Talk Morgan Forums Community The Malvern Arms First and second

Whilst one would assume that motor manufacturers would rejoice at the news of a delay, early reports are they are displeased with the uncertainty this introduces into their planning horizon and may impact on their earlier recovery of the substantial investment in the EV platforms with the consequential reducing of predicted demand for EV's as a result of a 2030 ban delay, higher EV demand would them to help recover their investment costs. earlier

The wider debate in Europe, is the extend of the proposed lower emissions requirements of Euro 7 is creating a massive investment in ICE technology to comply with little improvement in real life 'green house' car emissions, with a very short investment recovery period before ICE's are banned, when that funding should be being invested in EV cars and battery investment.

Both are very sound business arguments, we seem to suffer a new form of madness and political correctness allowing the 'green lobby' to much sway, increasingly demonstrated by the likes the Welsh 20mph speed limit, that is projected to cost Welsh economy £9 billion a year....very little press is given to the projected trillions its going to cost to make the UK economy green...and who is paying for it...obviously the consumer/taxpayer. And despite all the economic cost burden we will subject ourselves to as a result of going green, it wont matter much in the grand scheme of global warming whilst the likes of China, India and the US continue to pollute at their current levels

This was not really unexpected. The 2030 deadline was overambitious and as much a “ look how committed we are, better than others who chose 2035”posture and spin. Manufacturers have therefore made their plans and spent £££££ on developing them to that deadline. Now they have a further 5 years. I’d be less than happy at this decision if I was a manufacturer I’d not be happy. Surely they must now also review after sales for spares etc? What is the situation with MMC and trads?
Next potential hiccup might be hydrogen as it is being upscaled but still developing.
In my view the date of 2030 was a political ploy and soundbite typical of modern politics. Politicians trying to look good with unrealistic proposals. Vote grabbing, short term strategies based on 5 year inter election periods.
There are long term strategies that should be in place and endorsed by all parties. Not easy as exhibited by nuclear generation policy. Expensive and needs long term planning and management, not a 5 year, new government stop-start.
Anyway, the Plus Four just bought should see me out.

Surely if the manufacturers had any expectation of the 2030 deadline being acheivable they'd just carry on regardless and make it plain they were stopping ICE at that point .... I'm sceptical that so much of the rhetoric coming out of the private sector these days is just about putting political/media pressure on government for a taxpayer funded handout.

It would appear EV sales were slumping even before this announcement ... punters voting with their feet.

K

I do wonder if some manufacturers are actually breathing a sigh of relief in private as the margins on conventional ICE are probably much higher than on any EV product. A few extra years of stable margin with the prospect of battery prices coming down in the future may actually be a good thing for some of them and make EV's more affordable.

Whilst I do agree that the private sector maybe exercising some form of lobbying, I'm sure many manufacturers would not have invested so heavily into EV's development so early on (whilst other technologies such as cheap batteries were not developed adequately) had the EV solution to mass transport not been so widely backed by governments across the world, being panicked into what was perceived as a green solution. So I do believe they have some right to question government direction and the pace of change when they are facing massive additional investment requirements. We have yet to see where bio fuels and green hydrogen takes us over the coming decade or so and its impact on the EV debate going forward.

Already the US is investing and building in air scrubbers to collect the green house gasses and lock them away.......maybe we should focus more on cleaning the air with air scrubbers rather than trying to reinvent the wheel and throwing away proven technology and current infrastructure that works.

One does wonder from time to time how the world geopolitics are being re-engineered and to whose advantage as the oil rich economies become increasingly less critical to our general and economic well being as the world reliance on oil disappears and with it their power base. Who will be the eventual winner and are we creating a world that will see an ascendance of Asian power in the coming decades as the western world suffers from green house cost indigestion undermining their economic cost base and competitive effectiveness. Are we already experiencing it with eg cheaper Chinese EV's.

