LyrArc Article Gist
Under a landmark ruling by a federal court in Leipzig, German cities can now ban older diesel engine vehicles. The cities of Stuttgart and Dusseldorf are allowed to legally ban older higher polluting diesel cars from zones that are badly affected by air pollution. Environmental group DUH brought the lawsuit after 70 German cities exceeded European Union limits for nitrogen oxides (NOx) in 2017. NOx emissions can cause respiratory disease and difficulty breathing. Diesel engines produce high levels of nitrogen oxide, and low levels of carbon dioxide. EU air quality standards are not being met in cities across Europe, so that this could set a precedent for Europe, says the BBC. Of the 15 million diesel cars on German roads only 2.7 million meet the latest Euro-6 standards, according to German automotive watchdog agency. Diesel car market share is dropping- falling to 39% in 2017 from 48% in 2015. The VW diesel emissions scandal in 2015 further eroded public confidence. The German government already has suggested alternatives such as offering free public transport in cities with poor air quality. The government opposed the ruling because it did not want the car industry to bear the additional cost of retrofitting older vehicles at a time when German carmakers were investing in electric vehicles.  Yet the trend is clear. Paris, Madrid, Mexico City, Athens have pledged to ban diesel vehicles from the centre of cities by 2025, with Copenhagen doing this in 2019. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig, Germany, ruled in an appeal of a lower court decision, that German cities Stuttgart and Dusseldorf could ban diesel vehicles from urban traffic to reduce air pollution. Diesel vehicle technology of German manufacturers took a hit with the VW emissions cheating scandal. This ruling now puts pressure on the next German government to force car makers to take on estimated 8 billion euros in costs to refit older diesel vehicles to reduce pollution. Another option for government is to push this cost onto taxpayers, not a popular move. A longer term trend is also underway now that diesel fumes are seen as being more damaging to health than previously thought. Cars made up half of cars sold in Europe before the 2015 VW diesel emissions scandal when VW misrepresented the real amount of emissions taking place. This has dropped now to 44%, and is now more concentrated in delivery vehicles, craftsmen vehicles, according to analysts. This is expected to drop to 20% by 2025. The Leipzig ruling accelerates the decline of the diesel engine in Europe. As the Leipzig ruling is at the federal level the Environmental Action Germany which setup the lawsuit says the first diesel bans could go into effect in 3-6 months.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This perspectives piece in the DW.com says Germany should now have cleaner air and cleaner cars on the road thanks to a little pressure from the EU and from the courts. This comes after a federal court in Leipzig ruled in favor of cities imposing ban on diesel cars where air pollution is bad. DW.com points out that Chancellor Merkel was known as the "climate chancellor" early in her first term after her push for international climate protection policies, but she forgot to take along the German auto industry.

The German auto industry it says neglected to take heed to the shift in policy and continued to develop high diesel emission vehicles ending up in the situation of diesel emissions data manipulation in the diesel emissions scandal.

