This is exactly what I predicted back in 2007. An updated version of that post ran here at CC in 2015, after the VW Dieselgate scandal hit. The only difference is that it took a bit longer to really get rolling (downhill), due to inertia. But the VW Dieslegate scandal, which really encompasses much more than just VW’s cheating, has given it the kick in the pants it needed. The drop-off is quite remarkable, except for Italy, which has acquired quite a deep thirst for diesel, thanks to exceptionally strong incentives that lower the price of diesel there.
And what of the future?
In my post from 2007, I quoted a study by the consulting firm AT Kearny which predicted that only 25 percent of Europeans will find diesels an attractive economic proposition by 2020. That prediction may well come true in all of these countries, save Italy. Or at least mighty close. Frankly, these predictions by consulting firms are often as good as a Ouija board’s, but I used it because I felt strongly myself about the inevitability of diesel’s decline.
Cities in Western Europe are furious because their air is not meeting quality standards, due directly because of the vastly higher emissions from diesels than they should have emitted, had they been in compliance. And this does not apply just to VW; all the manufacturers gamed a compliance system that was designed to be very easy to do so. It’s going to take years to unravel just how blatant this whole diesel-fiasco really was. European leadership brought it on themselves to a large extent, by incentivizing diesels to meet CO goals, but then not having a system in place to monitor the actual emissions. Yes, the EPA’s system is bad enough, but the EU system makes that look good in comparison.
Buyers are shunning diesels for the simple reason that they are afraid their cars will increasingly be banned from cities. Older diesels already are in a number of them, and the trend is on an upswing. Clean gasoline engines, and especially gas-hybrids and EVs are perfectly poised to benefit from this. Porsche announced yesterday it’s dropping all of its diesel models.
And who’s the biggest single beneficiary by far? Toyota. Its European sales were up by double digits in 2017, thanks to its strong line of gas hybrids that are now seen as the ideal replacements for diesels, with comparable fuel consumption and much cleaner exhausts, plus the ability to operate in EV mode in dense city centers. Some 50% of Toyota’s sales in Western Europe in 2017 were hybrids.
Two thoughts. First, my background in economics compels me to point out that this hasn’t just “happened” but has been one of those unforseen results of government rules and regulations. Governments set the rules of the game and the rest of us respond. Europe set up systems that encouraged diesel and (no surprise) got a society that made heavy use of diesel as a motor fuel. The unforseen result was that too much diesel would become an unmanageable problem for air quality.
Also this makes me wonder about what will happen in refining. Out of every barrel of oil that is refined we will get some gas and some diesel (in addition to other things along the spectrum of distillates). The recent split of heavy gasoline use here and heavy diesel use in Europe has made for a fairly efficient use of those respective products. If diesel becomes the ugly stepchild of petroleum look for some innovative uses for the stuff because it is going to become very inexpensive.
Cheap diesel might benefit the trucking industry, if the government doesn’t take out the difference in higher road taxes.
Diesel is a global commodity; there’s plenty of developing countries that will snap it up.
Also, that gasoline-diesel ratio is not fixed. It’s the most efficient refining method historically, and it would take some major investment to change that, but if the market were to dictate it, it can be changed. Diesel isn’t about to get dumped into the streets (as if) 🙂
Well Ive never been into trends and recently bought another used French diesel car, unsurpassed ride comfort , road manners and reliability being the main reasons, maybe my next car will be something else unlikely though.
And, once again, Toyota shows that it’s smarter than the average bear, er, car company.
A repeat of the late 70’s/early 80’s when many books were published (of which I have some) and many magazine articles were published by many “diesel pundits” on how to convert your car or truck to a Diesel engine to save money in the “long run” so on and so forth, only to see it evaporate with $1 a gallon gas and the Oldsmobile fiasco. History does repeat itself to a certain extent.
