Score for this Data / Query Cell
InfluenceMap has researched and collated the following pieces of evidence associated with the data source and query indicated above. Extraordinary information is indicated by a coloured flag in the upper right corner. Evidence items in order of data inputted with exceptional items first.
Opposing government regulation
ACEA emphasizes the need for technology neutrality in emissions regulation, and appears to advocate against the inclusion of the transport sector in midstream Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) (ACEA response to European Commission consultation on the 2030 Effort Sharing Decision, June 2015)
Extract from Source:
In line with European Council conclusions, ACEA confirms its strong opinion to keep comprehensive and technology neutral approach for the promotion of emissions reduction and energy efficiency in transport. [...] On the specific topic of the inclusion of transport sector in ETS, ACEA calls for clear distinction between different options that are available. ACEA members do not consider midstream ETS – manufacturers responsible for emissions certificates for the use phase of vehicle - as a suitable and cost-efficient option. This is valid both for open or closed system (OEMs have to trade certificates only among themselves). Such system gives no planning certainty, need for estimates on vehicle mileage through the lifetime (in reality impossible due to huge differences in segments) and those long-term estimates are incompatible with floating ETS market prices. Therefore midstream ETS is clearly no solution for the industry.
Not supporting government regulation
Supporting climate policy with exceptions. Arguing that emission reductions should not be the primary basis for climate regulation. Stressing cost-effectiveness. Supporting some policy suggestions but arguing that long-term framework should avoid 'burdening the sector' (ACEA, comments on long term EU GHG emission strategy, September 2018)
Extract from Source:
The transport sector accounts for roughly a quarter of total CO2 emissions from fuel combustion, but absolute CO2 emissions should not be the primary basis for selecting abatement measures in an economy. Cost-effectiveness is the most important factor. Some of the measures already adopted in the road transport sector are very expensive per tonne of CO2, and some of the lowest cost opportunities for emission reductions in transport have not been exploited so far: better use of CO2-based taxation for vehicles, support for eco-driving, better road infrastructure and the optimization of freight logistics. Taxation should be EU harmonized to promote fuel efficient vehicles without disrupting achieved dieselization. [...] Long-term transport policy framework in view of the need to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions economy-wide should be based on a much more positive approach to road transport. The benefits that transport brings to the society and its direct link to GDP indicators have to be highlighted. All efforts should be made to improve its efficiency but at the same time efforts should be made to avoid burdening the sector with additional taxes, charges and restrictions.
Mixed on climate change regulation
Evidence suggests that ACEA considers market-based mechanisms to be the most important and effective response to climate change. However, the evidence also suggests that ACEA would support government legislation which is cost-effective for the automotive industry. (Position paper on Strategy for long-term EU greenhouse gas emissions reductions, Sept 2018)
Extract from Source:
In the end, it is however a global market acceptance and penetration that are needed to meet the challenge of climate change and to safeguard the competitiveness of the European automotive industry ...A supportive policy framework is needed for companies to innovate and successfully launch the new technologies. Industry and consumers need EU-wide harmonised incentives and standardisation of regulation. In order to safeguard industry's global competitiveness, public authorities need to enable the EU automotive industry to reach policy objectives more cost-effectively.