Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ' Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the measures to be taken against the emission of gaseous and particulate pollutants from internal combustion engines to be installed in non-road mobile machinery'
Date: 1996-02-28
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: approximation of laws, atmospheric pollutant, engine, pollution, pollution control measures













EUR-Lex - 51996AC0245 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51996AC0245

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ' Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the measures to be taken against the emission of gaseous and particulate pollutants from internal combustion engines to be installed in non-road mobile machinery'  


Official Journal C 153 , 28/05/1996 P. 0002 





Opinion of  the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive  on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the measures to be taken against  the emission of gaseous and particulate pollutants from internal combustion engines to be installed  in non-road mobile machinery' ()(96/C 153/02)On 7  November 1995, the Council decided to  consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article  100a of the Treaty establishing the  European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal. The Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services, which was responsible for preparing the  Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 7  February 1996. The Rapporteur was Mr  Paulo Barros Vale. At its 333rd Plenary Session (meeting of 28  February 1996), the Economic and Social Committee  unanimously adopted the following Opinion. 1. Introduction1.1. If it is to continue placing its faith in economic and social  development, the European Union must do so without jeopardizing the environment and natural  resources; these determine the quality of human activity and the sustainability of development  itself. 1.2. Likewise, for technological development to be adequately regulated, it is clearly necessary to  align all Member States' legislation on this subject. 1.3. The move to encourage a reduction in polluting emissions entails particular benefits for human  health and will be beneficial to the environment generally. 1.4. The European Union has already regulated the operation of engines in road vehicles; however  until now there has been no legislation on non-road machinery. The present proposal aims to plug  this gap. 1.5. This legislation (like the legislation being drawn up in the United States) is based on ISO  (International Standards Organization) Standard 8178 which has been adopted by the US EPA,  California Air Resources Board and the UN ECE and has been incorporated into Japanese legislation. 1.6. The Commission estimates that annual costs of all the technical improvements will be of the  order of ECU 31 million for the first stage and ECU 125 million for the second; these costs passed  on to consumers will represent increases in the cost of the engines of around 1 %-3 % in stage I  and 3 %-8 % in stage II, which will have repercussions on the market value of the engines. 1.7. Costs for each tonne of pollutant less have been estimated at around ECU 1 400 for stage I and  ECU 2 600 for stage II. 2. Summary of the Commission proposal2.1. The aim of the Commission proposal is to bring about a  significant reduction in air pollution by pollutants from new internal combustion engines installed  in non-road mobile machinery; the proposal does not cover farm or forestry tractors, since this  machinery also travels on roads and is therefore subject to a different approval procedure. 2.2. Emissions from non-road vehicles had not hitherto been covered by European Union regulations,  unlike emissions from road vehicles which have gradually been cut back by means of rules and  regulations built up over the years. 2.2.1. Thus, when the amount of air pollution produced by emissions from the two different types of  machinery (road and non-road) is compared, emissions from non-road vehicles are now in relative  terms much higher and therefore have a greater environmental impact, particularly emissions of  nitrogen oxides (NO5/8) and particles (PT). 2.3. The engines covered by this legislation are used in industrial and farming machinery and in  machinery used for specific transport purposes. Thus, the type of machinery covered by this  Directive would, for example, be: compressors, bulldozers, fork-lift trucks, mobile cranes,  material handling equipment, etc.; it does not cover engines with a power capacity of less than 18  Kw. 2.4. The Commission proposal requires Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure that  the engines covered by the Directive satisfy the requirements for pollutant emissions. 2.5. It is proposed that there be two stages for introducing the new emissions standards, in  respect of engine production (Engine Built Date), the first running from  June 1997 to  December  1998 and the second from  January 2001 to  December 2003. 3. General comments3.1. The Commission proposal is in keeping with the environmental  requirements set out in the bulk of the regulations currently in force, given that air quality in  Europe continues to give rise to great concern. In view of this situation, any measure designed to  cut back air pollution, and especially to reduce emissions, needs to be implemented urgently. 3.1.1. The Commission estimates that in the sectors concerned, the proposed measures would reduce  emissions of nitrogen oxides by 23 %, of hydrocarbons by 11 % and of particles by 27 % in stage I;  in stage II the corresponding reductions would be 42 %, 29 % and 67 %, respectively. 3.2. The Committee welcomes the Commission proposal, particularly since it is in keeping with  regulations which the United States is currently developing in the same area. 3.2.1. If US and EU standards are harmonized, this will be an extremely important factor in  expanding and developing the world market in this kind of engine; it will facilitate the industrial  production in this sector and provide an incentive for competition. 