• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

UK switching to electric vehicles discussion

johncrossley

Established Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
4,455
Location
London
It is when it means that our car industry is closing down,

"Our" car industry? Who is the "we" here? I guess you are talking about the UK as a whole. If so, that's quite parochial. The so called "car industry" is relatively small and concentrated in certain specific locations. Most of it is owned by shareholders and institutions across the world. So it really isn't something to get patriotic about.

Most other European countries have even less of a car industry than the UK so have even less of a reason not to buy Chinese. Given that car models are generally supplied on a pan-European basis, if the rest of Europe buys Chinese cars, the UK will inevitably follow suit.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

MotCO

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
6,137
"Our" car industry? Who is the "we" here? I guess you are talking about the UK as a whole. If so, that's quite parochial. The so called "car industry" is relatively small and concentrated in certain specific locations. Most of it is owned by shareholders and institutions across the world. So it really isn't something to get patriotic about.
I'm not talking about patriotism. I'm happy for Nissan to be building cars in Sunderland. I'm talking about men and women losing their jobs at the car factories, at the businesses supplying the car factories, the corner shops that sell newspapers to the factory workers ...the list goes on. The net effect will be more unemployed, higher taxes for the remaining workers to pay for the unemployment benefit, lose of morale for those who lost their jobs, the impact on other family members, people with too much free time on their hands. It affects hundreds, and probably thousands of people.

I'd much rather the jobs were in the UK and not abroad. Hardly patriotism.
 

johncrossley

Established Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
4,455
Location
London
I'd much rather the jobs were in the UK and not abroad. Hardly patriotism.

Sounds very much like you have a bias simply because you have an emotional attachment to the UK. Obviously anyone in any country could say that they would rather have the jobs in their country but not in another. You could just as easily say that someone buying a car made in Sunderland hurts someone working in a car factor in Germany, and all the local suppliers there. You are basically saying that there shouldn't be international trade. Protectionism may be a vote winner in the short run but ends up being counterproductive in the long run. If Nissan want to survive then they need to build desirable electric cars at a competitive price.

Your bias is also illogical for the reasons I stated before. Buying a car made in Sunderland makes people in other countries richer.
 
Last edited:

renegademaster

Established Member
Joined
22 Jun 2023
Messages
2,222
Location
Croydon
Sounds very much like you have a bias simply because you have an emotional attachment to the UK. Obviously anyone in any country could say that they would rather have the jobs in their country but not in another. You could just as easily say that someone buying a car made in Sunderland hurts someone working in a car factor in Germany, and all the local suppliers there. You are basically saying that there shouldn't be international trade. Protectionism may be a vote winner in the short run but ends up being counterproductive in the long run. If Nissan want to survive then they need to build desirable electric cars at a competitive price.

Your bias is also illogical for the reasons I stated before. Buying a car made in Sunderland makes people in other countries richer.
They pay into the same taxpot that your services the government provide getting funded out of. You have rational reasons not to support what's left of our industry going abroad without being an extreme nationalist.
 

johncrossley

Established Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
4,455
Location
London
They pay into the same taxpot that your services the government provide getting funded out of. You have rational reasons not to support what's left of our industry going abroad without being an extreme nationalist.

If the UK embarks on protectionism and levies punitive tariffs to block Chinese imports, there are consequences. We end up with fewer cars to choose from, meaning that we end up spending more on cars and as a consequence we have less money to spend on other things. That ends up hurting small businesses in our local areas.
 

renegademaster

Established Member
Joined
22 Jun 2023
Messages
2,222
Location
Croydon
If the UK embarks on protectionism and levies punitive tariffs to block Chinese imports, there are consequences. We end up with fewer cars to choose from, meaning that we end up spending more on cars and as a consequence we have less money to spend on other things. That ends up hurting small businesses in our local areas.
Counteracting dumping is still within the spirit of free trade , because it's already a state backed distortion of the market that isn't going to last forever, not always a case of comparative advantage.
 

MotCO

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
6,137
Sounds very much like you have a bias simply because you have an emotional attachment to the UK. Obviously anyone in any country could say that they would rather have the jobs in their country but not in another. You could just as easily say that someone buying a car made in Sunderland hurts someone working in a car factor in Germany, and all the local suppliers there. You are basically saying that there shouldn't be international trade. Protectionism may be a vote winner in the short run but ends up being counterproductive in the long run. If Nissan want to survive then they need to build desirable electric cars at a competitive price.

