The third talk in the clubhouse series “SmartMobility” took place on Thursday, June 10th, 2021, in which we (lecturers, participants, and partners from our CAS program “Smart Mobility Management driven by Smart Cities & Smart Data”) discussed current issues in the mobility industry and answer questions from our listeners.

The central question of this third talk was:

“How is London shaping future mobility?”

with …

➡️ Catrin Braun | SMART City Expert | Deutsche Telekom

➡️ Dr. Philipp Rode | London School of Economics/Executive Director LSE Cities | Lecturer at CAS «Smart Mobility Management«

➡️ Lukas Neckermann | COO Splyt | Lecturer at CAS «Smart Mobility Management«


▶️ How has your personal mobility behavior changed since you’ve been in London? In London, like in many cities, it is incredibly expensive to utilize an automobile as the main form of transportation. While there are still some times in which driving can be enjoyable, utilizing it as a main form of transportation while living in a city makes little financial sense when compared to the other options offered such as public transport and ride sharing.

▶️ What was the initial moment in which London started to think about shaping the future of mobility?
One of the most significant landmark events that started the discussion around the future of mobility in London was the release of the report “Traffic in Towns,” in which Sir Colin Buchanan outlined the potential damages caused by a reliance on the motor car by transportation, one of which being the disruption of the overall city structure of London. Another would be the discussion around clean air, a concern that continues to be one of the top priorities for people living in London and something that London has tried to alleviate through means such as congestion charge zones.

▶️ Which kinds of concepts for Start-ups work in London?
There is a large innovation culture in London that relies heavily on the freedom of data in terms of land transportation that is offered through organizations such as Transport for London. Apps such as Citymapper rely on this data to ensure that users can get from point A to point B as easily as possible.

▶️ Is there anything that doesn’t work in London that other cities can learn from?
One peculiarity about London that makes experimentation and implementation of different progressive mobility ideas is the lack of consistency and agreement between the different people and boroughs within London. For example, if one would like to drive a rentable electric scooter in one borough, they may not be able to drive it within another. This lack of agreement leads to many failed projects and experimentation such as spreading congestion charging, pop-up bike lanes, and low traffic neighborhoods.

▶️ If you were the mayor of London, what would you change and how? One aspect is London’s role as a leader for innovation for mega cities. London could fulfill this role by following through with more progressive initiatives such as low-traffic neighborhoods, low emission zones, and implementing more pedestrian zones such as superblocks. Another aspect would be focusing on the funding of the future of mobility, especially with respect to the effects of a change from gas-powered to electric-powered mobility. 

“What will mobility in London look like in 2035?”

“Fewer lanes for automobiles, more electric buses, more autonomous mobility, and more integration of apps” (Lukas Neckermann)

“Calmer, slower and better flowing” (Dr. Philipp Rode)

” …. and greener and more sustainable” (Catrin Braun)

London provides an excellent example of not only what cities are currently doing to progress mobility, but also of what mobility in cities will look like in the future. Through the many methods of …
– reducing the reliance on automobiles,
– integrating accessible mobility, and
– implementing more sustainable means of transportation,
The areas that are currently taken up by automobile lanes can be turned into public spaces, allowing for a revitalization of many areas within the city. This idea of revitalization is one that we can expect from cities all around the world.



Efficiency and CO2 emission analysis of Internal Combustion Engines (ICE) and Electric Vehicles (EV)

This blog is an addition to a study commissioned by the Austrian Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology and the Federation of the Austrian economy [1]. We want to stress the significance of transparent information regarding the vehicles efficiency and the environmental footprint.

In Austria, an Electric Vehicle (EV) needs to drive 80.000km to have lower CO2 emissions as an Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) due to the electricity mix of the country. In countries with an electricity production depending heavily on coal like Poland and China, the EVs will always have higher CO2 emissions than an ICE. To provide you a better overview a summary of the essential drivetrain efficiency and CO2 emissions is provided.

