162

Giulio MattioliAugust 31, 2026 at 4:51 AM EDT

Over the next months, the EU will decide whether to water down car emission regulations, which currently prescribe the sale of zero-emission vehicles only from 2035 Predictably, the regulation is coming under attack from various political and media actors in Germany. A THREAD

Bavarian conservative leader Söder and newspaper Bild build their case on a study recently published by researchers at TU Munich university. What does the study say? It's hard to say in detail because it doesn't seem to be publicly available. So I have to rely on media reports. The main point of the study seems to be that EVs are "zero emission" only for *tailpipe emissions*. If emissions from other phases of the vehicle's "life-cycle" are taken into account (electricity generation & production) then they are not zero but still lower carbon than ICEs So far so good - this is well known and uncontroversial. It also doesn't undermine the case for EVs. They are still lower emission than ICEs and electricity generation is tackled by other EU policies and targets and in fact decarbonising rapidly. Production is a tougher nut to crack as it involves for example decarbonising steel, which is one of the hardest sectors for that. But that applies to both EVs and ICEs. What's the problem with the reporting and the use that is being made of this study? First, the results are being presented as unprecedented and revolutionary, and something that the EU did not take into account before. Let's make it very clear that *this is not the case

(as an aside: even if these results were unprecedented and revolutionary, one would be well advised to: wait until they are *published and peer reviewed* - neither of which seems to be the case here (correct me if I'm wrong)) Second the results are being presented as a reason to abandon the zero (tailpipe) emission target altogether. That: - is not what the study suggests (again correct me if wrong) - would not make sense as the study shows that ICEs emit more on a lifecycle basis

But let's take the point that car production matters seriously - what follows for climate policy? 1. That there should be policy in place to reduce emission there *alongside policies to reduce tailpipe emissions*. I believe that there are, though ofc can be improved 2.(and this is a point that transport and climate researchers have been making for a long time): that a shift to EVs, while helpful, is not a silver bullet and should be accompanied by measures to reduce the distances that we travel by car, e.g. with a shift to other modes. Incidentally, note how none of the actors involved in this brouhaha makes the second point. I suspect they would consider it anathema and taboo.

Another issue with this debate, in my view, is the nationalistic undertone. Some non-surprising findings are being hyped up as reserachers from the "best university in the EU" discovering something "revolutionary" that the clueless EU (and other researchers) did somehow ignore

This is: 1. Not how research works (99% of the time) - it's a cumulative collective process 2. Not what is happening here - this is a well established field of research, and the EU took into account of the evidence when making its regulations. END. Please share as there is way too much disinformation on this 🙏

1 / 1