Your bias is also illogical for the reasons I stated before. Buying a car made in Sunderland makes people in other countries richer.
Taking your argument to extremes, you'd rather all industry was based abroad, and no-one in the UK had a productive job.

Have you even been made redundant? Not a pleasant feeling, to put it mildly. Ever heard of "Charity begins at home"?
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,793
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Taking your argument to extremes, you'd rather all industry was based abroad, and no-one in the UK had a productive job.

Have you even been made redundant? Not a pleasant feeling, to put it mildly. Ever heard of "Charity begins at home"?

I'm not buying poor quality, overpriced goods just because they are made here. They need to up their game.

Rover, for example, made terrible cars and deserved to fail.

It's not just China. Japanese cars are far higher quality than UK ones because of their factory processes and the likes (though they do seem to successfully import those processes to the UK Nissan factories). The UK just isn't good at mass manufacturing of anything, really.
 
Last edited:

johncrossley

Established Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
4,455
Location
London
Taking your argument to extremes, you'd rather all industry was based abroad, and no-one in the UK had a productive job.

Have you even been made redundant? Not a pleasant feeling, to put it mildly. Ever heard of "Charity begins at home"?

Most people at work actually face competition from companies based in this country, maybe even in the same town. It is no comfort to someone made redundant that your company lost business to another UK company.
 

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
4,912
It is when it means that our car industry is closing down, affecting long supply chains and their employees, laying off workers, depressing towns etc. Yes, our car industry should have foreseen this, but I do have a suspicion that China are plaing a long game to exert greater influence over the world, and we have been caught napping.
Nah. It's just cheaper to make stuff there due to lower wages etc.
We don't make TVs and toasters and kettles etc any more. All made in China. We don't make clothes any more. All made in the far East.
The sky hasn't fallen in.

China could have a capitalist government and it would still be cheaper to build cars there.

But you're right, their government does plan for the long term but we are hobbled by short termism.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

I'm not buying poor quality, overpriced goods just because they are made here. They need to up their game.

Rover, for example, made terrible cars and deserved to fail.
Actually the irony is the 25 and particularly 75 were good cars. I remember a vox pop with one of the workers when it shut "We made rubbish for decades, now we make really good cars and nobody wants them". I imagine many potential buyers were put off from previous experience. My girlfriend at the times father had a 75 and it was a lovely car.

I don't see anything wrong with China selling us good cars at low prices, same as all the other stuff they make.
Nissan came out with the Leaf and had a real head start but then basically did nothing in the EV space for a decade.
VW had a proper go but lots of software and quality issues with the iD range only now sorted has hurt them badly.
The Koreans are doing well.
Most other legacy manufacturers have produced very expensive not particularly EVs so it's hardly surprising they are feeling some pain.
 
Last edited:

MotCO

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
6,137
Most people at work actually face competition from companies based in this country, maybe even in the same town. It is no comfort to someone made redundant that your company lost business to another UK company.
Our initial exchange was my disagreeing with your view that "the internal politics of China is not our concern". I'm arguing that it is when it comes to saving jobs in this country. Yes, there is competition between companies in the UK, but the staff could move to their competitors, supply lines could be realigned etc, so the overall impact in this country is reduced This is not the case when jobs are lost overseas.

I'm not buying poor quality, overpriced goods just because they are made here. They need to up their gameYes, .
I made that point in my earlier post

Yes, our car industry should have foreseen this, but I do have a suspicion that China are plaing a long game to exert greater influence over the world, and we have been caught napping.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,793
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Most other legacy manufacturers have produced very expensive not particularly EVs so it's hardly surprising they are feeling some pain.

Stellantis in particular is whining quite loudly while producing lots of decidedly average and extremely expensive cars. I just can't see why I'd buy a tinfoil Citroen/Pug/"Vauxhall"* over an MG, the quality is no better and the price, particularly as an EV, is astronomical.

* Actual Vauxhalls were better, but it's all badged Stellantis platforms now.
 

johncrossley

Established Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
4,455
Location
London
Our initial exchange was my disagreeing with your view that "the internal politics of China is not our concern". I'm arguing that it is when it comes to saving jobs in this country. Yes, there is competition between companies in the UK, but the staff could move to their competitors, supply lines could be realigned etc, so the overall impact in this country is reduced This is not the case when jobs are lost overseas.

