1 Vehicle type approval:
emission limits
| (27173)
5163/06
COM(05) 683
+ ADD 1
| Draft Regulation on type approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions and on access to vehicle repair information, amending Directive 72/306/EEC
Commission Staff Working Document: Annex to draft Regulation on type approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions and on access to vehicle repair information, amending Directive 72/306/EEC
|
| Legal base | Article 95EC; co-decision; QMV
|
| Department | Transport |
| Basis of consideration | SEM of 20 April 2006
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 34-xx (2005-06), para 7 (1 March 2006)
|
| To be discussed in Council | September/October 2006
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | For debate in European Standing Committee
|
Background
1.1 Design and construction standards for motor vehicles in the
Community are currently governed by Directive 70/156/EEC,[1]
which seeks to achieve a single market through harmonised standards
using the concept of type approval. Because of the significant
— and
increasing —
contribution which such vehicles make both to air pollution generally
and to emissions of greenhouse gases, those granted type approval
must also comply with the mandatory emission "Euro"
standards, which are defined in terms of the maximum permissible
mass of pollutants which may be emitted per kilometre travelled
when a vehicle is tested in a specific driving cycle. The standards
applying to cars and light vans up to 3.5 tonnes weight were first
laid down in Directive 70/220/EEC,[2]
and have since been progressively tightened, with newly registered
cars and car-derived (Class I) vans having to comply with the
fourth major stage of reductions (Euro IV) as from 1 January 2006,
and larger (Class II and III) vans from 1 January 2007.
1.2 In December 2005, the Commission put forward
this proposal, which introduces the next stage (Euro V) of emission
controls for new cars and vans (see Annex). However, it differs
from previous such measures in that it takes the form of a draft
Regulation rather than a Directive. It also aims to incorporate
all current requirements and test procedures into a single piece
of legislation and to concentrate on more fundamental provisions,
leaving the detailed technical specifications to be adopted by
the Commission under the comitology process.
1.3 More specifically, the proposal would tighten
existing mandatory standards for emissions from new cars and vans
of hydrocarbons (HCs), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and, in the case
of diesel vehicles, particulate matter (PM); amend the basis on
which emissions of particles are measured to reflect the improved
techniques devised by the UN ECE Particle Measurement Programme;
remove a derogation allowing cars of a gross weight greater than
2.5 tonnes (and currently used by diesel off-road vehicles, small
diesel minibuses, diesel motor homes, taxis and some diesel MPVs)
to be approved on the basis of the limit values and dates applicable
to Class II and III light goods vehicles; increase from 80,000
km to 160,000 km the durability period which manufacturers are
required to demonstrate for emissions control systems at type
approval; require vehicle repair information to be made available
via websites in a standard format; and allow Member States to
provide financial incentives for new vehicles in series production
which comply with the requirements of the Regulation in advance
of the effective dates, for retrofitting of existing vehicles
to meet those requirements, and for scrapping those vehicles which
do not.
1.4 In our Report of 1 March 2006, we noted that
the Government broadly welcomes this proposal, which it sees as
essential in helping the UK to achieve the legally binding air
quality limit values set by the Community and national air quality
objectives for concentrations of nitrogen dioxide and particles
in a number of areas. However, the Government is opposed to the
inclusion of the provisions on fiscal incentives, which has been
made under Article 95, and is hence subject to qualified majority
voting, since it takes the view that any such provisions should
be subject to unanimity. It has also pointed out that the proposal
will have a significant impact on the vehicle manufacturing sector,
and could affect the development of new car and engine model ranges,
industry's ability to meet other demanding environmental requirements
(such as reducing emissions of carbon dioxide), as well as increasing
costs.
1.5 Since the Government had also said that the detailed
implications of the proposal, including the cost, benefit, and
impact on vehicle manufacturers and manufacturers of emissions
control equipment, would be set out in a Regulatory Impact Assessment,
which could lead to reservations about some of the other aspects
of the proposal, we decided simply to draw it to the attention
of the House, and to consider it further when that information
is available.
Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum of 20 April
2006
1.6 Although the Minister of State at the Department
of Transport (Dr Stephen Ladyman) provided on 20 April 2006, a
supplementary Explanatory Memorandum, summarising a very comprehensive
partial Regulatory Impact Assessment, these did not in fact reach
us until 14 June. Be that as it may, the Minister says that, having
considered the detailed implications of the proposals with interested
parties, it maintains its broad welcome for them, whilst retaining
its opposition to the inclusion of fiscal incentives in a measure
to be adopted under Article 95 of the Treaty.
