Consumers to get tax incentives for buying new cars?
30 October 2008

The European Commission has put its weight behind proposals that will encourage people to buy new, greener cars and could help pull motor manufacturers out of the financial slump. In a Brussels meeting organised by the European Union between motor industry executives, ministers and MEPs, a £32 billion package of low interest loans was proposed to help the industry develop new green technologies. In the future, consumers would get tax incentives to scrap their old cars and buy newer, more efficient models. So-called gas-guzzlers would be penalised by very high taxes in a system that could mirror the one recently introduced in France.Christian Streiff, boss of Peugeot-Citroen, said European sales were falling, forcing factories to idle. He insisted the motor industry needed EU-backed loans to develop greener cars. He claimed that encouraging consumers to scrap older, less efficient cars would reduce total car CO2 emissions by 4.5 per cent. Naturally, it would also increase new car sales and could help carmakers avoid potentially huge lay-offs.The plan mirrors the soft-loans package being provided by the Bush administration to GM, Chrysler and Ford in the States.The European Investment Bank, which would lend the money, is understood to be wary about the scale of loans. Environmental campaigners are also unhappy about the money being made available to an industry that has failed to meet emissions reduction targets.

Will Powell

Join the debate

Comments
14

30 October 2008

Right... so if someone with one of the first V8 engined BMW X5s kept it for the rest of his life, that would be worse for the environment than if he got it scrapped and bought a brand new Prius?

I don't think so.

-------- 

I'm The Ωmega Man, always talking to myself

30 October 2008

Agree with TheOmegaMan - its about more than CO2 produced while actually driving. Given that 10% of the energy that goes into a car during its lifecycle is during manufacture I can't possibly see how getting rid of perfectly good old cars and replacing them with new bland modern dross is going to be in anyway environmentally friendly. The scrapping and recycling process is pretty grubby too.

If we don't want to buy new cars, then we don't want to buy new cars. Obviously the car industry, like the banks, think we owe them a living. I'm presuming 'tax incentives' means making it prohibitivly expensive to run anything that is built before 2001.

30 October 2008

[quote TheOmegaMan]

Right... so if someone with one of the first V8 engined BMW X5s kept it for the rest of his life, that would be worse for the environment than if he got it scrapped and bought a brand new Prius?

I don't think so.

[/quote]

Ahh, this is because you are not a politician!

You are bang on correct in what you say (this is normally one of my soap boxes!) but when it comes to saving the economy, the environment goes out of the window.

Very clever piece of spin this. We'll dress it up as an "environmental" policy which is also good for manufacturing but neglect the real issues involved and hope no one notices.

Fat chance EU, not when you have the Autocar forum contributors on your case.

 

 

It's all about the twisties........

30 October 2008

What a load of bullshit, the tax incentive will be nothing compared to what it actually costs to run say an Isuzu Trooper, which is probably a sturdy piece of kit even if I detest them, so the stuff that will get scrapped because of the tax incentives are things like Punto60s and Fiesta 1.25s which will be perhaps be replaced by slightly newer models because there is no credit available. To repeat what everyone else said this is all about the economy and not the enviroment.

Went to the bank this morning with my expansion plan which had not changed, but because it did not show a profit for the first six months the deal is now off. So it's off to the building society for me if I decide to go ahead.

No government help for the little guy is available.

30 October 2008

[quote TheOmegaMan]

Right... so if someone with one of the first V8 engined BMW X5s kept it for the rest of his life, that would be worse for the environment than if he got it scrapped and bought a brand new Prius?

I don't think so.

[/quote]

First let me say that I think I agree with everyone here that retrospectively taxing people with older cars is wrong as it penalises people for a decision made years ago. Likewise I think that simply trying to get people to scrap their cars is stupid, as in order to get someone to scrap a car that may be worth £8000 you’ll need to tax them to an utterly staggering degree or pay them a fortune of taxpayers money.


That said I’m afraid the comment above doesn’t seem accurate. According to Paul Everitt the CEO of the Society Of Motor Manufacturers and Traders:
“around 85 per cent of the lifetime carbon emissions of a vehicle will be in the in use phase. Approximately ten per cent will be in manufacture and five per cent in disposal.”


According to the environmental audit committee report on road tax the average lifespan of a car is 13 years. I will make one large assumption here that, within reason, higher emissions cars won’t use massively more energy to make and recycle than efficient cars. A 335i for example won’t take twice as much energy to make as a 318d.


Taking an average emissions rate of 160g/km over a lifespan of 130000 miles a car will produce around 33540000g of CO2 in the use phase.


That leads to an approximate manufacture and recycle cost of 5920000g of CO2.


Thus by halving the lifespan of a car the CO2 “cost” is the 50% of that overhead CO2 figure that is effectively wasted. This comes to approx 2960000g (2.9 tonnes)


Taking the example above of an X5, lets say someone scraps their 4.4 X5 in favour of a brand new 3.0d X3, half way through it’s lifespan.
The X5 produces 335g/km, compared to 196g/km for the X3, for a saving of 139 g/km.
During the 65000 miles that the X5 would have been on the road the X3 would save 14572000 g of CO2 (14.5 tonnes)


So the saving of 14572000 would be enough to recoup the “cost” of 2960000g almost 5 times over. So scrapping the X5 for an 3.0d X3 would save vast amounts of Co2 even considering the cost of manufacture.

I'm not agreeing with the scrappage scheme by any means, as I think it'll never work on economic grounds as well as being totally unfair. However I think if we wish to argue against it we need to use the best argument.

30 October 2008

well Im glad you lot arent administering the taxes & incentives. it was suggested that 10% of a car's energy foot print is in it's manufacture. I read 20%, but anyway. and then 10% is in recycling. that leaves 70-80% of lifesycle energy consumption in use. this means fuel consumption! therefore if europe can be helped to scrap abysmal machines like the Isuzu trooper at 350+ g/km of CO2, and get into things more than twice as efficient (perhaps BMW 520d at 136 g/km), then a massive impact can be made on 70% of the energy usage of cars.

so yes, long term use of a V8 X5 is worse for the enviroment than scrapping it and buying a Freelander TDI Start-Stop, or whatever takes your fancy. yes, they are expensive, but that is what these incentives are supposed to help with.

in some part youre right though - that there is plenty of other political motivations behind the scheme - things like maintaining a european industry and protecting millions of jobs. it. want your kids to drive a chinese car? or your neighbour to loose his job?

30 October 2008

nice analysis Phenergan - my point exactly

30 October 2008

The thing is that taking an X5 as a starting point is a quite extreme example. A better comparison would be my 8 year old Volvo V40 1.6 (which I would love to scrap, but that's a different matter). Yes its probably not as efficient as a say a new V50, but the calculation phenergn has done would come out with a very different result for cars of similar output.

One of the problems is that there are no CO2 output figures for pre-2001 cars (or is it later than 2001?), hence why they are still crudely banded by engine size for tax purposes. Without that information its impossible to work out if a trade-in offers good environmental value.

30 October 2008

EU voters: "Just say NO!" as the old campaign went.

Or better still, I propose scrapping the EU! Would save lots of money and protect us all from its ever more hare-brained notions.

Only kidding.......half kidding....

Presume there'd have to be some sort of exemption for classics but where would they draw the line?

30 October 2008

[quote Mr_Rhubarb]

so yes, long term use of a V8 X5 is worse for the enviroment than scrapping it and buying a Freelander TDI Start-Stop, or whatever takes your fancy. yes, they are expensive, but that is what these incentives are supposed to help with.

[/quote]

In all due respect, how many X5 owners are going to "down grade" (their words) to a Freelander. I know a couple of V8 X5 owners and the only thing they will be changing for is an equivalent vehicle.

The environmental savings just wouldn't be there.

 

 

It's all about the twisties........

Pages

Add your comment

Log in or register to post comments

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week

  • Jaguar XF Sportbrake TDV6
    First Drive
    19 October 2017
    The handsome Jaguar XF Sportbrake exhibits all the hallmarks that makes the saloon great, and with the silky smooth diesel V6 makes it a compelling choice
  • Volkswagen T-Roc TDI
    First Drive
    19 October 2017
    Volkswagen's new compact crossover has the looks, the engineering and the build quality to be a resounding success, but not with this diesel engine
  • BMW M550i
    First Drive
    19 October 2017
    The all-paw M550i is a fast, effortless mile-muncher, but there's a reason why it won't be sold in the UK
  • Volvo V90
    First Drive
    19 October 2017
    The Volvo V90 is a big estate ploughing its own furrow. We’re about to see if it is refreshing or misguided
  • Kia Stonic
    First Drive
    18 October 2017
    Handsome entrant into the bulging small crossover market has a strong engine and agile handling, but isn’t as comfortable or complete as rivals