So when is international trade permissible? If the UK blocks international trade then that will mean lost international markets for UK companies when inevitably other countries retaliate by stopping imports from the UK. The overall impact in the *world* is what counts in the long run. Artificial trade barriers allow companies to get away with being uncompetitive, which means less innovation and lower economic growth.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
16,061
Location
St Albans
So when is international trade permissible? If the UK blocks international trade then that will mean lost international markets for UK companies when inevitably other countries retaliate by stopping imports from the UK. The overall impact in the *world* is what counts in the long run. Artificial trade barriers allow companies to get away with being uncompetitive, which means less innovation and lower economic growth.
Precisely, just look at where the Trabant ended up!
 

GusB

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
8,174
Location
Elginshire
Is it realistic that the UK will switch to EVs?

"No, because they're built in China."

:rolleyes:
 

cactustwirly

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Messages
8,424
Location
UK
I'm not buying poor quality, overpriced goods just because they are made here. They need to up their game.

Rover, for example, made terrible cars and deserved to fail.

It's not just China. Japanese cars are far higher quality than UK ones because of their factory processes and the likes (though they do seem to successfully import those processes to the UK Nissan factories). The UK just isn't good at mass manufacturing of anything, really.

After BMW bought Rover and turned it around, they made some really good cars unfortunately the reputational damage had already been done.

The European Nissan's are hardly Japanese these days. Effectively rebadged Renaults with a Japanese badge
 

MotCO

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
6,137
So when is international trade permissible? If the UK blocks international trade then that will mean lost international markets for UK companies when inevitably other countries retaliate by stopping imports from the UK. The overall impact in the *world* is what counts in the long run. Artificial trade barriers allow companies to get away with being uncompetitive, which means less innovation and lower economic growth.

I have not suggested tariffs. I agree that free trade is preferable, but when China subsidises its car manufacturing, either by low wages, or cheap and dirty electricity, should we accept unfair trading? Should the UK Govt offer financial incentives to manufacturers in the UK?

Is it realistic that the UK will switch to EVs?

"No, because they're built in China."

:rolleyes:

I am not against EVs, but they're just not for me at the present time (but maybe the drivability of EVs may not match that of ICEs - they may feel too disconnected from the driver, but that is a personal view).

We are still in the early evolution of EVs, and there will be a time when they are as cheap and convenient as an ICE in terms of range and charging facilities. I just don't want to be an early guinea pig with uncertainties about depreciation and future values. Who would buy my EV in a few years' time, when a new EV could be cheaper and have a greater range? Maybe ICEs could be cleaner than EVs in the future - they will still be built in the future for markets where EVs are not suitable. Who knows what will happen?
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
19,373
Location
Yorkshire
Is it realistic that the UK will switch to EVs?

"No, because they're built in China."

:rolleyes:
I do find it odd that so many in this thread are very pro-EV and pro-"net zero"... Yet are happy to fund a deeply corrupt authoritarian regime on the other side of the world which is currently releasing huge amounts of carbon dioxide and showing very few signs of curbing those emissions.

Buying some stuff from the PRC is unavoidable unless you want to go off-grid and live in the woods, but you do have a choice over which vehicles you buy, for now.
 

johncrossley

Established Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
4,455
Location
London
I have not suggested tariffs. I agree that free trade is preferable, but when China subsidises its car manufacturing, either by low wages, or cheap and dirty electricity, should we accept unfair trading? Should the UK Govt offer financial incentives to manufacturers in the UK?

Wage levels vary across the world. The cost of living is lower in China so wages are lower. You can't seriously refuse to trade with a country because wages are lower there. There are many countries where wages are higher than the UK. By your logic, Switzerland shouldn't allow trade with the UK because wages are lower in the UK.

As for subsidies, the UK needs to comply the agreements made with countries that the UK has free trade deals with.
 

RailWonderer

Established Member
Joined
25 Jul 2018
Messages
2,219
Location
All around the network
So when is international trade permissible? If the UK blocks international trade then that will mean lost international markets for UK companies when inevitably other countries retaliate by stopping imports from the UK. The overall impact in the *world* is what counts in the long run. Artificial trade barriers allow companies to get away with being uncompetitive, which means less innovation and lower economic growth.
It's also about Europe protecting its own market for vehicles (Germany and Spain especially). https://www.statista.com/statistics/585024/leading-car-automotive-manufacturer-europe-by-country/
This graphic shows German production of passenger cars was 3.3m and Spain's 1.7m in 2022. There is enough competition among European marques that will allow us to be competitive even after applying tarriffs to Chinese EVs. There are also political reasons, the BRICS countries want to compete harder with Europe and the US.

