Coventry Journalism Review 2008

When REM sang ‘It’s the end of the world as we know it’ they were not predicting an apocalypse, but the end may be closer than they think. The Doomsday Clock is a representation of the fragility of human existence and represents just how close we are to the end of the world. It currently stands at five minutes to midnight.

For many years The Doomsday Clock has stood as a barometer to the world; charting the changing threats to serve as a reminder that things need to change. Like a mystical council from a J.R Tolkien story the committee in charge of ‘the clock’ moved its hands two minutes closer to the hour to reflect, for the first time, the threat of climate change.

Since the publication of the Stern Report[1] there has been a heavy response from the Government to the threat of climate change. Fresh initiatives have been launched to make the public more aware of their impact on the climate creating a public fixation with CO2 emissions. This phenomenon, spurred on by barrage of media shock stories about polar icecaps and rising sea levels, has inevitably filtered through into the industry of one of the most visible pollutants; car manufacturing.

Current political demands placed on manufacturers is expanding the technology upon which future cars will be based. Already the surge in popularity of hybrid vehicles has lead some major manufacturers including Porsche to develop the technology. European Emission Regulations have set incremented steps for emissions from tailpipes leaving some companies struggling to keep up with the wave of new technology. Currently aiming towards emission level 5 (EU5), many manufacturers are struggling to meet the stringent particulate emissions target that will see up to an 80% reduction in nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons[2] from petrol and diesel engines before 2009. The problem faced by manufacturers is compounded by the UK Government who has set the bar well below realistic levels with demand for 120g/km vehicles in London’s Congestion Charging Zone.

It would seem that the political pressure for emissions reform is greater than the needs expressed by the consumer. How then has CO2 come to be such a deciding factor in today’s car market? Is the hype purely marketing or do customers really care about the environment? Have the UK’s automotive media adopted a political agenda, and who is it benefiting? And finally, what sparked this craze? It seems ‘green concern’ is here to stay, but who is responsible?

If we were to attribute blame, it can be laid squarely at the feet of three groups; manufacturers, consumers and government. Each of these groups is responsible for the growing environmental awareness surrounding the automotive industry, but perhaps blame is too strong a word. Improving our air quality is not a bad thing after all, and to lay blame, implies there is a malfeasance, where I merely would state there is a misguided momentum towards the evils of CO2. As the susceptible consumer we are bombarded with facts from manipulative marketing departments on a daily basis. Whether you are buying a wardrobe or a washing machine, a cardigan or a car, Marketing will sell to you the story to fit, leaving you satisfied you have brought the best there is to offer and that the non-porous surface of your wood-grained wardrobe will leave your freshly laundered cardie smelling of new car – or so the spiel might go. We are suckers for a story, and if our governments tell us that CO2 is the route of all evil we will inevitably believe it.

The catastrophic affect of CO2 is not one I wish to discuss, but I feel it will suffice to say it is not the only bad thing to come from a car exhaust. Far worse chemicals leach from our tailpipes but it is CO2 that takes the wrap despite every one of us breathing out tonnes of the stuff every year from our own hollowly pipes. What we have been told is that CO2 is bad, and that if we persist in pumping out tonnes of the stuff from our cars we will be penalised, and as a consumer that is never going to settle too well. As always, the Marketing Department’s response is feed of the fear and label everything to enhance consumer awareness.

They, however, are not the only ones to blame – manufacturers feed off public demand. We demand a cleaner, greener car to quell our ever increasing fears that we are destroying the planet single-handed and the manufacturers respond by giving us CO2 figures until we are forced to take them into consideration, banding the numbers around like we are accustomed to with 0-60 mph times. But, all of this has of course filtered down from the Government who are keen to make us aware that we must do everything we can to offset something called a ‘carbon footprint’. Green thinking has been brought about through Government pressure, but it is consumer demand that ultimately drives the need for greener vehicles. Financial incentives to take up the green baton have prompted consumers to think more about the damage their driving habits cause. Penalising heavy CO2 polluters is creating greater consumer awareness to car pollution, driving manufacturers to consider new ways to market the environmental benefits of their vehicles. Heavy marketing pressure from the manufacturers then leads to a greater emphasis on the environmental benefits that the consumer needs to know about, all of which are transmitted through the mainstream media, affecting the attitude of the automotive press towards green consumerism.

In 2007 many manufacturers chose the Frankfurt Motor Show to underline their green credentials. Hailed by many as the first Green Motor Show, the level of development already underway in emerging technologies was evident. Manufacturers from all areas of the market and all corners of the globe presented their own vision for the future. At the time Autocar Magazine said “well-advanced hybrid concepts were to be found on most major manufacturers’ stands.”[3] Notable contributions to the green spectacle came from Mercedes-Benz, debuting their F700 Concept. Powered by a 1.8 litre engine, labelled ‘DiesOtto’, Mercedes boasted that this revolutionary new technology harnessed the best of both petrol and diesel engines and would produce 240bhp whilst churning out only 126g/km of CO2. The wild and extravagant claims for the greenest ‘best in show’ didn’t stop there though. As the home team the Germans were keen to ‘wow’ their audience, but there was a stark difference between exhibits from Volkswagen and BMW. The contrasting visions of these two automotive powerhouses in the direction of green technology development could not have been more different. BMW unveiled its mammoth X6, offsetting the shrieks of disgust from bemused journalists who failed to see the purpose of the coupe off-roader, by surprising everyone with details of its hybrid powertrain. Volkswagen took a different approach, emphasising big things about its small cars. The ‘Up’ concept promised small engines in an even smaller package, showing that weight-saving is just as affective as new green technology. New concepts from Volvo (C30 Recharge), Chevrolet (Volt), and Opel (Flextreme) rounded up the major eco-warriors at the show, underlining the importance the world’s major manufacturers place on this growing technology and endearing themselves to environmental campaigners.[4]