As I wrote in my treatise on Brown, Manual, RWD Station wagons…
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/automotive-histories/the-brown-rwd-manual-transmission-diesel-station-wagon-a-comprehensive-guide-to-that-mythical-beast-of-the-internet/
…the advantage of Diesel engines in the 70s and 80s was the complete lack of emissions controls (as opposed to the hodgepodge of hacks on the gas engines of the times). However, the indirect-injection Diesels of the day were horrible polluters.
Once Diesel engines were subject to emissions regulations, they became far more complex then Dr. Diesel’s original design, and in fact, more complex than their gasoline counterparts. The Diesel engine lost all of it’s competitiveness, excepting fuel economy, but in many cases the savings in fuel were not offset by the higher cost of purchase and maintenance on the Diesel engine.
Excepting heavy trucks (and I’m talking Class 8 trucks, not F350s) the Diesel engine has outlasted its usefulness.
I’m going to respectfully disagree with that take on one market segment- the 2500-3500 (and in some makes, 4500) series domestic pickups. Reason- the choice of diesel vs. gas in that market isn’t dictated by fuel mileage, but by power. In Ford, for example, the 6.7L Powerstroke is rated at 450HP and a whopping 935 ft/lbs. of torque. Compare those numbers to the largest gas motor offered- a 6.2L V8 with 385HP and a paltry 430 ft/lbs of torque. Numbers are comparable in GM and Dodge Ram offerings.
Granted, that diesel doesn’t come cheap- typically $7K more than the gas model. Oddly enough, though, all of that money comes back at trade-in time, even given a longer timeframe.
Yup. because it really take 935lb.ft. (or more, when chipped) of torque to do the job these typically do (see below).
Yet somehow, the commercial fleets (city,utility, etc.) manage to get along quite well with the gas versions. ?
It’s not about rolling coal. Back in the 60’s, a typical RV setup was a 3/4T 2WD pickup with a Camper, pulling a boat. Said truck had a 292 I-6 and a 4 spd. They always got there- and home, albeit slowly. Now, people expect to pull a 15000-20000lb toyhauler 70 mph uphill without slowing down. Expectations have changed.
That 292 I-6 had 262 lb-ft of torque. The “paltry” 430 lb-ft of that “wimpy” 6.2L with a 9 speed auto should keep up at 70 all day. Gearing also has a lot to do with keeping momentum going, and the automatics seem to be doing a better and better job of wringing out better performance in almost every condition. Expectations have not really changed, just perception.
Interestingly, SAE Standard J2807, aka the Davis Dam Towing Test, specifies that a dual-rear-wheel vehicle only maintain 35mph up the 12% grade, which is a lot less than the 70mph specified by you.
“Now, people expect to pull a 15000-20000lb toyhauler 70 mph uphill without slowing down. Expectations have changed.”
Expectations may have changed, but physics hasn’t. Pulling that much trailer with an F350 at that speed is foolish. And I’m pretty sure prohibited in every state.
@PolarBear – if only it was 70 mph. I go a few ticks over 80 mph (in a 75 mph zone on I-40) and danged if those diesel truck owners pulling 5th wheel trailers aren’t PASSING me!
It’s only a matter of time before Class 3 trucks like the F-350 become subject to more stringent emissions controls, rendering the Diesel engine too expensive.
In the 70s, all pickup trucks were effectively emissions exempt. That’s because pickups were considered to be “work vehicles”. This led to creations like the Dodge “Lil Red Express” which was effectively nothing more than a muscle car clothed in a pickup body, to skirt emissions requirements.
This led to a rise in the use of pickup trucks as personal transportation vehicles.
Similarly, the modern use of F-350s and their ilk as personal transportation vehicles (see bro-dozers) will cause increased stringency of emissions controls on Class 3 trucks, rendering the Diesel obsolete in Class 3.
Then, of course, everyone who actually *needs* that power will be forced into Class 4 trucks… and the cycle continues.
