The proposed regulation on the ‘Euro 7’ standard elicited mixed reactions from MEPs and interest groups on Thursday 10 November, with environmentalists and environmental organisations regretting the European Commission’s lack of ambition, and the industry questioning the cost-benefit ratio of the proposed measures.
Green MEP and chair of the Transport and Tourism Committee (TRAN) Karima Delli (Greens/EFA, French) was very critical of the text. “Seven years after the ‘Dieselgate’ scandal, the European Commission had the opportunity to put forward an ambitious proposal with the ‘Euro 7’ standard for road transport vehicle emissions. It is clear that the institution has not lived up to the health challenges”, she said. The MEP is regretful of the fact that the emission thresholds remain virtually unchanged from the text on the ‘Euro 6’ standard (see EUROPE 13061/14).
On the contrary, Peter Liese (EPP, German), his group’s spokesperson on environmental issues, said he was “extremely happy” that “the European Commission has not taken into account the harmful and over-ambitious demands of the Greens and The Left within the European Parliament”, instead welcoming a proposal that was “much more realistic than expected”. Like the arguments put forward by the European Commission, he emphasised the importance of not “overloading” European industries and car users. He added that air quality in Europe had improved greatly.
The same differences were reflected between environmental NGOs and the automotive industry lobbies. Transport & Environment, for example, criticised the proposals as “so weak, the auto industry might have drafted them themselves”. In the opinion of the environmental organisation, the European Commission has not taken into account the latest technological developments designed to limit emissions of particulate matter. The European institution maintains a conformity factor below 0° Celsius and foresees a maximum durability of 8 years for light vehicles, whereas the average life of a European car is almost 12 years.
The industry, for its part, has shown limited enthusiasm. ACEA, the European organisation representing the major players in the automotive industry, has been somewhat perplexing in its reaction to the text. The European Commission's proposal is certainly “constructive”, ACEA emphasised, but “it heavily increases the cost of vehicles” for an “environmental benefit (...) [that] is very limited”.
CLEPA, the European organisation that defends the interests of automotive suppliers, has noted, on the contrary, the renewed ambition on the part of the European Commission. However, CLEPA will specifically ensure that the position adopted by the equipment industry is heard and taken into account in the delegated and implementing acts adopted by the European Commission in order to implement the Regulation. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)