Brexit will change the mix of cars sold in the UK.
Discussion
braddo said:
Does anyone have a (very) broad idea of how much the manufacturer fines might equate to by individual vehicle?
For example if a manufacturer's fleet average is the current UK average, I wonder what sort of size fine would be levied and how that would translate to higher purchase price for the consumer.
If it was 2% of RRP it might not change buying habits at all. At 5% it would make a difference and at 10% I expect sales would drop significantly.
For an idea of how much of a problem this is for the big manufacturers:For example if a manufacturer's fleet average is the current UK average, I wonder what sort of size fine would be levied and how that would translate to higher purchase price for the consumer.
If it was 2% of RRP it might not change buying habits at all. At 5% it would make a difference and at 10% I expect sales would drop significantly.
https://www.paconsulting.com/insights/2019/co2-emi...
Jaguar Land Rover currently facing a potential fine of 400% of their profit.....
irocfan said:
df76 said:
You’ve answered your own question. The idea of a “pay per mile” taxation system was first raised about 15 years ago (including a variable on what time of day you drove). Went down very badly.
one might imagine with the (perceived) current fervor for greenness that this proposal might meet with more favour these days....meatballs said:
Policy seems bit poorly thought out.
They want to reduce CO2 but aren't targeting the source of the CO2 - the petrol/diesel coming out of the pumps.
A 500g/km vehicle is less polluting than a 96g/km car if it is rarely used.
I suspect raising taxes on fuel wouldn't go down with anyone's voter base though.
(I'm also a bit bitter that I pay full VED on a car that does hardly any miles...)
IMO it is all very well thinking our future choices with regard to emissions and new technologies for NEW car purchases but I am more concerned about the ICE cars I am running at the moment.They want to reduce CO2 but aren't targeting the source of the CO2 - the petrol/diesel coming out of the pumps.
A 500g/km vehicle is less polluting than a 96g/km car if it is rarely used.
I suspect raising taxes on fuel wouldn't go down with anyone's voter base though.
(I'm also a bit bitter that I pay full VED on a car that does hardly any miles...)
The government is letting us down badly in not giving us a clear steer to the way forward for existing ICE owners. Not that I trust them anyway since the rush to diesel and now backtracking.
If the take-up of EVs doesn't gain traction with the motorist due to purchase prices/unknown depreciation or just plain unwillingness to make the change, what happens to all the existing ICE cars on the road? Will the government start using the stick of higher and higher VED rates for older polluting vehicles to make us change? That will be painful for a lot of people.
Of course it seems hypocritical to scrap a perfectly good serviceable car and then to commission the building of a NEW one with all the associate emissions. Will the government take this into account?
Meatball, I am like you in that I do very few miles and yet pay full VED, but I knew that when I chose my vehicles. I still don't like it though. It's not proportionate.
Some further thoughts.
There is much mention of CO2 levels and the associated penalties on manufacturers fleets but obviously this must go hand in hand with NOx emissions too. Are there any similar penalties on manufacturers for NOx emissions being exceeded by 2021/2025/2030? I guess there are but CO2 seems to be the driver.
It seems to me that:
CO2 = global warming
NOx = particulates and air quality in towns
For the time being it seems the manufacturers are going for Hybrid/EV to mitigate their fleet averages with this drive to lower and lower emmisisons. Which begs the question of which to choose when looking at a NEW car purchase.
I am currently delaying swapping my car and really don't know which way to jump.
I think I will just sit tight until the EV charging network is more mature and the government make a clear policy statement of the pathway to greener motoring.
There is much mention of CO2 levels and the associated penalties on manufacturers fleets but obviously this must go hand in hand with NOx emissions too. Are there any similar penalties on manufacturers for NOx emissions being exceeded by 2021/2025/2030? I guess there are but CO2 seems to be the driver.
It seems to me that:
CO2 = global warming
NOx = particulates and air quality in towns
For the time being it seems the manufacturers are going for Hybrid/EV to mitigate their fleet averages with this drive to lower and lower emmisisons. Which begs the question of which to choose when looking at a NEW car purchase.
I am currently delaying swapping my car and really don't know which way to jump.