OK, please educate me on this one, as I must not understand some of the issues that predicate the need for such torque. Evan specifically called out commerical/Class 8 vehicles as needing diesels still. What exactly is being towed or hauled non-commercially by said 2500 or 3500 class pickups on a regular basis to require such an amount of torque? And is that vehicle being used expressly for commercial use, or is it just something that is being used as a daily driver/toy hauler? Ford claims that a F250 can tow 14,000-18,000 lbs, and a F350 can tow 13,000-21,000 lbs depending on model. Per the GM literature, a standard 1500 can tow 12,500 lbs max, a 2500 can tow 18,100 lbs max, and a 3500 can tow 23,300 lbs max. A standard midsize car weighs 3500 lbs, a standard 24 foot travel trailer weighs 4000 lbs, and a 24 foot speedboat with trailer weighs about 5500 pounds. So, using those weights, what non-commercial vehicle would need that amount of torque?
Yes, you are correct that the diesel version of these trucks has more available power in getting moving, but after overcoming inertia, what real gains does one see in the diesel? Is there any objective reason for the diesel, or is is just a preference thing?
I admit right now that I think it is all based on preferences, the ability to “roll coal”, and the current “diesel is so cool” trend, but I will gladly change my mind if presented with objective facts. For commercial, diesel still is the go-to choice, but for everyday use, I just don’t see the need.
My brother in law farms. He has had several F-250s and F-350s (and one Excursion) with the 7.3 Powerstroke diesel. He has also had one Dodge 2500 with the Cummins diesel. He has bought every one of them used and has used them in his farming operation for years at a time. He tows and hauls big loads with them. He also maintained until recently that the diesel was the better bet because it cost less to maintain and to run and lasted a long, long time. But times have changed – he just bought the first gas pickup I can remember because the new diesels have become more troublesome, more expensive to maintain and more expensive to run.
He also has at least one semi tractor and numerous pieces of equipment, and all of that is still diesel, so far as I am aware.
That makes sense, and the use is commercial. PolarBear is not basing his argument for diesels on commercial use. I am trying to hear one objective reason for the diesel for a non-commercial use truck and not really hearing one.
“So, using those weights, what non-commercial vehicle would need that amount of torque?”
My question would be: How many F350 are sold to non-commercial users? Most pickups in you find in residential driveways or office parking lots are 1/2 ton models and don’t need big torque ratings.
In contrast, F350 and F450 models are sold to the landscaper pulling a trailer of mowers or contractor hauling a load of drywall. These models may be “light duty” trucks, but they’re still commercial vehicles.
I asked because there are so many in traffic with me here in central Florida that are not towing anything and appear to be daily drivers. Maybe more F250s than F350s, but so it goes. Same with the HD GM and Ram trucks. Yes, we see a lot of landscapers/contractors with the larger ones, but those would seem to be commercial vehicles as intended, not bro-dozers. Again, I am trying to learn, not provoke.
There is also the semi-commercial use that I see a lot.
Person owns many acres and has a lot of cattle. Person purchases F-350 for being multi-purpose as it can pull cattle trailer to and from the sale barn, slaughter house, etc. and can then haul wife and kids to camp ground while pulling RV. He is not in business per se, so technically it’s not a commercial vehicle.
Many states won’t require any type of identification on the side stating its use.
Not many years ago, Ford Super Duty pickups outsold the F150’s by a fair margin. In GM, you’ll find the opposite to be true. There are also significant tax advantages to owning a truck or large SUV with a GVW of over 6000 lbs… which explains the number of small business owners in those vehicles.
In SoCal yes but out here in CO on th front range there are TONS of F250/2500 series trucks used as personal vehicles. Some gas but many diesels. The two I know personally are used to tow a boat and a travel trailer occasionally but usually are just driven around town. Why? Because they can afford to do so and want to. Both could very likely make do with a gasoline 150/1500.
