The ACEA is calling for a review of the EU’s CO2 targets, warning of job losses, investment shocks and a weakening of industry.
The European green transition is entering one of its most critical and politically charged phases, as the ACEA brings to the fore the possibility of renegotiating the very core of the European automotive strategy. The conflict is not just about electric cars or CO2 emissions, but the future of European industry, employment, investment and the geo-economic balance vis-à-vis China and the United States. The wellEuropean automotive industries warn that the current 2030 targets and especially the de facto end of internal combustion engines in 2035 no longer meet real market conditions, creating a risk of de-industrialisation, loss of competitiveness and transfer much capital out of Europe. At a time when the European continent is trying to balance between the green transition and industrial survival, the debate on the future of the car is now becoming a major economic and political issue.
The reality is that the European car industry is not questioning the goal of carbonisation. Instead, it claims it has already invested hundreds of billions of euros in electrification, in developing new platforms, in gigafactories of batteries and in new zero-emission technologies. What is now openly challenged is the pace, the methodology and especially the one-dimensional approach of the European Union, which relies almost exclusively on full electrification via BEVs. And this is where the real battle for the future of the car in Europe
begins.
The big problem: The EV market is not moving as fast as Brussels demands
The core argument of ACEA is simple but extremely critical: the European Union’s CO2 targets were based on forecasts of electric car market growth that are ultimately not borne out. European authorities had assumed that electric vehicle penetration would accelerate at a much faster rate by 2030, but the actual data shows that the market is moving significantly slower.
According to data presented by ACEA, S&P Global forecasts show that pure electric cars will reach about 37.7% of new sales in 2030 and about 63.8% in 2035. These numbers are dramatically far from the de facto 100% required by the European framework to meet zero emission targets.
Compliance target of 63.8%
The ACEA argues that the problem is not due to inertia on the part of manufacturers. Automakers have already launched hundreds of electric models, transformed production lines and invested huge amounts of capital. However, the market remains cautious.
Charging infrastructure remains the weak link
One of ACEA’s strongest arguments concerns charging infrastructure in Europe. Despite significant progress, the public charging network is still characterised by strong disparities between member states.
In Northern and Western Europe, countries such as Norway, the Netherlands or Sweden have already developed mature electrification ecosystems. In contrast, in Southern, Central and Eastern Europe, infrastructure remains limited, and in many regions access to fast chargers is still problematic.
ACEA stresses that automakers cannot be penalized with fines because infrastructure development depends on governments, energy networks and public investment. In essence, it argues that manufacturers are being asked to meet targets that depend on factors outside their control.
EV costs continue to drive consumers away
Despite the increase in available electric models, price remains a significant barrier for much of the European market. ACEA says there are already dozens of electric models under €30,000, but this is not enough to create a mass transition.
The problem is even greater in countries with lower disposable income, where buying a new car is already a difficult task. For millions of Europeans, electric cars are still considered expensive, and uncertainty about autonomy, resale value and battery life adds to the concern.
ACEA warns that excessive pressure to comply with CO2 targets may ultimately lead to even more expensive cars as manufacturers try to absorb the costs of fines and investment.
Billions in fines and fear of loss of competitiveness
One of the most aggressive points of ACEA’s intervention concerns potential non-compliance fines. The association warns that if manufacturers fail to meet CO2 targets, they risk billions of euros in penalties.
ACEA believes this money could be invested:
* in new technologies,
* in battery plants,
* in research and development,
* in new EV production.
On the contrary, there is a risk that they could end up buying carbon credits from competitors such as Tesla, effectively moving funds outside the traditional European automotive industry.
The issue takes on even greater significance as China dramatically strengthens its position in the global EV market, while the US is pushing aggressive industrial policies through the Inflation Reduction Act.
ACEA brings back ‘technology neutrality’
Perhaps the most important political message of the papers is about the return of the concept of technology neutrality. ACEA is essentially asking the European Union to stop seeing the battery as the only acceptable solution to carbonisation.
The industry is calling for the role of:
* hybrids,
* plug-in hybrids,
* e-fuels,
* sustainable fuels,
* low-carbon materials,
* and even possible future technologies to be recognised.
The logic of ACEA is that CO2 reduction can be achieved by more than one route and that over-reliance on a single technology poses risks to Europe’s competitiveness.
The 2035 battle: from 100% to 90%
The most controversial part of the proposal concerns the 2035 target. Currently, the European framework essentially requires complete elimination of CO2 emissions in new cars.
ACEA is calling for a change in this philosophy.
From:
100% reduction
To:
90% reduction + 10% offset
The remaining 10% could be covered through:
* green fuels,
* low carbon footprint materials,
* sustainable fuel blending,
* carbon removals,
* fleet renewal.
In essence, ACEA is trying to keep a part of the heat engine alive beyond 2035.
Why China scares Europe
The ACEA documents include repeated references to China. And not by accident.
The Chinese EV market is growing rapidly, yet China does not have a corresponding complete “ban” on internal combustion engines. Instead, it maintains a more flexible model where hybrids and plug-in hybrids still play an important role.
ACEA argues that this gives Chinese groups:
* greater flexibility,
* higher profitability,
* better cost balance,
* faster adaptation to market conditions.
At the same time, many European companies face high energy costs, more expensive labour and stricter environmental rules.
Vans are a separate problem
ACEA devotes a separate analysis to commercial vans, arguing that they cannot be treated with the same criteria as passenger cars.
Vans:
*carry loads,
*are used for business,
*make long daily journeys,
*operate under different conditions of use.
The transition to full electrification is much more difficult for this category.
ACEA reports that electric van sales are just over 11%, making current targets almost impossible.
Therefore it calls for:
* a target of -80% instead of complete zero,
* super credits,
* a specific compliance framework,
* additional incentives for European vans.
2029 could be a turning point
ACEA formally calls for a review clause to be introduced by 2029. This means that the European Union will have to review overall:
* the development of the EV market,
* geopolitical conditions,
* Europe’s competitiveness,
* infrastructure progress,
* affordability.
If such a clause is eventually adopted, 2029 could become a defining year for the future of the thermal engine in Europe.
The real battle is over the future of European industry
Behind the EV and CO2 debate lies something much bigger: Europe’s struggle to maintain its industrial strength.
The automotive industry is one of the most important pillars of the European economy:
* millions of jobs,
* huge supply chains,
* industrial know-how,
* billions of euros in exports.
ACEA fears that an overly violent transition could lead to:
* factory closures,
* job losses,
* production being moved out of Europe,
* dependence on Chinese batteries and raw materials.
And that is why the conflict that is now starting is not just about cars. It is about the industrial future of Europe itself.
