New era unfolding for the automobile industry
Transcription
New era unfolding for the automobile industry
% ! April 1, 2009 What makes this recession exceptional is that every major global car market is currently seeing either a sharp decline in demand or much slower growth. Following more than 100 years of dominance by the traditional internal combustion engine the degree of electrification in the sector is now beginning to increase. Alternative fuels are also gaining prominence. ! The EU regulation stipulating that the CO2 emissions of new cars must be reduced to 120 grams per kilometre by 2015 at the latest is an important instrument for promoting lower-carbon individual mobility. In addition, the expectation of rising oil prices will prompt automakers to produce more energy-efficient cars. ! They push up new car prices significantly. This implies that CO2 abatement costs are high. Government incentives can accelerate market penetration, but a subsidies battle between the leading automaking nations needs to be averted. In the long term all new propulsion technologies and fuels need to be able to survive without subsidies. " Authors Eric Heymann +49 69 910-31730 eric.heymann@db.com ! ! ! $ ! # Admittedly, no rapid structural change can be expected in new car registrations and most definitely not in the stock of vehicles on the road. Such a change is precluded by the long development lead times required for the new technologies and the long operating lives of cars. Currently, petrol and diesel cars still enjoy many advantages over alternatively fuelled vehicles. Thus cars equipped with internal combustion engines will probably make up around 90% or even more of new registrations in the EU on average during the next decade. Meta Zähres Editor Tobias Just Technical Assistant Angelika Greiner & ! CO2 emissions of new cars in the EU-15, g/km 190 Deutsche Bank Research Frankfurt am Main Germany Internet:www.dbresearch.com E-mail marketing.dbr@db.com Fax: +49 69 910-31877 180 170 160 Managing Director Norbert Walter 150 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 Sources: European Commission, European Federation for Transport and Environment EU Monitor 62 1. New era unfolding against the backdrop of the crisis The global recession in the automobile industry is currently hogging the headlines – and quite rightly: the current crisis in the sector is exceptional because in the coming months, too, the demand for new vehicles in all major car markets around the globe will decline sharply or at least grow much more slowly. The countries being hit the hardest are those where the real estate and financial crises are particularly severe; namely the US, Spain and the UK. For the first time since 2001 there were declines in global unit automobile production (down 4%) and global new car registrations (down 5%) in 2008. 2009 will be the most difficult year for the automobile industry in decades. Significant cutbacks in output likely Carmakers and autoparts suppliers are reacting to the sales crisis. They are cutting back production, shortening the working week or extending holiday shutdowns. In the US, first and foremost, carmaking plants are bound to be closed. Many companies – especially autoparts suppliers and car dealers – will not survive the current recession. Across the entire sector we will see not only more bankruptcies but also an increase in mergers and acquisitions. The automotive industry can thus be said to be heading for far-reaching consolidation. At the same time as experiencing this cyclical turmoil the auto industry is also set to undergo a technological revolution. For the first time in over a century of the automobile’s existence there is a realistic chance that motor vehicles will no longer be powered by fossil fuels alone. There are two main drivers for this development: firstly, environmental and climate policy demands a reduction in CO 2 emissions by cars – on account of the climate change threat. And secondly, the stratospheric rise in the oil price until mid-2008 and the expectation that its current decline will prove a temporary phenomenon have led the auto industry to redouble its research efforts into alternative propulsion systems. Below we shall assess the EU regulation limiting the CO2 emissions of new cars. In the second part of this report we shall summarise the advantages and drawbacks of alternative means of propulsion and their future prospects compared with conventional internal combustion engines. 2. Auto industry in the spotlight of environmental policy ! Greenhouse gas emissions in the EU by mode of transport in %, 2005 Sea 14.4 Other 1.6 Road 72.2 Air 11.8 Source: Eurostat 2 ' The automotive industry has been the subject of environmental regulation for decades, with governments employing a wide variety of instruments. Petroleum taxes and motor vehicle taxes in the EU, for example, are also ecologically motivated. The obligatory fitting of catalysts, introduced in several EU countries at the end of the 1980s, and the gradual tightening of exhaust emission standards (Euro 1 to Euro 6) are aimed at reducing harmful vehicle emissions (e.g. oxides of nitrogen and hydrocarbons). Another example is the tax incentive for the retrofitting of diesel cars with particulate filters in Germany or the bonus/penalty (or “feebate”) system for new cars in France in which tax rebates are granted on vehicles with low CO2 emissions whereas cars with high emissions are saddled with punitive tax fees. At the initiative of the EU measures to combat the potential risks of particulate matter emissions must be implemented by member states. In Germany, for example, a system of environmental badges (Feinstaubplaketten) has been introduced April 1, 2009 New era unfolding for the automobile industry ( )*+ Diesel share of new car registrations in Western Europe* in % 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 * EU-15 + EFTA Source: ACEA that signifies the level of a vehicle’s particulate matter emissions, and in many cities “green zones” have been designated in which cars without the corresponding badge may not be driven. The objective of the EU end-of-life vehicle directive issued in 2000 is ultimately to ban the use of hazardous substances (e.g. heavy metals) in automaking, to boost the rate of recycling for old vehicles to 95% by 2015 and install a disposal system that is free to consumers for cars that have come to the end of their service lives. Given the growing threat from climate change motor vehicle CO2 emissions are of course central to environmental policy. After all, transport is the only sector in the EU in which greenhouse gas emissions have risen constantly since 1990 (by a good 30%) – despite the significant reduction in specific vehicle emissions. The transport sector currently generates nearly one-quarter of all emissions in the EU. Over 70% of the sector’s emissions come from the road traffic segment, with passenger cars in turn responsible for around two-thirds of road traffic emissions; this is the equivalent of some 12% of all CO2 emissions in the EU. Automobile industry failing to satisfy its own self-commitment , -. CO2 emissions in the EU-27 by sector, 1990=100 140 120 100 80 60 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 Energy Industry Transport Households Source: European