I think I will just sit tight until the EV charging network is more mature and the government make a clear policy statement of the pathway to greener motoring.
Down on the Farm said:
Some further thoughts.
There is much mention of CO2 levels and the associated penalties on manufacturers fleets but obviously this must go hand in hand with NOx emissions too. Are there any similar penalties on manufacturers for NOx emissions being exceeded by 2021/2025/2030? I guess there are but CO2 seems to be the driver.
It seems to me that:
CO2 = global warming
NOx = particulates and air quality in towns
They deal with them differently - NOx and particulates are dealt with by means of hard per-vehicle limits. You can't legally bring a car to market if it fails those tests, there is no facility to offset a dirty car with some clean ones. CO2, historically no limits, now bringing in fleet average limits but not per-car limits, so you can still sell a few thirsty cars if you also sell a lot of frugal ones. There is much mention of CO2 levels and the associated penalties on manufacturers fleets but obviously this must go hand in hand with NOx emissions too. Are there any similar penalties on manufacturers for NOx emissions being exceeded by 2021/2025/2030? I guess there are but CO2 seems to be the driver.
It seems to me that:
CO2 = global warming
NOx = particulates and air quality in towns
Stick Legs said:
By 2025:
Jaguar Electric thingy = No emissions x not many sold.
Jaguar Hybrid thingy = Small emissions x lots sold.
Jaguar XJ s/c V8 thingy = Loads x not many sold.
Average emissions = Under the limit.
Isnt the jag SC V8 being phased out now? ISTR reading that it is made by Ford at the engine plant that is closing. So supply will be limited?Jaguar Electric thingy = No emissions x not many sold.
Jaguar Hybrid thingy = Small emissions x lots sold.
Jaguar XJ s/c V8 thingy = Loads x not many sold.
Average emissions = Under the limit.
jhoneyball said:
Stick Legs said:
By 2025:
Jaguar Electric thingy = No emissions x not many sold.
Jaguar Hybrid thingy = Small emissions x lots sold.
Jaguar XJ s/c V8 thingy = Loads x not many sold.
Average emissions = Under the limit.
Isnt the jag SC V8 being phased out now? ISTR reading that it is made by Ford at the engine plant that is closing. So supply will be limited?Jaguar Electric thingy = No emissions x not many sold.
Jaguar Hybrid thingy = Small emissions x lots sold.
Jaguar XJ s/c V8 thingy = Loads x not many sold.
Average emissions = Under the limit.
te TX.
^tbf the Yaris GR seems a great car in a small package so perhaps not all bad
otolith said:
They deal with them differently - NOx and particulates are dealt with by means of hard per-vehicle limits. You can't legally bring a car to market if it fails those tests, there is no facility to offset a dirty car with some clean ones. CO2, historically no limits, now bringing in fleet average limits but not per-car limits, so you can still sell a few thirsty cars if you also sell a lot of frugal ones.
Thanks for that otolithAs I suspected NOx and particulates an absolute maximum not to be exceeded.
I can see that NOx and particulates are becoming more a driver in towns and cities for better air quality that is driven from separate EU legislation and will become a bigger driver to get people to migrate away from ICE in the (near) future? Bristol Birmingham etc
My worry is that as the planets align we get the perfect storm of conflicting/conflating? targets and limits set by different legislation that will ensure the death of the ICE quicker that we think.
What to do in the meantime?
Possibly. There was a decision taken in the early 2000's to discourage owning higher CO2 cars, and the decision against scientific advice to add an accompanying measure to discourage owning higher NOx/particulate cars led inevitably to a lot of people buying diesels. And now we have crap air quality in our cities.
Getting cars onto electricity does at least mean that the focus is likely to move from whether cars are green enough to whether generation is green enough. I'd rather the crusties were protesting Drax than blocking the roads (although many of them have issues with cars which go beyond emissions, so we might not get rid of them entirely).
Getting cars onto electricity does at least mean that the focus is likely to move from whether cars are green enough to whether generation is green enough. I'd rather the crusties were protesting Drax than blocking the roads (although many of them have issues with cars which go beyond emissions, so we might not get rid of them entirely).
meatballs said:
Policy seems bit poorly thought out.
