Lhe European resolution to impose CO emissions2 zero from 2035 to new passenger cars and light utility vehicles was taken in 2023, but the political will to achieve this dates back to 2015. It was carefully considered and debated at length between the Commission, Parliament and the twenty-seven European executives. Indeed, the Paris climate agreement, signed in 2015, commits humanity to maintaining “the increase in global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels” and, if possible, below 1.5°C. To do this, we must cap global greenhouse gas emissions as quickly as possible, then achieve net zero emissions in the second half of the century. The United States, Europe, Japan, the United Kingdom and others have committed to it for 2050, China will follow in 2060, India in 2070.
Also read the analysis: Article reserved for our subscribers Electric cars: democratization facing a supply problem
Add to your selections
Right-wing and far-right candidates in the European elections on June 9 want to repeal this decision, reclassified as “choice of all-electric”. Their main complaints: this choice “violates technological neutrality”excluding ” other ways “ to reduce emissions, according to François-Xavier Bellamy, head of the Republican list. Too high a cost would deprive the middle and working classes of a financially accessible means of transport. The climate record of electric vehicles would be mediocre. Chinese competition, finally, ahead in electric technology, would pose a serious threat to the European automobile industry, “disorganized” by switching to electric, according to Jordan Bardella, head of the National Rally list. What are these grievances worth?
Campaigning for the electrification of transport
Concerning technological neutrality, European regulations allow hydrogen cars, equipped with a fuel cell or a thermal engine. But their acquisition and usage costs are still much higher than those of battery-powered electric vehicles, their efficiency is mediocre and their climate performance is catastrophic if hydrogen is not itself strictly zero carbon. Is there ” other ways “ to reduce automobile emissions as much? Biofuels are limited, plug-in hybrids have shown their inefficiency. And sobriety solutions, never mentioned on the right of the political spectrum, cannot be enough to gradually reduce emissions to zero.
Also read the column: Article reserved for our subscribers Use of the car: “Neither individuals nor businesses have any interest in calling into question the dominant mode of transport”
Add to your selections
As for the climate balance, the manufacture of an electric car, battery included, certainly leads to more CO emissions.2 than that of a “thermal” car. But then the emissions suck. To claim that, for long road trips, the emissions of electric cars are equivalent to those of cars using petroleum fuels is grossly inaccurate. In Europe, whether the car is manufactured locally or in China, total life cycle emissions (manufacturing and use) are reduced on average by two thirds. In France, they are divided by four or five, electricity being largely decarbonized thanks to nuclear power and renewables. We are also surprised that the most vibrant supporters of nuclear energy do not want to exploit it more fully by campaigning for the electrification of transport, which would at the same time reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, the air pollution and our dependence on imported fossil fuels.
You have 39.33% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
