EU 2035 Car Emissions Target Faces Growing Political Divide

EU states split over 2035 car rules and ETS 2 as low-carbon steel and electrification enter the debate.
0
EU 2035 Car Emissions Target Faces Growing Political Divide
EU, ETS

EU 2035 car emissions target remains firmly backed by France, Spain and Sweden, while Poland is pushing for greater flexibility on vehicle rules and a slower rollout of the bloc’s emissions trading system for road transport and buildings.

EU 2035 car emissions target requires new passenger cars to reach 0g/km of CO2 from 2035. France says it has assembled enough support to block attempts to extend conventional internal combustion engine sales beyond that date.

EU 2035 car emissions target is becoming increasingly linked with industrial competitiveness. Policymakers are debating whether biofuels, e-fuels and low-carbon steel should help manufacturers meet emissions obligations without weakening overall climate targets.

The discussion also exposes widening divisions over ETS 2, electricity costs and how quickly Europe can electrify transport while preserving automotive manufacturing.

Car Rules Bring Steel, Fuels and Manufacturing Into the Debate

France, Sweden and Spain argue that weakening the 2035 target would undermine investment certainty for electric vehicles and associated supply chains.

Sweden has warned that slowing electrification could make European automakers more vulnerable against global EV competitors. Spain has also expressed concern that excessive flexibility would dilute the original target.

The European Commission has proposed allowing carbon-neutral biofuels and e-fuels to count toward up to 3% of vehicle CO2 targets.

More importantly for the metals sector, low-carbon steel credits could contribute up to 7% of manufacturers’ CO2 reduction requirements for cars and vans.

This creates a direct connection between automotive regulation and green steel demand. Carmakers using lower-emissions steel could gain additional compliance value beyond conventional material performance.

For European steel producers investing in electric arc furnaces, hydrogen-based ironmaking and lower-carbon power, such credits could create a stronger demand signal from automotive customers.

However, broader flexibility also creates policy risk. If compliance pathways become too generous, demand for battery electric vehicles could grow more slowly than expected.

That would affect not only automakers but also lithium, nickel, graphite, copper and battery manufacturing investment across Europe.

ETS 2 Reform Highlights Europe’s Cost and Competitiveness Problem

Poland is separately calling for another delay to ETS 2, which is already scheduled to begin in 2028 after being postponed from 2027.

The system will extend carbon pricing to road transport and heating fuels, potentially increasing costs for households and businesses using fossil fuels.

Warsaw is also seeking to transform the existing emissions trading system market stability reserve into a stronger price control mechanism.

The reserve currently absorbs excess allowances from the market, but Poland wants greater ability to prevent sharp carbon price increases.

Germany is taking a different approach, arguing that changes to the annual reduction rate for existing ETS allowances should only begin from 2036.

These positions show that Europe increasingly faces two competing priorities: maintaining credible decarbonisation targets while preventing carbon costs from damaging industrial competitiveness and consumer affordability.

The debate also extends beyond Europe. Turkey has proposed a global target for electricity to reach 35% of final energy consumption by 2035, reflecting the growing role of electrification in international climate policy.

For metals markets, faster electrification would support long-term demand for copper, aluminium, electrical steel and battery materials. But the pace will depend increasingly on whether Europe can manage power, carbon and manufacturing costs simultaneously.

The Metalnomist Commentary

Europe’s climate debate is shifting from whether to decarbonise toward how to distribute the industrial cost. The inclusion of low-carbon steel credits shows that automotive policy is increasingly becoming metals policy as well.

No comments

Post a Comment