They want to reduce CO2 but aren't targeting the source of the CO2 - the petrol/diesel coming out of the pumps.
A 500g/km vehicle is less polluting than a 96g/km car if it is rarely used.
I suspect raising taxes on fuel wouldn't go down with anyone's voter base though.
(I'm also a bit bitter that I pay full VED on a car that does hardly any miles...)
Agreed.They want to reduce CO2 but aren't targeting the source of the CO2 - the petrol/diesel coming out of the pumps.
A 500g/km vehicle is less polluting than a 96g/km car if it is rarely used.
I suspect raising taxes on fuel wouldn't go down with anyone's voter base though.
(I'm also a bit bitter that I pay full VED on a car that does hardly any miles...)
Taxes are aimed at your "Ability to pollute" not your "Actual pollution". Until this mindset changes, we are going to fail to reduce CO2.
Why should someone pay heavily for having a 500g/km car if they only drive 1,000 miles a year. When repmobile man in his Mondeo doing 30k miles a year gets let off because his car only does 80g/km, when in reality he is polluting a lot more.
If I was in charge, I would move, over time, to putting any taxes completely on the fuel, this then makes those who pollute more, pay more, which has to be the best way to try and get people to reduce their pollution?
otolith said:
Possibly. There was a decision taken in the early 2000's to discourage owning higher CO2 cars, and the decision against scientific advice to add an accompanying measure to discourage owning higher NOx/particulate cars led inevitably to a lot of people buying diesels. And now we have crap air quality in our cities.
Governments are not all to blame here. NOx levels in cities would be noticeably lower than they are today if diesel cars of the past 20 years hadn't been spitting out 10 times the prescribed NOx limits in real driving.braddo said:
otolith said:
Possibly. There was a decision taken in the early 2000's to discourage owning higher CO2 cars, and the decision against scientific advice to add an accompanying measure to discourage owning higher NOx/particulate cars led inevitably to a lot of people buying diesels. And now we have crap air quality in our cities.
Governments are not all to blame here. NOx levels in cities would be noticeably lower than they are today if diesel cars of the past 20 years hadn't been spitting out 10 times the prescribed NOx limits in real driving.Olivergt said:
Agreed.
Taxes are aimed at your "Ability to pollute" not your "Actual pollution". Until this mindset changes, we are going to fail to reduce CO2.
Why should someone pay heavily for having a 500g/km car if they only drive 1,000 miles a year. When repmobile man in his Mondeo doing 30k miles a year gets let off because his car only does 80g/km, when in reality he is polluting a lot more.
If I was in charge, I would move, over time, to putting any taxes completely on the fuel, this then makes those who pollute more, pay more, which has to be the best way to try and get people to reduce their pollution?
But why shouldn't someone be penalised for emitting 5 times more g/km than Mondeo man? The cost of fuel is not enough of an incentive if doing low mileage. The fact that many people complain about it, and that £550 annual VED turns people off owning particular cars, prove that it is an effective policy in encouraging everyone to have more efficient cars no matter what mileage they do.Taxes are aimed at your "Ability to pollute" not your "Actual pollution". Until this mindset changes, we are going to fail to reduce CO2.
Why should someone pay heavily for having a 500g/km car if they only drive 1,000 miles a year. When repmobile man in his Mondeo doing 30k miles a year gets let off because his car only does 80g/km, when in reality he is polluting a lot more.
If I was in charge, I would move, over time, to putting any taxes completely on the fuel, this then makes those who pollute more, pay more, which has to be the best way to try and get people to reduce their pollution?
Just be grateful we don't have similar costs as in Ireland, Netherlands and Scandi countries...
otolith said:
braddo said:
otolith said:
Possibly. There was a decision taken in the early 2000's to discourage owning higher CO2 cars, and the decision against scientific advice to add an accompanying measure to discourage owning higher NOx/particulate cars led inevitably to a lot of people buying diesels. And now we have crap air quality in our cities.
