The Germans have an idea: when calculating fleetwide emissions rules at the end of the decade, don't count the 20 percent of our vehicles that are truly road-mauling gas guzzlers. That's more or less what the German government is asking for in its attempt to get the European Union to be a little more lenient about its strict emissions mandate for 2020, Bloomberg News reports.

German environment minister Peter Altmaier says the government is in talks with the EU about lightening up a bit on the German auto industry, which includes luxury and higher-end sports car makers like BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Porsche. Right now, Europe's automakers are charged with cutting emissions by about 30 percent to 95 grams of CO2 per kilometer by the end of the decade. Germany says it's OK with that if the EU counts only 80 percent of its new vehicles, boosting that percentage up to 90 percent in 2022 and going full compliance in 2024, four years after the current goal.

German officials have been lobbying for a more lenient 2020 emissions mandate since at least this summer, and BMW has said the current standards would be "impossible" to meet. That's because Germany's fleetwide CO2 emissions are about 11 percent higher than the rest of Europe's, and German automakers would have to cut fleetwide emissions by about 55 percent to meet the EU's 2020 target.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 34 Comments
      DeeDee
      • 1 Year Ago
      The bureaucrats in Brussels are out of touch with the real world. And countries like France are too happy to push for regulations that affect German car industry while behaving like cry babies when other countries want to regulate the trade of their stinky cheese on solid scientific ground... In this case Germany is asking for a delay because its car makers don't want to be caught in artificial deadlines...
        Alexi
        • 1 Year Ago
        @DeeDee
        Total misread on EU politics. Trade regulations are played by every eu member state (look at the German beer wars). The issue here is that no German brand took the effort to prep for the coming regs. Instead they chose to lobby. Other brands planned ahead, just look at Ford's hybrid range, or renaults new lineup
      Michael
      • 1 Year Ago
      The German Auto-manufacturers know that horsepower numbers sell their vehicles more than MPG numbers. Those buying M series and AMG series vehicles don't care how much they are spending on fueling up their vehicles, they just want them to go fast. It seems they've made the decision that putting money into delaying the new regulations would be cheaper and more effective for them than meeting the upcoming regs on time. Looks like it's time for the EU to flex any muscle it has, or bow down to their business overlords.
      Marcopolo
      • 1 Year Ago
      It hard to be sympathetic for the German auto-industry's difficulties with EU emission regulations. The regulations would appear to be for the common good of all Europe, and indeed the planet. So why is the German car industry complaining ? Well, it's not just the German car industry complaining. Many Germans are having second thoughts about the swathe of 'green' regulations that were created at the height of the green boom. At that time Germany, was one of the most enthusiastic supporters of the " green revolution" . However, as time passed, the ordinary German started to become uneasy at the economic wisdom behind dismantling nuclear power production. There's a growing belief that EU and EC bureaucrats interfere with German industry to benefit European rivals, while asking Germany to pick up the tab for EU failures and excesses. The hubris of 'green advocates', along with ill-conceived and failed policies, is producing a backlash from disillusioned voters around the world. The absolute refusal of many extreme environmental activists to adapt , moderate or admit that many once applauded policies and ideological beliefs, have proven impractical, unrealistic, or just plain wrong, is creating a counter-reaction. Regrettably, the more stubbornly 'hardcore' green advocates remain inflexibile, the more hypocritical they appear. Joe Public may not be very well educated in the science, but he knows hypocrisy when he sees it (and is asked to pay for it). The German car industry may be using the growing opposition to Brussels for their own purposes, but the growing anti-EU, anti-UN sentiment is real, and growing stronger. The NATO-US sanctioned removal and eventual murder of the Qaddafi family, in Libya might have been accepted, if Libyan society had transformed into a modern stable government. But the opposite is the case, Libya is worse off, while the French who cynically destabilized the regime, have been rewarded by securing Libya's oil for France, instead of the PRC. The claim by Greens that German industry and power generation is more efficient without nuclear power, while at the same time asking German voters to pay 18% more for the privilege of sitting through power cuts and blackouts, strengthens anti-green opposition. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/15/germany-energy-idUSL6N0I511920131015) Support for ''Energiewende'' is fading as German Union and Industry leaders count the cost to the German economy. (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/germanys-international-competitiveness-threatened-by-rising-german-energy-prices-and-low-cost-energy-in-the-united-states-ihs-study-says-2013-10-09). German consumers identify failed "green' policies, with Euro and EU regulations. The belief that these policies are just anti-German, is becoming popular . (http://www.thenational.ae/business/energy/german-green-energy-bid-leaves-consumers-cold). Reappraisal of the objectives, and priorities, of EU policies, is long overdue.