Commission - / ! Average performance and engine capacity of cars in the EU-15, 1995=100 140 130 120 110 100 90 94 96 98 00 Engine capacity 02 04 06 Performance Source: ACEA 0 The above-mentioned growth in emissions makes political action necessary. In the 1990s the European Commission initially relied on the instrument of voluntary self-regulation: in 1998 the European automobile industry made pledges to the European Commission that, among other things, it would cut average CO2 emissions of new cars to 140 g/km by 2008/09; in 1995 the average CO2 emission level was still 186 g/km. In the early days of self-regulation the auto industry made relatively major strides, although the average power and capacity of engines in newly registered cars increased. This development was enhanced by the trend towards more fuel-efficient diesel cars. In recent years, however, the progress has slowed, so the sector will miss its target; in 2008 the average CO2 emissions by new cars in the EU was 157 g/km. The main culprit for this failure is the automobile industry itself, since it has the greatest influence on the development and deployment of more efficient engines, new propulsion technologies or lighter materials when designing vehicles. All the same, a number of developments in the regulatory arena and on the demand side are also partially to blame. Tougher regulatory requirements with regard to harmful emissions and consumer desires for increased safety and comfort have driven up the average weight of cars considerably. This has cancelled out the savings achieved via technological improvements. In addition, over the last ten years it is precisely luxury cars and larger-engined niche vehicles such as sports-utility vehicles and sports cars that have become very popular with customers. The preferential tax treatment of company cars has been a contributory factor. In Germany in 2008, for example, 86% of new luxury car purchases were recorded as commercial registrations, while for off-road vehicles and sports cars the corresponding figure was no less than 60%. In a competitive market it thus comes as no surprise that most manufacturers gear themselves towards such products. For example, all leading carmakers have at least one off-road vehicle in their range. By contrast, very economical models have largely proved to be sales flops. Such “green” cars have sold sluggishly due to sizeable markups and often mediocre design, among other things. A lesson can be learned from the failure of voluntary self-regulation by the European auto industry. Although flexibility and the reduction April 1, 2009 3 EU Monitor 62 in red tape are convincing arguments in its favour, voluntary selfregulation does have one major failing, which is that the achievement of environmental policy objectives cannot be guaranteed because of the lack of binding regulations and the inability to implement sanction mechanisms. Furthermore, it encourages freeriding behaviour. New regulation on CO2 emissions by cars… When it became apparent that the European auto industry would fail to achieve its reduction target, the European Commission decided to rely on binding targets for reducing CO2 emissions by new cars. Initially the limit was to be set at 120 g/km as the average for new cars registered in 2012. Manufacturers of heavy cars whose emissions are usually higher would have to achieve larger percentage reductions than companies already producing relatively economical (and small) vehicles. In turn, however, the CO2 ceiling 1 would be higher for heavier vehicles. Following months of discussions and consultations with associations and interest groups at the end of 2008 the EU agreed on a regulation to reduce the CO2 emissions of new cars. It contains the following key elements: — The automobile industry will be granted a longer phasing-in period for reaching the reduction targets. This arrangement is designed to factor in the length of the typical product life cycle in the sector. Initially, that is by 2012, only 65% of new cars will have to comply with the average CO2 limit of 120 g/km. The figure must then rise to 75% by 2013, 80% by 2014 and not until 2015 does it have to reach 100%. , — There are exceptions for makers of niche vehicles, which will have to make only minimal reductions in their average CO2 emissions or none at all; this can be interpreted as a de minimis rule. As previously proposed, the makers of heavier cars, whose fuel consumption thus tends to be higher, will have to reduce their emissions more significantly. CO2 emissions of newly registered cars by country (g/km), 2007 SE FI DE UK — On top of the originally planned possibility to use savings of 10 g/km derived from eco-innovations and biofuels to be counted towards the reduction target, an additional 7 g/km is to be allowed. NL GR DK EU BE ES FR IT PT 0 50 100 150 200 Source: European Federation for Transport and Environment ) — Fines will be imposed on manufacturers that exceed their limit: between 2015 and 2018 a fine of EUR 5 per vehicle will have to be paid for the first gram over the limit, for the second gram EUR 15, for the third EUR 25 and from the fourth gram EUR 95 per vehicle. From 2019 onwards the standard fine will be EUR 95 per gram in excess of the limit per car. For a car whose CO2 emissions in 2019 are 10 grams higher than the target figure this would mean a fine of EUR 950 being levied. — A long-term CO2 target was set at an average of 95 g/km in 2020. The figure is to be reviewed in 2013. 1 4 The objective was to be achieved by means of an “integrated approach“: in addition to improvements in vehicle engine technology other measures should be able to be used to a limited degree (10 g/km) to count towards attaining the objective. These so-called eco-innovations would include reduced rolling resistance of tyres, display of the ideal time to change gear, minimum standards for the energy efficiency of air conditioning systems or increased use of biofuels. This package was to be accompanied by tax measures such as changing the basis for vehicle tax to CO2 emissions and improved information for consumers. April 1, 2009 New era unfolding for the automobile industry 3 … has advantages and drawbacks $ The EU regulation contains the typical elements of a (political) compromise. It therefore comes as no surprise that both the automobile industry and the environmental associations are critical of particular provisions in the agreement. It does indeed contain both positive and negative aspects: the extension of the phasing-in period can be criticised from an ecological point of view. It is a major concession particularly if the sector is judged according to the targets it has set itself. All the same, setting the CO2 limit for new cars in the EU a few grams higher or lower will have only a modest impact on global climate change. We therefore consider it more important that the adopted regulation constitutes a legally binding instrument to bring about a long-term reduction in new car CO2 emissions. In this case what counts in the truest sense is the end product. The advance notification of ambitious limits for 2020 provides the sector with a reliable basis for its planning. It also makes sense to reassess the target in the light of technological progress that takes place. However, the long-term targets