Analysing various fuel productions and drivetrains:

For an objective analysis of the overall efficiency of a drivetrain, the entire energy chain must be examined. At the moment this is called well-to-wheel analysis, which investigates the used energy and the efficiency from the energy source to the wheel. The overall efficiency is strongly influenced by energy production. The well-to-tank analysis provides information on the efficiency of energy generation (how much energy is lost during e. g. electric power generation). The tank-to-wheel analyses refer to the used energy in vehicles from the tank system to the road.

Figure 1.1 explains the well-to-wheel analysis with the subcategories well-to-tank and tank-to-wheel.

Figure 1.1: Conceptual illustration of Well-to-Wheel analyses for efficiency and CO2 emissions (Source: Own illustration based on [2])

Well-to-tank analysis:

Figure 1.2 gives an overview of the efficiency in energy production of fuels. Minimum or fixed values are displayed in violet. Values that are dependent on the efficiency of the used production method are striped violet. Values for the EU electricity mix are marked in blue and the values for the Austrian electricity mix are marked in red.

With little effort raw natural gas is produced by drying and desulphurisation at efficiencies around 90%. The production and supply of fossil fuels, such as petrol and diesel, are also produced at high efficiencies of up to 85%. Production efficiency of bio-fuels gaseous is strongly dependent on the raw material and the processing method, typical efficiencies between 15 and 50%. Hydrogen can be produced at efficiencies of between 10 and 80%, both in the production from methane and in the production with electrolysis, values of up to 80% can be achieved. The generation of electricity takes place between 15 and 90% efficiency.

Figure 1.2: Well-to-Tank analysis of the efficiency (Source: Own illustration based on [3])

Figure 1.3 shows the CO2 emissions of the well-to-tank analysis. The production of fossil fuels cause emissions of approximately 50 g CO2/kWh for petrol and diesel. Biogenic fuels are often described as CO2-neutral, because of the collected CO2 due to photosynthesis during the growth process of the plants. However, depending on the raw material used and the manufacturing process, a broad spectrum of greenhouse gas emissions is produced. Some production methods produce higher CO2 emissions than fossil fuels and some produce fewer greenhouse gases than the plant collects through photosynthesis. For electricity, the values lie between 15 g CO2/kWh when generated from wind energy and over 1000 g CO2/kWh from lignite production. With the EU electricity mix 340 g CO2/kWh are produced. If hydrogen is produced by electrolysis, the emission loads can vary from 21 g CO2/kWh to 1400 g CO2/kWh. The value for the European electricity mix is approximately 425 g CO2/kWh and for the Austrian electricity mix 129 g CO2/kWh.

Figure 1.3: Well-to-Tank analysis of CO2 emissions (Source: Own illustration based on [3])

Tank-to-Wheel efficiencies and CO2 emissions

Despite these developments, the combustion engine is not very efficient compared to alternative propulsion technologies. Tank-to-wheel analyses refer to the used energy in vehicles from the tank system to the road. The petrol engine can achieve an efficiency of up to 35% at the best point, and an average of 20% in a driving mode according to the NEDC driving cycle. The diesel engine reaches approx. 45% at its best point and approx. 28% in a driving mode according to the NEDC driving cycle.

The battery-powered electric vehicle can achieve an efficiency of more than 85% at the best point, in driving mode (NEDC driving cycle) an average of 60 – 75% is achieved. The fuel cell vehicle can achieve an efficiency of more than 65% at its best point, in transient driving mode (NEDC driving cycle) an average of 40-55% is achieved.

Figure 1.4: Tank-to-Wheel analysis of CO2 emissions of different vehicle segments and drivetrains (Source: Own illustration based on [3])

The emissions in g CO2 per km tested on the NEFZ cycle for different vehicle segments (B/small cars, C/medium cars, F/luxury cars) and drive trains is shown in Figure 1.4. Vehicles with battery-powered electric motors or hydrogen-powered FCEV as well as hydrogen-powered combustion engines are CO2-free in operation.

Well-to-Wheel efficiencies and CO2 emissions

For an objective analysis of the overall efficiency of a drivetrain concept, the entire energy chain must be examined. This is called well-to-wheel analysis, which investigates the used energy and the efficiency from the energy source to the wheel. The overall efficiency is strongly influenced by energy production. For petrol engines, the Well-to-Wheel efficiency drops and reaches between 14% and 20%. The diesel engine still achieves 21% to 26% overall efficiency.

