, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 573–595 | Cite as

Reducing CO2 from cars in the European Union

  • Sergey Paltsev
  • Y.-H. Henry Chen
  • Valerie Karplus
  • Paul Kishimoto
  • John Reilly
  • Andreas Löschel
  • Kathrine von Graevenitz
  • Simon Koesler


The European Union (EU) recently adopted CO2 emissions mandates for new passenger cars, requiring steady reductions to 95 gCO2/km in 2021. We use a multi-sector computable general equilibrium (CGE) model, which includes a private transportation sector with an empirically-based parameterization of the relationship between income growth and demand for vehicle miles traveled. The model also includes representation of fleet turnover, and opportunities for fuel use and emissions abatement, including representation of electric vehicles. We analyze the impact of the mandates on oil demand, CO2 emissions, and economic welfare, and compare the results to an emission trading scenario that achieves identical emissions reductions. We find that vehicle emission standards reduce CO2 emissions from transportation by about 50 MtCO2 and lower the oil expenditures by about €6 billion, but at a net added cost of €12 billion in 2020. Tightening CO2 standards further after 2021 would cost the EU economy an additional €24–63 billion in 2025, compared with an emission trading system that achieves the same economy-wide CO2 reduction. We offer a discussion of the design features for incorporating transport into the emission trading system.


Emission trading Emission standards European Union Carbon emissions Passenger cars 



We are thankful to Jamie Bartholomay and three anonymous reviewers for their valuable contribution. The authors affiliated with the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change gratefully acknowledge the financial support to the Program from the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science under DE-FG02-94ER61937, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under XA-83600001-1, and other government, industry, and foundation sponsors of the Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change (For a complete list of sponsors, please visit The authors affiliated with the ZEW gratefully acknowledge funding by Adam Opel AG/General Motors and BMW as part of the project “The Future of Europe’s Strategy to Reduce CO2 Emissions from Road Transport”. Any opinions expressed in the paper are those of the authors.

Supplementary material

11116_2016_9741_MOESM1_ESM.docx (94 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 94 kb)


  1. Abrell, J.: Private Transport and the European Emission Trading System: Revenue Recycling, Public Transport Subsidies, and Congestion Effects. (2011)
  2. Acemoglu, D., Aghion, P., Bursztyn, L., Hemous, D.: The environment and directed technical change. Am. Econ. Rev. 102, 131–166 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Achtnicht, M., von Graevenitz, K., Koesler, S., Löschel, A., Schoeman, B., Tovar, M.: Including road transport in the EU-ETS—an alternative for the future? Report, Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW GmbH) (2015)Google Scholar
  4. Aghion, P., Dechezleprêtre, A., Hemous, D., Martin, R., Van Reenen, J.: Carbon taxes, path dependency and directed technical change: evidence from the auto industry. J. Polit. Econ. 124(1), 1–51 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Allcott, H., Wozny, N.: Gasoline prices, fuel economy, and the energy paradox. Rev. Econ. Stat. 96, 779–795 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anderson, S., Sallee, J.: Using loopholes to reveal the marginal cost of regulation: the case of fuel-economy standards. Am. Econ. Rev. 101, 1375–1409 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arthur, W.: Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Econ. J. 99, 116–131 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Atabani, A., Badruddin, I., Mekhilef, S., Silitonga, A.: A review on global fuel economy standards, labels and technologies in the transportation sector. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15, 4586–4610 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blom, M., Kampman, B., Nelissen, D.: Price effects of incorporation of transportation into EU ETS. CE Delft Report, Delft (2007)Google Scholar
  10. Brand, C., Anable, J., Tran, M.: Accelerating the transformation to a low carbon passenger transport system: the role of car purchase taxes, feebates, road taxes and scrappage incentives in the UK. Transp. Res. Part A 49, 132–148 (2013)Google Scholar
  11. Calel, R., Dechezleprêtre, A.: Environmental policy and directed technological change: evidence from the European carbon market. Rev. Econ. Stat. 98(1), 173–191 (2016)Google Scholar
  12. Cambridge Econometrics: the impact of including the road transport sector in the EU ETS. A report for the European Climate Foundation, Cambridge (2014)Google Scholar
  13. Creutzig, F., Jochem, P., Edelenbosch, O., Mattauch, L., van Vuuren, D., McCollum, D., Minx, J.: Transport: a roadblock to climate change mitigation? Science 350, 911–912 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Desbarats, J.: An analysis of the obstacles to inclusion of road transport emissions in the European Union’s emissions trading scheme. (2009)
  15. EC [European Commission]: Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Results of the review of the Community Strategy to reduce CO2 emissions from passenger cars and light-commercial vehicles. Brussels, Belgium (2007)Google Scholar
  16. EC [European Commission]: Road transport: reducing CO2 emissions from vehicles. (2016)
  17. EC [European Council]: Regulation No 443/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 Setting emission performance standards for new passenger cars as part of the Community’s integrated approach to reduce CO2 emissions from light-duty vehicles, Brussels, Belgium. (2009)
  18. EC [European Council]: Conclusions on 2030 Climate and Energy Policy Framework, SN 79/14, Brussels (2014a)Google Scholar
  19. EEA [European Environment Agency]: Monitoring of CO2 Emissions from Passenger Cars—Regulation 443/2009, European Environment Agency. (2014)
  20. EIA [Energy Information Administration]: Almost all U.S. gasoline is blended with 10% ethanol. (2016)
  21. Ellerman, A., Jacoby, H., Zimmerman, M.: Bringing transportation into a cap-and-trade regime. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change. Report 136. Cambridge, MA (2006)Google Scholar
  22. EPA [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency]: Final rulemaking to establish light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards: Joint technical support document, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2010)Google Scholar
  23. EPA [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency]: EPA optimization model for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases from automobiles (OMEGA). Assessment and Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2012a)
  24. EPA [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency]: Regulatory impact analysis: final rulemaking for 2017–2025 light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards and corporate average fuel economy standards. (2012b)
  25. EPA [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency]: Fuel economy testing and labeling. Office of Transportation and Air Quality, EPA-420-F-14-015 (2014)Google Scholar
  26. EPRS [European Parliamentary Research Service]: Reducing CO2 Emissions from New Cars, Briefing 20/02/2014, European Union (2014)Google Scholar
  27. EU: Directive 2008/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to include aviation activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, Brussels (2008)Google Scholar
  28. EU: Regulation No 333/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 amending Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 to define the modalities for reaching the 2020 target to reduce CO2 emissions from new passenger cars. (2014)
  29. Eur-Lex.: Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 510/2011 to define the modalities for reaching the 2020 target to reduce CO2 emissions from new light commercial vehicles. (2014)
  30. Flachsland, C., Brunner, S., Edenhofer, O., Creutzig, F.: Climate policies for road transport revisited (II): Closing the policy gap with cap-and-trade. Energy Policy 39, 2100–2110 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Feigon, S., Hoyt, D. McNally, L., Mooney-Bullock, R.: Travel matters: Mitigating Climate Change with Sustainable Surface Transportation, Transportation Research Board. (2003)
  32. Frondel, M., Schmidt, C., Vance, C.: A regression on climate policy: The European Commission’s legislation to reduce CO2 emissions from automobiles. Transp. Res. Part A 45, 1043–1051 (2011)Google Scholar
  33. Gitiaux, X., Rausch, S., Paltsev, S., Reilly, J.: Biofuels, climate policy and the European vehicle fleet. J. Transp. Econ. Policy 46, 1–23 (2012)Google Scholar
  34. Goldberg, P.: The effects of the corporate average fuel efficiency standards in the US. J. Ind. Econ. 46, 1–33 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Greene, D., Patterson, P., Singh, M., Li, J.: Feebates, rebates, and gas-guzzler taxes: a study of incentives for increased fuel economy. Energy Policy 33, 757–775 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Heywood, J. MacKenzie, D.: On the road toward 2050: potential for substantial reductions in light-duty vehicle energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (2015)
  37. Heinrichs, H., Jochem, P., Fichtner, W.: Including road transport in the EU ETS: a model-based analysis of the German electricity and transport sector. Energy 69, 708–720 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. ICCT [International Council on Clean Transportation]: EU CO2 emission standards for passenger cars and light-commercial vehicles. International Council on Clean Transportation, Washington, D.C (2014a)Google Scholar