should not be watered down on the basis of flimsy arguments. All in all, the regulation contains the world’s most stringent new car CO2 reduction targets currently in force. Of course the longer phasing-in periods granted are also related to the current recession in the automotive sector. CO2 emissions of new registered cars in Germany by vehicle segment (g/km), 2007 Luxury Sports Off-road Executive Midsize Vans Compact Supermini Mini 0 100 200 300 Source: Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt In addition to being critical of the phasing-in periods, a number of environmental organisations have also condemned the credits for eco-innovations as too generous and the potential fines as too low. We basically welcome that there will be recognition for all the technological measures that help to reduce vehicle CO2 emissions. This increases the flexibility and room for manoeuvre of companies. And ultimately in this case achieving the ends is more important than the means employed to get there. The risk of misuse must of course be precluded by implementing appropriate measures. That is why there is also a provision that the efficacy of eco-innovations must be verified. Fines too high or too low? 1 # Commercial share of new car registrations in Germany (%), 2008 Luxury Executive Midsize Vans Off-road Sports Compact Mini Supermini 0 25 50 75 100 Source: Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt April 1, 2009 2 Our assessment of the potential fines is inconclusive. On the one hand, for expensive cars in particular the markup resulting from an excessive level of emissions will probably be too low to dissuade the majority of customers from purchasing such a vehicle. If, for example, a vehicle costing EUR 50,000 exceeds the permitted CO2 emissions limit by 10 grams, the fine would push the price up by a mere 1.4% in 2015. An appreciable impact on potential buyers’ eventual choice of vehicle is thus unlikely to be achieved, even though this impact is likely to be significant in cases where the limit is exceeded by a much larger margin. On the other hand, a fine of EUR 95 per gram of CO2 over the limit would result in expense of no less than EUR 475 per extra tonne of CO2 emitted by the vehicle if it is driven a total of 200,000 km during its life. This price per tonne of CO2 is many times higher than that charged under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. If one exceeds the limit, one could thus use the fines to purchase emissions certificates and thereby reduce supply. Afterwards there would still be sufficient resources to fund environmental projects, for example. The mathematical exercise above illustrates firstly that differing environmental policy instruments almost inexorably result in differing CO2 prices. This should not actually be the case with a homogeneous, tradable good and indicates ecological and economic inefficiency. In the end, 5 EU Monitor 62 however, this fact reflects the political realities. On the other hand, the exercise indicates that many measures to reduce automotive CO2 emissions entail very high costs for achieving these reductions. 2 This is true in particular compared to the building sector. Further political intervention appears necessary Automotive industry will launch more energy-efficient vehicles When all is said and done, the EU regulation will force the auto industry to redouble its efforts to develop and manufacture more energy-efficient vehicles. The fears expressed by some critics of the regulation that the extended phasing-in periods and the generous credits available for eco-innovations will prompt the industry to sit back and do nothing for now will prove to be incorrect. The industry has recognised that it is time to take action. The energy efficiency of cars is an increasingly important criterion in the decision-making of commercial and private customers – not just because of the high variable costs, but also because a vehicle’s resale value drops significantly if its fuel consumption is high. This is why more and more economical vehicles will come onto the market over the next few years. Changeover to CO2 as basis for car tax sends an important signal This trend could be given extra impetus by additional government measures aimed primarily at kickstarting the hitherto tentative demand for economical cars. For example, in Germany the changeover to a car’s CO2 emissions as one basis for assessing vehicle tax will not take place until mid-2009, although there has actually been political agreement on this for years. This measure sends a clear signal to consumers that they should pay attention to low fuel consumption. By contrast, the stalemate of the past months and years has unsettled consumers and made them reluctant to buy cars. Also the preferential tax arrangements contained in the company car rules could in future be geared more closely to ecological criteria: the more economical the vehicle, the greater the tax deductibility could be, for example. Since such measures would be likely to encounter short-term political opposition, their early announcement and phasing-in periods appear to make sense. 4 The expansion of electronic traffic management systems and the rapid removal of bottlenecks from the road transport infrastructure would also help to cut road traffic emissions. And finally, campaigns that provide information about the economic and ecological benefits of economical driving habits would probably be beneficial. The public sector and the auto industry have equally important roles to play in this regard. Average CO2 emissions of new cars in the EU by marque (g/km) Daimler Mazda BMW Nissan Volkswagen Suzuki Ford Hyundai GM Honda Toyota Renault Fiat PSA Supplementary costs to remain manageable for the time being 0 2005 100 2006 2007 200 Source: European Federation for Transport and Environment 5 The measures to reduce motor vehicle CO2 emissions do of course entail additional costs for the automotive industry, which will then be reflected in the selling prices of vehicles. According to calculations by Germany’s Federal Environment Agency published in 2008 the costs of a 20% reduction in emissions both for petrol and dieselengined cars would be less than EUR 1,000 per vehicle. The resulting markup would already be recouped after three to four years based on today’s fuel prices and average distance driven and would therefore not be prohibitively high. In its report “Costs and Potential of Greenhouse Gas Abatement in Germany” published in 2007 McKinsey also identified a series of economically viable abatement measures for the automotive sector. A report conducted 2 6 See Auer, Josef et al. (2008). Building to save the planet. The construction industry will benefit from climate change. Deutsche Bank Research. Current Issues. Frankfurt am Main. April 1, 2009 New era unfolding for the automobile industry for the European Commission and published in 2006 calculated the costs of achieving the “120 g/km by 2012” target at around EUR 1,700 per car. Every analysis comes to the same conclusion that much more extensive abatement measures result in a sharp rise in marginal abatement costs. In the above-mentioned Federal Environment Agency report the costs of achieving a 40%+ reduction were estimated at up to EUR 5,000 per vehicle. The resulting markups