Members of the European Parliament’s Transport Committee debated on Tuesday 19 April the European Commission’s proposal for a regulation on the deployment of infrastructure for alternative fuels (AFIR) (see EUROPE 12933/5).
“The question of scope should not be a major problem. A debate will be needed on definitions, particularly in relation to fuels or batteries. As far as charging infrastructure is concerned, I think we can find a solution, even if it will certainly not satisfy everyone 100%”, warned rapporteur Ismail Ertug (S&D, Germany).
Other differences between the groups were apparent from the 1,175 or so amendments tabled. “On liquefied natural gas, it could be difficult”, Mr Ertug said, pointing out that the groups’ positions also differed on the deployment of alternative fuel infrastructure for aircraft and on the overall approach advocated by the European Commission.
While a large majority of MEPs welcomed the rapporteur’s work, some, such as Jens Gieseke (EPP, Germany) and Anna Deparnay (Greens/EFA, Germany), insisted on the need for easy access to charging systems for vehicles.
In addition, attention was also drawn to the importance of taking into account the costs of implementing the future regulation.
“The division between the market and government action is not defined, although this affects investment. It is a huge problem that is not at all addressed and discussed”, said Dominique Riquet (Renew Europe, France).
Furthermore, Mr Riquet expressed his concern about access to recharging infrastructure. “There will be a statutory inequality of access to electricity, this will be predominant. There will be a huge difference between people who have a car park or a garage and those who do not, who will be dependent on public infrastructure”, he added.
Differences on potential exemptions
Other MEPs, such as Carlo Fidanza (ECR, Italy), insisted on “not moving from one energy dependency to another”, also regretting the overall lack of “technological neutrality” in Mr Ertug’s text.
Anna Deparnay, for her part, said that the role of the Transport Committee was not so much “to decide on the technologies to be used”, but to focus on “ensuring a European network”.
The German Greens/EFA member also stressed the importance of thinking about pricing methods and transparency. The role that rail could play in decarbonising transport was also raised by Mrs Deparnay, who called on all players in the sector to play an active part.
The issue of exemptions for the deployment of infrastructure in certain less densely populated or island geographical areas was also addressed.
On this point, some groups are arguing for potential full exemptions. Caroline de Nagtegaal (Renew Europe, Netherlands), on the other hand, called for “very clear rules so as not to compromise the objective of the text”.
The Greens/EFA group also tabled several amendments to give an advisory role to the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) coordinators and to appoint a national coordinator for alternative fuel infrastructure to oversee the implementation of the regulation. (Original version in French by Thomas Mangin)