The rise in fuels reveals our weaknesses

The current international context, marked by instability derived from the conflict in Middle East once again places energy at the center of the economic conversation. Not so much for its immediate impact — for now, we do not see signs that mark a change in the market trend, which stands at a cumulative growth of 7.4% in the first quarter — but for what it reveals each time this type of tension occurs: the structural vulnerability of our mobility model.

Because, beyond geopolitics, each rise in fuel prices activates a known mechanism, but no less worrying for that. A mechanism that almost automatically transfers the increase in costs to citizens and companies, and does so, moreover, in an unequal way.

In Spain, that inequality has a clear origin: the age of the vehicle fleet. With an average age of 14.6 years, our country maintains a very large base of less efficient vehicles, with higher consumption and less capacity to adapt to changes in the energy environment. This means that the same fuel price increase does not impact all drivers equally. It impacts more, and with greater intensity, those who use older vehicles.

We are not facing an abstract impact, but rather a direct transfer of income that is concentrated precisely on those who have the least room to absorb it

If that scenario of high prices is prolonged over time, the aggregate effect ceases to be cyclical and becomes a first-order economic problem. According to our estimates, vehicles over 10 years old would account for nearly 4 billion euros in annual refueling cost overruns, compared to about 1.3 billion in newer vehicles. The difference is not small, and neither is what it reveals.

Behind that figure there is a very concrete reality: families who see their monthly expenses increase without room to maneuver, self-employed workers who absorb additional costs in their daily activity, and small businesses that operate with less capacity to compete. We are not facing an abstract impact, but a direct transfer of income that is concentrated precisely on those who have the least room to assume it.

The problem, therefore, is that such an important volume of vehicles that consume more, are less efficient and -let's not forget- more unsafe because they do not have driving aids that are now essential, turns any episode of energy tension into a systemic impact on the everyday economy. In other words, each energy crisis not only makes mobility more expensive, but also amplifies an existing weakness.

From here, it is advisable to introduce an element that often remains outside public debate: the reality of the consumer themselves. Not all families can afford the leap to an electrified vehicle today, for different reasons (economic capacity, type of use they make of the vehicle, areas with little charging infrastructure...). And that forces the transition to be approached from a realistic perspective, where technological neutrality is not a theoretical principle, but an effective tool.

Because as we advance in electrification, there are solutions that allow immediate action on the problem. Latest generation combustion vehicles represent a very significant leap in efficiency compared to the current fleet. They consume less, emit less, and, in a context of rising fuel prices, directly reduce the cost of use for the citizen. And of course, they are much safer than any vehicle over 10 years old. All this, in a country that aims to remain a European and world leader in automobile production.

However, these options do not always have homogeneous support throughout the territory and in the political sphere, which limits their capacity to act as a transitional solution. And that is where the debate on the renewal of the fleet acquires a broader dimension: it is not just about where we are going, but about how we help the citizen while we get there.

When from the sector we insist on the need to renew the fleet, in addition to the benefits in environmental and road safety terms, we also do it from the perspective of economic efficiency, consumer protection, and competitiveness. A more modern fleet not only reduces emissions; it reduces usage costs, improves safety, and, above all, limits the country's exposure to this type of external shocks.

In this regard, the regional renewal and scrapping plans that have been developing at the regional level since January 2024, have shown that, when measures are agile and well-designed, citizens are supported in that transition and the automotive value chain also responds. But they also show that the scale of the problem demands a country-wide response. The renewal of the fleet cannot depend solely on territorial efforts, however valuable they may be. It needs continuity, stability, and a coherent national strategy.

The Sustainable Mobility Law establishes the government's obligation to implement a national renewal plan, complementary to those that may be established to promote electrification. That obligation - unequivocal in the wording of additional provision no. 21 - established a deadline of three months, which ended in March of this year. We are late, but the opportunity is there and we must not miss it.

Deepen in the right direction

Therefore, recent measures, such as the promotion of the Plan Auto+ or tax incentives linked to electrification, are going in the right direction. But the challenge requires something more. It requires a stable framework over time that allows citizens and companies to make decisions with certainty, and that turns the renewal of the fleet into a sustained policy over time. That is why it is time to have a plan to promote electrification (Plan Auto +), and to have a complementary renewal plan for the rest of the technologies. Electrification is the key, the heart of technological neutrality, but it must be supported by the rest of the energies, because that is what will guarantee that in this transitional period, no one is left out, nor relegated from exercising the right (because we are talking about a social right) to mobility.

And faced with that reality, the response cannot be reactive. It has to be structural. A country with a younger workforce is a more efficient, more competitive, and less vulnerable country. And that, probably, is one of the clearest lessons that each new increase in fuel prices leaves us.