would admittedly dampen demand as it takes much longer to recoup the additional outlay depending on an individual’s driving style. It also becomes clear that the CO2 abatement costs of many initiatives are very high. 3. Initial market reactions materialising France’s bonus/malus “feebate” system for new car purchases Since early 2008 France has had in place a feebate system for new car purchases. Depending on a new car’s CO2 emissions the buyer receives either a tax rebate or is obliged to pay a fee. The lower the CO2 emissions per car, the higher the environmental rebate: — EUR 200 for emissions between 121 and 130 g/km; — EUR 700 for emissions between 101 and 120 g/km; — EUR 1,000 for emissions between 61 and 100 g/km; — EUR 5,000 for emissions of up to 60 g/km. Conversely, the higher the CO2 emissions, the larger the penalty fee: — EUR 200 for emissions between 161 and 165 g/km; — EUR 750 for emissions between 166 and 200 g/km; — EUR 1,600 for emissions between 201 and 250 g/km; — EUR 2,600 for emissions above 250 g/km. Source: French Embassy ( The recent months have seen particularly feverish activity: while the European market as a whole underwent severe contraction in 2008 there were successes for several marques with a reputation for building small cars with low fuel consumption (such as Smart, Fiat). The German market also serves as an example: in 2008 the average CO2 emissions of new registrations fell by about 3%. In 2007 this figure fell by nearly 2%, whereas in 2006 it was still flat. In addition, the mini vehicle segment in Germany has fared very much better than the market as a whole for years. In 2008 new registrations rose by nearly one-fifth in this segment, which contains for example the Smart Fortwo, the Renault Twingo, the Fiat 500 and the VW Fox. The examples of France and Spain also illustrate the effectiveness of environmental regulation: on January 1, 2008, both countries introduced a “feebate” system of bonuses and fines for new cars. This has led to a sharp reduction in the average CO2 emissions of cars sold (a drop of around 8 g/km in France). In the Netherlands, too, the tightening up of a roughly two-year-old system at the start of 2008 led to a sharp fall in average emissions during the course of 2008. Auto industry is better than its reputation Newly registered cars in Germany by vehicle segment (% yoy), 2008 Overall, it is thus becoming clear that higher fuel prices and environmental regulation do have an impact. In any event the performance of the European automotive industry is better than portrayed by the frequently negative media reports and the many statements issued by environmental organisations, even though the industry will miss its CO2 target. The German automotive business in particular has long been criticised for its alleged ecological backwardness. At first glance the criticism appears to be justified, as a number of examples show: Mini Midsize Off-road Compact Supermini Luxury — On the introduction of the catalytic converter and the particulate filter for diesel cars, for example, German automakers were among those who dragged their feet, although in both cases they eventually turned out to be technological trendsetters. Vans Sports Executive -20 -10 0 10 Source: Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt April 1, 2009 The stratospheric rise in oil prices until mid-2008, the continuing debate about ways to reduce vehicle fuel consumption, and the first political measures in individual EU member states have already triggered significant reactions on both the supply and demand sides. Currently around one-third of newly registered cars in the EU have CO2 emissions of less than 140 g/km. In the mid-1990s just 3% of new cars managed this. Average new car CO2 emissions in the EU have fallen by some 16% since then. 20 6 — On average, German carmakers build bigger and more luxurious vehicles whose fuel consumption is thus higher than that of most of their European and Japanese competitors. Several niche 7 EU Monitor 62 7 vehicles also have extremely high fuel consumption and are antiquated from an ecological point of view. By contrast, the segment containing cars with a list price of around EUR 10,000 had been ignored until recently. ! The most environmentally friendly cars*, 2008/2009 1 Toyota Prius 6.7 2 Honda Civic Hybrid 6.7 3 Smart Fortw o Coupé cdi 6.4 4 Citroën C1 1.0 Advance 6.3 4 Daihatsu Cuore 1.0 6.3 4 Peugeot 107 Petit Filou 70 6.3 4 Toyota Aygo 1.0 8 Smart Fortw o Coupé mhd/ Cabrio 6.3 9 Daihatsu Trevis 1.0 6.0 6.2 10 Citroën C2 1.1 Advance 5.8 10 Daihatsu Sirion 1.0 10 Fiat Panda 1.2 8V Bi-Pow er Gasbetrieb 5.8 5.8 * Based on the VCD environment al list; Scale f rom 0 t o 10 Source: VCD '* — In developing specific new forms of propulsion like hybrid technology German companies lag a considerable way behind Japanese automakers (namely Toyota and to a lesser extent Honda). Despite the reasons cited, the blanket criticism of the German auto industry does not stand up to closer inspection. For example, German luxury cars enjoy great international popularity. This segment will also continue to experience global growth going forward, as small cars are not a reasonable alternative for all consumers. German carmakers can therefore hardly be blamed for satisfying this demand. There is no question that further improvements in fuel consumption must be made. At the same time it should be noted that especially in countries with subsidised fuel prices fuel consumption is only one of many selection criteria for the car buyer. In addition, the German Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) reports that German manufacturers now offer around 80 models whose fuel consumption is lower than 5 litres per 100 kilometres; this means that such models probably make up a good double-digit percentage of all German cars. In addition, German companies have recently made greater progress than their competitors in reducing average CO2 emissions. In any case German automakers produce cars that boast the lowest CO2 emissions per unit of weight and power. This is one important reason for their ongoing market share gains in the US, the most important market for big cars. Current significance of hybrid technology is overestimated 4 The most environmentally friendly cars*, 2008/2009 1 Honda Civic Hybrid 6.7 2 Audi A3 1.4 TFSI S tronic 5.1 3 Ford Focus 1.6 TDCi ECOnetic 5.0 4 Volksw agen Golf 1.4 TSI DSG 5 Mercedes A 160 CDI Blue Efficiency 6 Audi A3 1.4 TFSI Sportback S Tronic 5.0 5.0 4.9 7 Ford Focus 1.6 TDCi 7 Volksw agen Golf 1.6 TDI BlueMotion United 4.8 4.8 9 Audi A3 1.9 TDI e/Sportback 4.6 9 Hyundai i30 1.6 CRDi 9 Volksw agen Golf 1.9 TDI BlueMotion 4.6 4.6 * Based on t he VCD environment al list ; Scale from 0 t o 10 Source: VCD '' The above-mentioned backwardness in hybrid technology is also put into perspective by looking at the significance of this type of propulsion: the segment continues to lead a lonely niche existence. In Europe in particular its share of new registrations remains stuck well below 1%. In Germany in 2008 just 0.2% of all newly registered cars were full hybrids; their market share thus actually fell compared to 2007, after rising nearly 50% in 2006. In 2008, by contrast, four times as many natural gas-powered cars as hybrids were registered in Germany. In