records to determine whether a vehicle involved in an accident has electric or hybrid electric propulsion. This is only possible for British-registered vehicles where a full and accurate vehicle registration mark (VRM) is contained in the police record. This information exists for around three-quarters of vehicles involved in personal injury accidents. There may therefore have been additional accidents involving electric or hybrid electric vehicles that are registered outside Britain, or where the reported VRM was invalid or missing.

The Department does not hold information on whether a vehicle was operating in electric mode at the time of the accident, nor whether the vehicle is of the ‘plug-in’ type.

Read Full Post »

A seaside chat about #roads and #cars. @LibDems on planes, trains & automobiles

Back from the Liberal Democrat conference in Brighton, literally blown home last night by the gales.

Despite the wind and the rain however, there was some comfort to be taken from proceedings because of the amount of discussion related to roads and road transport – even if the conclusions drawn were not always as reassuring. Norman Baker’s comments in the press at the weekend that the green lobby should see cars with good eco-credentials as ‘friends’ was welcome though.

This has to be right. There is no reason to believe that carbon emissions from road transport cannot be significantly cut. What it will take is a concerted, co-ordinated effort from the politicians and the industry.

At the extreme, a government could simply legislate away the problem by banning cars emitting more than a certain amount of CO2 per kilometre, but more reasonably, ministers should be imposing challenging carbon targets which the automotive manufacturers can achieve while still being able to sell cars. And this leads to a word of caution on price. It is not guaranteed that the greenest cars will be cheap to buy, even when produced in bulk, and in the short-term the benefits of lower running costs will only be seen by the wealthy who can afford to buy the greenest of models on the market in the first place.

Worth noting too that there was concern in Brighton about the plans to end the five-year 100% tax exemption on ultra-low carbon company cars from 2015, something which one delegate in the know said threatened to kill the green vehicle market stone dead given that it is fleet and commercial buyers who are key to the adoption of the newer technologies.

Road safety was another recurring theme, with the party members voting to pass a watered-down motion on 20mph zones. As originally put, the motion called for moves to make all residential areas mandatory 20mph zones over the next decade. An amendment meant that the final resolution backed a call for English councils to actively consider a move to the slower speed zones but without a Whitehall diktat.

A fringe meeting on younger drivers’ insurance painted a grim picture of death on the roads. There was unity amongst the speakers – including representatives from Brake, the ABI and Direct Line – that something had to be done, and there was similar agreement that graduated licenses would help.  Though not his area of responsibility, Norman Baker said he had some sympathy for the idea.

There was less sympathy for black box telematic technology which would record an individual’s driving style and offer them discounts on their insurance premiums if they drove in a safer manner and stayed off the roads at the most dangerous times (e.g. at night).

Direct Line had been offering this sort of policy and found the take up very slight despite the insurance company offering to install the necessary equipment at its own expense.

Depressing news on road spending, particularly that associated with road maintenance. Several Lib Dem councillors reiterated the warning contained in an LGA report earlier this year that the financial demands of social care will swallow up ever increasing amounts of council budgets, to the detriment of just about everything else. The report makes sobering if extremely depressing reading.

Read Full Post »

Cutting emissions is not just about using green energy, it also means using less energy

The Delta E-4 is an electric car to be reckoned with. Built by Delta Motorsport at their base at the Silverstone race circuit its green credentials are not limited to the power train, though that is impressive enough. Simon Dowson and his team recognise the necessity of not only using the cleanest energy around (leaving aside for the moment the crucial issue of the carbon content of grid electricity) but also the importance of designing a vehicle which, through things like aerodynamics and light-weighting, requires the least amount of energy to propel it forward.

Taking all this into account Delta has still produced a highly attractive and desirable car which looks good, drives well and is encouragingly green. Compared with many electric cars its performance is notable: 0-60mph in four seconds, masses of mid-range torque and a range of up to 200 miles. Overall it is a car you want to drive rather than merely feel you should drive.

The RAC Foundation is delighted to be teaming up with Delta for the 2011 RAC Future Car Challenge which will showcase around 80 of the latest eco-friendly cars in a run from Brighton to London.

We are equally pleased to have the C4 Grand Designs presenter Kevin McCloud behind the wheel. Kevin’s interest in sustainable living goes beyond the small screen. He is the founder and director of Hab Housing. Of one of his projects, he says:

“Hab Oakus is working with Swindon Borough Council and local people to ensure that the Triangle project serves as a springboard to introduce initiatives such as car clubs and local food networks which will benefit the wider community and Swindon as a whole.”

The RAC Foundation is one of the sponsors of the FCC. Our reason for supporting the event is to show that low-carbon technology is not futuristic but available now. However, we are realistic about what it can deliver in the short-term and how things such as price will continue to exclude some motorists from the changes going on, especially in the near-term.

Before anything else, the population needs to be engaged with environmental debate and to understand some of the issues involved in it. The Future Car Challenge helps foster that conversation – as does the involvement of people like Kevin McCloud.

 

 

Read Full Post »

If small is beautiful, is tiny better still?

The pressures to make cars cleaner and more economical are clear.  Environmental, congestion and economic concerns have shifted car sales towards smaller cars like city cars and super-minis.  Increasingly, small, cleaner cars are getting more attractive: better made and with more features that used to be the preserve of the big saloons (e.g., luxury brands, convertibles, leather seats, cruise control).   Small no longer means cheap and nasty. Nor indeed unsafe.

Cars are a major purchase and people naturally tend to want a car to cover all eventualities: from the commute to the family holiday.  Unfortunately, this often means buying a big car for the rare occasion, leaving the car buyer with a car much bigger (and therefore less efficient) than is  needed for the regular journeys.  According to the National Travel Survey 2009, 85% of commuting car trips are made in cars with a single occupant.  For these motorists, what is the point in driving around with three empty seats, and paying for the privilege?

At this year’s Frankfurt Motor Show, Volkswagen launched the Nils concept vehicle, a single-seat electric vehicle designed for commuting and city driving.  While the car does have some the usual concept car traits that will never make it into a production vehicle, the Nils concept is not just science fiction.  VW’s attempt at shrinking the car is part of a trend for micro vehicles which will reduce the costs and carbon impacts of motoring, are more suited to our congested roads, are easier to park and will match our travel patterns more closely. They’re not for everyone of course, and not all the time, but the number of solutions to the ‘problem’ is growing.

While new fuels, hybrids and emissions regulations have critical roles to play in making cars cleaner, another way to reduce the impacts and costs of motoring is through vehicles specifically designed for common, short, single occupant journeys.  Perhaps even smaller vehicles, which put fewer demands on the engines or electric motors, can be a useful part of the mix? Their small scale also means significantly less resources – materials, energy and labour – are needed to make them in the first place. Smart was one of the first manufacturers to venture into this territory, but there are others now and it is an interesting new part of the market.  Renault has the Twizy EV, a two seat micro-car.  Piaggio has the MP3, a three wheeled scooter that can variously (depending on the gap between the front wheels) be ridden on a motorcycle licence, a car licence or with a CBT certificate.  Audi has the Urban Concept, which is similar to VW’s Nils. Gordon Murray’s T.25 and T.27 vehicles have demonstrated how well less-is-more can work.  As part of new vehicle efficiency, it is worth borrowing from the legendary Lotus Formula One designer Colin Chapman: “add lightness”.

Read Full Post »