On Thursday 4 December, European transport ministers adopted their negotiating position (‘General approach’) concerning the revised directive on weights and dimensions of heavy-duty vehicles. However, four Member States and the European Commission have expressed reservations.
The EU Council agreed that zero-emission vehicles should be eligible for a weight bonus greater than the technology’s weight. Six-axle electric vehicles would benefit from a four-tonne allowance and five-axle vehicles from a two-tonne allowance. The compromise also allows for two clean tonnes, so if the battery weighs one tonne, it would be possible to load an extra tonne. This distinction should prevent damage to infrastructure, which was a red line for many Member States. An additional length of 0.9 m would be permitted for these vehicles.
Germany supported the compromise, but said in a statement that it lacked a European approach for vehicles longer than 17.88 metres. However, Portugal and Spain did not support the proposal due to the lack of harmonisation at European level, which would not allow for a level playing field for carriers. “We believe that Member States can increase the weight up to 44 tonnes, the maximum weight”, regretted Secretary of State Hugo Espírito Santo.
European Commissioner for Sustainable Transport and Tourism Apóstolos Tzitzikóstas was of the same view. He argued that this extra weight would have given zero-emission vehicles a competitive advantage over diesel vehicles, thereby facilitating their adoption by the market.
Hungary’s Nándor Csepreghy and Italy’s Matteo Salvini also voted against this position. “The measures envisaged and their impact could run counter to the objective of transforming rail freight transport. In practice, this could lead to a diversion of deliveries from rail to road”. They also discussed the risks to road safety and infrastructure.
“Investments in upgraded valuable road infrastructure, such as ageing bridges, will in any case be necessary, to improve military mobility”, said the Commissioner.
In response, European associations representing rail and intermodal freight transport (CER, ERFA, RFF, UIP, UIRR, UNIFE) have issued a statement underlining the harmful impact of this position. It could “consciously widen the competitiveness gap that has disadvantaged rail freight for far too long”. They reiterated that this text should “go hand in hand with the revision of the Combined Transport Directive” (see EUROPE 13739/10). According to the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA), the text “falls far short of what is needed to accelerate the deployment of zero-emission trucks, buses and coaches“.
Read the General approach: https://aeur.eu/f/joz; and the German declaration: https://aeur.eu/f/jud (Original version in French by Anne Damiani)