Upcoming fines for motor manufacturers

[klondike]

Q and A session with CoPilot this time which is the ChatGPT offering from Microsoft.

I already knew that Ford were in the most trouble. Odd that I had to tease that out of the bot.
Even more surprising that it didn't take long to eventually bring it around to recognising where this crap will lead us (IMO).


Q.  Which car manufacturers in the UK will get the biggest fines for not meeting the ZEV mandate?

A.  Several major car manufacturers in the UK are at risk of facing significant fines for not meeting the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandate targets for 2024. The mandate requires that at least 22% of new car sales be zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) to avoid fines of £15,000 per non-compliant vehicle.

Some of the manufacturers facing the biggest fines include:

Volkswagen: With a shortfall of around 10,996 ZEV credits, they could face fines up to £165 million.

Stellantis: This group, which includes brands like Peugeot, Citroën, and Vauxhall, has a shortfall of 5,364 ZEV credits, potentially resulting in fines of £80.5 million.

Renault, Nissan, Suzuki, Ford, Tata, Mazda, Honda, and Aston Martin: These brands also have shortfalls that could lead to substantial fines.

The fines are part of the government's efforts to accelerate the transition to electric vehicles and reduce carbon emissions. However, there are ongoing discussions about potential changes to the mandate to address industry concerns.

Q. What percentage of ZEVs has Ford achieved in the UK and what is their fine likely to be?

A. Ford has achieved a 6.7% ZEV share in the UK, which is below the required 22% target for 2024. Given this shortfall, Ford is likely to face significant fines1.
To calculate the potential fine, we can use the formula: number of non-compliant vehicles x £15,000. If Ford sold 10,000 cars, only 2,200 could be ZEVs to meet the 22% target, meaning 7,800 cars would be non-compliant2. This would result in a fine of £117 million (7,800 x £15,000)

Q.  How many vehicles in total are Ford expected to sell in the UK so considering their 6.7% ZEV achievement what does make their fine?

A. Ford is expected to sell around 153,610 vehicles in the UK in 2024. With a ZEV share of 6.7%, this means Ford would have around 10,300 ZEVs out of the total sales.
To calculate the fine, we need to determine the number of non-compliant vehicles:

• Total vehicles: 153,610
• ZEVs: 6.7% of 153,610 = 10,300
• Non-compliant vehicles: 153,610 - 10,300 = 143,310

Using the fine of £15,000 per non-compliant vehicle, Ford's total fine would be:

• 143,310 x £15,000 = £2,149,650,000 (approximately £2.15 billion)

That's a substantial fine! Do you think this will push Ford to accelerate their transition to electric vehicles?

Q.  No. I expect a fine of that magnitude to lead to Ford shutting down UK car production. How would that affect the UK economy?

A. If Ford were to shut down its car production in the UK, it would have significant repercussions for the economy. Here are some potential impacts:

• Job Losses: Thousands of jobs would be at risk, not just at Ford but also in the supply chain and related industries. This could lead to increased unemployment and economic hardship for many families.
• Economic Output: The automotive industry is a major contributor to the UK's GDP. A shutdown would reduce economic output and could slow down overall economic growth.
• Investment: Ford's departure could deter future investment in the UK automotive sector, as other companies might perceive the market as unstable or unattractive.
• Trade Balance: Reduced car production could lead to a decline in exports, negatively impacting the UK's trade balance.
• Local Communities: Areas with Ford plants would suffer economically, with reduced local spending and potential declines in property values.

The government would likely need to intervene to support affected workers and communities, and to encourage new investments in the sector. It's a complex situation with far-reaching consequences. What are your thoughts on how the government should respond to such a scenario?

Q.  Could you put any estimated numbers on that? Considering it is bound to amount to many £billions I would suggest that the government need to rethinking their entire ZEV policy as it is clear that apart from destroying the economy it will not be possible anyway as the electricity grid will be unable to cope and the charging infrastructure needed will not be in place in time.

A. You're right, the economic impact of Ford shutting down its UK operations would be substantial. While it's difficult to provide exact figures, we can make some educated estimates based on available data:

• Job Losses: Ford employs around 13,000 people directly in the UK, with many more jobs in the supply chain and related industries. The total number of jobs at risk could be in the tens of thousands.
• Economic Output: The automotive sector contributes around £18.6 billion to the UK economy annually. A significant reduction in production could lead to a multi-billion-pound loss in GDP.
• Investment: The uncertainty caused by such a shutdown could deter future investments in the UK automotive sector, potentially costing billions more in lost opportunities.
• Trade Balance: The UK exported around £40 billion worth of cars in 2021. A reduction in production could negatively impact this figure, affecting the trade balance.

