Comment by mft_

Comment by mft_ 20 hours ago

16 replies

View on Hacker News

Manufacturers must hit a level of CO2 emissions on average across their whole fleet. As such, Suzuki is choosing to discontinue the Jimny because of the tougher fleet average targets starting in 2025. Overall you’re right that it’s a bit of a fix; Mercedes ‘pools’ its emissions with other manufacturers/brands. It currently pools with Smart, but may also pool with Volvo/Polestar? [0] It’s such an obvious approach to ‘game’ the targets, it’s a wonder the EU didn’t see it coming when they introduced the scheme. [0] https://www.schmidtmatthias.de/post/mercedes-benz-intends-to...

throw10920 15 hours ago

This is why its so important to be super careful with how you write regulation - because even if the intent was good, it's so hard to both anticipate unintended second- and third-order effects, and it's so difficult to update after you've pushed to production.

Just like code, regulation isn't intrinsically valuable - it's a means to an end, and piling lots of poorly-written stuff on top of each other has disasterous consequences for society. We have to make sure that the code and law that we write is carefully thought out and crafted to achieve its desired effect with minimal complexity, and formally verify and test it when possible.

(an example of testing law may be to get a few clever people into a room and red-team possible exploits in the proposed bill or regulation)

Reply View 3 replies
  • motorest 14 hours ago

    > This is why its so important to be super careful with how you write regulation - because even if the intent was good, it's so hard to both anticipate unintended second- and third-order effects, and it's so difficult to update after you've pushed to production.

    It seems that the goal is to pressure automakers to improve the efficiency across their entire line instead of simply banning low-efficiency models altogether.

    If an automaker discontinues a low-efficient model in order to have access to a market, isn't this an example of regulation working well?

    Reply View 1 reply
    • throw10920 7 hours ago

      Did you read the parent comment?

      > so the little Jimny is emitting 146g/km but somehow there is no problem to buy a G-Class that is emitting 358g/km

      This is an example of a manufacturer discontinuing a more efficient vehicle while continuing to sell a larger vehicle that is significantly less efficient.

      That's the opposite of what you want. So, no, this is not an example of regulation working well.

      Reply View 0 replies
  • [removed] 6 hours ago
    [deleted]
    Reply View 0 replies
tonmoy 16 hours ago

I don’t see the issue in that though. If the target was to keep the average emission down across the entire country and if inefficient brand A decided to merge with efficient brand B to keep the average down that seems like it still adheres to the spirit of the law

Reply View 3 replies
  • pbhjpbhj 10 hours ago

    Seems more like it meets the letter of the law.

    The spirit was surely be too accelerate efficiency by ensuring all manufacturers improve. That has been negated; reducing the necessary efficiency for some manufacturers just because others are doing well.

    It's like if you allowed multiple people to mix blood samples for a DUI check. Sure, there'd have to be less drinking over all, but some would still be drunk af and the effectiveness of the law would be greatly reduced.

    Reply View 1 reply
    • Jweb_Guru 5 hours ago

      Not a great analogy. CO2 emissions are a global phenomenon, so the average emission level is exactly what matters. Drunkenness is not.

      Reply View 0 replies
cenamus 11 hours ago

A last effort to extend the many favors granted to the dying german auto industry

Reply View 0 replies
kranke155 18 hours ago

They likely saw it coming… and deliberately did it this way.

All local industry distorts their relevant politics. There’s lobbyists in the EU too.

The EU economy has a lot of car manufacturing, so cars are probably a big deal in Brussels.

Reply View 3 replies
  • chihuahua 14 hours ago

    Especially in Germany, which has several major manufacturers (Daimler-Benz, VW, BMW) that are important to the economy. Additionally, VW is part owned by the government of one of the states, which is why they are frequently favored by the government. Despite various scandals at VW, there are rarely any serious consequences for the company, because the government always finds a way to make trouble go away.

    And Germany is fairly influential in the EU so they probably extend the protection of these companies to the EU level.

    Reply View 1 reply
    • kranke155 7 hours ago

      EU politics are basically French, German politics vs smaller countries now, I think. The triangle balance of France, Germany, UK has been replaced by a more centralised but also more diffuse model, although Poland seems to be becoming more important.

      Reply View 0 replies
  • motorest 14 hours ago

    > The EU economy has a lot of car manufacturing, so cars are probably a big deal in Brussels.

    Car manufacturing is a strategic component of a nation's defense infrastructure. It goes way beyond trade protectionism.

    Reply View 0 replies
jimbob45 19 hours ago

Is that weighted for individual car popularity? Because couldn’t you put three push cars in your lineup that you don’t realistically expect to sell and be fine?

Reply View 1 reply
  • rv3392 17 hours ago

    AFAIK the average emissions are based on cars that were actually sold. So yeah, it's weighted for popularity in a way.

    Reply View 0 replies