Prof Ludg Niedermayer
Ludk Niedermayer, Economist, MEP, TOP 09 + STAN
How do you see the recent introduction of new standards for Europe?
If we want to significantly reduce emissions in the EU, we cannot avoid emissions in transport, which represent a very significant proportion of the total emissions produced. After 2035, with exceptions, only zero-emission cars can be produced and marketed as a prerequisite for safe emissions reduction in the transport sector and the safe possibility of unlimited personal mobility. Battery cars have two essential advantages: they are very energy efficient (rated at approximately 3 compared to a car with an internal combustion engine) and they do not produce local emissions that are harmful to healthy people.
Therefore, act as the dominant model of the early personal movement in the future. The final possibility of regional production of internal combustion cars makes no sense, given the adopted goals, for special use (including sports). Synthetic fuel is not suitable under everyday conditions due to very poor utilization of energy.
The legislation is now open for review in 2026, but given the current circumstances, I expect no changes will be made, for the reasons described.
Aren’t you afraid of a big negative impact on the car industry, which is a question of the Czech economy?
Don’t worry because we need to find out if the alternative is better for the car industry. I mean, no. Not only because companies in Europe but also in America are clearly moving in this direction, and if we don’t jump on the bandwagon quickly, the end of technology could happen to the automotive industry, and it will be very high. the pain
Importantly for the car industry (as well as other sectors), thanks to the confirmation of the agreement negotiated by our President, I am clear on what will apply within a ten to fifteen year time frame. and enough time to choose an appropriate strategy for the path to change.
I have repeatedly spoken to people in the automobile industry and I know how far they are willing to go first and then dominate in terms of battery-powered vehicles (BEVs). On the other hand, if the car companies are uncertain about the future rules, it can have disastrous consequences, which may refuse to pass the law through the Parliament. I consider it highly unlikely that the Council and the EP will agree on a substantially different proposal. And out soon.
Can you explain to people why you shouldn’t make such drastic changes? Are their opportunities for individual movement undiminished, and therefore the overall state of life to be believed?
First, this is not a drastic change. Combustion cars will be sold for another 12 years if needed. Then they last longer in the market. The possibility of selection does not disappear.
I think a lot of people will soon find that electromobility is the best and cheapest option for their needs. Sorry, there are still huge prejudices about the limited internal combustion engine and the electric car. Oh people change so fight back
There is a price. I believe companies will gradually shift their offering towards cheaper, cheaper cars and we will see the results. The best way to make electric cars cheaper is to put a bonus on low-emission cars and a tax on new cars or only high-emission company cars (which cost nothing to begin with). Some form of such bonus exists in some EU countries.
Along the way, he encouraged companies to buy BEVs, cars that typically return to the market at lower prices and more quickly, thus representing an affordable alternative.
But among other things, the prices of new models with an internal combustion engine and an electric engine are on average more expensive at the same time, which means that the operating costs of BEVs are significantly lower.
A combination of the development of infrastructure and the offer of new cars, the emergence of a market for cars with small utility and you and a small support, with a certain change in the rhetoric of people with a big influence. Public money (including those who agree to our agreements in the EU), I think they could have changed ours as well.