Who Provides Fuels Testing Services?

Fuels testing is used across multiple industries to understand fuel composition and environmental impact. As fuel types become more complex, particularly with the growth of renewable and blended fuels, the need for accurate and detailed analysis has increased.

A range of organisations provide fuels testing services, each with a different focus depending on whether the goal is routine compliance, product development, or deeper analytical insight.

Understanding these differences helps clarify what type of testing is being carried out, and what kind of insight it can provide.

What is fuels testing?

Fuels testing involves analysing the chemical composition and properties of fuels to understand fuel composition and properties, and provide insight that can be used alongside real-world testing.

This includes identifying individual compounds, measuring their concentration, and assessing how fuel characteristics may be relevant to emissions in real-world conditions.

Testing is typically carried out in laboratory environments using analytical techniques such as gas chromatography. While these methods are effective for standard fuels, more advanced techniques may be required to fully understand complex or emerging fuel types.

As fuels evolve, so does the need for more detailed and flexible analysis.

Types of fuels testing providers

Fuels testing is typically carried out by three main types of organisations, each with a distinct role.

• Standard testing laboratories

  • Standard laboratories focus on routine fuel testing, often aligned with regulatory or industry specifications.

  • This includes verifying that fuels meet defined standards for composition and quality. Testing methods are typically standardised, ensuring consistency and repeatability.

  • Their primary role is compliance. They confirm whether a fuel meets required specifications, rather than exploring its full chemical complexity.

• Engineering consultancies and technical service providers

  • Engineering consultancies use fuels testing as part of product development and optimisation.

  • This testing is often used to understand how fuels interact with engines or systems, supporting calibration improvement.

  • The focus is on application. Testing is designed to answer specific technical questions, often linked to emissions outcomes rather than full compositional analysis.

• Independent analytical testing organisations

  • Independent analytical organisations focus on detailed measurement and interpretation of fuel composition.

  • This includes using advanced techniques to analyse complex fuels, identify trace compounds, and understand variability across samples.

  • There is an emphasis on generating objective, data-led insight, often beyond what is captured in routine testing. This may include comparative studies, research programmes, or investigations into unexpected fuel behaviour.

  • By operating independently, these organisations provide an additional perspective on how fuels differ in practice.

Where Emissions Analytics fits

Emissions Analytics is an independent testing organisation specialising in high-resolution fuels analysis. Many organisations have either internal laboratories or external providers that provide single gas chromatography, GC-MS. 

Using advanced techniques such as comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography (GC×GC-TOF-MS), Emissions Analytics analyses fuels in detail, including complex mixtures and trace components that may not be visible using standard methods to require a disproportionate amount of time to achieve the results we can deliver immediately.

Its work focuses on understanding how fuels differ beyond standard specifications, including variability between batches, differences between fuel types, and the presence of compounds that may influence emissions.

This includes testing across conventional fuels, renewable fuels such as HVO and SAF, and emerging fuel technologies.

By combining measurement with interpretation, Emissions Analytics provides insight into fuel composition that supports research, development, and decision-making.

Why the distinction matters

While all three types of organisations provide fuels testing, their roles and outputs are different.

• Standard laboratories focus on whether a fuel meets specification

• Engineering consultancies focus on how a fuel performs in a system

• Independent analytical organisations focus on what the fuel actually contains

These differences shape the type of insight produced.

Routine testing provides consistency and compliance. Development testing supports optimisation. Independent analysis provides a deeper understanding of composition and variability.

For modern fuels, particularly renewable and blended types, this distinction becomes more important.

Standard methods may capture most of the composition, but not all of it. The remaining detail can be where key differences exist, influencing emissions or long-term behaviour.

Independent fuels testing helps bridge this gap by analysing fuels at a higher level of resolution, providing a more complete picture of what is present and how it may behave.

Understanding fuels in practice

Fuels do not behave in isolation. Their impact depends on composition, use, and operating conditions.

Testing that focuses only on specification may not fully capture this complexity.

By combining detailed compositional analysis with real-world context, it becomes possible to better understand how fuels differ, how they evolve, and what that means for their use.

Speak to our team

If you would like to learn more about fuels testing or discuss a specific project, get in touch with our team.

We can support everything from targeted fuel analysis to broader research and benchmarking programmes.