Most 350/3500 (but not all) around here are used for commercial purposes, often in the oil fields or for towing big (commercial) loads such as drilling equipment etc and sometimes big qtys of horses.
I’ll point out another semi-commercial application; bread routes. In the ’00s most commercial bakeries went to “independent contractor” delivery drivers who supply their own vehicles, with the step-van being replaced by a pickup, usually a gas 250(0), pulling an enclosed trailer and doing double-duty as a daily driver.
@PolarBear
what years did the Super Duty outsell the F-150 trucks? I only have production numbers up to 2000, and the heavy duty pickups never came close to the F-150 sales.
FWIW, around here, it seems there are many F-250 and F-350’s used for personal transport. I work with a guy who drives an F-450 as his DD (and to haul to travel trailer with Toybox). Heck, there is a local lawyer that drives a brand new F250 diesel as a DD and I have never seen it haul anything. Many trucks are also owned by companies, such as landscaping or construction, and the owners use them as DD and for business use while getting the tax write-off. They are more often than not driven around with light loads and no trailers.
The majority of Super Dutys are sold with the highest trim levels. So I am sure the majority have intentions to be used beyond purely commercial use. As quoted from Truck Trend:
“From November 2015 through 2016, 71 percent of Super Duty retail sales have been the Lariat, King Ranch, and Platinum trims of the Super Duty equipped with the 6.7L Power Stroke diesel, with an average transaction price of more than $60,000.”
http://www.trucktrend.com/news/1612-high-trim-models-dominating-2017-ford-super-duty-sales/
OK… (deep breath).
I posted a pic of a typical toy hauler setup below. I know Paul and I see these things rolling up and down I-5 by the dozens on any given day. A typical 5th wheel or toy hauler with sliders weighs 15000-18000 lbs. Throw in a couple of quads, gear, fuel, all the stuff for a weekends camping, and you can add another ton to those figures.
Boating your thing? The Pacific Northwest is famous for fishing. A typical Duckworth Aluminum boat weighs about 4500 lbs. with the trailer. Lets not forget the obligatory slide-in camper. Slide-outs are all the rage now in these things- figure 5-6,000 lbs in the bed for the camper, PLUS another 4-5,000 lbs hanging off the back. You see where I’m going here?
What’s really eye-popping about all this is the pricetags, especially considering how many you see on the road. Diesel truck, RV setup and/or boat can easily top $200,000. Makes the price of a loaded S-Class seem downright cheap. And, as private consumers, the expectation is to roll all this down the highway without impeding traffic- 70 mph is about the norm for our Interstates (posted speed limits are viewed more as guidelines than de facto rules here).
Any of that clarify your question?
So a guy pulls up outside my office one Saturday two weeks ago. Two of us look out the office door and go what is that. He stops, blocking the handicap parking, and out the door jumps a teenage girl down to the ground. She is being dropped off for dance class. The truck is pictured here.
what’s inside a typical toy hauler
I think things have progressed well beyond need; there will surely be medium-duty trucks with less power and torque than these pickups where there is a full-on arms race for diesel engine output.
Towing capacity too, I am sure I have seen 30,000 lb claims or close to it. Or have they extended the J2807 to cover the heavier trucks now?
To return to the subject of the post, I’m not disappointed that diesels are dropping in popularity although it doesn’t seem to be happening in Australia (passenger car diesel sales have halved from a very low base, but SUVs are 2/3 diesel and light commercials 92% diesel). The emphasis on CO2 output versus more directly harmful particulate emissions was misguided in my opinion.
The trouble is I’m not sure that direct-injected turbo petrol/gasoline engines don’t have their own issues in this regard (particulate matter)
As the diesel has started to drown, electric motors are holding its head under the water. Electric torque from zero to max rpm is well known. Ludicrous mode Teslas getting ludicrous 0-60 times are all about torque.
Pickup trucks are going full electric. Workhorse just announced its W-15 4WD pickup will be available next year. While not specifying torque they do say it’s 460 hp.
