In 2025, alliances between manufacturers proved decisive in keeping car emissions within EU limits. None of the major automotive groups appears far from the bloc’s CO₂ targets, despite intense lobbying that led Brussels to revise compliance timelines and adjust the 2035 objective for conventional engines.
How alliances helped control car emissions in 2025
The EU’s three-year compliance window for CO₂ reduction has reshaped the automotive landscape. Fearing multi-billion-euro fines, manufacturers pushed Brussels to make the emissions target triennial rather than annual.
The lobbying effort also contributed to revising the 2035 phase-out of combustion engines, shifting the requirement from a 100% to a 90% reduction in pollution from traditional vehicles.
Alliances in the name of emissions
Data published by the French outlet Automobile Propre show a broadly positive picture. Major global carmakers met or nearly met their targets in 2025.
Industrial groups formed alliances with brands focused on electric vehicles to offset CO₂ output. Companies stronger in electric mobility effectively sell credits to those with higher shares of combustion engines.
Car emissions: who is teaming up with whom
Japanese manufacturer Nissan partnered with Chinese giant BYD. Stellantis, which includes numerous brands, aligned itself with Tesla, a producer exclusively of battery electric vehicles.
In practical terms, manufacturers with higher electric output compensate those more dependent on internal combustion engines.
The Nissan-BYD pool is projected to remain 19 g CO₂/km below the 2025–2027 limit, though it represents only 3% of European registrations. By contrast, the Tesla-led pool accounts for 31% of EU sales, followed by Volkswagen at 27% and the Renault-Dacia alliance at 11%. Both slightly exceed their targets but operate at far larger volumes, meaning overall car emissions must be assessed against total registrations.
Hyundai and Volkswagen rank lower in the emissions table but remain close to their objectives. It is reasonable to assume they could meet targets by the end of 2027.
This raises a broader question: if electric vehicle volumes, while still averaging below 20%, have been sufficient to meet or nearly meet EU limits, was it necessary to adjust the 2035 trajectory?
Was the policy shift necessary?
From an environmental standpoint, perhaps not. However, the adjustment was considered necessary to ease price pressures on battery electric vehicles for consumers.
The more decisive gap remains in charging infrastructure and battery technology. Faster charging times and greater driving range are still central to sustaining progress in reducing car emissions across Europe.