Not so much lobbying as straight up chancers 🙂 .... with the eco-twitterati behind them it's no work to monster the govt until they part with a few mil (or tens of mil, or hundreds of mil) in 'transition support' here and there to shut them up ... saw it here with Brexit ... a number of firms (and organisations of big players in sectors) claiming meltdown for various industries ... levering the political sensibilities over cross-border politics into multi-million pound payments ... suddenly all went quiet ... certainly haven't seen mass closures in Fraserburgh or the money being used to open up significant new markets ... just trousered the cash, got used to the extra paperwork and carried on much as before.

As for the car makers, this only applies to the UK (most other countries quoted later dates for ICE phase out from the start ... we're falling more into line with them) ... we don't make a lot of cars on a global scale, and most are internationally owned .... now our deadline is more in harmony with the rest of Europe, head office can harmonise planning better rather than worse ... here and globally, manufacturers can continue making what they do for another 5 years in their ICE range ... certainly no need to invest in new models ... the current ones will suffice nicely for another few years.... big savings there.

Certainly agree that us weighing our economy down to slightly improve on our few percent of global pollution while our big 'cheap labour dodgy rules' heavy-polluting competitors laugh up their sleeves and ignore it all doesn't bode well for the future prosperity of the UK

K

Can't see what all the fuss is about, it was 2035 until Boris poked his nose in and changed it.

^^^^^^ Exactly that - the green environmentalists with lots of spare cash will continue buying EV and guinea pig a little longer before mainstream are forced down that path.

Battery development will only improve in time and thus range

It's looking very likely it will never effect me or my good lady.

I'd go for Hydrogen but not this stop gap, it'll be worth the wait.

Industry is always having it's hand out, not just for Government incentives/investments like the current £500m for conversion to electric arc furnaces, but also in low corporation tax rates such as those in Ireland to attract HO locations, that most likely quickly disappear and relocate elsewhere when ever their low tax rates disappear.

Globalisation and the free movement of capital across borders ensures no country has a guarantee of continuity of an given industry base within their borders (except on the grounds of nation security) and even that can be circumvented. So its often the case that many governments are not masters of their own destiny when it comes to maintaining/retaining an economic base within their borders. The UK is not unique in this ,Germany is now experiencing more of its industrial base is moving or threatening to move overseas to lower cost bases and so the federal government is looking at all sorts of incentives/rebates to keep eg heavy energy consumers like glass industries to remain in Germany since the loss of access to cheap Russian gas,. because their global competitiveness has been undermined. A reliance for the most part created by the German government closing its nuclear power stations almost overnight.

Foreign ownership of a manufacturing company is not a great issue IMHO, its more important to have the wealth generation in form of local employment, supply chains and taxes etc paid domestically. The UK major motor manufacturers have been foreign owned almost from the outset eg Ford and Vauxhall by USA. Paying UK earned dividends abroad is a small price to pay, by comparison a major element of the UK corporate declared profits and resultant UK taxes paid are made on overseas earnings. Oversea ownership of manufacturing entities is not as big an issue as for service industries where wealth is created in one country and then thru licencing agreements/transfer pricing, the profits are taxed in low corporation tax areas like Ireland to the detriment of the wealth generating country.

John ... indeed ..... my thoughts on international ownership being that all the EU companies are working to 2035 already so, despite their squeaking, this just harmonises the date across their various national units ..... JLR have come out in favour of the UK change (saying that harmonisation is helpful) .... Ford and Vauxhall against .... we shall see who has their hand out !🙂 .... Interestingly the Vauxhall parent company claims to be working towarda 2030 across the whole of Europe already ... can't see what their beef is??

As noted above we were aiming for 2035 all along till Johnson wanted to grandstand .... how long til the media's desire to attack the sitting government has them rehabilitating Boris into a saviour of the planet 😁.... bit like their hate-figure Jeremy Hunt being wheeled out as a voice of reason as soon as he started criticising the government ... media are appalling

K