Tesla’s class 8 semi is coming too. They don’t spec torque either, but Musk has been quoted saying “With the Tesla semi we want to show that an electric truck can out torque any diesel semi.”.
As for range, a heavy truck’s size, weight and price can accommodate a large long-range battery pack. After all torque comes from current, and the bigger the battery pack the more current you can draw.
“Some 50% of Toyota’s sales in Western Europe in 2017 were hybrids.”
That’s an amazing statistic- It’s easy to forget the difference each manufacturer sees in market share and product mix from region to region.
Here in the US, Toyota hybrids account for about 15% of Toyota’s overall sales, despite the fact that Toyota dominates the US hybrid market segment.
If gas were $6-7 gallon, it might be the same here. 🙂
Our very low gas prices have put a damper on Toyota’s hybrid sales, but that will likely improve with the upcoming CAFE regulations, unless they’re scrapped.
Also, the Prius was Japan’s bestselling car again last year, including both cars and kei-class vehicles.
And the Aqua (AKA Prius C) is runner-up, within Toyota’s range.
Toyota played the long game beautifully in their hybrid investment.
As a side note, Toyota’s incentives on hybrids right now are often higher than on the conventional models. For example, the Rav4 hybrid has double the rebates a conventional one has.
More evidence of the differences from market to market- I doubt Toyota is offering big incentives on Hybrids in Europe.
We bought my wife’s 2017 Prius precisely because of incentives, which negated our earlier cost-benefit analysis that a hybrid wouldn’t pay off over a reasonable time. Now she won’t consider anything with sub 50 mpg performance; the Honda Clarity, however, is now on hand.
When I was purchasing light trucks for the company a few years back, diesels were only a brief consideration. The Isuzu salesman steered me away ( not that he had to after seeing the DEF setup) and I was very happy with the gas jobs. Once the 2007 emissions requirements hit, boy did the cost per truck jump on the diesels!
I’ll be sticking with my diesel daily until it runs no more. it happily runs on waste cooking oil, so no rolling coal either. The u.k government shouldn’t be taking the piss with petrol prices if they want everyone to give up their diesels.
Sticks in my mind I read an article a while back that traced the origin of the EU preference for diesel. iirc, government started from the position they wanted to reduce carbon emissions. Fundamentally, reducing carbon out meant reducing carbon (fuel) in. So the search was on for the best means of reducing fuel consumption, while maintaining vehicle size and performance.
The Japanese had the lead in hybrid technology. The Europeans had the lead in diesel technology. The EU (perhaps with a nudge from EU auto industry lobbyists) decided to incentivize diesel as the best way to meet their carbon emissions objective. Now, it turns out “clean diesel” is as much marketing fluff as “clean coal”.
Watched a road test a few weeks ago, of a European spec, diesel, Jeep Compass. The tester said the Fiat diesel in the Jeep was so noisy it was embarrassing.
That typical diesel clatter opened the door to another nutty European market Honda advert.
During the last high price of gasoline, diesel partly promoted by VW, was sold as savior for our pocket, and planet earth. VW Golf and Jetta with TDI were a symbol of progressive movement in New York region while Toyota Perius was just another alternative vehicle, and GM Volt had not buyer. Even Porsche and upper scale VW models got into the game selling v10 diesel to claim down the guilt of the wealthy buyers. Mercedes and BMW also got into selling thier desiel cars and trucks in US. Audis went futher to race with its own Diesel engine, as did Mazda. Toyota and Honda were planning to introduce thier own diesel to North America. VW diesel gate stop all of them.
Europe is always the biggest market for diesel because of government tax policies and refinery configuration to produce more diesel than gasoline per barrel — American refinery is configured exactly opposite, producing more gas less diesel. If they start using gasoline hybrid like Perius, I wonder how much the driver saves. And Can European enjoy driving a Toyota car?
