OPINION

The Environmental Cause and ‘Pulpit’ type tactics

Climate change, and the reduction of carbon footprint in industry, is currently top of the agenda for everybody - and will be forever more, it seems. These are divisive subjects and there is not a single business or individual on the planet that will not be impacted by these issues in some way. Everybody seems to have a different view on how they should be tackled, but opinions are generally formed by a person’s own actions and what they can justify. So, for example, some people feel that because they drive a modern diesel engined truck or car, they are making an effort, whereas the next person thinks that by getting the bus to work they are doing their bit. Finally the more enthusiastic among us feel that by cycling and walking everywhere they are the only ones that really care about carbon reduction. These conflicts will continue and needless to say will lead to much discussion and many arguments.

The real problems will start when the authorities start to legislate and bring extra expense to companies and individuals. Already some European cities are announcing target dates to remove combustion engined vehicles from circulating around and within their boundaries. Imagine the consequences this will have on distribution from both a logistical and financial point of view. One point that has not resonated with people yet is the cost of being “Green”. In fact, worse still, most of the general public are of the view that any cost should be borne by the State and industry. This will likely change as tax is used to turn around people’s habits.

A recent announcement by the European Commission to introduce a new Euro 7 standard for vehicles is likely a sign of what is to come. It differs from previous regulations in that it is the same standard for all vehicles (cars, vans, buses and trucks) as it is for the total vehicle. So, the introduction of the new legislation will emissions from brakes and tyres are included, as they will for electric vehicles also. Not surprisingly the European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA) is against this proposal. The organisation stated that the investment and resources required will take from the development currently focused on electric vehicles and other alternative fuel types. According to some engineers the Euro 7 proposals will increase cost for all motorists because the likelihood is that tyre and brake wear may be reduced because of design changes. One manufacturer described the new standards as being “at the edge of technical feasibility”.

Saving the environment will bring inefficiency to the forefront. If that is what is required, then so be it, but it would be terrible to bring all of these changes to our daily lives if they were to make little or no difference. Governments and State agencies must not allow regulations to go too far ahead of resources. We’re already seeing that plans for making sufficient power available for electric vehicles are well off target. The original argument of measuring from “well to wheel” has not been explored sufficiently to make a compelling case to go at the speed forecasted for carbon removal from the economy.

It was recently announced that the railway line from Foynes to Limerick would be re-opened. I thought at first this would be a fantastic way to take commuter traffic off the roads around the Limerick area, but the big focus will be on freight. I am very keen to see how this will work. People will likely think the road haulage industry would be against this. I do not think so, because there will still be a similar amount of truck movements as rail freight is inefficient and costly over short journeys. Let’s see if industry will be happy to pay more for a less efficient service without seeing a true audit on the environmental benefits.

It is clear that the removal of carbon from the environment is key for all of us, but the future of the world cannot be dictated by enthusiasts. To bring public opinion on board and get people actively involved, clear benefits should be visible. There is a danger that environmentalists could isolate the importance of their message by using ‘Pulpit’ type tactics.