Brussels, 04/03/2008 (Agence Europe) - The EU's 27 member states have not yet managed to fully agree on the draft regulation to force EU car manufacturers to reduce the average CO2 emissions of new cars and vans to 130 grammes per kilometre (g/km) by 2012 through new engine technology (a further 10g reduction would also have to be made through other technical innovations like improving tyres, aircon systems, braking systems and the use of biofuel).
A policy debate among EU environment ministers in Brussels on Monday 3 March confirmed the main faultline between three groups of countries: manufacturers of big cars (Germany, supported by Scandinavian countries and the Czech Republic), manufacturers of small cars (France, Italy and Spain) defending conflicting interests (both groups saying that the draft regulation will penalise them), and countries without any car industry, which seem to be more inclined to save the environment than the car manufacturing countries. But new EU member states also have concerns, fearing that car manufacturers' emissions reductions will lead to higher vehicle prices, which will have the impact of discouraging renewal of the car fleet and therefore be environmentally counterproductive. They are calling for the 130g/km target to be phased in from 2012 to 2015 or even postponed until 2015 to give industry time to adapt.
Summarising the main arguments in the debate, Slovenian minister Janez Podobnik (who chaired the debate) noted: - broad support for the aim of forcing the car industry to take a fair share of responsibility for the EU's policy to combat climate change; - delegations fully support the joined-up approach recommended by the Commission which will enable a target of 120g/km to be reached through additional measures; - the need to strike the right balance between ensuring the industry's competitiveness, ensuring measures are neutral from the competition point of view, cutting CO2 emissions from transport, which accounts for 12% of total EU CO2 emissions; - and a desire to examine the option of adding long-term targets to the regulation, demanded by various delegations (Denmark, the United Kingdom, Greece, France and Sweden) to provide predictability for the future.
At a press conference, French minister Jean-Louis Borloo said France wanted a target of 80-100g/km to be set right now for 2020, to be confirmed in 2012, in order to get the discussions moving again. Borloo recently met his German opposite number, Sigmar Gabriel, in Germany and announced that Gabriel would be visiting Paris at the end of the month.
During the debate, Germany called for all categories of cars to be put on an equal footing, with the graph determining burden-sharing in line with the weight of a vehicle having a curve of between 74% and 80% (the Commission suggests 60%). Italy says that the burden-sharing does not respect the polluter-pays principle because the least polluting cars will pay more than the others, and it says the slope should be 20%, or 30% at the most. France wants 20%. The Netherlands backs a slope of less than 60% to ensure heavier vehicles do not benefit, but it did not suggest an exact figure.
Agreeing with the overall target of 120g/km, Denmark wants to the Commission to publish a roadmap on how exactly the extra 10g reduction is to be achieved. Echoing this, Belgium and Spain call for details to be published very soon with an open list of measures including improving legislation on consumer information and labelling.
Fines for each gramme above target. Ireland wants to ensure that such fines will be weighty enough to have a dissuasive effect. Italy, however, thinks the idea of fines is bad because all vehicles would be penalised, irrespective of the extent to which they pollute the environment. Austria says the fines should not be too heavy and should be revised. Poland says the fines are disproportionate and should be paid into member states' coffers rather than the EU budget. The Netherlands, however, feels they are too lenient and should certainly not be reduced. Attention should instead focus on ensuring the fines are not passed on by manufacturers to consumers.
Criteria. Denmark says it is not weight that should be decisive, but rather a differentiated approach should be taken for the heaviest, most powerful cars, and the lightest, least polluting vehicles. Austria, on the other hand, argues that the weight criterion is the right one. France says it would be difficult to combine a 60% curve with a weight criterion and wants the vehicles' carprint to be used instead. Portugal is calling for further information on both types of criteria. Greece suggests that the weight criterion should be replaced with a carprint criterion when the directive is reviewed.
To avoid polarising the debate still further between manufacturers of big and small cars, the Untied Kingdom focussed on the question of exemptions for specialist manufacturers of cars produced in small quantities, and suggested that all manufacturers across the board should be required to cut emissions by 25%.
On behalf of the European Commission, Stavros Dimas said the measures on the table would not alter the competitive nature of European car manufacturers and low-income consumers would not lose out. The proposals is only the first stage, he said, and requirements would be tighter in the long-term, as noted in the revised strategy for cutting private car and utility vehicles emissions. The commissioner said he was confident that the industry would respect legislation and fines would therefore not have to be levied. If industry failed to toe the line, he said, fines would have to be set at a level high enough to make meeting the target financially worthwhile. The use of parameters to measure emission reductions matched the diversity of European car manufacturers, he argued, but said that the European Commission did not yet have enough information about carprints to make use of the concept. (A.N)