That leads to Tesla, which burns no gas. And it’s carbon foot print is even lower in France where large percent of electricity generated by atomic energy. But how many consumers can afford a Tesla? Then they will try BYD electric sedan with range of 400km? Can they survive in BYD in accidents? I think they go back to drive a gasoline power Golf or 206 or Polo etc etc….
The slim margins of fuel economy between hybrids and turbodiesels did contribute a lot to the European market’s slowness to accept the former, but now that the future of passenger car diesels looks dicey from an emissions standpoint, it’s more the other way around — “How can we get comparable mileage to what we’re getting now without getting slapped with city bans or punitive tax penalties from the country or city trying to get our diesel cars off the road?”
I bought the 2013 MB E350 BlueTec we’d leased when the lease expired in 2015. I don’t regret the decision. It has been a great car so far, returns 36-38mpg on the highway and – to the best of my knowledge – meets the California stds without cheating. I did note that I had to smog the car in its 4th year.
Discrimination!!!
Anyone else remember this Audi ad?
Wow, I think I saw that film when I was in Jr High. I remember that line about “well maintained” diesels not smoking. Over the following weeks after I saw the film, I made a point of looking at every semi I saw on the highway. Some of them did emit visible smoke and some did not.
I have two diesels in my driveway both run well neither smoke much ones a common rail computer controlled engine and the other an old school injector pump engine, rolling coal can be effect can be achieved on the older car simply by adjusting the injector pump it doesnt produce any extra power or lower the fuel mileage so is largely a waste of time unless you like traffic tickets, the other one? Well I have no idea and really dont want to mess with it.
Paul is big fan of Toyota, maybe its hybird finally broke a hole in Europe markets. Diesel scamdals, a new one from Mercedes, starts to diesel to rest. But hybird still depends on internal combustion engine and fossil fuel that produces carbom emissions and contributes gobal warming. The better solution is the electric vehicles like BYD e6 and Chevy Bolt eV — customers are still waiting forTesla 3 delivery.
But EVs have their own downside. Man should have learned by now: there is no Magic Bullet in any technology; there are only trade-offs.
https://ru-clip.com/video/k6GeHnMwl1c/is-tesla-a-cult-the-inconvenient-truth-about-electric-cars.html
(Yes, I know this Aussie has a potty mouth, but he makes good points nonetheless).
Oh my. That video is chock-full of factual errors. It’s worse than what it’s trying to rebut in the first place.
What are the factual errors, then? And is his premise wrong?
You expect me to to go point for point and spell them all out for you? Sorry, I have better things to do than to spend my time rebutting Tesla haters. It makes for good tv or cklick-bait, but that’s really what it is.
Let’s do one early point: he says that batteries are absolutely never going to be viable in heavy duty trucks and ships.
Tell that to the many major trucking companies that have placed deposits for the Tesla semi, and have confirmed its capabilities. And in case you don’t know, Norway has converted several ferries to battery power, and they’re so successful, they’re now swamped with orders from other ferry boat operators for similar conversions.
And yes, Musk is right when he says that its possible (and highly advantageous) to power all the world’s grids with PV and batteries. It’s already starting to happen…
And so on, and so on…
Musk/Tesla haters always end up eating their words, because Musk is always years ahead. It may take some time for the implementation of what he (and others ) say, but eventually…
And no, I’m not a Musk cultist. But I’m also not an idiot, which this guy says I am for believing some very well proven facts about the Tesla. He’s the idiot. And in a few more years, he might actually realize it.
This has been going on for a long time. But does anyone aver hold these guys accountable for the negative/false/misleading BS they spew?
Especially in commercial vehicles the CNG and LNG/LBG powered engines are becoming more and more popular.
Scania, Volvo and Iveco are all offering “gas-engines”. Below a 13 liter Scania LNG engine as an example.
I will make two predictions:
1) we will see the price of diesel drop drastically in comparison to gasoline. Supply will greatly exceed demand here in the USA.