Economic strength and GDP growth are more important than climate deadlines and that's why we're seeing a lot of pushback in Europe (growth can be spent on defence etc). The US is by far the highest polluter per capita and China is growing in per capita use and starting up dozens of new coal plants every year - in comparison, Europe is doing a lot already for climate protection, even if the most stringent deadlines are being sensibly pushed back on.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,370
I do find it odd that so many in this thread are very pro-EV and pro-"net zero"... Yet are happy to fund a deeply corrupt authoritarian regime on the other side of the world which is currently releasing huge amounts of carbon dioxide and showing very few signs of curbing those emissions.

Most outside observers expect China's emissions to begin falling in the next couple of years.
The official Communist Party plan is to peak before 2030, and the CCP has learned the hard way (from the old Soviet bloc) to avoid overpromising on that sort of thing.

Indeed, some projections are that Chinese carbon emissions may have already peaked.

In either case, I certainly find the Chinese regime to be less objectionable than Saudi or the other Gulf oil-states.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
19,373
Location
Yorkshire
Most outside observers expect China's emissions to begin falling in the next couple of years.
The official Communist Party plan is to peak before 2030, and the CCP has learned the hard way (from the old Soviet bloc) to avoid overpromising on that sort of thing.

Indeed, some projections are that Chinese carbon emissions may have already peaked.

In either case, I certainly find the Chinese regime to be less objectionable than Saudi or the other Gulf oil-states.
If you believe anything coming out of the CCP's official channels, I've got a bridge to sell you... (and it will be structurally sound and not made of "tofu dreg" construction, I promise!)

Neither the CCP nor the various authoritarian theocratic regimes in the Arabian peninsula are to be trusted, but I wasn't are we had to choose between one or the other. There are other sources of petroleum products, for now there are other sources of EV batteries but how long will that remain the case?
 

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
4,912
I am not against EVs, but they're just not for me at the present time (but maybe the drivability of EVs may not match that of ICEs - they may feel too disconnected from the driver, but that is a personal view).
Take one for a test drive and you'll find you feel way more connected than with any ICE.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
16,061
Location
St Albans
I do find it odd that so many in this thread are very pro-EV and pro-"net zero"... Yet are happy to fund a deeply corrupt authoritarian regime on the other side of the world which is currently releasing huge amounts of carbon dioxide and showing very few signs of curbing those emissions.
So with the UK's 2023 carbon figure being 4.4t per capita, you refuse imports from China (8.4t) yet your commitment to the global environment is comfortable with importing goods from:
Spain (4.6), Turkey (5.0), Italy (5.3), Germany (7.1), Japan (8.0), South Korea (11.2), Canada (14.0), U.S.(14.3) and Australia (14.5).
Mmm, I think a genuine concern for the global climate would benefit from ignoring the politics.
 

MotCO

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
6,137
There is an interesting interview in today’s Telegraph https://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/news/how-zero-emissions-vehicle-mandate-skewing-uk-car-market/ with MG UK’s commercial director. He is referring to the ZEV Mandate which requires car manufacturers to sell at least 22% of total sales as EVs in 2024, and the steps manufacturers are taking to minimise the impact.

Compliant manufacturers:

Tesla, BYD, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Jeep, Cupra, MG

Less comfortable are

Lexus, Hyundai, Vauxhall, Honda, Audi.

Non-compliant:

Toyota, Skoda, Kia, Nissan, Volkswagen, Ford, Mazda, Jaguar Land Rover, Seat, Suzuki.



Also interesting is where the growth of EV sales is taking place, and it is not the private buyers who probably reflect real-life views rather than the corporate ‘toe-the-line’ view, and dealers and manuacturers are having to self-register a lot of vehicles.