With BEVs, the well-to-wheel efficiency drops to approx. 32% with the EU electricity mix. With the Austrian electricity mix, an overall efficiency of approx. 50% is possible. With FCEV, the well-to-wheel efficiency drops to approx. 22% due to the high energy consumption with the EU electricity mix. With the Austrian electricity mix, an overall efficiency of approx. 34% is possible. This corresponds to a higher degree of efficiency than with combustion engines.

Figure 1.5: Well-to-Wheel analysis of CO2 emissions of different vehicle segments and drivetrains (Source: Own illustration based on [3])

For the determination of the total CO2 emissions, the values of the well-to-tank and tank-to-wheel are summed up for the well-to-wheel analysis, shown in Figure 1.5. The range of the BEV reaches from a CO2 free operation with energy from renewable energy sources to electricity produced with lignite. For FCEV and internal combustion engines the range is between electrolysis from renewable electricity to lignite produced electricity. The Austrian Energy mix is shown with red bars and the EU energy mix is marked with the blue bars.

With the Well-to-Wheel analysis it is possible to assess the efficiency of drivetrains and the energy transport/production. The analysis above was made with the NEDC test cycle. It is to be expected that with the new WLTP test cycle the CO2 emissions will increase about 20%. Another disadvantage is: the analysis gives no information about the raw material production (steel, aluminium, …), the production of the vehicle itself, the recycling and the disposal of the vehicle. An analysis considering the use phase, the energy supply and the product life cycle is called Cradle-to-Grave analysis. Only with the Cradle-to-Grave analysis the vehicles can be compared objectively and as a whole. The other methods will lead to insecure customers and false information.

What can be seen very clearly with the Well-to-Wheel analysis is that the electrification of the drivetrain requires an energy revolution towards sustainable energy production.

Authors: Dr. Hans-Peter Kleebinder, Michael Semmer


[1] H.-P. Dr. Kleebinder, A. Dr. Kleissner, and M. Semmer, “Auf der Siegerstraße bleiben! Automotive Cluster der Zukunft bauen.,” Wien, Nov. 2019.

[2] Mazda, MAZDA: Aiming to Make Cars that are Sustainable with the Earth and Society. [Online] Available: Accessed on: Nov. 06 2019.

[3] M. Klell, H. Eichlseder, and A. Trattner, Wasserstoff in der Fahrzeugtechnik: Erzeugung, Speicherung, Anwendung, 4th ed. Wiesbaden: Springer Vieweg, 2018.

Thumbnail by Petovarga –

This was the question asked by the Münchner Kreis in Potsdam at the two-day symposium “Mobility Systems in the Digital Transition” at the end of March 2019. In workshops and presentations, experts from science and practice presented and discussed the following questions:

  1. How is the mobility value chain changing?
  2. What does service centring mean for the future mobility ecosystem #SMARTMobility and #SMARTCities?
  3. How is Europe preparing for the #SMARTMobility offensive from China and America?

The Munich Circle is a non-profit registered association, which has been dealing with questions of technology, society, economy and regulation in the field of information and telecommunication technologies as well as media since 1974. He wants to give people in leading positions guidance in the digital transformation.

The current Chairman of the Executive Board is Prof. Dr. Michael Dowling.

I was a participant on behalf of the Bundesverband eMobilität BEM e.V. as their scientific advisory board and representative for Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) and China. Representatives of all affected sectors were represented, only the automotive industry shone by absence and was missing as an important technical and power promoter of our future mobility systems.

Diagnose Deutschland: Mobilitätsinfarkt

Mobility is one of the most urgent social challenges of the 21st century and the foundation of our global economy. This makes it a driver of growth and prosperity. The freedom to move ourselves and goods across national borders and continents is an important pillar of our quality of life and livelihoods, which in turn are strongly influenced by changes in our climate. Professor Andreas Herman, Director of the Customer Insights Institute at the University of St. Gallen, even declared mobility to be a human right. On our own doorstep in Germany, we are currently experiencing a mobility infarction: our mobility behaviour on the roads, railways and in the air is exceeding capacity limits, is very expensive and marked by the loss of time due to traffic jams, air pollution and extremely high land consumption in the cities.