2) You will no longer be able to find diesel at your local pump. You will have to dodge the semi-trucks at the truck stop to fill up your RAM. It will be just like the 70s all over again.
Now would be the perfect time to restore that diesel Rabbit CC and experience the joys of 48 West German horsepower and 35 mpg. At least you’ll be saving money when you fill up, right?
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/1977-volkswagen-rabbit-diesel-test-review
The above link has downloadable pdfs for your reading pleasure
I can get nearly that mileage from my 59 Minx, neither of my diesel cars have that little horsepower or use that much fuel no matter how hard you drive them, one uses an 80s technology engine for 90hp and 150ftlbs of torque, a vast improvement on VWs effort.
I traded my very capable and economical Alfa 159 JTDm in for a new Mito Veloce 1400 gas model.
Because I fear that the Diesel wiil be slowly killed by the EU
The EU itself is run by hughe corporations like Volkswagen, it struck me why VW rightfully got penalties in the US but in Europe their is a roaring silence about compensating VW Diesel owners.
It is said in itself as I am still convinced that these modern Diesels are still the best option, fuel economy and torque wise.
Most modern European cars now have engines the size of foodmixers that need enormous turbo chargers which eventually will kill them.
And Volkswagen who announced their hughe profits for 2017 are laughing all the way to the bank!
European people simply have lost it since the EU, like sheep we swallow everything, except for the British !
I long thought the EU’s incentivizing of diesels but not gasoline/electric hybrids puzzling. Diesels get their biggest fuel economy gains on steady high-speed thoroughfares, the sort that’s rare in crowded Europe, while hybrids, which make their main MPG gains in stop-and-go city driving are incentivized in the U.S. where we have lots of land for spread-out interstate highways, but not diesels that nearly match hybrid fuel-economy figures in highway driving. If anything, Europe should have put incentives on hybrids and the US on diesels, not the other way around.
Paul Niedermeyer, thanks for the article post.Really thank you! Great.
Another factor which slowed down is DPF. On distances ca. 5-7 km on a single run (quite common distance in european cities) DPF cloged fast and hasn’t a chance to burn itself – so on each oil change diesel owners need change also much more expensive DPF filter.
The Financial Times is reporting that, in Fiat Chrysler’s new 4 year plan, to be announced June 1, the company will announce it will phase out diesel cars across it’s brands by 2022.
https://www.ft.com/content/25fa04ac-1a08-11e8-aaca-4574d7dabfb6
And there you have it: the hightest German administrative court deemed city-issued diesel bans permissible, if necessary for the those cities to reach the EU pollution norms. In the same ruling the court also held that the cities can be held liable for not meeting those norms, which have been in effect since 2010 and were laid down in 1999. That was plenty of time, and it’s the collective failure of the car industry to live up to those norms, and of the federal German government for failing to uphold them. That absence of action lead to private actors forcing the authorities to do their duties in enforcing laws that have been in effect for years.
The owners of all pre-2015 diesel cars will effectively be paying the price now; whether by replacing them or getting expensive fixes – or simply avoiding inner cities. Ironically it’s VW that’s got a head start in developing fixes for existing vehicles, putting them at an advantage.
In any case, that’s it for the diesel in passenger cars. Once it falls out of favour in Germany, it will quickly disappear from the European roads altogether.
Even keeping the diesels for the Jeeps and the larger vehicles like the Fremont (Journey in the US), this will be a huge mileage hit for FCA. Many Fiats have a single “token gasoline model with very low performance, and a half-dozen 1.3 or 1.6 (and a few 2.0 in high performance models) liter turbo diesels. Unlike Mazda and Volvo, they haven”t announced anything that would make it attractive to move from a 50 mpg (@ $5.50 gal.) diesel to a 38 mpg (@ $7.00 gal.) gasoline model. In many areas of western Europe, diesels are still well above 50% of automobile sales.