Year on year changes:
  • private EV sales of 59,500 are 3.8 per cent down
  • true fleet registrations of 142,174 are only 1.6 per cent up
  • dealer registrations which are up 12.8,
  • manufacturer registrations which are up 27.8 per cent
  • demonstrator cars up 37.7 per cent
  • Motability registrations of 48,750 are 110.4 per cent up.
The Motability one is strange, but is because manufacturers are dumping their unsold EVs here to meet the Mandate targets. (Interestingly, the Motability share of the new car market is quite high at around 10 – 15%, but that’s a debate for another thread.)

The MG UK’s commercial director says “The rate of rejection from Motability customers has been high. So many cars have been sold into this market, in fact, that Motability has called a halt to EV sales. It has decided that it has too many EVs on its fleet and manufacturers have had to draw back.”


How the Zero Emissions Vehicle mandate is skewing the UK car market

MG’s commercial director speaks frankly about the industry’s ‘dirty secret’ one year into the scheme to encourage electric car take-up

01 December 2024 10:00am GMT



Guy Pigounakis says the ZEV mandates are artificially skewing the operation of the free market Credit: Hans Wahlgren/Alamy Stock Photo

“Why is no one talking about it? Because it’s our dirty secret,” says Guy Pigounakis, MG UK’s commercial director and motor-industry veteran about the hidden state of the UK car market at the end of the ZEV mandate’s first year.

The policy requires car manufacturers to sell a certain percentage of electric vehicles (EVs) each year, with fines of £15,000 for each non-compliant vehicle sold. For 2024, the target is for EVs to comprise 22% of their new car sales, rising to 80% by 2030.

“Never in my long career, have I seen a piece of legislation that has so fundamentally changed the way we design, build and bring cars to market,” adds Pigounakis, “and [it] will continue to do so in its current guise.”

As well as the changes to the market, Pigounakis claims the ZEV mandate has also introduced bizarre incentives resulting in manufacturers registering increasing proportions of battery-electric cars, many of which haven’t actually been sold, which is artificially skewing the operation of the free market.

With more than a quarter of sales being EVs, MG will end 2024 without paying any fines Credit: Richard Parsons

“With a 27 per cent proportion of EV registrations this year, MG is not going to pay fines in 2024 and we are comfortably positioned for next year whatever the Government decides to throw at us,” said Pigounakis. “But you need to look at the challenges and the [registration] channels to see how some original equipment manufacturers [car producers] are manipulating the market.”

Minister’s commitment

Pigounakis was speaking the day after Jonathan Reynolds, the UK business secretary, under pressure from the motor industry, announced a consultation on the controversial ZEV mandate. Meeting its requirements is estimated to have cost the industry up to £2 billion this year and Reynolds’s speech to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) was given on November 27, the same day Vauxhall announced the closure of its Luton van plant with the loss of 1,100 skilled jobs, with part of the blame aimed at the cost of meeting the stringent new EV requirements of the ZEV mandate.

Reynolds said that while the Labour government was “absolutely committed” to a 2030 cut-off date for the sale of “new cars solely powered by combustion engines”, he was “profoundly concerned” that the ZEV mandate was “not operating today in a way that anyone expected”.



But do politicians really understand what unintended consequences it is having on the market? Pigounakis thinks not and spelled out some of the lengths to which car makers are going to avoid paying the fines of £15,000 per non-compliant car.

Who is in trouble?

Separate research by The Telegraph motoring desk show a litany of seemingly successful companies which, with only a month to the end of the year, are facing massive bills for non-compliance.

Electric-only producers such as Tesla and BYD are obviously in the clear, with BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Jeep and Cupra – along with MG – having EV sales comfortably over this year’s 22 per cent threshold. In fact, some of those companies are trading their surplus in a carbon market that has been encouraged by Government.

Less comfortable are Lexus, Hyundai, Vauxhall, Honda and Audi.

Those selling large volumes of cars, many of them uncompliant with the ZEV mandate, face the largest fines. Think Toyota, Skoda, Kia, Nissan, Volkswagen, Ford, Mazda, Jaguar Land Rover, Seat and Suzuki.

Innovators also lose out

“I’m very sympathetic to companies such as Toyota and Mazda,” says Pigounakis, “which have spent millions developing alternative drivetrains, but in the ZEV mandate they count for nothing.”

Hybrid technology for example, as pioneered by Toyota over the last 30 years, will have saved hundreds of thousands of tons of CO2 from entering the atmosphere in that time, yet because of the way the ZEV mandate dispensations are calculated will garner the Japanese company only small allowances in the first two years, before they finish at the end of 2026.