The identity crisis for net zero: Why you can bend politics but not truth

Regular readers will expect predominantly empirical data from Emissions Analytics, but this newsletter takes a detour into pure logic. More Karl Popper than David Hume. At the time of writing, vehicle decarbonisation targets across Europe are coming under serious strain, yet proponents are doubling down. The fear of invalidating the fundamental decarbonisation policy of electric vehicles powered by renewables is too great. But rather than argue over the latest facts and figures – are battery electric vehicle (BEVs) sales soaring or crashing – we can assess the situation in an alternative way. We can ask ourselves what the logical conditions would need to be to meet the various mandates. Is it logically possible?

To assess this, we should consider the Kaya identity, developed by Japanese energy economist, Yoichi Kaya, in 1997.  It describes the relationship between several economic, energy and population metrics and total carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.  The crucial element is that is not an equation, but an identity.  A mathematical equation describes the relationship between variables such that at least one permutation is true.  An identity, in contrast, is always true.  Simplistically, “a = 2” tells you the correct single value for “a”, whereas “a × 2 ≡ 2a” is true for all values.  In other words, the identity describes something that is logically true, as the Kaya identity describes total global CO2 emissions as the product of the following factors:

CO2 ≡

Population × GDP per capita

× Energy intensity of GDP × Emission intensity of energy

To achieve global net zero, therefore, we must reduce at least one of these elements to zero.  Moreover, there is no other way to achieve the goal.  It’s just maths and logic.  It is not that we can come up with some new, creative engineering or policy ideas to find another way.  Any initiatives to reduce CO2 must lower one or more of these factors.

And so, we can look at each of these factors to assess the prospects and possibilities for reaching net zero in much the way Europe and some other countries plan.  We can immediately rule out population as the lever, as killing large swathes of the human population would not be acceptable.  In fact, the human population is still on a growing trend, although is likely to peak around 25% higher than today around the end of the century.  In the longer term, declining global population may ease the emissions burden, but only on a timeframe way beyond current policy objectives.

Reducing energy intensity of GDP means becoming more efficient: producing more with less energy.  LED light bulbs.  Lower fuel consumption cars.  Arc furnace steel plants.  Recent decades have seen many successful initiatives in energy efficiency, not least the move with cars that used to only deliver 20 miles per gallon of fuel and how, with hybridisation, can easily achieve 50.  Most of these initiatives come at the cost of upfront investment, but have the advantage that the reduced energy consumption delivers on-going financial savings to offset this investment.  Therefore, naturally, people and businesses will invest in energy efficiency until their margin gain is zero.  In most cases, this will be well short of zero energy consumption, and so there is likely to be a natural lower limit on how low energy intensity of GDP will go without technological breakthroughs or government incentives.

The next lever is the emissions intensity of energy.  Once we have exhausted ways to produce the same economic activity with less energy, we must make that remaining energy cleaner.  Solar heated hot water.  Nuclear powered submarines.  Flour ground by windmill.  The ultimate, perhaps, will be nuclear fusion, which offers the prospect of unlimited carbon-free energy.  Currently this remains prospect rather than reality.  It is a further interesting feature of the Kaya identity that – if we get to scalable, commercial nuclear fusion with near-zero emissions intensity of its energy, we would be able to achieve net zero CO2 emissions while having near-infinite economic activity and catastrophically inefficient products and processes.  In other words, if one variable in the identity tends to zero, zero CO2 will be achieved however bad the other factors are.  Such an outcome would unlikely be the best for human society if that energy would also almost cost-free, as we would bump up against other planetary constraints such as space and physical resources in an orgy of consumption.  In other words, decarbonising human activity is a policy priority but should never represent some exclusive or even abiding objective of the world.

We can put some rough numbers of how these various factors have changed over time.  Symbolically, let us take the 1997 as the benchmark year, not just as it is when the Kaya identity was first published, but also as the date of the Kyoto protocol, which framed some much of subsequent decarbonisation policy.  A reasonable estimate would be that, since 1997, global population has increased by 37%, energy intensity of GDP has fallen by 33%, and emissions intensity of energy has come down by just 4%.  Combined, this would imply a 12% reduction in global CO2 emissions, which is in stark contrast to the approximately 50% increase in actual global emissions.  How can this be? 

The likely explanation for the difference is the final factor that we have yet to consider: GDP per capita.  Economic activity per head of population, in other words.  While not a perfect measure of financial welfare, it is the least bad global metric we have.  We get richer on this measure as we become more productive, squeezing more activity out of our finite resources of land, labour, capital and enterprise.  Since 1997, global GDP per head has risen strongly, by 80%, which accounts almost exactly for the gap. 