the US, too, hybrid car sales make up just 2-3% of the market. Most hybrid vehicles primarily display their superior efficiency in urban traffic and are less energy efficient than modern petrol and diesel cars for motorway driving. After all, the markup for hybrid vehicles is not inconsiderable and is probably one reason for their currently still low market penetration. However, we emphasise categorically that these statements are not intended to denigrate hybrid technology, which has already proven itself on the road. In future hybrid vehicles will undoubtedly play a more prominent role than they do at present. Given the abovementioned statistics, it is nevertheless surprising how much hype is generated about hybrid technology by the German media and many environmental associations. What is also frequently ignored is that German companies are among the global pioneers in researching into other alternative forms of propulsion. In the meantime the advances made by German carmakers in the environmental field have definitely been recognised. For example, the Verkehrsclub Deutschland (VCD), an association for sustainable mobility that tends to be critical of the German auto industry, ranks many vehicles made by German carmakers or their subsidiaries as 8 April 1, 2009 New era unfolding for the automobile industry among the best in its current “Environmental Car List 2008/2009“. In the compact class these cars make up no less than nine out of eleven of the most environmentally friendly vehicles, seven out of ten family cars and all five of the best 7-seater models; these also include vehicles from German and European subsidiaries of US automakers which, however, have largely been developed in Germany. The bottom line is that although the automotive industry has not met its own CO2 targets, the blanket criticism of the German automotive industry is overdone. The role of the car buyer in particular has been ignored. 4. Propulsion technologies of the future & Over the next few years alternative propulsion technologies will gradually become more important. At the same time, it is illusory to believe that the conventional internal combustion engine will cede its dominant position in the short term. There are three main arguments that back up our assessment: The most environmentally friendly family cars*, 2008/2009 1 Toyota Prius 2 Ford Focus 1.6 TDCi ECOnetic Turnier 3 Renault Clio Grandtour 1.2 16V TCE eco 4 Ford Focus 1.6 TDCi Turnier 6.7 5 Honda Civic 5dr 4.8 6 BMW 318d 7 Mercedes B 170 Blue Efficiency NGT Gasbetrieb 4.6 — Firstly, most of the vehicles due to be launched over the next two to three years will be fitted with petrol or diesel engines because they are already being developed today. With a service life of 15 years or more, current-generation cars will still be seen on the road in the mid-2020s. A structural change in the cars on the road can therefore only occur over many years in any case. 5.0 4.9 4.8 — Secondly, there is still a great deal of potential for reducing the fuel consumption of petrol and diesel engines despite all the efficiency gains that have been made over recent years. Over the next few years smaller engines with compressor chargers (downsizing, for short), direct injection petrol engines and many other refinements will help to reduce the fuel consumption of conventional engines by another 20-25% across all vehicle classes. Furthermore, the lower fuel consumption of diesel cars could see them bid farewell to their current niche position in the US for example. 4.6 8 Skoda Fabia 1.2 Combi 9 Skoda Fabia 1.4 TDI GreenLine Combi 4.5 9 BMW 318d Touring 4.5 4.5 * Based on the VCD environmental list ; Scale from 0 t o 10 Source: VCD ' — Thirdly, despite a growing body of research, there is currently no prospect of quantum leaps in alternative fuel technologies that could offset their many drawbacks compared to conventional engines in the short term. This applies primarily to the currently still considerably higher production costs and the resulting markups. In these respects the levels of vehicles with conventionally fuelled cars are only gradually being approached. Economies of scale and technical advances are needed to close the gap. There are also shortcomings with regard to their range and other aspects of performance. Rising degree of electrification – costs must be reduced Electric vehicles emit low levels of pollutants and noise April 1, 2009 As things currently stand, there is no disputing that the number of cars powered by electrical energy will increase going forward. There is a large range of application areas for electrical energy in road traffic: at the bottom end of the scale there are micro and mild hybrid vehicles. They are fitted with an automatic stop/start device or an electric motor that helps the car to accelerate and converts the mechanical energy into electrical energy and stores this in a battery. Autos with a full hybrid system have more powerful electrical engines that remain engaged right into the upper rev range and even allows the vehicle to be driven for short periods without the internal combustion engine; here, too, braking energy is recovered and reused. These are the kind of vehicles that people usually mean 9 EU Monitor 62 when they talk about hybrid cars; the best-known example is the Toyota Prius. One advantage of these cars is that they do not require any special infrastructure, and can be refuelled at filling stations like every other vehicle. At the upper end of the scale there are plug-in hybrid cars whose onboard batteries can also be recharged by plugging them into an electrical socket; plug-in hybrid cars are currently not yet in series production. 4 CO2 emissions of cars per 100 kW engine output, g/km French Korean Italian Japanese German 0 50 100 150 200 250 Source: German Association of the Automotive Industry '/ Hybrid is a bridge technology Hybrid technology can reduce fuel consumption by up to 25% compared with similar petrol-driven models. This virtue comes to the fore in urban driving. By contrast, on longer journeys at steady high speeds the extra weight of the electrical power unit proves to be a handicap; fuel consumption then tends to be higher than for cars with conventional engines. The technology has huge potential for use in urban buses or taxis where the higher purchasing costs can be recouped relatively quickly. But also where there is mixed use (primarily journeys in urban and rural areas) hybrid vehicles can prove an ideal solution because their range – unlike that of fully electric vehicles – is almost a match for diesel or petrol vehicles. Hybrid vehicles are thus a key bridge technology on the road towards electromobility. Their market share of new registrations will rise in the EU, simply because competition will drive more and more manufacturers to offer such cars. However, these cars will have captured no more than a low single-digit percentage of the market by 2015 because, among other things, the markups on them will remain substantial. As with all alternative fuel technologies the high markups for hybrid vehicles still frighten off many buyers even though the extra outlay can actually be recouped quickly. Economies of scale, technical progress and a steep learning curve are, however, likely to significantly reduce the extra costs and