Figure 1: Dr. Mara Cole, Director Connected Mobility at Zentrum Digitalisierung Bayern and Dr. Nico Grove, CEO Institut für Infrastructure Economics & Management, summarize the results of the workshops.

Wem gehört der Lebensraum Stadt?

On average, 50% of urban public spaces in European metropolises are dedicated to cars, in Los Angeles the figure is 70%. The cityscape is characterised by streets and car parks and this automatically leads to more traffic. Our infrastructure has grown with the increasing volume of traffic – instead of building human cities, car-friendly cities have been built since the 1950s. The consequences range from polluted air to congestion columns in almost all large and small cities. Last year, air pollution caused by diesel exhaust gases was higher than permitted in 57 German cities. Initial measures have led to compliance with the EU limit value for harmful nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in eight cities. (Source)

Does it have to be like this? The answer is no when Oliver Bertram, architect, urban planner and founder of Wideshot Design GmbH in Vienna, presents his vision of the future. He radically focuses on people and their needs. He demands a higher quality of life, more open spaces, more green space, areas for temporary use, safe streets and residential quarters. Today, vehicles in Vienna are in motion for about 1 hour and spend 23 hours in parking areas. In the future, with #SmartMobility and #SMARTCity solutions, this relationship can be reversed. So 1 hour standstill and 23 hours the vehicle should be in motion. According to his estimation, 60-80% of all parking spaces become obsolete and grey parking spaces could turn into green meeting zones:

Figure 2: Parking area in Vienna             Figure 3: Simulation (

According to the calculations of the German Federal Ministry of Economics, 50% of our value added in Germany is directly and indirectly dependent on the automobile. This could change radically in the coming years: Platforms from the USA, batteries from Asia and “Robotaxis” will redefine the value chain of the mobility of people and goods using low-cost standard hardware.

There’s a lot at stake. If the digital platform for autonomous driving with artificial intelligence for the automobile of the future were to come from the USA and the battery from Asia, Germany and Europe would have lost more than 50 percent of the value added in this area. The associated effects went far beyond the automotive industry. This problem therefore affects not only the companies in the sector, but all economic and government players equally.

Excerpt nationale Industriestrategie 2030, BMWi

Mobility-as-a-Service based on a traffic management system

All this leads to a transformation of today’s motorised private transport (MIV) and to an optimised Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) system. The experts agreed that a comprehensive “traffic management system” (VMS) was needed as a foundation. This controls all traffic according to demand and integrates all other means of transport. An integrated VMS enables mobility services on the one hand and considers our data protection in Europe as a very specific challenge on the other.

Prof. Florian Matthes, Head of the Chair for Software Engineering of Operational Information Systems at the Technical University of Munich, conducted a study in the Munich region in 2018 and showed that the various modes of transport and sectors have little or no willingness to use a common platform. The trend is towards many different individual solutions, with each provider optimizing its own goals for itself.

It remains to be seen whether the customer will accept this. For my part, I don’t want to use more than two dozen different platforms/app services, as I currently do, but a provider who is planning my trip from Munich to Berlin, for example. This platform should (m)suggest an ideal combination of public transport, bicycles, scooters and vehicles. Individually based on my mobility behaviour and my mobility data from the past.

#SmartMobility needs this integrated traffic management for this. According to the Treaty of Rome, the EU has a duty to design this new #SMARTMobility in such a way that on the one hand competition remains, on the other hand mobility in the EU is realized barrier-free and European data protection regulations are observed. Thus, uniform EU licensing conditions and communication standards for VMS and autonomous driving will be required – from #SmartData as a basis and control option with regard to planning but also flexible utilization to real-time coordination between different means of transport. Although these new technologies, mobility as a service and also autonomous mobility, are “ante portas”, no activity of this kind has become known at European level, according to the lawyer Dr. Lang, partner at the law firm Bird&Bird. His proposal: The traffic management system is part of the infrastructure and thus becomes a public task. Private and public companies, including start-ups, can acquire licenses under conditions to be determined and gain access to the VMS by providing the traffic data in anonymous form. Blockchain technology could serve as a basis here in the future. The billing between mobility platforms and means of transport, the coordination and the exchange of data will thus be made possible securely and anonymously. (Source)

#SmartMobility offensive from America and China

Is it possible to find an overall European solution? Will there be a solution in Germany or only individual solutions from providers and municipalities? Does our policy oversleep the trend and leave the field to the technology giants and market leaders from America and China? Questions to which we must now find an answer.