Some manufacturers which have healthy demand for their petrol-engined cars will be forced to restrict supply to dealers to only two or three cars in the closing weeks of this year to avoid adding to fines, which in many cases represent many times more than the profit margin on each car.

“It’s ironic that the cleaner the engines you sold before the mandate was introduced, the worse your position is now,” says Pigounakis. “I am not without sympathy for some of our rivals.”

Pushing into Motability

But as well as levying huge fines of £15,000 per non-compliant car and £18,000 (reduced to £9,000 this year) per van and the frantic trading of credits, the ZEV mandate is also encouraging “market manipulation” according to Pigounakis, who is accusing the industry of practices such as pushing unwanted EVs into the UK Motability fleet. This is a partnership between UK Government, charities, four major banks, motor makers and insurance companies, which is basically a leasing operation aimed at bringing mobility to disabled people, funded by customers’ entitlements such as personal independence payments.

At more than 600,000 vehicles, the Motability fleet is one of Europe’s largest and typically makes-up some 10 to 15 per cent of the overall market, mainly from non-premium manufacturers. Yet year-on-year growth of EV sales into Motability are up 110 per cent as manufacturers seek to register EVs into the fleet to comply with this year’s EV requirement.

“The rate of rejection from Motability customers has been high,” says Pigounakis. “So many cars have been sold into this market, in fact, that Motability has called a halt to EV sales. It has decided that it has too many EVs on its fleet and manufacturers have had to draw back.”

Getting around the regulations

But Motability is not the only way car firms have been seeking to circumvent the regulations in a market which “has brutal discounting” says Pigounakis and is also notable for heavily tax-incentivised fleet sales with little demand from private buyers.

Manufacturers are selling cars to themselves with demonstration car registrations showing a big year-on-year increase up 14.8 per cent. Also, up 12 per cent are “captive” sales, which are sales to employees, friends and families, dealer registrations are up two per cent and what are known as OEM sales are up 11.3 per cent.

It amounts to a lot of extra EVs which aren’t necessarily reflected by actual demand, while the potential writedown of value of those cars when they eventually hit the market is causing major headaches. In short, there’s a huge writedown liability from these EVs which no one is talking about.

“They won’t even admit it to themselves,” says Pigounakis. “It’s a massive liability which they aren’t putting on the books.”



Guy Pigounakis (centre) said he had sympathy for some of MG’s rivals who were disadvantaged by the ZEV mandates

EV sales not as they seem

The effect is to skew the market and give a false impression of the popularity of EVs in the first year of the ZEV mandate. While the headline figure is that EV registrations are showing a 14.2 per cent year-on-year increase, with a total EV mix of new car registrations of 18.1 per cent (well short of the 22 per cent required under the mandate), closer examination doesn’t look quite so rosy.

Private EV sales of 59,500 are 3.8 per cent down year on year, true fleet registrations of 142,174 are only 1.6 per cent up; it is dealer and manufacturer registrations which are up 12.8 and 27.8 per cent respectively, with demonstrator cars up 37.7 per cent and Motability registrations of 48,750 are a 110.4 per cent increase.

Should the mandate be eased?

It calls for some serious debate as car makers lobby Government for an easing of the ZEV mandate.

“The transport secretary and I have heard you loud and clear,” Reynolds told the SMMT this week. “We know that you need certainty and that’s why we will fast track on the consultation giving you clarity on the direction of travel and giving you the answers you need in the coming weeks before you make decisions in January.”

Except that three days after that speech, the transport secretary Louse Haigh, a key part of those negotiations, resigned over a telephone “mistake”. Her replacement, Heidi Alexander, who acted as London mayor Sadiq Khan’s deputy mayor for transport from 2018 to 2021, will have to rush to catch up the brief. The political furore will not help speed the negotiations so crucial to those companies working out whether they pay the fines or purchase credits from companies such as Tesla, BYD or even MG.

Besides, as Reynolds said, there will be no wavering of the main target: “We are not changing the level of our ambition for the transition.”

Pigounakis also thinks there won’t be much on the table in the way of easing the ZEV mandate. He says that giving way to the motor industry would leave the Government’s tough stance on pensioner winter fuel allowances, or inheritance tax changes to the farming industry, look shaky as well.

Do the politicians care?

