Yesterday the automotive headlines were dominated by such important stories as the “grand debut” of a Dodge Challenger with 1,025 horsepower. Yet almost entirely absent from the trade journals and buff magazines was coverage of an important — and sobering — scientific report.
Thus far the only mention I have seen of this report was at Autoblog, which posted a Reuters (2023) story that concluded: “Climate scientists on Monday appealed directly to everyone on the planet to seize a dwindling chance to limit global warming to an average increase of 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) or risk harming people living today and their descendants for thousands of years to come.”
The International Panel on Climate Change — an arm of the United Nations — found in its research that the “world is likely to pass a dangerous temperature threshold within the next 10 years, pushing the planet past the point of catastrophic warming — unless nations drastically transform their economies and immediately transition away from fossil fuels,” The Washington Post reported (Kaplan, 2023).
Rush to EVs a response to increasingly dire situation
The automotive media should be paying more attention to the findings of the IPCC because they could influence governmental policies that will impact the industry’s future. For example, an increasing number of nations — and states within the U.S. — have called for a ban in the sale of new gas-powered vehicles by 2035 in order to comply with emission-reduction targets.
Such bans have been described as unrealistic by some within the auto and fossil-fuel industries (e.g., Mulkern, 2022; Grimes, 2022). That may indeed turn out to be true. The problem is that governments have already fallen behind in meeting their pledges in the 2015 Paris Agreement (Reuters, 2023). This is a treaty developed at a UN climate change conference whose overarching goal is to limit the average global temperature increase to under 2°C above pre-industrial levels — and ideally no more than 1.5°C.
Also see ‘Popularity of SUVs could offset climate advantages of EVs‘
According to the United Nations, in order to stay under 1.5°C, “greenhouse gas emissions must peak before 2025 at the latest and decline 43 percent by 2030” (UNFCCC, 2023b).
Despite the challenges of doing so, the latest IPCC (2023a) report insisted that there are “multiple, feasible and effective options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to human-caused climate change, and they are available now.”
Okay, it’s hard reading scientific writing, but still . . .
I get why an automotive journalist would be hesitant to write about the IPCC. For one thing, scientific writing can be difficult to wrap your brain around if you aren’t used to doing so. That said, the IPCC has tried to summarize its findings in ways that can be understood by lay readers. There are also plenty of stories in newspapers and policy journals that can help one interpret the reports.
This is not the first time that the automotive press largely ignored an IPCC report (go here for another example). One result is that car enthusiasts may be skeptical or even hostile to climate change policies because they don’t understand the science behind it.
Also see ‘It’s a big deal that Ford and GM knew about climate change in 1960s’
As a case in point, did you know that the IPCC (2023c) does not do original research? Instead, it “identifies the strength of scientific agreement in different areas and indicates where further research is needed.” Thousands of experts from around the world volunteer their time to help produce reports with a process designed to “reflect a diverse range of views and expertise.”
The UN argues that the key “to the IPCC’s credibility is the fact that this is a science-driven process and the rigorous peer-review process ensures its reports cannot be politically motivated” (UNFCCCa, 2022).
I am hard pressed to point to another topic that has been studied by a broader range of scientists. The automotive media would do well to listen more closely to what these folks have to say.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Grimes, Katy; 2022. “California’s Oil and Gas Workers Send Warning to States About Newsom’s Devastating Energy Policies.” California Globe. Posted July 28.
- IPCCa; 2023. “Urgent climate action can secure a liveable future for all.” International Panel on Climate Change. New release posted March 20.
- IPCCb; 2023. “Synthesis Report of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6): Summary for Policymakers.” International Panel on Climate Change. Posted March 20.
- IPCCc; 2023. “About the IPCC.” International Panel on Climate Change. Accessed March 20.
- Kaplan, Sarah; 2023. “World is on brink of catastrophic warming, U.N. climate change report says.” The Washington Post (subscription required. Posted March 20.
- Mulkern, Anne C.; 2022. “Calif. poised to ban sales of new gas-fueled cars by 2035.” E&E News. Posted Aug. 25.
- Reuters; 2023. “‘Act now’: Scientists appeal to us all to salvage 1.5C climate goal.” Autoblog. Posted March 20.
- UNFCCCa; 2022. “Everything You Need to Know About the IPCC Report.” Posted April 7.
- UNFCCCb; 2023. “What is the Paris Agreement?” United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Accessed March 21.
I think it is reasonable to assume that as long as Silverados, Rams and F-150s are the prime generators of ad revenue for mainstream automotive media, there will be little meaningful coverage of climate change under their respective banners.
Why is it always these three? Why not Sequoias, Armadas and Ascents?
Perhaps because:
1) The Japanese automakers’ big trucks and SUVs don’t typically sell nearly as well as the Big Three’s,
2) Large trucks and SUVs typically represent a smaller percentage of Japanese automakers’ total sales, and
3) The Big Three have historically produced more greenhouse gases per vehicle than the Japanese.
Back in 2019 I did a story that touches on some of these issues (go here). The data is now a little old but I think the comparisons are still valid. I have been meaning to write a follow-up article but wasn’t sure if enough readers would be interested. The number crunching can take a bit of time.
I would definitely be interested in a follow-up article. I did read the original story and it was a very interesting and relevant read.
Car and Driver magazine dedicated their October/22 issue (I hope I’m correct) to electric vehicles – and it was so good that l “saved” it! Recommended reading!
The trucking industry should be change to what – hydrogen? Same with rail? What about airlines? What about military ops? Agriculture? The “third world”? There is a lot to think about – and effectively take action about if we are serious. And all of these have impact on our cars – and the journalism attached.
You’re right about most of the auto press. But this is such a large political issue , by necessity, that it is difficult for them.
Yeah, but that Chally runs on E85 😬
Ole stopped by to tell us that “(p)erhaps the automotive media doesn’t cover climate ‘science’ because there is no actual science in it.” There’s more — much more — to Ole’s comment, but I’m not going to post disinformation that reads like a press release from one of those climate denialist lobbying groups.
If you want to debate the science of climate change, I’d invite you to check out realclimate.org. This is a website run by working climate scientists who see it as an important part of their job to educate the media and the public about how their field operates.
Okay: There is a place for the trucking industry, but because of the rationalization of the railroad industry in the 1970s and 1980s, the capacity to move trains is no longer there (although much of the right-of-way still exists); therefore, we are nationally dependent on over-the-road trucks. Railroads have become much more fuels and emissions efficient: For example, the Federal Railroad Administration has demanded that that the Genessee & Wyoming scrap several older diesel locomotives that were illegally certified as compliant with the latest standards, but actually never certified.
Progress in technology is two-steps forward and one-step back, as detailed in this article on Thomas Midgley, Jr.: https://dnyuz.com/2023/03/15/the-brilliant-inventor-who-made-two-of-historys-biggest-mistakes/.
James, you linked to a fascinating article. Thank you!
To paraphrase another saying: Science is hard.
The automotive media has no will to take on the controversial subjects; climate change, legislation regarding future vehicles, sociological impact that personal transportation has on the planet. This all requires deep consideration of our actions and choices, possibly confronting some very uncomfortable realities.