 

LyrArc Article Gist
Brinkmauer and Pfister of the German magazine Der Spiegel interview German Chancellor Angela Merkel in September 2017. The interview covers a range of topics from whether Merkel is addicted to power, why she chose to run for a fourth term, revolving door for CDU politicians as lobbyists for the automobile industry, the AfD right wing party, the refugee crisis and the CDU's historic policy of controlled immigration, and whether democracy is losing strength.  In characteristic Merkel fashion the chancellor takes up the idea of her addiction to power by saying she is careful not to let this happen to her by reading critical articles in the press and having her staff bring critical reports. Her discussion with her constituents in her electoral district are also frank and open, more so in 2017. About the idea that Helmut Kohl's fourth term as chancellor being not good for Germany and for the CDU, Merkel responds that she has given it considerable thought. She found that she still has the intellectual curiosity to learn new things, understands that she has much to learn about how the country and the world is changing. This has been decisive in her decision to run.  Merkel believes that someone who has worked in politics should be able to work in private industry following historic practice in Germany. On the government links with the automobile industry Merkel says her approach has been to look at what was best for an industry employing 800,000 people in Germany, yet deplores the diesel emissions cheating at VW. Has democracy lost momentum after the U.S. elections and the refugee crisis? Merkel says democracy is still strong, and that she will do everything to strengthen democracy in Germany and other parts of the world.  Merkel's view is that it is important that there be counterweights in democratic systems. In this way democracy is strong in America, and also in Poland and Hungary. The chancellor cites high voter turnout of 82% in 1998, 79% in 2002, 78% in 2009. Since then she says in 2009 it dropped to 71% and 2013  72%, yet  expects that with the issues in this election people will come out to vote in larger numbers.  For many years Merkel is seen as co-opting the issues of the left parties and the SPD, being careful to move to the centre. Der Spiegel puts this idea forward to the chancellor by asking her if she is the best SPD chancellor Germany ever had.  In her matter of fact style Merkel responds that voters do not think of it this way, simply expect her to her job as best as she can possibly do it.       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Axel Friedrich, a top German Environmental Agency regulator who advocates using modifications of existing vehicles as a more effective solution to the auto emissions problem. He recently reconfigured the VW Golf to show that by making changes- such as lighter seating and weight saving hood other steps to reduce the car's weight, low resistance tires, and engines that turn off when stopped and start when accelerator is pressed, more efficient gear ratios, removing the mirrors and substituting tiny cameras, and improving the aerodynamics- emissions can be cut 25% even with horsepower intact. Working with the Institute of Automotive Engineering at RWTH University in Aachen, Germany, Axel redesigned the Golf in this way to achieve a CO2 emissions reduction from 172 grams per kilometer to 131 grams and is working to bring it to 120 grams. 120 grams per kilometer is the EU's tentative target for emissions for cars sold in the region by 2012. Automakers have for years complained that this would be difficult to do in this manner because customers were concerned about safety and comfort. Its not clear that this would affect safety. However with global warming a big issue in Europe, most automakers are making changes now to prepare for a shift to 120 grams per kilometer in emissions. VW has announced a diesel version of the gasoline version that incorporates some of the redesign changes that Axel Friedrich made on his Golf, such as low resistance tires, and more efficient gear ratios, lower chassis for improved aerodynamics etc. This diesel version costs a base price of euros 20,615, and is only euros 315 mor than a standard diesel Golf. BMW has a new diesel version of its 1-Series with low resistance tiresand a gearshift indicator, which emits 16% less CO2 and costs nearly same as its predecessor. At Frankfurt Auto Show Mercedes Mercedes is expected to announce more cars with stop start systems. All this will help automakers in Germany achieve the EU 2008 target of 140 grams of CO2 emissions by 2008 on the way to the 2012 EU target of 120 grams. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Wagoner became President at age 45, CEO at age 48. So you would think that young blood is coming in to GM, but that does not appear to be the case. At the Board level most of the Board members like George Fisher formerly of Motorola, have been around for a long time, and there does not appear to be new blood that would bring in fresh thinking. And serious decisions about investment in developing new technologies to develop fuel efficient cars, like hybrid technologies, electric and other alternative technologies, diesel technology, have been held up for years at General Motors. The way decisions are made on such issues with Board members voicing their opinions more than wrestling seriously with the issues, shows serious shortcomings of management and the Board. At key points of decision making the CEO and key members of his team had not prepared carefully, and Board members did not come up with serious thinking on the problems facing GM. It, appears that the investment in technologies to develop fuel efficient cars much earlier, long before they were finally being addressed in 2006, was a failure of Wagoner's management and of the Board. Management discussed this but continued to be mired in old ways of thinking that continuing with the status quo- cars with existing low fuel efficiency- would not expose GM to illwinds as preferences changed. Its clear from the description here of discussions within GM that the old thinking is quite entrenched at GM, and Wagoner just was not the kind of person who could vigorously articulate a new vision for GM. A couple of things are noteworthy in this account of management indecision at GM. When fuel prices began hurting sales of SUV's and large vehicles in 2005, efforts to get a decision on investments in new technologies for fuel efficiency for the whole product lineup failed at the Board level in an April 2005 meeting. One Board member saying at that meeting, that" do we want to lose another billion dollars in developing new technology for fuel efficient cars." And no one calling him to account that the remark still did not address the point that GM had to respond to the changing market and world oil dynamics, and not just hope for the best, as GM had aggressive competitors, and faced continually diminishing role in the market place for the entire decade of the 1990's. While April 2005 was already at the tail end of the previous era of gas guzzling cars and a decision then would still not have shown a forward looking vision of things, it was not until 10 months later that a decision was reached. And this almost from necessity, as oil prices jumped in 2006 after hurricane Katrina, and by this time President Bush was also calling for higher mandated fuel efficiency standards. The other noteworthy point here is that by making the changes so late in the game, GM had to compress the development cycle for new and some cases unknown technologies into short time frames. If the ingenuity of its engineers comes to its rescue it still faces another hurdle that of cost, because the technologies have to be perfected and improved, so that the costs are low enough for customers, and importantly comparable with what it is costing competitors to make the same fuel efficient technology engine or other part. Which is why one Honda executive remarked, "GM like everyone else is serious about this, because they have to be, but how many of their hybrids and how many Volts will they sell? Their technology is very expensive." Even if GM develops the Volt electric car by 2010, GM will need a whole range of fuel efficient technolgies to power its large product lineup. Its just to hard to avoid the conclusion that this is going to prove costly. All the dragging of feet and indecision, and failure to prepare GM for a different world in case something drastically different from what was expected happened, will prove very costly especially considering how aggressive and well financed some of the Japanese and German competitors are. It also hard to avoid the conclusion that there is too much bureaucracy at the large auto companies, and getting new blood and new ideas and fresh thinking is tough in a place where everybody agrees with everybody else, and there is uniformity of thinking. This makes it difficult for any original or wayward types to thrive. These bureaucracies look up to the top for direction. Initiative is discouraged on one hand, and at the same time even if a new direction is taken at the top. a lot of resistance can be expected to implementing it throughout the company without persistent persuasion and reminder of new facts and realities. This is true for both Wagoner and Mullaly as they face the skepticism of subordinates to new direction. Mullaly for instance has to remind his managers that large vehicles are only a small percentage of the entire global market, and if Toyota is making money in small cars so can Ford. See the link to this. Is Toyota immune from bureaucracy type behaviour throughout the company? Not really, Toyota's chairman emeritus came out of retirement in fact and went out of the way to caution its CEO and management about their complacency a year or so before. Shoichiro Toyoda personally intervened to caution against too much expansion in the US and climbing wage costs, and other risks they perceived such as the company managers in the USA appearing to be resting on their laurels. See the link to this. A lot of discussion is probably going on within these companies about the present state of affairs, and considerable anxiety for what the future will bring. It may be useful to ask the question is there something that makes it difficult for once successful organizations -now with entrenched bureaucracy and set ways -to put forward leaders with vision and foresight, till it becomes very late? The vision and foresight about where their markets and the world is heading, and the ability to move their organizations in that direction. Or to break out of old patterns of behaviour and thinking....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration is pushing for new U.S. fuel efficiency standards of 56.2 mpg by 2025. In May 2009 President Obama announced domestic car and light truck fuel efficiency standards of 35 mpg by 2016. Europe is expected to reach fuel efficiency of 60 mpg by 2020. This would still leave Europe considerably ahead of the U.S. in fuel efficiency for automobiles, but the gap would be much smaller. For the last several decades the U.S. has fallen sadly behind Europe and Japan in fuel efficiency. The perception of poor fuel efficiency hurt the automakers badly during periods of high fuel prices and when buyers were facing difficult economic choices. The automakers are beginning to grasp this fact. Mark Reuss, president of General Motors, commented that- "it's very challenging, but its upto us engineers to provide high value to the customer and support the environment." This is an issue that has serious national and global implications as it affects the future prices and demand for oil, emissions, and future economic growth. It would also bring the U.S. in line with Europe and Japan when it comes to fuel efficiency of automobiles. ...