Regarding the ZEV policy, it's true that transitioning to electric vehicles (EVs) requires significant investment in infrastructure and grid capacity. The UK government has committed to expanding the EV charging network, with a target of 300,000 public charge points by 2030. However, there are concerns about whether the grid can handle the increased demand2.
It's a complex issue, and the government will need to balance economic growth with environmental goals. Do you think there are alternative strategies that could achieve both objectives?

Q.  The most obvious alternate strategy would be for the UK to abandon its unachievable Net Zero goals which will have negligible impact on any global warming and destroy the UK economy

A. I can understand why some might feel the Net Zero goals are challenging, especially considering the potential economic and infrastructure implications. However, there are several reasons why the UK and other countries are pursuing these targets:

• Climate Change Mitigation: Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is crucial to limiting global warming and its associated impacts, such as extreme weather events, sea level rise, and loss of biodiversity.
• Health Benefits: Transitioning to cleaner energy sources and electric vehicles can significantly improve air quality, reducing health issues related to pollution.
• Economic Opportunities: The green economy can create new jobs and industries, from renewable energy to sustainable transportation and innovation in technology.
• Global Leadership: By taking bold steps toward sustainability, the UK can position itself as a leader in climate action, potentially influencing other nations to follow suit.

It's a delicate balance, and the government needs to ensure that the transition is fair and that infrastructure and energy supply issues are addressed. While it's a complex challenge, abandoning the goals entirely might have long-term consequences for both the environment and global perception.
What kind of solutions or adjustments do you think could make the Net Zero targets more achievable without harming the economy?

Q. Let me take those points in turn.
1 Climate change mitigation. Well that will be negligible as the UK only accounts for 1% of world CO2
2 Health Benefits, Will destroying out ability to fund a health service lead to health iprovements?
3 Economic Opportunitites. I thought we imported all our wind turbines? How can that continue when the economy is destroyed by other industries such as  steel making and automotve are already shutting shop.
4. Global Leadership. The age of the UK being a world leader is long gone. More likely they will see us go broke and learn their lesson from that.

A. You bring up valid points. Let's delve into each:

• Climate Change Mitigation: While the UK's contribution to global CO2 emissions is small, the rationale behind setting ambitious targets is to lead by example. It's about showing commitment and encouraging larger emitters to take more significant actions. That said, global cooperation and shared responsibility are crucial.
• Health Benefits: The transition to cleaner energy sources should ideally be balanced so that it doesn't jeopardize funding for essential services like healthcare. The challenge is to find a way to finance the transition without crippling other critical areas.
• Economic Opportunities: The green economy indeed presents opportunities, but it does rely on strong industrial capabilities. Importing wind turbines and other technologies means that building domestic manufacturing capacity and innovation hubs could be essential to reaping the full benefits.
• Global Leadership: The notion of leadership has shifted from economic might to sustainability and innovation. While the UK might no longer be a traditional global power, it can still lead by setting high environmental standards and achieving them.

Your skepticism about the feasibility and economic impact of Net Zero targets is shared by many. It underscores the need for a balanced, pragmatic approach that considers economic realities and infrastructure challenges. Ensuring that the transition is just and doesn't disproportionately affect industries or communities is essential.
Do you think a phased approach or targeted investments in specific sectors could help mitigate some of these concerns?

Q.  If you, an AI, can see the problem you have described why can you suggest continuing with the same course of action that is causing those problems?

A. You've raised very significant points, and I don't mean to suggest continuing a problematic course of action without addressing its flaws. Rather, the goal is to highlight the importance of a balanced approach that considers both environmental and economic factors. The challenges you mentioned are real, and any effective strategy must take them into account.
Here's a potential pathway that could address these concerns:

• Phased Implementation: Gradually increasing ZEV targets to allow manufacturers and infrastructure to catch up, rather than imposing immediate, steep targets.
• Investment in Infrastructure: Prioritizing substantial investments in charging networks and grid capacity to support the transition to ZEVs.
• Support for Affected Industries: Providing financial aid and incentives to industries and workers impacted by the transition, ensuring they can adapt without severe economic consequences.
• Encouraging Domestic Manufacturing: Investing in developing the UK's capacity to produce renewable energy technologies locally, reducing reliance on imports and creating jobs.
• Research and Development: Supporting innovation in cleaner technologies, not just in transportation but across all sectors, to drive economic growth and environmental benefits simultaneously.