1.7 As regards individual elements of the proposal,
he says:
- that the proposed 80% reduction
in particulate matter limits for diesel-engined vehicles will
deliver major air quality benefits, and is fully supported by
the Government, and that it also regards as proportionate the
Commission's intention to limit to the same level as diesel cars
particle emissions from the new generation of lean burn direct
injection petrol engine, since such emissions are significantly
higher than those from conventional petrol engines (and the new
limit could probably be met without the need for after-treatment
systems, such as particulate filters);
- that, although significantly tighter NOx limits
for diesels are required than the "modest" 20-25% proposed
by the Commission if the UK is to meet its air quality objectives
on nitrogen dioxide, these are likely to represent a major development
burden for industry, and the required technology is unlikely to
be developed sufficiently within the Euro V timescale: however,
after a further 3-5 years, NOx reduction exhaust after-treatment
systems for diesel engines should be sufficiently robust for application
across the full range of vehicles, enabling reductions of about
70% in diesel limits, and the UK therefore intends to press for
a second stage of reductions in such limits, probably from around
2015 (though, in view of this, it will not seek any tightening
of the first stage NOx limits, since this would impose costs for
only a short-term benefit);
- that, whilst the Commission's proposal for a
25% reduction in the NOx limits for petrol-engined vehicles are
achievable at relatively low cost, these vehicles are a far less
significant source of NOx than diesels, and the Government will
not therefore be seeking any further reductions;
- that, whilst the Government supports the adoption
of new techniques for particle measurement (which will allow much
improved control of ultra-fine emissions), it would prefer to
see these adopted in the course of negotiations on the current
proposal, rather than through a further Regulation using the comitology
process;
- that, although the Government recognises the
benefits of withdrawing the current arrangement which enables
heavy passenger cars, such as off-road vehicles, to work to the
higher emission level applicable to light goods vehicles, the
need to adopt a more sophisticated NOx control technology for
these vehicles within a relatively short time-scale would have
disproportionate impact on certain UK manufacturers which specialise
in this type of vehicle: in view of this, and the relatively small
environmental impact of such a step as compared with tighter second-stage
NOx limits, the Government wishes to retain the current allowances
for heavy passenger cars until such time as the new second-stage
NOx limits are introduced;
- that the Government believes there is little
evidence of a problem over the durability of emission control
systems, and considers that a more transparent approach might
involve retaining the current durability period of 80,000 km,
whilst tightening the emissions limits; and
- that the Government supports the proposal regarding
access to vehicle repair information.
1.8 The Minister says that the Government has also
consulted UK manufacturers and independent experts on the likely
cost of the measures proposed by the Commission, though he adds
that these have varied greatly according to the manufacturer,
and that consequently a wide range of unit costs has been used
in his department's modelling, with a "most likely"
cost being calculated on the basis of independent estimates. These
estimates show the following unit cost impacts (with annualised
figures in brackets):
| Vehicle type
| Low |
Most likely
| High |
| Petrol car & van
| £9 (£10m) |
£24 (£40m) | £24 (£50m)
|
| Diesel cars
| £110 (£120m)
| £178 (£190m)
| £932 (£880m)
|
| Diesel small vans
Diesel medium-large vans
Total diesel vans
| £110
£186
(£50 million)
| £178
£287
(£70 million)
| £962
£1047
(£220 million)
|
| Total[3]
| (£180 million) |
(£300 million) | (£1150 million)
|
These figures show that the increase in total costs
would be incurred primarily in the diesel vehicle sector (and
in particular diesel cars, due to their higher sales volumes).
The figures also include an assumed fuel consumption penalty arising
from the effect of after-treatment systems, but not the impact
of removing the heavy passenger car provision, which the Minister
says is difficult to assess at this stage (though £36 million
a year is seen as a broadly indicative "most likely"
figure).
1.9 The Minister has also provided comparable figures
for cost of the Government's preferred option of introducing tighter
second-stage NOx limits for diesel vehicles by 2015. These are
as follows:
| Vehicle type
| NOx (mg/km)
| Low |
Most likely
| High |
| Diesel cars
| 80 | £233 (£200m)
| £612 (£410m)
| £1997 (£1410m)
|
| Diesel small vans
Diesel medium-large vans
Total diesel vans
| 80
106-125
| £223
£419
(£80 million)
| £612
£1100
(£160 million)
| £1549
£1997
(£350 million)
|
| Total[4]
| | (£280 million)
| (£570 million) |
(£1760 million) |
1.10 Finally, the Minister has provided estimates
of the likely health benefits arising from a reduction in emissions
of particulate matter and NOx. He suggests that those arising
annually as a result of the Commission's proposal would be between
£501 million and £1,181 million, whilst the comparable
figures if the more stringent second-stage reduction in NOx emissions
favoured by the UK were to be adopted would be between £555
million and £1,306 million. He says that there would also
be financial, albeit unquantifiable, benefits to manufacturers
resulting from the preservation of the single market, whilst UK
suppliers of pollution abatement technologies would enjoy substantial
benefits of between £860 million and £5,900 million
from the Commission's proposal (rising to between £1,510
million and £13,570 million under the UK approach).
Conclusion
1.11 We note that, notwithstanding its reservations
over the inclusion of certain fiscal incentives in a measure to
be adopted under Article 95 of the Treaty, the Government has
maintained its broad support for these proposals, which it sees
as producing substantial environmental and economic benefits,
which would together outweigh the likely costs. We also note that
the UK would support a more stringent second-stage emission limit
for NOx in 2015.
1.12 To that extent, the proposals are perhaps
less contentious than they might have been, but they are nevertheless
significant in both environmental and economic terms, and the
figures provided in the Regulatory Impact Assessment indicate
that there is a wide variation in the cost estimates provided
by manufacturers. For that reason, and given also the general
importance of reducing the contribution which vehicles make to
air pollution generally and to emissions of greenhouse gases,
we think it right that they should be considered further by the
House, and we are therefore recommending them for debate in European
Standing Committee.
1 OJ No. L 42, 23.2.1970, p.1. Back
2
OJ No. L 76, 6.4.1970, p.1. Back
3
There would also be an environmental cost of around £20 million
a year, because the Commission proposal would lead to the adoption
of diesel particulate filters on all light duty vehicles, which
would have small impact on fuel consumption and emissions of carbon
dioxide. Back
4
Under this approach, the environmental cost would rise to about
£40 million. Back
|