the markups for such vehicles in future. In climate policy terms, however, hybrid vehicles are among the most inefficient ways to reduce CO2 emissions: the abatement costs according to McKinsey amount to more than EUR 3,000 per tonne of CO2, which makes them many times more expensive than the prices currently being charged under the EU emissions trading scheme. This drawback is also often ignored in assessments of the technology. Electric vehicles – the battery is the sticking point Low emissions of pollutants, CO2 and noise 10 The logical next step in the development of hybrid technology is the discarding of a conventional engine and its replacement with an electric motor only. The odds are very good that this technology can play a significant and sustained role in road transport over the next few years. The main advantage of electric vehicles is their high level of efficiency: the bulk of the electrical energy is used to propel the car; by contrast, vehicles with petrol or diesel engines lose a large amount of energy as heat. Further winning attributes of electric vehicles are that their emissions of local pollutants, CO2 and noise are only very low or nonexistent. CO2 emissions per kilometre travelled of course depend on the energy mix of electricity generation. The emissions of Germany’s current power grid system would already fall below the EU target of 120 g/km according to Germany’s federal environment ministry. A higher share of renewable energies would of course enhance the carbon footprint of electric vehicles. One major benefit for consumers is the low variable costs: the electricity cost per 100 kilometres driven is (under the current tax regime) in the low single-digit euros and is thus – depending on the April 1, 2009 New era unfolding for the automobile industry pump price – only around one-third of the fuel cost for an average diesel or petrol car. Batteries currently still very expensive Given these advantages it is surprising at first glance that electric cars have hitherto failed so miserably. The main reasons for this can be found by taking a look at the battery technology. Battery costs are extremely high at around EUR 1,000 per kWh at present. In order to enable the range of electric vehicles to be increased well beyond 100 kilometres would require an additional outlay of EUR 10,000 or more. Another problem is the low energy density of the batteries, which means they are heavy and take up a lot of space. The life (number of charging cycles), the safety and the overall eco-profile of the battery over the life cycle are further areas that require attention. For the time being, the range of pure electric vehicles (without replacing the batteries) will in most cases remain at (well) under 200 kilometres. At present it still takes several hours to recharge a battery; this considerably limits the usability of electric vehicles. “Big business” is investing in electromobility Investments in infrastructure necessary Some of the problems cited can be mitigated with lithium-ion batteries that are widely used in laptops and mobile phones. One important lever in the ongoing development in the whole field of electromobility is increased collaboration between automakers and autoparts suppliers, power utilities and technology groups. This ought to speed up the pace of technological progress greatly. The most important objective will probably be to cut the production costs of batteries by 70-80% and at the same time to increase their performance while reducing their size. In addition, investment in the power supply infrastructure will need to be made over the next few years. Charging stations for electric vehicles will need to be installed in multi-storey car parks and lay-bys or at special electric replenishment stations so as not to limit the pool of potential users too severely. Long-term, strategic investors are thus required, since these investments will not have paid for themselves after just a few years. Replaceable battery blocks could mitigate problem of short range Of course a system of replaceable battery blocks is conceivable; this would mitigate the problem of short ranges and also make electric vehicles attractive to frequent drivers. Also conceivable is a system in which the car buyer is not the owner of the battery, but is merely the lessee and/or pays a variable usage fee to the battery’s owner. The beauty of this would be that the customer would not a priori be frightened off purchasing an electric car by the high battery costs. The leasing rate and/or the variable usage fee for the battery as well as the electricity costs would have to be lower than the fuel costs for cars with internal combustion engines in order to make these models economically attractive. The first pilot projects conducted in the electromobility field – in Israel and Denmark among other places – contain such elements. Major opportunities, but only gradual structural change Average car journey covers short distance April 1, 2009 The potential market for electric vehicles is fundamentally huge, regardless of the concrete technological concept. Even the still short range is not a fundamental problem for most car drivers because the average car journey in Europe is just 30-40 kilometres, and on 80% of all days the distance driven amounts to less than 40 kilometres. This would make an electric car an interesting alternative for many customers if intelligent solutions can be found to the remaining mobility issues (e.g. car sharing, rental cars, quick charging systems for batteries). The German government expects around 1 million 11 EU Monitor 62 electric vehicles to be on German roads by 2020; applying the same formula to the EU the total number of electric cars in member states would thus come to around 5 million. At first glance this appears to be a modest objective as it would correspond to just 2% or so of all cars on the road then. However, even this share can only be attained if the costs of electric cars fall dramatically over the next few years. Using today’s technology the CO2 abatement costs of electric vehicles are exorbitantly high. The question of where the electricity for the electric cars will come from is of little relevance for now, because the additional power required by the above-mentioned 1 million electric cars could largely be supplied by the power stations currently in service. In the longer term of course it must be ensured that more and more low-carbon energy sources are included in the power generation mix in order not to worsen the eco-profile of electric vehicles. Alternative fuels: Very important, many issues to be resolved Conflict between use of crops for fuel or food 8 The aforementioned McKinsey report refers to the fundamentally great potential of biofuels to reduce CO2 emissions and to their comparatively low abatement costs. The specific eco-profile and carbon footprint of biofuels are, however, highly dependent on what plants are cultivated under which climatic conditions and whether the emissions which result from the change in land use are also taken into account. There have been a number of analyses of this which – depending on the assumptions – arrive at highly contrasting outcomes. The competitiveness of biofuels compared with fossil fuels will also be heavily determined by the regulatory environment (e.g. tax burden, blend levels) and by the oil price. 