Do ministers truly understand or even care about the damaging effects of the ZEV mandate, which include companies closing factories, market manipulation, massive fines, subsidies to rivals in the carbon market and the fact that this is a peculiarly UK problem (even Northern Ireland, under the current EU agreement, has a different system).

“No,” says Pigounakis, “they don’t, because if you look at it, they’re getting what they want.”

“I want to do everything possible to encourage the take-up of EVs,” said Reynolds this week. “But I also want to do everything possible to make sure that EVs are built here in Britain. The future of EV cars in the UK is not and should not be a negative story.”

The trouble is, without sound and sustainable financing and investment from car producers as well as charging companies and battery factories, that EV story looks distinctly nuanced on the side of woe.
 

johncrossley

Established Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
4,455
Location
London
So with the UK's 2023 carbon figure being 4.4t per capita, you refuse imports from China (8.4t) yet your commitment to the global environment is comfortable with importing goods from:
Spain (4.6), Turkey (5.0), Italy (5.3), Germany (7.1), Japan (8.0), South Korea (11.2), Canada (14.0), U.S.(14.3) and Australia (14.5).
Mmm, I think a genuine concern for the global climate would benefit from ignoring the politics.

Unfortunately, people only look at total figures for a country when of course per capita is what counts. China gets the bad publicity because it has a high population and therefore the total amount is high when the population is multiplied by the per capita emissions. But nobody talks about Australia and Canada.
 

MotCO

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
6,137
Indeed, some projections are that Chinese carbon emissions may have already peaked.
But they are still building coal-fired power stations. Where are they reducing emissions to offset these? Do these coal-fired power stations only have a limited life - they are usually good for at least 30 years.


Wage levels vary across the world. The cost of living is lower in China so wages are lower. You can't seriously refuse to trade with a country because wages are lower there. There are many countries where wages are higher than the UK. By your logic, Switzerland shouldn't allow trade with the UK because wages are lower in the UK.

As for subsidies, the UK needs to comply the agreements made with countries that the UK has free trade deals with.

But the Chinese do not experience eye-wateringly high energy costs which pervades all parts of life in the UK, from personal heating bills, to the costs of heating hospitals, running factories etc, which are reflected in higher taxes or prices in shops. The hgh energy costs are due to our aversion to clean carbon fuels, and needing to keep power stations in reserve when the wind is not blowing or the sun is not shining so we need to maintain double the power provision at double the cost. Plus the higher cost of importing electricity through interconnectors.


There is another aspect of imports which is rarely mentioned these days, and that is the Balance of Payments. In the 70s and 80s much was talked about the Balance of Payments, and woe betide if we actually had a deficit -the £ would fall and all hell would break lose. Why is it not so important nowadays, or is the deficit so great, no-one can get their heads round the figures and correct it?


 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,370
But they are still building coal-fired power stations. Where are they reducing emissions to offset these? Do these coal-fired power stations only have a limited life - they are usually good for at least 30 years.
Megawatts of coal capacity and megawatt hours of coal produced electricity are very different things.
The capacity factor of the Chinese coal fleet is falling as more electricity is being produced from other sources.

There has also, reportedly, been a major reduction in coal use for steel production due to falling construction activity.

And yes, it is likely that a large part of the chinese coal fleet is unlikely to have a particularly long operational life. At least before collapse into the backup role that natural gas will be performing in the UK.
 

gabrielhj07

Established Member
Joined
5 May 2022
Messages
1,620
Location
Herts
So with the UK's 2023 carbon figure being 4.4t per capita, you refuse imports from China (8.4t) yet your commitment to the global environment is comfortable with importing goods from:
Spain (4.6), Turkey (5.0), Italy (5.3), Germany (7.1), Japan (8.0), South Korea (11.2), Canada (14.0), U.S.(14.3) and Australia (14.5).
Mmm, I think a genuine concern for the global climate would benefit from ignoring the politics.
The lowest carbon thing we can do, then, is to buy homemade goods wherever possible.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
19,373
Location
Yorkshire
Unfortunately, people only look at total figures for a country when of course per capita is what counts. China gets the bad publicity because it has a high population and therefore the total amount is high when the population is multiplied by the per capita emissions. But nobody talks about Australia and Canada.
In this case, per capita is largely irrelevant. The climate doesn't care about the "per capita" rate. It's a useful method for tracking change, not for apportioning blame.
 

Top