Governments are not all to blame here. NOx levels in cities would be noticeably lower than they are today if diesel cars of the past 20 years hadn't been spitting out 10 times the prescribed NOx limits in real driving.braddo said:
otolith said:
braddo said:
otolith said:
Possibly. There was a decision taken in the early 2000's to discourage owning higher CO2 cars, and the decision against scientific advice to add an accompanying measure to discourage owning higher NOx/particulate cars led inevitably to a lot of people buying diesels. And now we have crap air quality in our cities.
Governments are not all to blame here. NOx levels in cities would be noticeably lower than they are today if diesel cars of the past 20 years hadn't been spitting out 10 times the prescribed NOx limits in real driving.Terminator X said:
As someone else posted above, cars need to be zero CO2 by 2040 so the industry will need to massively change over the next 20 years whether in or out of the EU.
"The current Road to Zero strategy aims to see between 50% and 70% of new car sales, and up to 40% of van sales, being “ultra-low emission” by 2030, with only sales of “effectively zero emissions” vehicles by 2040."
Imho the industry will be in chaos during this period as EV demand is not there, yet the manufacturers are forced to build EV.
TX.
Effectively zero emissions by 2040 doesn’t mean EVs only, hybrids are also allowed to be sold."The current Road to Zero strategy aims to see between 50% and 70% of new car sales, and up to 40% of van sales, being “ultra-low emission” by 2030, with only sales of “effectively zero emissions” vehicles by 2040."
Imho the industry will be in chaos during this period as EV demand is not there, yet the manufacturers are forced to build EV.
TX.
The minimum battery only range/co2 per km of such vehicles doesn’t appear to be defined as yet, guess they’ve got a while to decide.
IMHO pretty much everyone will be in such vehicles way before then anyhow so it’s pretty arbitrary.
Olivergt said:
Agreed.
Taxes are aimed at your "Ability to pollute" not your "Actual pollution". Until this mindset changes, we are going to fail to reduce CO2.
Why should someone pay heavily for having a 500g/km car if they only drive 1,000 miles a year. When repmobile man in his Mondeo doing 30k miles a year gets let off because his car only does 80g/km, when in reality he is polluting a lot more.
Sorry to quote again, but bear in mind the first person is paying a few hundred quid more in VED per year, while Mondeo man is forking out over £4k in fuel of which £2-3k is tax? I'm not sure he is getting let off!!Taxes are aimed at your "Ability to pollute" not your "Actual pollution". Until this mindset changes, we are going to fail to reduce CO2.
Why should someone pay heavily for having a 500g/km car if they only drive 1,000 miles a year. When repmobile man in his Mondeo doing 30k miles a year gets let off because his car only does 80g/km, when in reality he is polluting a lot more.
Butter Face said:
Pappyjohn said:
Rumors are that the new Jimny is being pulled from Europe because of its high polluting nature.
That's what is going to happen. Cars that have high co2 will get removed from sale. Simple.
The Jimny should never have had that engine in it anyway IMO. The Co2 figures on it hammer Suzuki's average level pretty hard. So they sell 1 Swift hybrid @ 97 g/km and 1 Jimny Auto at 170 g/km and it hits them hard.That's what is going to happen. Cars that have high co2 will get removed from sale. Simple.
No wonder they're restricting (or just not building enough) supply! They need to get the 1.0 boosterjet in it and get it down to 130 g/km, or the 1.2 dualjet hybrid (which in a swift 4x4 scrapes 101 g/km)
Terminator X said:
As someone else posted above, cars need to be zero CO2 by 2040 so the industry will need to massively change over the next 20 years whether in or out of the EU.
"The current Road to Zero strategy aims to see between 50% and 70% of new car sales, and up to 40% of van sales, being “ultra-low emission” by 2030, with only sales of “effectively zero emissions” vehicles by 2040."
Imho the industry will be in chaos during this period as EV demand is not there, yet the manufacturers are forced to build EV.
There is demand for cars. If the only cars you can buy are EVs, there is demand for EVs. "The current Road to Zero strategy aims to see between 50% and 70% of new car sales, and up to 40% of van sales, being “ultra-low emission” by 2030, with only sales of “effectively zero emissions” vehicles by 2040."
Imho the industry will be in chaos during this period as EV demand is not there, yet the manufacturers are forced to build EV.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff