Gains from Harmonizing US and EU Auto Regulations under TTIP - Fuelly Forums
Go Back   Fuelly Forums > The Pub > General Discussion (Off-Topic)
Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 09-14-2016, 09:18 PM   #1
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 39
Country: United States
Gains from Harmonizing US and EU Auto Regulations under TTIP

Just started reading this lengthy policy brief, itís fascinating.

https://piie.com/publications/pb/pb15-10.pdf

I ran it through one of those summary-generating websites:

Quote:
INTRODUCTION The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership aims at harmonizing regulations across the European Union and the United States.

Despite disparities in regulations and hence production requirements, we show that these regulatory regimes are not significantly different in terms of the safety outcomes they deliver.

To measure the trade loss from having two sets of regulations, the Policy Briefexamines how the 1958 Agreement affects trade, using a difference-in-differences approach.

Achieving regulatory harmonization or mutual recognition of regulations nowwould help US and EU producers benefit from scale economies and compete inthe global marketplace, while providing consumers with more varieties within amarket and equivalent safety at lower prices.

Simply put, by harmonizing regulations in some industries or agreeing to recognize each otherís regulations, replication in production could be avoided, generating real productivity gains.

While there are barriers to harmonizing environmental regulations, notably inthe driving pattern required during testing, there is also room from amanufacturing perspective to create one model for both markets that adheresto the most stringent emissions regulation.

As a result, environmental regulations can create a race to the top, where anautomobile that meets the highest standard on various emissions tests is marketable in both economies.

In contrast, safety requirements are more complex and often incompatible in the sense that one car cannot meet both regulations simultaneously.


The first column lists the technical regulation in the European Union, column 2is the corresponding US regulation, and column 3 explains the differences, ifany, between the two regulations.
Of particular interest to fuelly users:

Quote:
While there are barriers to harmonizing
environmental regulations, notably in the driving pattern
required during testing (including distance, speed, and whether
the car is allowed to warm up before testing begins), there is also
room from a manufacturing perspective to create one model
for both markets that adheres to the most stringent emissions
regulation. For example, the European Union is moving toward
a greenhouse gas emissions standard of 95 grams/kilometer
(60.6 miles per gallon equivalent) for 95 percent of vehicles by
2020 and the United States is moving toward an average level
of 163 grams/mile (54.5 miles per gallon equivalent) by 2025. It may be in the producerís interest to make one car for both
markets that meets the 60.6 miles per gallon threshold.2
A clear hierarchy in these regulations favors low emissions. As a result,
environmental regulations can create a race to the top, where
an automobile that meets the highest standard on various emissions
tests is marketable in both economies.
In contrast, safety
requirements are more complex and often incompatible in the
sense that one car cannot meet both regulations simultaneously
__________________

__________________

cuts_off_prius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2016, 06:10 AM   #2
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,299
Country: United States
Location: north east PA
If it is like TPP though, corporations will end up with more rights than nations.
__________________

trollbait is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2016, 09:25 AM   #3
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,128
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Mid Wales
Are those targets based on lab test figure averages, or real World? The gap between the NEDC European lab tests and real world is larger than the EPA sticker figures/real world gap in the US. It makes it hard to compare, but it could take longer than initially thought to reach those averages given that the industry average for all passenger cars here are 84% of the lab tests. On saying that, there are already hundreds of smaller fuel efficient vehicles on sale, and have been for a number of years here that meet those targets, and in many cases exceed them too.
__________________

Please check out and 'like' my Facebook photography page
Draigflag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2016, 03:42 PM   #4
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 65
Country: Canada
Location: Oakville, Ontario
Quote:
Originally Posted by trollbait View Post
If it is like TPP though, corporations will end up with more rights than nations.
Absolutely correct. It's an example of where the true power lies: In economic superpowers, those being GigaCorporations and extremely affluent families (e.g., the Rockefellers). The "power of the people" expressed through democratic vote is an illusion. Vote in your Donkey or Elephant. The true power can be found if you follow the money trail.
__________________

2015 Audi Q5 "Progressiv" + S-Line + Scuba Blue, 3.0L V6 TDI
(Highest fuel economy for all Audi Q5s on Fuelly!)

SteveMak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2016, 03:04 AM   #5
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 21
Country: Canada
Seems exciting. Britain should also have been part of the deal.
tommypress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2016, 09:39 PM   #6
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 39
Country: United States
If we were serious about cutting emissions, we would harmonize FMVSS/CMVSS/EPA with UN-ECE UNIVERSAL standards. We Americans and Canadians simply do not have access to the ultra efficient passenger cars and their drivetrains across the pond due to our unnecessary market protection regulations. Even if we made responsible car buying decisions, the same cars simply don't hold a candle to what is offered across the pond. Want a base Ford Fusion? Stuck with an archaic 2.5l NA I-4 gasoline engine. Meanwhile in the UK for the same car in base trim, Ford Mondeo, you get to choose from 1.0T Ecoboost, 1.5T Ecoboost, 1.5 TDCi diesel, and 2.0 TDCi diesel. Multiply this with hundreds of models and you have quite a descrepancy with emissions between the two places. And this is for the reasonable consumers who buy what fits their needs, not even counting the hordes of light truck (SUVs, crossovers, vans) buyers (which account for about 2/3 of the market). It all adds up!

U.S. vehicle CO2 emissions still almost double Europe and Japan

In this regard, I hope that TTIP deal goes through...