        raktmn
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Marcopolo
        Bullpucky. Anti-green whiners have always existed. All you have shown is that they still exist, and continue to whine just as loud as ever. The funny thing is that these same whiners are the same the world over. They go out their door and breath in a nice breath of relatively fresh air, taking for granted that it was green policies that is keeping that air relatively fresh, and then blather about how bad the greenies are. Grumble mumble old man whine. They get in their cars and get relatively good gas mileage, thanks to green policies, and then complain endlessly about the "damn price of gas". All while not realizing that the price would be much higher if cars got 8 MPG like they did before the greenies demanded MPG ratings and higher MPG fleet averages. Ungrateful, grumpy old men who complain endlessly about greenies while enjoying the benefits of green legislation are a dime a dozen. (present company included) Yet for all this whining and complaining that has gone on for decades, serious lawmakers throughout the world have all still trended towards more and more environmental regulations. That is a decades long fact. This is happening because responsible people in positions of power figure out they are literally holding people's lives in the balance through their actions. Good environmental policy is good health policy, which is good economic policy. Good tourist policy too. Who wants to visit a polluted crappy dump? A simple thank you to all the greens who came before you, for your clean air, your clean water, your good MPG and green vehicles would suffice.
          Marcopolo
          • 1 Year Ago
          @raktmn
          @ raktmn, Talleyrand said about the Bourbon Kings, " they learned nothing and forgot nothing". Y'know , sometimes you remind me of what he meant. It's exactly your sort of refusal to admit errors, and persistence with dogmatic ideology, that's served to alienate the average person from environmental causes. From Australia to Germany, excessive "Green-Left'' policies are being abandoned. This isn't a rejection of all environmental ideals, but a rejection of failed policies. No, German voters are not happy paying an 18% increase for electricity bought from France or the Czech Republic ! Nor do German voters think it's great to learn that not only is Germany falling behind in industrial output, but is using more coal fired power than ever ! This is not the reaction of a few " Ungrateful, grumpy old men ", this is a response from millions of voters ! Your reaction is typical of the attitude by all arrogant promoters of government backed schemes. (you're so good at spending other peoples money). If the scheme fails, you never blame yourself, or your ideology, or even admit that the policy didn't work ! Your response is to abuse the victims of inadequate schemes, and continue to demand even more taxpayer money, ( backed by draconian government regulations), in order to pretend that what doesn't work, and never will, is really all ok, and just needs more time ! (and taxpayer money) The reason you can afford such hubris, is because it's not your money you're wasting ! Incidentally, what's with the condescending lecture on green vehicle usage ? I've been involved in the Electric Vehicle business for 16 years. I drive a production EV every day, and have done so, years before EV's became available in the USA. I'm not opposed to government investment providing industry incentives, but I don't depend on government money. I put my own money behind "green' products. If I can persuade enough members of Joe public to agree, then I'm ahead on my investment . If it fails, I accept their verdict, learn from what went wrong, and look for a better method. True environmentalists, look for real issues, where a real difference can be made. Old fashioned leftist ideologues, disguised as "green' advocates, demand governments continue with failed schemes simply to maintain their sense of supercilious superiority, while the ordinary taxpayer suffers. Good environment policies, can be popular, and attract popular support. But in order to do so, they must be economically viable, practical, realistic and effective. That doesn't include failed schemes, that swallow up vast amounts of taxpayer money while failing to achieve the original objective.
          Marcopolo
          • 1 Year Ago
          @raktmn
          @ Alexi, You are correct that Germany was, along with the Nordic countries, foremost among the adopters of "green" technology. Germany has a large "Green Party" , with substantial political influence. But that was before the economic collapse of Southern Europe and the failure of the German power system. Oh, and yeah, you are quite right, the hysteria surrounding Fukushima has lost it's impact. Simply adopting an attitude of ignoring the growing tide of discontent and dismissing legitimate concern about the failures of some "green'' policies as " fodder for extreme anti-enviro advocates" is very short sighted. But, I do agree that many other factors, (some unrelated) contribute to the tide of discontent, and are unfairly attributed to environmental policies. Just as much of the resentment of Green Parties has come from the expansion of those Parties who have broadened the parties platform to include Leftist ideology and unrelated social reform. That's really my point, it's important for environmentalists to keep focused on those issues which can achieve a measure of success, and abandon those which have proved unsuccessful.