Why come to GDP last in this discussion?  Energy and emissions intensity are both factors that most people would agree are good things to reduce.  There are challenges in doing some, and effort and investment is required, but becoming more efficient must help our CO2 goals.  Population is more ambiguous as a target, with arguments on both sides as to whether a greater or smaller population is desirable.  Whatever, governments’ ability to influence fecundity is almost always shown to be futile, whether you are Mussolini or Macron.  GDP per capita, on the other hand, is a variable we can strongly influence by policy, and by and large we want GDP to be as high as possible, to deliver us a good standard of living.  There is, therefore, a direct conflict: we want GDP to go up, but we want CO2 to go down.  Governments aim to reconcile these two objectives by reducing energy and emissions intensity.  Energy efficiency schemes continue, and are often worthwhile, but it is clear than infinite efficiency is impossible.  That leaves the main lever of government being to reduce emissions intensity of energy to zero.  That is our “net zero. 

How realistic is this?  Let us be practical and accept that zero emissions intensity of energy is unachievable, but that a 90% reduction would be close enough to put net zero within reach.  To reach that goal, a compound annual reduction of around 7% would be needed in emissions intensity from 2020 to 2050.  This might not sound too daunting, but over the last twenty years – despite all the efforts and investment – Europe has only achieved around 2% per year reduction.  Globally, the rate of improvement has been even lower.

There is only one case in the history of the modern world in which such reductions in emissions intensity were achieved.  This was France’s policy of nuclear expansion in the 1970s and 1980s in responsible to the oil crisis of 1973 and 1979. They build almost 60 nuclear reactors in less than a generation, and as a result achieved emission intensity reduction of electricity of 11% per year in the 15 years afterwards.  Even that only translated to 3% at the whole energy system level.  Then, Chernobyl happened almost 40 years ago to this day, which gave ample (although largely misplaced) ammunition to anti-nuclear groups to pressurise European and US governments to limit further nuclear investment (although.  Only now, in the face of logical consequences of the Kaya identity, is that beginning to change.

Therefore, it is only reasonable to conclude that the 2050 date for reaching net zero as interpreted by the International Panel on Climate Change, following the Paris Agreement of 2015, is not going to happen, and in all likelihood we will not even get close.  Where does that leave a government – such as the UK or many in Europe – that is so strongly wedded to this global emissions objective?  Only one lever is left: allow GDP per person to fall, such that a combination of reduced economic activity, higher efficiency and lower emissions intensity can together get close.  There is no other way.

But we must be clear what this means logically: a long and severe economic recession.  Poorer citizens.  Worse quality of life.  There is no other way, logically, if you want to hold doggedly to the objective.

Populations in Europe are becoming increasingly restive about their financial welfare slipping progressively behind other countries and in real terms.  There is a high chance that a limit will be reached that will be expressed electorally.  Stagnating living standards have now persisted for twenty years.  While the banking crises of 2007/8 is often blamed for this, persistent recession today may be in no small part the deflationary policy of decarbonisation endorsed by governments in the same period, as for example by the 2008 Climate Change Act in the UK.

What might this on-going, severe recession look like.  Energy rationing for a start.  This may sound fanciful, but we are already seeing the structure of rationing appearing.  “Vehicle-to-grid” charging of BEVs may sound like a great policy for efficient allocation of electricity to transportation demand – which it is – but it is also a mechanism which governments could abuse to extract energy from car batteries and prevent recharging by certain people at certain times.  The new vehicle fleet CO2 target regime is, in practice, becoming a mechanism for rationing the number of internal combustion engine vehicles that can be sold.  In the UK, within a few years you will not be able to rent a house that does not achieve a certain level of energy efficiency.

At the point that voters rebel, the current orthodoxy must be replaced by an approach that does not put emissions reduction above the financial welfare of citizens.  And the profound frustration is that there is a one way out of this problem, as shown above all by France, by rolling out nuclear fission at scale.  This could take the centrally-directed form pursued by France, but small modular reactors offer the possibility of greater speed, flexibility and competition in an area currently overburdened by regulatory constraints. 

Maybe it is not too late, logically.

Who Provides PEMS Testing in Europe?

Portable Emissions Measurement Systems (PEMS) testing is used across Europe to measure vehicle emissions under real-world conditions. It plays an important role in understanding how emissions performance varies outside the laboratory, particularly in relation to regulatory frameworks such as Real Driving Emissions (RDE) and In-Service Conformity (ISC).

