Technology & Science
EU Scales Back 2035 Auto Mandate to 90% CO₂ Cut, Re-allowing Hybrids
On 17 December 2025 the European Commission unveiled draft rules replacing the bloc’s total 2035 ban on new internal-combustion cars with a looser target that requires only a 90 % CO₂ reduction versus 2021, letting automakers keep selling hybrids and range-extenders.
Focusing Facts
- Draft regulation dated 17 Dec 2025 shifts the 2035 passenger-car emissions target from 100 % to 90 % of 2021 levels and permits limited ICE sales beyond 2035.
- Remaining emissions must be ‘compensated’ through EU-made low-carbon steel and certified synthetic or bio-e-fuels, per the proposal.
- Proposal also gives a 2030-32 grace period during which fleet CO₂ may average a 55 % cut instead of meeting the single-year target.
Context
Industrial policy, not ecology, has nudged Brussels before: in 1993 the EU watered down its ‘ACEA voluntary CO₂ agreement’ under pressure from French and German automakers, much as U.S. CAFE standards were relaxed in 1986 amid oil-price crashes. Today’s climb-down mirrors those episodes, signalling that climate goals bend when strategic industries feel existential threat. The move fits a longer trend—since the 2022 energy shock—of Europe re-balancing the Green Deal against competitiveness vis-à-vis China’s low-cost EV ecosystem and a deregulatory U.S. shift under Trump. Over a 100-year arc this decision may prove a hinge: if technology cost curves keep favoring full battery electrics, Europe’s delay could replicate Britain’s 1970s reluctance to back semiconductor fabs—ceding a growth frontier to rivals; if hydrogen, e-fuels or hybrids win out, the added flexibility could avert another ‘dieselgate’-style credibility crisis. Either way, it exposes how policy certainty in climate transition is as fragile as the electoral cycle and the balance sheets of flagship manufacturers.
Perspectives
European pro-industry political and business outlets
e.g., The Local, Perth Now — They frame the EU’s retreat from the 2035 combustion-engine ban as a pragmatic, economically sound lifeline that gives carmakers the flexibility they need to stay competitive and protect jobs. Because these publications foreground automaker quotes and German political praise, they echo industry lobbying interests and underplay the risk that weaker rules could stall climate progress.
Environmental and clean-transport advocacy-oriented coverage
e.g., eNCAnews, RTE.ie — The policy back-pedal is depicted as a damaging setback for climate goals that will slow EV investment, hurt Europe’s competitiveness and amount to a "tragic" victory for legacy combustion-engine lobbies. By spotlighting Greenpeace, T&E and Polestar warnings while giving little space to cost or consumer concerns, this camp may overstate the immediacy of climate harm and minimize the auto sector’s economic strains.
Chinese state-owned media
e.g., Global Times, China Daily — They interpret the EU’s climb-down as proof that European brands are losing ground to technologically superior and cheaper Chinese EVs, reinforcing the narrative of China’s ascendancy in the sector. This perspective selectively highlights EU weakness and Chinese advantages to bolster national pride, glossing over challenges such as China’s own subsidy rollbacks and overcapacity noted elsewhere.