Quote:
U.S. vehicle CO2 emissions still almost double Europe and Japan
Darren QuickDarren QuickJune 21st, 2010

Despite ongoing efforts to wean itself off the teat of foreign oil, the U.S. car market is still almost twice as polluting as Europe and Japan. This new finding from automotive data provider, JATO Dynamics, comes despite the Car Allowance Rebate System (CARS) – better known as “cash for clunkers” – program that replaced over 690,000 vehicles on the roads with more fuel-efficient models and the fact that American consumers are significantly more inclined to adopt Hybrid technology than Europeans. Then why is it so?

JATO’s study of the U.S. light vehicle market in the first quarter of 2010 reveals that the market’s average CO2 output is 268.5 g/km. In order to reflect like-for-like comparison with car markets in other global regions, excluding pick-up trucks, full size vans and small commercial vehicles, the figure falls to 255.6 g/km. This figure compares very unfavorably to Japan (130.8 g/km) and Europe’s five biggest markets, which average 140.3 g/km.

All markets improved marginally when compared to the full-year average in 2009 with Japan’s CO2 output down 0.4 g/km, the USA down 1.0 g/km and Europe improving most significantly with a 4.3 g/km reduction in the year-to-date.

“It is still clear that American consumers need to undergo a fundamental re-think of their vehicle buying preferences, but the past period of economic upheaval is likely to have meant that other domestic issues have taken consumer’s priority”, says David Mitchell, President of JATO Americas. “The blame can’t just lie with consumers though, the OEM product offering in the US still does little to promote alternatives to the large engine capacity gasoline vehicles which still dominate the market.”

Gasoline, diesel and Hybrid cars

However, Americans consumers have taken a shine to Hybrids such as the
Toyota Prius. Hybrids enjoy a 2.3 percent market share in the U.S., while in Europe it is still only 0.5 percent. Not surprisingly though, Japan leads the way with 10.1 percent of market share going to Hybrids.
While they mightn’t have embraced Hybrids as much as Americans, Europeans have been able to reduce their CO2 emissions thanks to the rising popularity of diesel, a fuel which has a 48.9 percent market share in Europe. Conversely, Japan has a tiny diesel share of only 0.11 percent, but its highly congested roads make very small and economical gasoline cars a popular choice. Currently, the U.S. market is dominated by gasoline which has 81.9 percent market share, with only 1.7 percent being diesel.

Fuel too cheap?

JATO sees cost as a major factor in the difference between the popularity of different fuels and fuel technologies in different countries. The price of gasoline still remains comparatively low in the U.S. when compared to other global markets where its rising prices have been one of the key influences for change. Of the vehicles sold in the U.S. 33.9 percent fall within a 15-20 mpg consumption bracket, compared with only 0.63 percent in Japan and just 0.29 percent in Europe.
Carrot or stick?

JATO says varying CO2-based taxation regimes that reward or penalize certain technologies can also play a part in regional variances. Japan’s high-technology driven economy favors new technologies such as Hybrid and electric vehicles, while European vehicle "scrappage" schemes have contributed significantly to the introduction of a large number of low polluting, fuel-efficient small cars – something that “cash for clunkers” didn’t do to the same effect.
I wonder what the latest figures (grams CO2/km) are for our markets.
__________________

cuts_off_prius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 12:14 AM   #7
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,128
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Mid Wales
Not sure about the rest of Europe, or the US, but in the UK, average emissions of passenger cars have fallen for 17 years in a row now, in fact almost 70% of us drive cars with C02 emissions of less than 100 grams per KM. They have dropped 27% since 2007.
__________________

Please check out and 'like' my Facebook photography page
Draigflag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 12:36 AM   #8
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 65
Country: Canada
Location: Oakville, Ontario
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draigflag View Post
Not sure about the rest of Europe, or the US, but in the UK, average emissions of passenger cars have fallen for 17 years in a row now, in fact almost 70% of us drive cars with C02 emissions of less than 100 grams per KM. They have dropped 27% since 2007.
When you say emissions have fallen, are you referring to real-world emissions? Here, in North America, only in-lab emissions are measured for vehicles, and as we know very well, there don't reflect actual emission, when the vehicle is operated in real-world conditions, by a long shot!

Last I heard, UK official reported that just about every vehicle they tested as a result of the Dieselgate fiasco, both diesel and gasoline (petrol) powered, emitted many multiples of the lab-legal levels of regulated gasses when tailpipe emissions were checked in real-world conditions.

Here in North America, we feel good that emissions have "gone down" over recent years, but we look only at the lab numbers. And while the real-world emissions have also (likely) gone down during the same time, we don't actually know, because we don't measure them, advertize them, or talking about them.
__________________

2015 Audi Q5 "Progressiv" + S-Line + Scuba Blue, 3.0L V6 TDI
(Highest fuel economy for all Audi Q5s on Fuelly!)

SteveMak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 02:15 AM   #9
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,128
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Mid Wales
Well I was referring to C02 emissions, of which fuel consumption figures are calculated from, and the average car achieves 84% of its quoted MPG numbers, so you can safely assume emissions are probably 15-20% higher than the lab tests too.

At least lab figures however inaccurate provide a basis for like for like comparisons. C02 emissions per capita have only fallen by 1% in the UK since 1996, but have risen 7% per capita in the US.
__________________

Please check out and 'like' my Facebook photography page
Draigflag is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 10:12 AM   #10
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,128
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Mid Wales
You might like this website, it compiles every car available here under each sector, SUV, Hatchback etc and shows you how many models are available and their C02 emissions etc.

Carbon Dioxide CO2 Car Emissions | UK New Car Data
__________________

__________________

Please check out and 'like' my Facebook photography page
Draigflag is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.