          Alexi
          • 1 Year Ago
          @raktmn
          Wow raktmn and Marcopolo, you both shot off into the stratosphere. @Marco, your basic thesis that the German auto industry angst is really just a manifestation of the deeper German people's troubles with globalization (and somehow tied to NATO, UN, and environmental protections) is only defensible by massive scope shifts. Let's be very clear; Germany has the most seats in the EU parliament and has benefitted hugely as a result. If the Germans as a whole despised these schemes they would have either changed governments or had the current gov change policies. They did neither, instead the industry itself had to lobby hard after the adoption of the regulations, which shows that it was the current industry, not the industry that failed to object years ago when the regs were persuaded or the people who have yet to object. Also, your rant about the demise of Nuke power in Germany completely fails to mention the impetus for the whole thing. Was Fukushima that long ago? Connecting the delay in the regulations and the shift away from Nuke to larger global trends is dishonest. Both events give fodder for the extreme anti-enviro advocates, but do not speak for a larger anti-globalization backlash and are isolated from other revised environmental schemes around the world. I could just as easily take the Nordic region's adoption of EV's or China's impending smog regulations as evidence to the opposite of your argument. In the end, you simply ignored Germany's influence in the EU. In this instance the change comes from the industry, not the people.
      paulwesterberg
      • 1 Year Ago
      Good luck selling your high end sports cars in third world countries.
      raktmn
      • 1 Year Ago
      On one hand, it is absurd that they are complaining about a target date that is still 6 years away. They clearly haven't even tried yet to even attempt to meet that goal. They should put some honest effort into it first, before asking for a delay. On the other hand, if they are asking for a 4 year delay, something should be able to be negotiated if they get to 2018 and they really can't meet the goal for another couple of years. (After showing they really put some effort into it). Asking for it now just sounds like a delay tactic, where they will just keep asking for more years of delays in hopes that they can kill the mandate somehow before all the delays are over. That is often the goal when legislation is delayed.
        EZEE
        • 1 Year Ago
        @raktmn
        Go figure, I am feeling more hardcore than YOU! And it was your point that did it! :-) The French have leaned on electrics (with partner Nissan), while the other Japanese and American mfg's (ford especially) have leaned on hybrids. Also, Ford has worked on smaller displacement engines with turbo assist. What have any of the Germans done? If they had a massive effort but were coming up short, well okay then. Nice try! But here...VW....BMW....Mercedes.... Diesels....sigh.
        EZEE
        • 1 Year Ago
        @raktmn
        Still smiling that you convinced me on your point....
      • 1 Year Ago
      I am puzzled. The German car manufacturers , Audi,BMW and Daimler, must have known 2- 3 years ago that the proposed 95 gm/km EU emission limit for 2020 is unattainable for their top end ICE models without some sort of electrification (HEV,PHEV and possibly BEV). The technology is proven; top end models can be made well within the emission limit. What is holding the Germans back? Sales and marketing? Mass production? Perhaps all of these.
        Smoking_dude
        • 1 Year Ago
        Of course they knew it. And they also stopped the last limit. We can't do it. The technology is not there. So they trained the customers to avoid efficient cars like hybrids. they even paid test magazines to discredit EVs or hybrids. During the years a regular Prius was never better than 33MPG. So the result is clear. Buy a Diesel instead... The peak was a comment about the prius beeing a molestation of physical laws. The engine is described as SUPER noisy. And the acceleration as super sluggish. During an internship I offered several ppl a lift. They were all astonished. The Prius is a JAMES BOND CAR because it is inaudible in "stealth mode", efficient and still offers a tremendous oomph from the electric motor. also there is the voice command (nav, climate, audio) Even whem maxing it out (using my BRAIN) keeping an eye on the soc that the battery is still charged. ppl were surprised that I was doing ~110 mph for almost an hour and they did not notice it. it is so quiet... No one could understand the bad ratings of the magazines. Even with a recent Prius Plug-in review the paid reviewer only got 25mpg. NO JOKE! Today after 10 years there is a shift. but toyota is now almost 17 years ahead. now there are hybrid yaris, auris, lexus cars that get very good reviews, and as there is a growing community that posts real world data, the lies became ridiculous...
        Alexi
        • 1 Year Ago
        Profits. Like the US auto industry in the 1990's (so much money in SUVs they couldn't adapt to market changes).
      EZEE
      • 1 Year Ago
      You have obviously never read Marco and rak when they have an argument. I am left with a stack of history books, dictionaries, plus Wikipedia trying to understand what each one of them says while trying to consult the other.
      Alexi
      • 1 Year Ago
      The German marks should have been spending their money on designing the necessary changes instead of lobbying the German gov to beg for a derogation. They act like the regulations are surprising and/or unattainable, but they've known since before 2011 and done nearly nothing in preparation. I say, let them pay the fines.
      danfred311
      • 1 Year Ago
      It's the Göbbels way
        EZEE
        • 1 Year Ago
        @danfred311
        Hitler was an environmentalist and a vegetarian...