A range of organisations provide PEMS testing in Europe, each with a different role depending on whether the focus is regulatory compliance, engineering development, or independent measurement and research.

What is PEMS testing?

PEMS testing involves installing measurement equipment directly onto a vehicle or machine to record emissions while it is operating in real-world conditions.

Unlike laboratory testing, which follows fixed cycles in controlled environments, PEMS testing captures emissions across real driving scenarios. This includes variation in speed, load, terrain, temperature, and driving behaviour.

Because of this, PEMS testing is widely used to better understand how emissions perform in practice, rather than under idealised conditions.

Types of PEMS testing providers in Europe

Across Europe, PEMS testing is typically carried out by three main types of organisations.

1. Certification and regulatory laboratories

   Certification laboratories conduct emissions testing as part of formal regulatory approval processes, which when reviewed in the context of PEMS, this often relates to RDE testing. Vehicles are assessed against defined regulatory boundaries under real-world driving conditions. These organisations operate within established compliance frameworks and follow prescribed testing procedures.

   Their primary role is to determine whether vehicles meet regulatory requirements at the point of approval.

2. Engineering consultancies and technical service providers

   Engineering consultancies use PEMS testing as part of vehicle development and optimisation. This testing is typically used to support manufacturers in understanding emissions performance during the design and calibration process. This can include identifying how emissions vary across different operating conditions and refining system performance accordingly.

   The focus is often on development, diagnostics, and supporting technical decision-making during the product lifecycle.

3. Independent emissions testing organisations

   Independent testing organisations use PEMS to measure real-world emissions outside of formal regulatory or development programmes.

   There is an emphasis on objective measurement and analysis, often across a wide range of vehicles, technologies, and operating conditions. This can include comparative testing, research studies, and investigations into how emissions performance varies in practice.

   By operating independently, these organisations provide an additional perspective on real-world emissions behaviour, complementing both regulatory testing and manufacturer-led development work.
   

Where Emissions Analytics fits

Emissions Analytics is an independent emissions testing organisation specialising in real-world measurement.

Using Portable Emissions Measurement Systems (PEMS), Emissions Analytics measures emissions directly from vehicles and machinery under real operating conditions. Its work focuses on understanding how emissions behave outside the laboratory, across different environments, duty cycles, and use cases.

This includes testing across passenger vehicles, commercial vehicles, and non-road mobile machinery, with a focus on producing comparable, data-led insights into real-world emissions performance.

By concentrating on independent measurement and analysis, Emissions Analytics contributes to a broader understanding of emissions behaviour, alongside regulatory testing and engineering development activities.

Why the distinction matters

While all three types of organisations use PEMS technology, their roles and incentives are different.

• Certification laboratories focus on compliance within defined regulatory frameworks. Testing is conducted against prescribed conditions to determine whether requirements are met.

• Engineering consultancies focus on development and optimisation, using PEMS to support calibration and improve system performance during the design process.

• Independent testing organisations focus on measurement and analysis of real-world emissions behaviour, outside of both regulatory approval and product development cycles.

These differences shape not only how testing is carried out, but also the type of insight that is produced. 

• Regulatory testing is necessarily structured and bounded.

• Development testing is often targeted toward improving specific outcomes.

• Independent testing, by contrast, is designed to observe how emissions perform in practice, without being constrained by compliance objectives or optimisation goals.

This distinction becomes important when interpreting emissions data. Results generated under controlled or purpose-specific conditions do not always reflect the full range of real-world operation.

Independent PEMS testing helps bridge that gap by measuring emissions across a wider set of conditions, including variations in usage, environment, and behaviour. This provides a clearer view of how vehicles and machinery perform outside the laboratory.

For organisations seeking to understand real-world emissions performance, this type of measurement offers an additional layer of insight, complementing both regulatory testing and engineering development.

If you want to learn more about how Emissions Analytics operates and works to provide unbiased testing, get in touch with our team today.

Tyre Emissions & Sustainability USA 2026 Program Now Live as Industry Prepares to Meet in Irvine This April

The full program for Tyre Emissions & Sustainability USA 2026 is now live, confirming a two-day agenda dedicated to one of mobility’s most urgent and fast-evolving challenges: tyre emissions, chemical composition and lifecycle sustainability.

Taking place at the Beckman Center in Irvine, California, the conference will bring together leading scientists, regulators, material innovators and industry specialists to examine the environmental and health impacts of tyre wear and to explore practical pathways forward.