3.2.2. Since the rules for stage II have not yet been laid down in the United States or in the  European Union, and since it is anticipated that there will be some changes in ideas about what  rules are to apply, it would be in the interest of both the US and the European Union in the course  of the legislative process to align arrangements for the implementation of stage II in both the US  and the European Union; these arrangements would then be recognised by both parties on a reciprocal  basis. 3.3. The Committee welcomes the fact that the competent authorities for granting approval  certificates, to whom producers have to submit their applications for approval, will come under the  responsibility of each Member State. 3.4. Given the health risks engendered by emissions from this kind of engine, the limit values  proposed in the Draft Directive are acceptable; these limit values are based on the need to render  environmental protection requirements compatible with the industry's current technical, financial  and implementing possibilities. Industry should use the lead time before the Directive enters into  force to solve the problems involved in meeting the limit-values stipulated for Stage II,  especially for small engines (18 to 37 Kw). 4. Specific comments4.1. Annex I to the proposed Directive sets out the machinery and equipment,  the engines of which are covered by these regulations. Although the list is not exhaustive, the  Committee feels that the Directive should cover generators in the same way as it does compressors. 4.2. The authorities in the Member States who grant approval for engines should monitor these new  engines' compliance with the requirements. 4.2.1. Producers themselves should issue periodical reports so that compliance can be monitored and  they should keep files containing the necessary information. The Committee does however think it  unnecessary to keep this information for as long as 30 years, as happens in some cases; this seems  to be too long and would create difficulties for the industry. 4.3. The Committee understands and agrees that any engines for road use, which have been subject to  an approval procedure and which are used in non-road equipment, should not need to undergo a new  approval procedure. 4.4. Once all the parameters are defined and an engine or family of engines is approved  accordingly, the Committee stresses the importance of monitoring these engines during their  operational life so as to gauge to what extent the level of pollutant emission is maintained. 4.4.1. Although it deems a monitoring system to be indispensable, the Committee would draw  attention to the fact that, since such vehicles and equipment do not carry number plates, it could  be difficult to check up on them periodically during their operational life, since it is impossible  to pinpoint their location or even their owner, particularly if this system should ever be extended  to cover petrol engines. It is acknowledged that it is nowadays impossible to monitor emissions  from engines while they are in use. The International Standards Organization is developing a loaded  smoke test in order to address this problem. However, this will impose design constraints on new  engines to produce low smoke and will also enable measurements to be made while the engines are in  use. This test may be available when the limit values established for stage II are being  introduced. 4.5. It would be useful to have a mathematical correction procedure for particle emissions so that,  in respect of variations in sulphur content, different fuel specifications are used by the USA  (including California) and by the EU. 4.6. The Commission proposal for affixing identification plates creates a problem. Requirements for  marking engines as set out in Annex I (3.3) indicate use of supplementary marking which will create  problems in terms of the visibility of the markings in a cluttered environment. Nevertheless, the  proposed directive requires the main and supplementary identification plates to be clearly visible;  this negates any benefit in using a second identification plate. This part of the proposed  directive must be brought more closely into line with actual needs. 4.7. The Committee welcomes the idea of Member States granting fiscal incentives in order to  encourage early introduction of engines complying with the limit values now established for stage  II. 5. Conclusions5.1. The Committee welcomes the Commission proposal which aims at reducing the  pollution caused by non-road machinery and underlines the fact that this is the first Directive  proposed by the European Union to tackle this problem. The Committee however hopes that it will  receive proposals for machinery which is not covered by this directive. 5.2. Since the market for this kind of engine is immense and involves numerous applications, the  Committee recognises that it is in the industry's interest for the sector to be regulated and  harmonized with legislation in force in the USA as soon as possible, so that certificates are  recognized in both areas. The Committee believes that the Commission should make moves to secure  mutual recognition of the certificates issued by the USA's and EU's respective authorities. 5.3. Moreover, the Committee proposes that ideas be encouraged for converting such equipment and  machinery to run on natural gas or rape-seed oil. 5.4. The Committee would encourage the use of alternative, environmentally friendly and  biodegradable fuels, given that tests have shown that for every litre of eco-diesel consumed, 2,3  kg less of CO2 are discharged into the environment. 5.5. The Committee deems as important the sanctions against those manufacturers who, having  obtained type approval for one kind of engine, continue to produce engines of this family which do  not correspond to the features registered and approved in the approval procedure. 5.6. Monitoring should be the responsibility of the authorities in the Member States who grant the  approval concerned; they should also take measures to ensure that they are kept informed of any  changes to the contents of an 'approval' file; in addition, they should ensure that production  conformity is actually checked. Done at Brussels, 28 February 1996. The Presidentof the Economic and Social CommitteeCarlos FERRER() OJ No C  328, 7. 12. 1995, p. 1.