9& Share of fuel consumed on German roads in %, 2007 Diesel 39.1 The rising demand for biofuels was also blamed for some of the increase in prices of agricultural commodities until early 2008. With a limited area of land for cultivation there is indeed a usage conflict between crops for food production and others intended for power generation, but equally, the causal link between the demand for bioenergies and the prices of agricultural commodities is less strong: the latter have fallen dramatically of late without any serious changes in demand for bioenergies occurring. Petrol 53.2 Biodiesel Other* 5.6 2.2 * Vegetable oil and ethanol; Percentages do not add up to exactly 100% due to rounding errors Source: IW Köln Biofuels (ethanol or biodiesel) already play a major role around the world and their use is constantly rising – either in the form of pure fuels or for blending with petrol or diesel. Particularly in Brazil bioethanol made from sugar cane already has a long tradition, and most vehicles in Brazil are fitted with flex-fuel engines that are suitable for use with pure biofuels and blended fuels. '0 The bottom line is that bioenergies are associated with “unwanted side-effects”, but this ultimately applies to all energy sources. Despite all the justified concerns regarding biofuels the baby should definitely not be thrown out with the bath water, however. Advances in technology will also help bioenergies to solve or mitigate some of the above-mentioned problems. Second-generation bioenergies, in which whole plants and above all crop waste can be converted into energy and/or fuel and into which research is just beginning, should have a smaller carbon footprint than today’s biofuels and reduce the conflict over usage. One advantage of biofuels is that the existing infrastructure (e.g. the network of filling stations) can be used without the need for comprehensive retooling and expansion investments. The EU basically continues to set great store by biofuels, which can also be seen in the option to use biofuels for achieving part of the 12 April 1, 2009 New era unfolding for the automobile industry “120 gram target”. There are, however, no plans for a concrete target quota for biofuels at present. In future, biofuels will probably have to meet sustainability criteria in order to be licensed in the EU. Gas-fuelled vehicles are gaining importance internationally Autogas versus CNG There are basically two different types of natural gas that are used as fuel for road vehicles: Autogas and Compressed Natural Gas (CNG). Autogas (which is also known as Liquefied Petroleum Gas or LPG) is a compound containing propane and butane. Liquefication means that the gas tank occupies a relatively small amount of space. Petrol cars are usually converted to Autogas. In Germany the fuel will receive preferential tax treatment up to and including 2018 at the earliest. Unlike Autogas, CNG is in a gaseous state (as methane) when refuelling takes place. CNG requires special fuel tanks that take up quite a lot a space, which means that conversion can result in the loss of most of the vehicle‘s boot space. Gas-powered vehicles supplied straight from the factory are usually CNG fuelled. CNG will be taxed preferentially in Germany until at least 2020. Both LPG and CNG are burnt in conventional internal combustion engines. Reliable tax provisions important for consumers Natural gas is also increasingly being used as a fuel for road vehicles. According to figures from the Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW) the number of gas-powered vehicles worldwide climbed from a good 1 million in 2000 to more than 9 million by 2008; this is more than all the cars registered in the Netherlands, for example. Argentina, Pakistan, Brazil, Iran and India are leading users of such vehicles. The leading EU member state by a long way is Italy, followed by Germany. New registrations in Germany were roughly three times as high as in 2005. In nearly all countries the sale or use of natural gas is promoted via government incentives (e.g. a lower petroleum tax rate). The reasons for this are among other things that gas emits lower levels of CO2 and other pollutants than diesel and petrol. Car drivers find the lower price of gas at the filling station appealing – despite their higher fuel consumption compared with petrol and diesel cars. More and more carmakers are offering gas-powered cars straight from their factories as a higher-priced option. In addition, for those who cover long distances it can make financial sense to convert a car from a petrol engine to gas power (Autogas or LPG as a rule, see box). Often the petrol engine is retained so that the driver can choose between two types of fuel. One disadvantage for owners of gas-powered vehicles is the still very patchy network of refuelling stations. Nevertheless, the number of gas refuelling stations is expanding, above all in Italy, Austria, Switzerland and Germany. One basic flaw of gas-powered vehicles from an ecological point of view is that, after all, they also use an equally finite fossil fuel; this problem could be eased by an increasing share of biogas. On the one hand, the advantage of the lower price is dependent on the tax regime. Long-term, reliable conditions are therefore helpful for consumers. On the other hand, the gas price can rise faster than the oil price if global gas demand increases by an exceptionally large amount; this would also reduce its price competitiveness relative to diesel and petrol. The range of gas-powered vehicles is also shorter. Over the next few years gas-powered cars are likely to prove more popular than full hybrid alternatives in the EU. Hydrogen-fuelled vehicles are still a long way off There are still no practical examples of hydrogen-fuelled road vehicles, although many carmakers have successfully conducted test runs using prototypes for years. Hydrogen can be directly used in an internal combustion engine or a fuel cell to generate electricity – in both cases with zero CO2 emissions. Many unsolved problems currently still exist, such as in producing the hydrogen, storing and transporting the fuel in a loss-free and safe manner; substantial investments in the corresponding infrastructure would also be necessary. A market breakthrough cannot therefore be expected before 2020. The fuel does, however, possess enormous potential – not only in the transport sector – should it prove possible to generate large quantities of hydrogen at low cost from renewable sources 3 and install the necessary infrastructure. 