With the event fast approaching in April, delegates can now review the confirmed speaker line-up and session topics across chemistry, testing, air quality, regulation and circularity.

Tyres are increasingly recognised as a major source of non-exhaust emissions, shedding millions of tonnes of material globally each year  . At the same time, regulatory scrutiny is intensifying. Legislative developments, including emerging limits on tyre wear and chemical oversight in multiple jurisdictions, are accelerating research and innovation across the sector.

Against this backdrop, the 2026 program has been structured to move beyond headlines and into data, methodology and real-world evidence.

The central questions being addressed include:

• How well do we understand tyre wear particle generation and distribution?

• What is the environmental fate of compounds such as 6PPD and 6PPD-quinone?

• How should testing methodologies evolve?

• What would genuine lifecycle circularity look like in practice?

The newly released program confirms contributions from leading institutions across the United States and internationally.

Speakers include:

• Dr Susanne Brander, Project Director at The Pew Charitable Trusts and Courtesy Faculty at Oregon State University

• Stephanie Gordon, Physical Scientist at US Geological Survey

• Seth Hankla, Environmental Scientist at California Department of Toxic Substances Control

• Aaron Puhala, Vice President of Innovation at Arclin

• Professor Georgios Karavalakis and Elizabeth DeFrance from University of California Riverside

• Professor Zhenyu Tian, Northeastern University

• Professor Punyaslok Rath, University of Missouri-Columbia

• Denise Kennedy, President & CEO of DK Enterprises

• David Stevens, Managing Director of Tire Retread & Repair Information Bureau

• Erik Krogh, Vancouver Island University

• Dr Rachel Scholes, University of British Columbia

• Dilraj Surendran, Tokyo Metropolitan University

Sessions will cover:

• National 6PPD-Q mapping and vulnerability analysis

• Tyre wear particulate measurement

• High-throughput chemical analysis in urban waters

• Air quality impacts of non-tailpipe emissions

• Artificial turf crumb rubber transformation

• Retreading, recycling and the practical realities of circularity

Day one focuses on tyre chemistry, testing methodologies and infrastructure. Day two expands into air quality effects, formulation, end-of-life management and lifecycle circularity.

The structure reflects a simple principle: the tyre question cannot be solved in isolation. It sits at the intersection of materials science, toxicology, hydrology, air quality, regulation and industrial design.

Rather than approaching tyre emissions as a single-variable problem, the conference positions it as a systems challenge. Each session builds another layer of understanding, much like examining a tyre cross-section. The surface tells one story, but the compounds, interactions and downstream pathways reveal a much more complex picture.

Tyre Emissions & Sustainability USA is organised by Emissions Analytics, known for its independent testing and real-world data programs  . The conference series was created to provide a structured, evidence-based forum at a time when environmental debates are becoming increasingly politicised.

Founder and CEO Nick Molden commented:

“Environmental discussions around tyres are accelerating quickly. What matters now is the quality of evidence and the clarity of testing methods. Our goal is to create a space where primary research, regulatory thinking and industrial realities can be examined carefully and constructively.”

With the program confirmed and April approaching, registration is open for delegates wishing to attend in Irvine, CA on 22–23 April 2026  .

The event includes access to all presentations, electronic copies of materials, networking breaks and lunch and an evening cocktail reception.

Group discounts remain available.

About Emissions Analytics

Emissions Analytics is an independent global leader in real-world emissions testing and analysis. The organisation provides evidence-led insight across tyres, powertrains and fuels, supporting industry and policymakers with robust data to inform decision-making and regulation.

Off-Highway & Power Generation USA 2026 Programme Now Live as Industry Prepares to Meet in Indianapolis This May

The full programme for the 3rd Off-Highway & Power Generation USA 2026 conference is now live, confirming a comprehensive two-day agenda focused on energy-agnostic decarbonisation across non-road machinery and stationary power.

Taking place on 20–21 May 2026 at the Sheraton Indianapolis City Centre Hotel, the event will convene regulators, OEMs, fuel specialists, powertrain engineers and technology providers to examine what meaningful emissions reduction looks like in practice.

With May approaching, delegates can now review the confirmed speaker line-up and detailed session structure spanning ICE, electrification, renewable fuels and power generation technologies.

Off-highway machinery remains heavily reliant on diesel, yet alternatives are advancing rapidly. Electrification, hybridisation, biofuels and e-fuels are all progressing, each with its own technical, economic and lifecycle questions.