  39. ICCT [International Council on Clean Transportation]: From Laboratory to Road: A 2014 Update of Official and “Real-World” Fuel Consumption and CO2 Values for Passenger Cars in Europe. International Council on Clean Transportation Europe, Berlin (2014b)
  40. ICCT [International Council on Clean Transportation]: Global Passenger Vehicle Standards. International Council on Clean Transportation, Washington, D.C. (2016)
  41. IEA [International Energy Agency]: World Energy Outlook, Paris (2015)Google Scholar
  42. IMF [International Monetary Fund]: World Economic Outlook. Washington, DC (2015)Google Scholar
  43. Jaffe, A., Stavins, R.: Dynamic incentives of environmental regulations: the effect of alternative policy instruments on technology diffusion. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 29, 43–63 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jochem, P.: A CO2 Emission Trading Scheme for German Road Transport. Nomos-Verlag, Baden-Baden (2009)Google Scholar
  45. Karplus, V.: Climate and energy policy for U.S. passenger vehicles: a technology-rich economic modeling and policy analysis. Ph.D. Thesis. Engineering Systems Division, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA (2011)Google Scholar
  46. Karplus, V., Paltsev, S.: Proposed vehicle fuel economy standards in the United States for 2017–2025: impacts on the economy, energy, and greenhouse gas emissions. Transp. Res. Rec. 2287, 132–139 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Karplus, V., Paltsev, S., Babiker, M., Reilly, J.: Applying engineering and fleet detail to represent passenger vehicle transport in a computable general equilibrium model. Econ. Model. 30, 295–305 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Karplus, V., Kishimoto, P., Paltsev, S.: The global energy, CO2 emissions, and economic impact of vehicle fuel economy standards. J. Transp. Econ. Policy 49, 517–538 (2015)Google Scholar
  49. Kieckhäfer, K., Feld, V., Jochem, P., Wachter, K., Spengler, T.S., Walther, G., Fichtner, W.: Prospects for regulating the CO2 emissions from passenger cars within the European Union after 2023. Z. für Umweltpol. und Umweltr. 38(4), 425–450 (2015)Google Scholar
  50. Klier, T., Linn, J.: Fuel Prices and New Vehicle Fuel Economy in Europe. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C. (2011)Google Scholar
  51. Knittel, C.: Reducing petroleum consumption from transportation. J. Econ. Perspect. 26, 93–118 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Knittel, C., Busse, M., Zettelmeyer, F.: Are consumers myopic? Evidence from new and used car purchases. Am. Econ. Rev. 103, 220–256 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Martin, R., Muûls M., Wagner U.: Carbon markets, carbon prices and innovation: Evidence from interviews with managers. London School of Economics, (2012)
  54. Mock, P., Tietge, U., German, J., Bandivadekar, A.: Road Transport in the EU Emissions Trading System: An Engineering Perspective. Working Paper 2014-11, International Council on Clean Transportation (2014)Google Scholar
  55. Narayanan, B., Aguiar, A., McDougall, R.: Global Trade, Assistance, and Production: The GTAP 8 Data Base. Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University, West Lafayette (2012)Google Scholar
  56. Paltsev, S., Viguier, L., Babiker, M., Reilly, J., Tay, K-H.: Disaggregating Household Transport in the MIT-EPPA Model. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Technical Note 5, Cambridge, MA (2004)Google Scholar
  57. Paltsev, S., Reilly, J., Jacoby, H., Eckhaus, R., J. McFarland, J., Sarofim, M. Babiker, M.: The MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) Model: Version 4. Report 125. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change. Cambridge, MA (2005)Google Scholar
  58. Paltsev, S., Reilly, J., Jacoby, H., Tay, K.-H.: How (and Why) do climate policy costs differ among countries? In: Schlesinger, M., et al. (eds.) Human-Induced Climate Change: An Interdisciplinary Assessment, 282–293. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007)Google Scholar
  59. Paltsev, S., Capros, P.: Cost concepts for climate change mitigation. Clim. Change Econ. 4, 1340003 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Paltsev, S., Karplus, V., Chen, H., Karkatsouli, I., Reilly, J., Jacoby, H.: Regulatory control of vehicle and power plant emissions: how effective and at what cost? Clim. Policy 15, 438–457 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rausch, S., Metcalf, G., Reilly, J., Paltsev, S.: Distributional implications of alternative U.S. greenhouse gas control measures. B.E. J. Econ. Anal. Policy 10(1), 1–44 (2010)Google Scholar
  62. Rausch, S., Karplus, V.: Markets versus Regulation: the efficiency and distributional impacts of U.S. climate policy proposals. Energy J. 35(SI1), 199–227 (2014)Google Scholar
  63. Raux, C., Marlot, G.: A system of tradable CO2 permits applied to fuel consumption by motorists. Transp. Policy 12, 255–265 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Ricardo-AEA.: Evaluation of Regulations 443/2009 and 510/2011 on the reduction of CO2 emissions from light-duty vehicles. Brussels, 9th December 2014 (2014)Google Scholar
  65. Schwanen, T., Banister, D., Anable, J.: Scientific research about climate change mitigation in transport: a critical review. Transp. Res. Part A 45, 993–1006 (2011)Google Scholar
  66. Small, K., Van Dender, K.: Fuel efficiency and motor vehicle travel: the declining rebound effect. Energy J. 28, 25–52 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sterner, T.: Distributional effects of taxing transport fuel. Energy Policy 41, 75–83 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. TNO: Support for the revision of Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 on CO2 emissions from cars. Service request #1 for Framework Contract on Vehicle Emissions. Delft (2011)
  69. Transport & Environment.: Manipulation of fuel economy test results by carmakers: further evidence, costs, and solutions. (2014)
  70. US EPCA.: United States Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975. Pub. L. No. 94–163 (1975)Google Scholar
  71. Waugh, C., Paltsev, S., Selin, N., Reilly, J., Morris J., Sarofim, M.: Emission Inventory for Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases and Air Pollutants in EPPA 5. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Technical Note 12, Cambridge, MA (2011)Google Scholar
  72. Winkler, S., Wallington, T., Maas, H., Hass, H.: Light-duty vehicle CO2 targets consistent with 450 ppm CO2 stabilization. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 6453–6460 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global ChangeMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.University of MünsterMünsterGermany
  3. 3.Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW)MannheimGermany
  4. 4.University of International Business and Economics (UIBE)BeijingChina
  5. 5.Centre for Energy Policy, Strathclyde International Public Policy InstituteUniversity of StrathclydeGlasgowUK

Personalised recommendations