Summary of the Euro VI Emission Limits consultation
Public consultation on the future Euro VI Emission Limits for Heavy Duty Vehicles - Summary of replies
In the first half of July 2007, the European Commission launched a public consultation to seek the public's views on the best way forward in the field of pollutant emissions from heavy duty vehicles (Euro VI stage).
The summary below covers the main comments and issues that were raised by stakeholders during the public consultation on Euro VI and gives the Commission view on them where appropriate.
At the date of closing the public (internet) consultation, a total of 55 replies were received to the request for comments. Of these the breakdown by source is as follows:
· Governmental organisations…………………………9 replies
· Regional and Local official Organisations……… 4 replies
· Industry and business organisations………………24 replies
· NGOs, consumer and professional groups…… 13 replies
· Individuals…………………………………………… 5 replies
Comments and general issues
Almost all replies welcome the introduction of stringent limit values for the pollutant emissions from heavy duty vehicles. Very few replies state that the current limit values are still valid for the future and that energy efficiency, in terms of fuel consumption and CO2 emission reduction should be the main priority.
The vast majority of stakeholders support a single step with limit values close to those in US2010 (scenarios A or D).
Just eight replies, and within them only two industrial organisations (AGU-CEFIC and CLEPA) are supporting the two step approach. Those organisations are in favour of the less stringent scenarios (scenario C for Euro VI and scenario D for Euro VII).
In general terms transport operators and some national administrations (IT and SW) support a fuel neutral scenario (i.e. scenario D; NOx=0.5 g/kWh).
The motor industry (ACEA) and some other national administrations (among which CH, DE, FR and NL) and non governmental organisations support the introduction of a more stringent set of limit values (i.e. scenario A; NOx=0.4 g/kWh). Additional requirements on on-board diagnostic (OBD), off-cycle emissions (OCE) and in service conformity are also requested. In some replies it is stated that the foreseen fuel penalty associated to this scenario would be reduced by technical improvements by the date of entry into force of the Regulation.
A vast majority of replies (including ACEA) express support for the global harmonisation of testing procedures and driving cycles (i.e. introduction of WHDC - world-wide harmonised driving cycle) as a means of reaching future global standards while reducing the testing cost for the vehicle manufacturers.
In some replies, including national Administrations such as NL, DK and CH, the Greater London Authority and other non-governmental organisations, the introduction of a limit value for particle number is requested.
Monitoring of CO2 is supported in some replies.
Other issues can be summarised as follows:
· An independent research centre is proposing a change in the testing methodology and the use of different driving cycles according to the vehicle application but it should be reminded that the current test procedure (test of the engine by using an engine test bench) is the standard one accepted in US, Europe and Japan.
· In one reply the sender asks about the reason to allow higher NOx emissions, in some scenarios, to gas (PI) vehicles. On this issue, it should be noted that the possibility of considering one scenario for CI engines and another for PI engines was open, as expressed in another reply in which, for example, scenario D is supported for CI engines together with scenario A for PI engines.