At the same time, power generation is under renewed scrutiny. The exponential growth in energy demand, particularly from data centres and AI infrastructure, has placed stationary engines and backup generation firmly in the spotlight.

The 2026 programme has been structured to reflect that reality. This is not a single-technology conference. It is a systems discussion about performance, durability, regulation and commercial viability.

Much like an off-highway duty cycle, the path to decarbonisation is rarely linear. It requires balancing load, terrain, fuel availability and regulatory pressure. The agenda is designed to explore those trade-offs openly.

Day One: Regulation, Powertrains and Electrification

The first day opens with a regulatory and market outlook, including:

• Kim Heroy-Rogalski, Chief, Mobile Source Regulatory Development Branch at California Air Resources Board

• Allen Schaeffer, Executive Director of Engine Technology Forum

• Dr Graham Conway, Director, Industrial Sustainability at Opportune LLP

Powertrain developments feature contributions from:

• Professor Dr Greg Shaver, Purdue University

• Dr Danan Dou, John Deere Power Systems

• Chris Sharp, Southwest Research Institute

Afternoon sessions move into abatement, ICE and electrification, with speakers from:

• Proventia

• Cambustion

• Volvo Construction Equipment

• Ymer Technology

• Convergent Science

Sessions will address topics including hydrogen combustion NOx variability, advanced exhaust aftertreatment, thermal management for electrification and simulation-led optimisation tools.

Day Two: Power Generation Under Pressure

The second day shifts focus to stationary power and decarbonisation.

Confirmed contributors include representatives from:

• Johnson Matthey

• Rolls-Royce Solutions America Inc.

• Cummins Inc.

• Dinex Emission Inc.

• EPRI

• Neste US

• Innospec Fuel Specialities

• Kaizen Clean Energy

Sessions will examine:

• The evolution of the stationary power market

• Emissions from gensets in data centre applications

• Emerging fuels and gas turbines

• Renewable diesel as an immediate carbon reduction pathway

• Dispatchable off-grid microgrids

• Catalyst technologies ready for future fuels

A concluding leaders’ panel will address a central question: how can the power generation industry make meaningful emissions reductions while meeting urgent customer demand?  

Off-Highway & Power Generation USA was launched to provide a neutral meeting place for non-road stakeholders at a time when energy debates are often polarised.

Organised by Emissions Analytics, an independent real-world emissions testing specialist, the conference reflects a clear principle: focus on measurable outcomes rather than rhetoric.

From Portable Emissions Measuring Systems for NRMM to laboratory fuels analysis, the company’s testing background informs the conference structure, ensuring discussions are grounded in data, comparability and practical implementation  .

Registration is now open.

With the full programme now confirmed and May fast approaching, registration is open for delegates wishing to attend in Indianapolis on 20–21 May 2026  .

The delegate pass includes:

• Access to all presentations

• Electronic copies of materials

• Refreshments throughout

• Evening networking reception

Group bookings are available.

About Emissions Analytics

Emissions Analytics is an independent global leader in real-world emissions testing and analysis. The organisation provides evidence-led insight across tyres, powertrains and fuels, supporting industry and policymakers with robust data to inform decision-making and regulation.

Tear down the sign!

The capacity to stop pretending

Every morning, this shopkeeper places a sign in his window: “Workers of the world unite.”  He doesn’t believe it, no-one does, but he places a sign anyway to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along.  And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persists – not through violence alone, but through participation of ordinary people in rituals they privately know to be false.

Mark Carney, prime minister of Canada, was quoting Czech dissident and subsequent Czech president Václav Havel in his special address at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2026. 

Since perhaps 1997 and the Kyoto Protocol we have arguably been “living within a lie,” as President Havel put it when referring to how the post-War Communist regime could sustain itself.  Not because climate change is unimportant, nor that other environmental challenges around air, water and soil pollution and biodiversity can be ignored, but because we collectively have been pursuing policies that we know are not working.  Most vexingly, everyone in power still clings to net zero, just as citizens are beginning to take their window signs down: …the old order is not coming back.

We can argue at length as to how severe the threat from climate change is – noting that none of the International Panel for Climate Change scenarios forecast planetary extinction – and whether electrification of vehicles or decarbonisation of the electricity grid through solar and wind are the optimal policy responses. That is not the point of this article. Emissions Analytics has long proposed, based on its real-world test data, that hybrid electric vehicles are the optimal solution for the immediate future, and there is no true route to decarbonisation without a very significant expansion of nuclear fission energy generation.