Europe can learn from China and America. Both countries are far ahead of us in mobility issues and the first #SmartMobility solutions have already been successfully implemented. Both countries couldn’t be more different in their approaches

The approach in the USA is:

Business models are developed based on the user and his needs. These are integrated into an overall system without a clearly understood effect – according to purely market economy guidelines.

The Chinese approach is:

A solution is developed by the government for the entire country according to central planning and is then made as usable as possible for the travellers – quasi planned economy specifications.

#SmartMobility made in Europe?!

Claudia Plattner from Deutsche Bahn and Michael Hanke from Detecon AG (Munich) dealt with this topic. Europe could unite the best of both systems. An implementation plan that has been consistently thought through after clear formulation of objectives and whose solution elements have already been developed with and for the travellers. Europe can and should find its own way here, taking into account our social values and principles, such as the protection of privacy. Another way of dealing with data protection is the optional and transparent provision of personal data against added value, such as the planning and implementation of individual mobility needs.

The race for the supremacy of #SMARTMobility solutions, which will be strongly characterized by autonomous, secure, sustainable and intelligent mobility, has begun. We should adopt a credo from the USA and China: “Done is better than perfect”. The expertise, networks and think tanks (including Fraunhofer, Max Plank, Aurora, BEM e.V., Münchner Kreis) are available in Germany. The country that invented the automobile and the railways should now actively drive the mobility revolution forward and assume a leading role again.

On May 16, 2018, the University of Applied Sciences Fresenius Munich presented and discussed the topic “Designing Digital Cities” for the first time together with the Academy for Fashion and Design AMD at the Zukunfts Forum (Future Forum) 2018:

  1. How do we live and move in the future?
  2. Which technologies will become important and what does this mean for people?
  3. How does #NewMobility affect our quality of life?

Munich can look to the future, but other cities are currently faster

In the fully occupied Audimax, curator and presenter Dr. Hans-Peter Kleebinder greeted the audience and three global experts from the metropolises of London, Shanghai and Copenhagen with a strong personal connection to Munich with the following question:

What must happen that Munich, as the epicenter of the mobility industry, once again experiences a similar modernization push as it did last in 1972 at the Olympics?  

What are the premises and possible solutions for this?  

Munich has already shown convincingly how to cope with the future: In the only six years from 1966 to 1972, the city made itself fit for its 1972 Olympic Games and catapulted itself forward by a whole generation span with the infrastructure created for this purpose.

Car traffic shapes our cities

Our cities today are infrastructure built around the automobile. The basis for this is the 1920 Athens Charter, which postulated the separation of living, producing and shopping as the basis for global urbanization. This flood of cars has taken over the cities through urban highways and expressways. Almost all other available areas were diverted for parking traffic. In major German cities, traffic and parking space account for around 40 percent of the total urban area, in Los Angeles 80 percent. Nevertheless, people in cars are by no means always mobile. In Beijing, the Chinese capital, people spend 75 minutes a day, well over an hour in traffic jams; that’s about one working day a week. In Los Angeles, motorists spend more than 100 hours a year in traffic jams, in New York over 90, in Munich over 50, in Hamburg, Berlin and Stuttgart 44, in Cologne and the Ruhr 40 – in other words, more than one working week a year even there.

Urbanization as a driver of traffic congestion and air pollution

Contemporary and sustainable quality of life looks different. Once upon a time, the separation of functions in cities should serve, among other things, to improve air quality in residential areas. Today, road traffic pollutes the air everywhere in cities massively. Just one example: In Paris, air quality is the top priority issue for the population;47 percent of respondents cite it first, followed by housing (46 percent) and education (37 percent). Anyone who wants to improve our quality of life must move from outdated auto-centered mobility to “human-centered” #NEWMobility, a new form of mobility that does not reduce voluntary mobility and requires multimodal transport services, i.e. choices between sufficiently short footpaths, sufficiently safe cycle paths, sufficiently frequent buses and trains, and easy transfer options.