          Cavaron
          • 1 Year Ago
          @EZEE
          @EZEE: I have to disagree strongly. Hitler was no vegetarian, that's a myth. His doctor ordered him a mostly vegetarian diet because of bad breath and stomach-issues. His favored dish however where "liver dumplings". They are made with real liver (I recommend: The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler by Robert Payne). Sure, there are some laws about animal welfare under the nazi regime. One of them banned kosher butchering. There are movies from that time which showed many clips from cows getting butchered that way. The films suggested that the religious kosher rules are cruel and designed to raise bloodlust. Germans of course get referred to as animal loving persons "like Hitler" as a contrast to that. Hitler was (or was shown as) a fan of german folklore, which included trips into the mountains and forests, which where kinda protected. Goering restricted some forests for his private hunting-pleasure - don't know how green that is. Many of the properties where in former ownership of Jewish Germans, which where robbed of their belongings and deported to death. Also it was Hitlers goal to gain settle-space (or Lebensraum) - before the war, he ordered to dry-drain many marshes for that. Marshes are rare spaces of wildlife in Europe. Most of Hitlers image was propaganda and some people still get fooled by it. Please stop repeating that propaganda.
          Marcopolo
          • 1 Year Ago
          @EZEE
          @ EZEE I think sometimes people vote down what they want to be untrue, regardless of how factually accurate. Incidentally, if you look at Mussolini's achievement's between 1922-38, it's not hard to understand why so were prepared to overlook the negative aspects of his regime. But humans are curious creatures, Stalin and Mao still possess millions of admirers, despite their monstrous deeds. Churchill was once asked how he could find glory in war, replied, "I have often observed how small boys love to play with toys soldiers, I have never observed a single boy who requested to play with a set of pacifists! "
          Cavaron
          • 1 Year Ago
          @EZEE
          @ Marcopolo Ok, we can agree on that :)
          EZEE
          • 1 Year Ago
          @EZEE
          Marco! We got voted down for that...my my my...so in a fit of spite, I will also point out.... Hitler was pro guncontrol Hitler was pro socialized medicine Hitler (obviously) took a very dim view of people who disagreed Hitler (obviously) liked to put people into groups Hitler (obviously) was anti-Christian Hitler (obviously) was pro big government I have to imagine this will get voted down, but smiling the entire time I type...
          Marcopolo
          • 1 Year Ago
          @EZEE
          @ EZEE, You are correct, and Hitlers government was anti-smoking. Goering was the first Minister of the Environment , in any government in the world, and instituted many industrial safe practices, and clean air policies. (Paint shop worker supplied with Milk etc) . It's a curious fact of human nature, that even the most evil and reprehensible of individuals and organizations, can still do good, while the most morally idealistic often inflict the most harm and cruelty.
          Marcopolo
          • 1 Year Ago
          @EZEE
          @ Cavaron No matter how detestable any regime may have been, and the Nazi's were as bad as they get, historical truth can't be ignored. The Nazi's banned live vivisection, etc. Goering didn't just "restrict some forests for his private hunting-pleasure" , He was very influenced by the US National Park concept, and wanted to copy the idea in Germany. He re-introduced over 70 endangered species back to Germany, including fish stocks. Huge sums were spent on cleaning German river systems and enforcing smoke stack filtration. None of that justifies the regimes negative policies, but it doesn't mean it didn't happen either.
      mylexicon
      • 1 Year Ago
      The headline says Germany is fighting for higher emissions. The body text says Germany is fighting to delay the 2020 regulations until 2024.
      RC
      • 1 Year Ago
      Surely the Germans are smarter than this. Global Warming is only going to intensify and it will drive stricter regulations. Don't ever bet against an existential crisis.
        DarylMc
        • 1 Year Ago
        @RC
        Goodness I wonder if I am the only one who had to Google existential. But seriously there are many different desires or requirements for different vehicles and I cant see why it needs to be allocated on the basis of manufacturer.
      DaveMart
      • 1 Year Ago
      UPDATE: 'The German government has persuaded its EU partners to delay introducing new limits on CO2 emissions from cars. Environment ministers agreed to revise a deal, reached in July, that set a limit of 95g per km for the average car. That target for CO2 emissions was to take effect in 2020. But Germany, famous for its high-performance cars, says the 95g limit should not take full effect until 2024. ' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24532284
        Alexi
        • 1 Year Ago
        @DaveMart
        Looks like the German automakers convinced Europe that they aren't as advanced as the other automakers, while still producing massive V8s and not trying to meet the regs
    • Load More Comments
    Share This Photo X