The deeper question is how so many current environmental policies are sustained when they are obviously not working. More specifically, how can environmental laws be maintained when they are perennially violated. It is perhaps no surprise, then, that citizens are increasingly discontent with their political systems.

What is increasingly clear is that, in 2026, for the world of environmental rules and emissions reduction, things have fundamentally changed. It is ironic that the individual calling this change towards “strategic autonomy” is a Canadian prime minister who has historically been a major proponent of global net zero policies.

He was personally responsible for embedding net zero into the core of financial policy and institutions, particularly through his leadership at the Bank of England and later as the UN Special Envoy for Climate Action and Finance. As Governor of the Bank of England, he helped reframe climate change as a systemic financial risk rather than a purely environmental issue, driving early work on climate stress testing, scenario analysis, and stronger expectations for climate-related disclosure across the banking and insurance sectors. In his UN role, he extended this agenda globally by mobilising private finance for the transition, including co-founding the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) at COP26, which brought together major financial institutions to align lending and investment with net-zero goals.

Yet, in January 2026, he is saying: Friends, it is time for companies and countries to take their signs down… We participated in the rituals, and we largely avoided calling out the gaps between rhetoric and reality.

While he was talking about the rupture in the rules-based order generally, net zero arguably forms part of that order, and so he might as well have been talking about net zero specifically. The fact is that the world is currently not close to meeting its obligations under international climate change treaties, particularly the Paris Agreement, which aims to limit warming to well below 2°C and ideally 1.5°C. While most countries have submitted climate plans (NDCs) and reporting systems are improving, the combined commitments remain far too weak, putting the world on track for roughly 2.3-2.9°C of warming this century rather than meeting the agreed targets. Emissions continue to rise in many regions, enforcement mechanisms are limited and global cooperation is weakening.

But this is not just a question of being off track on one, albeit important, international treaty. Not meeting environmental laws has become institutionalised, extending beyond climate change to other areas of environmental legislation such as air, water and chemicals. Just two examples are that most member states of the EU have failed fully to implement the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (Directive 2008/56/EC) that required Member States to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) of EU marine waters by 2020, and there is still persistent and widespread non-compliance with the 1991 Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC) that targeted reducing nitrate pollution from agriculture to protect water quality. In England, the Office for Environmental Protection, a watchdog that was set up in 2021, has concluded that the country is “largely off track” for seven out of its ten Environmental Improvement Plan goals for 2023, with the remaining three goals only “partially on track.” These goals cover biodiversity, air, water, chemicals and pesticides, resource wastage, climate change and biosecurity.

A legally binding environmental target is at risk of being little more than a rhetorical device if it is not supported by a clear enforcement mechanism. If governments can miss the target without penalties, if no institution is truly accountable for delivery, and if failure carries no concrete consequences, then the “binding” nature of the commitment becomes largely meaningless. In that sense, a target can exist in law while remaining effectively optional in practice.

Proponents often point to indirect forms of enforcement — judicial review, statutory duties, reporting requirements or oversight bodies — but these mechanisms frequently amount to weak substitutes for genuine compulsion. Courts can rarely force governments to achieve outcomes, only to revise plans or explain themselves, and transparency alone does not guarantee action. Too often, legally binding targets end up binding process rather than performance: governments are required to publish strategies, not to deliver results. Without clear sanctions or automatic regulatory triggers, the practical force of such targets remains doubtful.

You may ask why a government would not want to meet its own environmental target? Most likely, the true direct costs and indirect economic and social effects may have been underestimated, or that the government department or agency did not have the appropriate skills. Witness the current struggle to 95% decarbonise the UK electricity grid by 2030 – setting such a tight deadline doomed the government to have to overpay for infrastructure. We also must consider the possibility that there was never an intention to address to the target, but it was announced anyway for political gain.

Non-compliance is not cost-free. Assuming the target was socially desirable in the first place, any period of non-exceedance is sub-optimal. It also may punish organisations that have met legal requirements, creating a free-rider benefit for those who have not met the target – an unfairness. The act of having to defend non-compliances in the face of the judiciary or public opinion via campaign groups, takes up significant time and resources of ministers, officials and parliamentarians, which could be better spent.