So as the first recognisably green motor show Frankfurt helped bring the issue of the environment back to the motoring press’s attention. An almost concerted effort to bring the need for investment and development had been shown, but given that the average development life for a new motor vehicle is around 5 years why had we not anticipated a show like this before? The fact is that most in the industry were well aware of the developments in alternative technologies, but the lack of consumer demand for vehicles of these types did not encourage reports in the media. Stories of technological development have made it onto the pages of popular magazines prior to the momentous Frankfurt epiphany but that is all they have been, stories and conjecture. It took one of the biggest companies in the world to create a new genre of powertrain to make even the slightest of dents in the minds of the consumer. It was of course Toyota and the Prius.

Introduced in the UK in 2001 the Prius has become a byword for hybrid technology. Along with its luxury brand Lexus, Toyota has championed hybrid power making it a trendy and viable alternative. The aggressive marketing and wave of interest surrounding the Prius has inevitably led to a greater coverage of emerging technologies within the media.

Initially the new hybrids were portrayed as fuel savers. Reports from Autocar in 2002 compared newer models with the ‘latest hybrid petrol-electric cars’[5], showing that the media at the time thought little of the environmental impact of the hybrid. Even by 2004 the benefits of zero-emission transportation was only confined to casual reference and benefits surrounding congestion charging. Auto Express ran long term test cars of both the first and second generation of Prius and was still championing the car for its unfeasibly high miles per gallon readouts rather than its environmentally friendly emissions.[6] It would seem that the media at the time were blissfully unaware of the severe CO2 legislation that would follow in the years to come, and although mpg and CO2 are related the media at the time was not concerned with emissions levels.

As consumer demand to be better informed about engine emissions has built up over the past three years, the automotive media have responded to the change. Autocar’s 2007 redesign looked to reinvigorate the magazine bringing it more into line with other weekly titles. However, important sections of the magazine not only changed in appearance, but also adapted to include environmental figures. Autocar’s road tests now feature a ‘green rating’, while the ‘New Car A to Z’ section includes CO2 per km figures. This shift towards more environmental awareness for the readership continues across the market, impacting on even the most committed of petrol fuelled publications, Evo.

In March 2008, Evo issue 118 focused on some alternative methods of propulsion. Despite editorial director Harry Metcalfe saying ‘enthusiasts will always prefer a really good petrol engine to anything else the world can offer’[7], in his editorial introduction to the issue, the magazine’s content suggests otherwise. Focusing on three petrol alternatives the feature ‘New Power Generation’ explores the future of the fast car with electricity, biofuel and diesel. Although mention of the environmental benefits, and drawbacks, of biofuel are consigned to a sidebar, the inclusion of CO2 patter in a magazine as committed to burning fossil fuels as Evo, is not to be taken lightly. Despite one of the subjects in the feature being a 1004 bhp supercar, the environmental impact of petrol use is being translated to the reader. Despite featuring an electric car in the magazine, the cynicism surrounding this alien automotive power source is apparent. Reynolds writes; “Tesla claims the Roadster’s efficiency is six times that of a rival sports car, with CO2 emissions reduced tenfold. It might even be true, but what’s painfully apparent as you delve into the world of battery electric vehicles, plug-in hybrids and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles is that everybody’s sequence of PowerPoint charts, funnily enough, favours themselves.”[8]

Reynolds makes a good point, as with the exciting and new technology, a host of terminology and numerical values are created. The motivation behind manufacturer’s claims is obvious – increased sales – but in a rapidly expanding and subsidised segment, alternative power in automotive manufacturing has the potential to be big business. The US State of California is in the process of setting stringent zero emission regulations on car manufacturers, forcing those wishing to sell in the State to comply or force being banned from the showrooms. Despite the unlikely approval of these laws, clean air policies across the world could seriously affect the choice of vehicles available to city dwellers, potentially causing massive damage to those manufacturers affected by the ruling.

Whether the automotive media encourage, reproach or ignore the political pressure imposed on the industry remains to be seen, but one thing that is clear is that environmental pressure is becoming an increasing factor for editors and consumers alike. We are already seeing an increase in consumer awareness both through manufacturer’s advertising and the automotive media’s editorial policy, but how long will it be before green consumerism breaks away from the online world of cleangreencars.com and onto our shelves with a publication like What Green Car? The automotive media has had relatively little to worry about since the birth of the car. Technology has developed, but always along the same linear structure of petrol and diesel engines becoming bigger and better or more recently, smaller and better still. Now a burgeoning new range of engines are threatening to dominate magazine pages for years to come. How this will affect the attitude to petrol only time will tell, but the transition has already began.