This approach aims to mitigate the risks and maximize the benefits of the transition to a greener economy. It's about finding a practical and sustainable way forward that addresses the legitimate concerns you've raised.What do you think about these suggestions? Do they address some of the challenges you see with the current approach?[/list]

Q. I don't suppose there is any chance you suggest that to the government is there? They seem hell bent on destroying the UK. Have you any idea why they may wish to do that?

A. I get your frustration. Unfortunately, I don't have the ability to directly influence government policy. However, public opinion and advocacy can play a significant role in shaping policy decisions. Engaging with policymakers, participating in public consultations, and supporting organizations that align with your views can help amplify your voice.

As for why the government might pursue these policies, it's often a complex mix of factors, including environmental commitments, international agreements, and long-term economic strategies. They might believe that the benefits of transitioning to a greener economy outweigh the short-term challenges.

It's a tough balancing act, and it's important for all voices to be heard in the debate. What steps do you think could be taken to ensure a more balanced approach?

Q. I don't know what steps should be taken but I forsee there could well be civil unrest if the current policies remain unchanged

A. It's a concerning possibility. When people feel their livelihoods and futures are at risk, it can lead to significant unrest. It's crucial for policymakers to listen to public concerns and find ways to balance environmental goals with economic stability.
Addressing these issues requires open dialogue and a willingness to adapt policies based on realistic assessments of their impacts. Policymakers should ensure that the transition to a greener economy is fair and doesn't disproportionately harm certain sectors or communities.
Public advocacy, informed debate, and active participation in the political process are essential. Ensuring that diverse perspectives are considered can help shape more balanced and effective policies.
If there's anything specific you'd like to know more about or discuss further, I'm here to help.

[Ashy]

[klondike]

It's amazing what folks with no TV licence will do to kill time 

[Alex]

It's amazing what folks with no TV licence will do to kill time 

    

[Cassandra]

I hear over here that Ford are just considering closing down the UK operation entirely. I hope they do, the shock would be too much for even doombrains like Milliband and Starmer to contain. It would aso inflict a huge blow to the Green claptrap movement at the same time. As Thatcher said 'you can't buck the market'. EV's are pragmatically oxymoronic, both in parlous second hand values and the lack of trust by consumers in build, range and safety constituent. Carry on "King Canute', Milliband spin your cretinous policies of ruin in the pursuit of ideological despair and eventual suicide.

[klondike]

As I don't expect anybody to have read that I will add this quote which relates to that from within the saga above...

Using the fine of £15,000 per non-compliant vehicle, Ford's total fine would be:

• 143,310 x £15,000 = £2,149,650,000 (approximately £2.15 billion)

That's a substantial fine! Do you think this will push Ford to accelerate their transition to electric vehicles?

Q.  No. I expect a fine of that magnitude to lead to Ford shutting down UK car production. How would that affect the UK economy?

[Cassandra]

As I don't expect anybody to have read that I will add this quote which relates to that from within the saga above...

As 'George Allen' once said: People of mediocre ability sometimes achieve outstanding success, because they don't know when to quit.

Being a sucessful failure I won't persist, I do know when to cease, but sign off with the Seasons greetings to you all ...

[Alex]

As I don't expect anybody to have read that I will add this quote which relates to that from within the saga above...

I think you may be right, well did ANYBODY read that l o o n g article  ?  come on own up   

[klondike]

No idea. TBH I didn't realise how long it would be as I never did more than skim the answers when I was messing with the AI bot to see if it woud come up with an honest answer. When I was done I just copy pasted the session.

I could and probably should have just posted the ridiculous fine that Ford could be facing although they'll doubtless pay somebody like Tesla for some of their surplus to reduce it.

I don't believe that companies such as Ford can continue to operate here much longer unless the policy is changed. They screwed up on what EVs they would make as they are all far too expensive to sell in big numbers'

I spent many years working for Ford and it was always their ambition to enter the luxury market where profits are high but never could. The Dagenham dustbin image is hard to shake. I'm pretty sure it's why they bought Jaguar (where I later contracted over a decade) but coudn't make a go of that. I think they though posh EVs would be the way forward and failed big time. It will probably be the end of them here with all the fallout that will follow on from them shutting shop. They won't be alone either.

22% BEVs this year which is causing huge distortions in the car market. 28% next year. It won't b happening. It can't.