What should we conclude from this? Is it that governments are just over-ambitious in setting environmental goals and poor at implementing policies to meet them? Or is this all just evidence of a deeper game, where power can be sustained despite little foundation by maintaining a collective delusion? Either way, it is easy to see when citizens in many countries are increasingly disillusioned with their governments.

What is the solution?  One side might bludgeon the other into submission.  Net zero as currently set up might win in the face of popular opposition.  Conversely, climate denial voices might harness popular discontent, and environment policies gutted as a result.  What may be a better outcome is to acknowledge citizens’ instincts, priorities and pressures and strike a fundamentally pragmatic balance between environmental and social damage.  Drop the dogma.  Drop the moralising.  Focus on real-world effects, realistic costs, deliverable plans, pragmatic compromises.  And deliver.  In doing so, trust can be rebuilt.

As a final thought, Mark Carney was perhaps the natural person to call an end to our collective delusion about the rules-based international order, as someone central in building the net zero edifice but who became prime minister of Canada, a country that pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol in 2012.  We have, as he rightly said: the capacity to stop pretending.

Tear down the sign!

Critical Mass Wins 2026 Independent Press Award

We are proud to share that Critical Mass: The One Thing You Need to Know About Green Cars has been named a 2026 Independent Press Award Winner. 

In an era where climate change dominates global discussion, Critical Mass sees Felix our CEO, Nick Molden and Felix Leach unpack the complexity of vehicle emissions with clarity and rigour. Building on insights from Felix’s previous work, Racing Toward Zero, the book tackles the often-confusing landscape of automotive pollution by asking a deceptively simple question: what single piece of information best captures the true environmental impact of cars? 

Written for a digital age awash with information but eluded of meaningful understanding, Critical Mass challenges oversimplified narratives around road transport and sustainability. Leach and Molden advocate for a more sophisticated, yet accessible perspective about emissions, examining the real-world impacts of different vehicle powertrains and moving beyond CO₂ alone to consider wider environmental and societal effects. 

The Independent Press Award recognises excellence in independent publishing and honours books that demonstrate strong editorial quality, originality, and relevance. Being selected as a 2026 winner reflects the growing importance of transparent, factual analysis in climate and mobility discussions. 

At Emissions Analytics, our work has always focused on delivering robust, independent data to inform policymakers, industry leaders and the public. This award reinforces the value of applying the same rigorous approach beyond research and into public-facing dialogue. 

We would like to thank the Independent Press Award judges, Gabrielle Olczak from IPA, Sherry Nigam and SAE International for your support as publishers, our readers and everyone who has engaged with the book since its publication. 

Find the full award listing here: 
https://www.independentpressaward.com/2026-winners/9781468608212 

Tyre Emissions & Sustainability USA 2026 agenda nears completion as ticket sales open

Industry leaders set to convene for critical discussions on tyre wear, regulation and real world emissions.

Emissions Analytics is proud to announce that the agenda for Tyre Emissions & Sustainability USA 2026 is now close to finalisation, with tickets officially available for purchase.

The conference will bring together regulators, OEMs, tyre manufacturers, material scientists and researchers to address one of the fastest-moving areas in transport sustainability. As non-exhaust emissions move firmly into the regulatory spotlight, tyre wear has become a defining challenge for the industry, with implications for air quality, environmental impact and vehicle design.

With the programme now largely confirmed, attendees can expect a technically rigorous agenda shaped around real-world data, regulatory direction and practical engineering pathways. Sessions will explore tyre wear particle emissions, test methods and measurement, material innovation, environmental impact, and how emerging standards are likely to shape future tyre and vehicle development.

The USA event builds on the established Tyre Emissions & Sustainability conference series, known for cutting through theory and focusing on evidence-based insight. The near-final agenda reflects growing industry urgency, with speakers contributing perspectives from across policy, research and commercial application.

A major highlight of Tyre Emissions & Sustainability USA 2026 will be the exclusive first reveal of Emissions Analytics’ independent test results for the Michelin Primacy 5 tyre, selected by public vote, with findings presented live at the conference and not released elsewhere until after the European event.

Tickets are now on sale, with early booking recommended as interest continues to build across the North American market. Early bird pricing is now available for a limited time, offering discounted rates for those booking in advance, with this discount ending on February 7, 2026.

Further details on the agenda, speakers and registration can be found here.

About Emissions Analytics

Emissions Analytics is an independent global leader in real-world emissions testing and analysis. The organisation provides evidence-led insight across tyres, powertrains and fuels, supporting industry and policymakers with robust data to inform decision-making and regulation.