  • Collective taxi (in Dubai, electronically linked pods of the start-up NEXT are on the move),
  • car sharing (1.7 million people in Germany used it in 2017) and
  • ride sharing (BlaBlaCar as the EU market leader with 55 million rides in 2017).

A basic requirement of this multi- and intermodal #NEWMobility is its availability, another is its networking. In London, this is done by the Citymapper app and creates transparency about the available means of transport for the mobility route preferred by the individual situation and person. One solution is an app on your smartphone or Smartwatch as a personal assistant for the organisation of individual mobility needs – the travel agency for every route from A to B in your jacket pocket, which individualizes and anticipates and learns to reserve, book and bill for us.  

These possible premises and concrete solutions of one of the climate-neutral, intermodal and networked #NEWMobility outlined the “Future Forum 2018: Designing Digital Cities” of the Fresenius University of Applied Sciences on 16 May 2018 in Munich.

Solutions from Copenhagen, Shanghai and London

Jon Pers, Head of Innovation at the Danish Innovation Center in Munich, presented the example of Copenhagen: The city has to decide what it spends money on: whether for pedestrians, cyclists or the car. In the Danish capital, local politics has given priority to sustainability, liveability and technology, with cycling being given priority 1. The result: 45 percent of commuters come to work or school by bicycle.

Dr. Rainer Daude, responsible for new mobility concepts at the BMW Group, presented “Vision E³ Way”, an innovative solution approach for megacities. E³ stands for “elevated, electric, efficient” – the characteristic features of the idea, which was developed in and for Shanghai: a modular, largely roofed and thus comfortable and safe elevated road over the existing city highways as a model for electrified pedelecs, scooters and motorcycles. The speed of these vehicles will be limited to 25 km/h and electronically controlled – with free driving on intersection-free routes. Will there be robot routes in the future according to this model, lanes for self-propelled cars, alongside car, pedestrian, bicycle and bus lanes?  Munich, as the Future Forum showed, with its mobility-oriented hardware and software companies is predestined for #NEWMobility as a model city and global #NEWMobility hub:

  • Traditional mobility companies such as BMW and MAN and within a radius of only 245 kilometres Mercedes, Porsche and Audi, new mobility offers such as FLIXBUS/Flixmobility, Clunno but also new mobility providers Lilium Aviation, Volocopter, the TU project Hyperloop and
  • new players on the market such as Tesla, Sono Motors, Byton and Faraday and the EU Mobility Cluster of TUM.

So far, however, other cities and metropolises such as Singapore, Dubai, Paris and London have outstripped the Bavarian metropolis.

The author and consultant for #NEWMobility, Lukas Neckermann, who grew up in the USA and works in London and Munich, was not surprised. The more traditional mobility providers, especially automobile manufacturers, are rooted in a location, the more the question of how their jobs can also be preserved in #NEWMobility counts. Neckermann calculated ahead: Private cars, which are usually only used in the morning and evening on the way to and from work, stand around 95 percent of the day unused. In Car-Sharing, cars are used intelligently six times more often than a private car several times a day. If everyone were to use Car-Sharing services and if flexible working hours allowed this, the demand for new private cars could be reduced to one-sixth – a blessing for cities plagued by cars, but an existential problem for car manufacturers. Even if they can cope with climate change with electric cars as a necessary (transitional) solution. Digitization and #NEWMobility will transform the image of our cities

As the discussion moderated by Dr. Hans-Peter Kleebinder at the Future Forum showed, #NEWMobility has not only friends, but also natural opponents. Nevertheless, it must and will come and give answers to the questions:

  • Will our city still look like a city in the future? 
  • Will our car still look like a car in the future?

The digital revolution offers new approaches, solutions and design possibilities for improving our quality of life for a better and more sustainable future for us and our future generations.