3 April 1, 2009 See Auner, Norbert (2004). Silicium the link between renewable energies and hydrogen. Deutsche Bank Research. Research Notes 11. Frankfurt am Main. 13 EU Monitor 62 Government incentives can speed up its success Providing government incentives is a balancing act Government incentives can accelerate the market penetration of alternative fuel technologies. There are no regulatory concerns with regard to incentive programmes for basic research in the area of electromobility, for example. Subsidies for setting up the infrastructure or tax breaks/direct rebates paid to buyers of energyefficient cars are a conceivable alternative. Providing government subsidies is, however, always a balancing act. A subsidies battle with other leading automaking nations needs to be prevented. In addition, CO2 abatement costs should be monitored: financial assistance for very expensive CO2 abatement technologies can mean that no funds are then left for ecologically and economically more sensible projects. Incentive policy is also difficult to conduct as it cannot yet be predicted which will be the dominant fuel technology of the future. As with every subsidy there are the serious problems of rent-seeking and opposition to the scaling back of previously granted state aid. In the long term all propulsion technologies and fuels need to be able to survive without subsidies. For many alternative fuel technologies, however, this is currently still a long way off. 5. Conclusion and outlook Great potential for alternative propulsion technologies and fuels, but structural change will not be rapid By adopting the regulation to reduce the CO2 emissions of new cars the EU has sent out an important signal focusing on the objective of lower-carbon road transport. The expectation of a resurgence in oil prices in the medium term and competition within the automotive industry are also driving the expansion in the range of energyefficient cars available. If the markups on energy-efficient cars can be recouped within a few years, demand will rise rapidly. However, rapid structural change cannot be expected in either new registrations or the overall fleet of registered vehicles. This is due to the long development lead times for new propulsion technologies and the long and increasing operating life of new cars. In addition, petrol and diesel cars currently still enjoy many advantages over alternatively fuelled vehicles. Conventionally fuelled vehicles are therefore likely to make up more than 90% of new car registrations in the EU on average during the next decade; in most developing countries and emerging markets the share will actually be even higher as petrol and diesel cars will remain cheaper to purchase than electric cars, for instance, for the foreseeable future. Nevertheless the degree of electrification in the automotive industry will increase. Alternative fuels will also become more important. The mobility concepts of the future will presumably be much more flexible than at present. Why shouldn’t a commuter use an electric car for the daily drive to work or other short journeys, but then swap this for a bigger car (from the same supplier or dealer) with an efficient diesel or petrol engine when going on holiday? The development and implementation of such concepts are likely to grow. All things considered, talk of a new era is not too overblown a description of the process currently underway in the sector. The current recession in the global automotive industry also offers opportunities for innovative companies. Carmakers and autoparts suppliers who, despite the poor economic circumstances, succeed in bringing energy-efficient vehicles onto the market that also satisfy customer requirements with regard to price, design, comfort, safety, performance etc. will undoubtedly be among the winners in the sector over the next few years. After all, global demand for cars will 14 April 1, 2009 New era unfolding for the automobile industry continue to grow over the coming years. Many German and Japanese automakers are well positioned to emerge stronger from the crisis. The innovative ones are likely to be trendsetters and set standards in developing and building energy-efficient vehicles. % ! Schematic comparison* w ith conventional engine (petrol, diesel); scale goes from "very much better" (+ + +) to "very much w orse" (- - -); o = neutral/same Purchasing costs Variable costs CO2 reduction CO2 abatement costs Infrastruct. expansion Performance*** Time until marketready - + + o o o Available Full hybrid - + + -- o - Available Plug-in hybrid Electric vehicles (electricity from renew able sources) Autogas/CNG Biofuels, 1st generation** Biofuels, 2nd generation -- + + -- - - From 2010/11 --- +++ +++ --- -- -- From 2010/11 - + + + - - Available o + + + - o Available o - ++ - - o Not before 2015 Hydrogen (from fossil fuels) --- - -- -- --- o Not before 2020 Hydrogen (from renew able sources) --- -- +++ -- --- o Not before 2020 Micro-/mild hybrid * Current assessment ; gap being closed t o pet rol and diesel cars due t o t echnological progress ** Variable cost s, CO2 reduct ion and abat ement cost s highly dependent on t ype of biof uels and regulation *** E.g. range, accelerat ion, flexibilit y Source: DB Research ') Eric Heymann (+49 69 910-31730, eric.heymann@db.com) Meta Zähres April 1, 2009 15 EU Monitor 62 Selected literature ACEA (2008). Reduzierung der CO2-Emissionen von Pkws – Auf dem Weg zu einem integrierten Ansatz. Brussels. European Commission (2008). CO2 from passenger cars. Memo/08/799. Brussels. European Commission (2007). Questions and answers on the proposed regulation to reduce CO2 emissions from cars. Memo/08/597. Brussels. European Federation for Transport and Environment (2008). Reducing CO2 Emissions from New Cars: A Study of Major Car Manufacturers’ Progress in 2007. Brussels. Herbener, Reinhard et al. (2008). Technikkostenschätzung für die CO2-Emissionsminderung bei Pkw – Emissionsminderungspotenziale und ihre Kosten. Umweltbundesamt. Dessau. VCD (2008). VCD Auto-Umweltliste 2008/2009. Berlin. VDA (2008). Handeln für den Klimaschutz. CO2-Reduktion in der Automobilindustrie. Frankfurt am Main. © Copyright 2009. Deutsche Bank AG, DB Research, D-60262 Frankfurt am Main, Germany. All rights reserved. When quoting please cite “Deutsche Bank Research”. The above information does not constitute the provision of investment, legal or tax advice. Any views expressed reflect the current views of the author, which do not necessarily correspond to the opinions of Deutsche Bank AG or its affiliates. Opinions expressed may change without notice. Opinions expressed may differ from views set out in other documents, including research, published by Deutsche Bank. The above information is provided for informational purposes only and without any obligation, whether contractual or otherwise. No warranty or representation is made as to the correctness, completeness and accuracy of the information given or the assessments made. In Germany this information is approved and/or communicated by Deutsche Bank AG Frankfurt, authorised by Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht. In the United Kingdom this information is approved and/or communicated by Deutsche Bank AG London, a member of the London Stock Exchange regulated by the Financial Services Authority for the conduct of investment business in the UK. This information is distributed in Hong Kong by Deutsche Bank AG, Hong Kong Branch, in Korea by Deutsche Securities Korea Co. and in Singapore by Deutsche Bank AG, Singapore Branch. In Japan this information is approved and/or distributed by Deutsche Securities Limited, Tokyo Branch. In Australia, retail clients should obtain a copy of a Product Disclosure Statement (PDS) relating to any financial product referred to in this report and consider the PDS before making any decision about whether to acquire the product. Printed by: HST Offsetdruck Schadt & Tezlaff, GbR, Dieburg ISSN Print: 1612-0272 / ISSN Internet and e-mail: 1612-0280