REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION on barriers posed by codes, standards and legislation to using climate-friendly technologies in the refrigeration, air conditioning, heat pumps and foam sectors
Date: 2016-11-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Climate Action, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, European standard, European standardisation body, air conditioning, clean technology, cold store, heat pump, legislation, reduction of gas emissions, technical standard

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 30.11.2016  
COM(2016) 749 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

on barriers posed by codes, standards and legislation to using climate-friendly 
technologies in the refrigeration, air conditioning, heat pumps and foam sectors 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
1.  INTRODUCTION 

Regulation  (EU)  No  517/20141  requires  a  reduction  in  the  quantities  of  hydrofluorocarbons 
(HFCs) companies may place on the market in the EU, i. e. through import or production, and 
thus  will  lead  to  a  reduction  in  emissions  of  these  powerful  greenhouse  gases  to  the 
atmosphere. This phase-down started in 2015 and will reduce the permitted supply of HFCs: a 
decrease of 79% in 2030 compared to 2009-2012. As a result, two-thirds of emissions will be 
saved  in  2030  compared  to  a  business  as  usual  scenario.2  Thus  it  will  make  a  significant 
contribution to meeting the Union's climate targets.3 

HFC  emissions  are  also  being  addressed  at  global  level.  Under  the  Montreal  Protocol  on 
Ozone  Depleting  Substances  an  agreement  has  been  reached  this  year  to  phase  down  the 
global  consumption  and  production  of  HFCs.  This  will  facilitate  a  worldwide  reduction  in 
greenhouse gas emissions in the context of the Paris Agreement.4  

Manufacturers of equipment and products using HFCs must therefore shift to the use of more 
climate-friendly alternatives. As technological progress has made large strides in recent years, 
a  shift  to  suitable  and  energy-efficient  alternatives  with  a  low  global  warming  potential 
(GWP)  has  become  feasible  for  many  types  of  equipment  and  products.5  However,  non-
technological barriers may put this transition to more climate-friendly alternatives at risk and 
result in higher costs than necessary.  

In  order  to  smooth  the  introduction  of  the  HFC  phase-down  measure  and  support  the 
development of green technologies, the co-legislators decided to ask the Commission to map 
potential  restrictions  on  the  placing  of  climate-friendly  alternatives  on  the  market.  Article 
11(6) of Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 mandates the Commission to "collect, on the basis of 
available data from Member States, information on national codes, standards or legislation of 
Member  States  with  respect  to  replacement  technologies  using  alternatives  to  fluorinated 
greenhouse gases in refrigeration, air-conditioning and heat pump equipment and in foams." 
The  Commission  shall  publish  a  synthesis  report  on  the  information  collected  by  1  January 
2017. 

1 OJ L 150, 20.05.2014, p.195. 
2 Commission Staff Working Paper: Impact assessment - Review of Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 on certain 
fluorinated greenhouse gases, 7.11.2012, SWD(2012) 364 final. http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/f-
gas/legislation/docs/swd_2012_364_en.pdf.  
3 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and 
Social committee and the Committee of the Regions: A policy framework for climate and energy in the period 
from 2020 to 2030, COM/2014/015 final: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52014DC0015 
4 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: The Road from Paris: 
assessing the implications of the Paris Agreement and accompanying the proposal for a Council decision on the 
signing, on behalf of the European Union, of the Paris agreement adopted under the United Nations Framework 
Convention on Climate Change,  COM(2016) 110 final: 
https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-110-EN-F1-1.PDF 
5 Study on alternatives for high ambient temperatures, Öko-Recherche, November 2014: 
http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/f-gas/legislation/studies_en.htm 

2 

 
 
                                                            
In  addition  to  analysing  the  situation  at  a  national  level,  this  report  covers  legislation  and 
standards at a European and an international level, as these standards establish benchmarks, 
widely  used  by  companies,  for  the  safe  use  of  equipment  throughout  Europe.  Many 
developing countries adopt European and international standards  and  make  them  mandatory 
in their own legislation. Hence, if such standards pose unjustified barriers to the uptake of 
climate-friendly technologies, the undesirable impact of these standards reaches markets 
far beyond the EU. 

To  facilitate  addressing  these  issues  the  Commission  has  since  the  adoption  of  Regulation 
(EU)  No  517/2014  conducted  extensive  consultations  with  stakeholders, 
including 
deliberations  within  the  Consultation  Forum  established  pursuant  to  Article  23  of  the 
Regulation as well as tasked and external consultant to provide an analysis, including carrying 
out  a  questionnaire  seeking  input  from  Member  States'  authorities.  This  report  draws  upon 
this analysis and consultation process. 

2.  RELEVANCE OF CODES, STANDARDS AND LEGISLATION   

Codes,  standards  and  legislation  may  indirectly  impact  the  use  of  alternatives  to  HFCs  by 
specifying requirements for the design or manufacture of equipment and its components, the 
installation  of  equipment  as  well  as  its  service,  maintenance  and  dismantling  that  are  not 
consistent with the use of a particular alternative technology.   

While  they  may  often  be  more  climate-friendly  and  energy-efficient  than  HFCs,  suitable 
alternatives  have  their  own  limitations  such  as  flammability,  poor  material  compatibility, 
toxicity  or  may  require  higher  operating  pressures.  These  characteristics  can,  however, 
usually be addressed through suitable product design and proper maintenance of equipment. 
Climate-friendly alternatives that can be used include: carbon dioxide (CO2), ammonia (NH3), 
hydrocarbons and unsaturated HFCs (HFOs). 

While  safety  levels  should  be  maintained  and  risks  minimised,  standards,  codes  and 
legislation should be adapted to technological progress and, in the context of a phase-down of 
HFCs and the Paris Agreement, allow the use of more climate-friendly alternatives where it is 
safe to do so.  

2.1  Overview of relevant European level legislation and standards 

Product and equipment manufacturers, installers and end-users need to comply with a range 
of legislation and standards applying at a European level. Some of the requirements relate to 
the safe use of refrigerants or foam blowing agents. However, most of the requirements do not 
directly relate to the use of a particular refrigerant or foam blowing agent, but cover general 
safety aspects.  

European  standards  are  set  by  the  European  Standardisation  Bodies,  CEN  and  CENELEC, 
and  rely  on  the  participation  of  industrial  stakeholders  to  set  the  technical  specifications. 
Contrary to legislation, the use of the standards is generally not mandatory (unless specifically 
taken up in legislation or in commercial contracts) but it is widely accepted that adherence to 

3 

 
 
a  relevant  European  standard  is  an  important  way  of  showing  that  the  equipment  is  safe  to 
use.  Consequently,  despite  the  fact  that  they  may  not  be  mandatory,  standards  are  widely 
applied and thus have a significant impact.  

Some  of  the  standards  adopted  at  the  European  level  are  aligned  with  broader  international 
standards  and  codes  such  as  IEC  and  ISO  standards.  An  overview  of  the  most  relevant 
European  standards  related  to  the  use  of  refrigerants  and  foam  blowing  agents  is  shown  in 
Table 1. 

Table 1: Summary of European level standards related to applications in refrigeration, 
air conditioning, heat pump and foam sectors 

Standard           

Purpose 

EN 378: 2008 

Refrigerating systems and heat pumps – safety and environmental 
requirements.  EN 378 provides practical rules to define important 
parameters such as maximum refrigerant charge.  It is harmonised 
with some of the above EU directives. 

IEC EN 60335-2-24  Safety requirements for household and similar electrical appliances 

IEC EN 60335-2-40 

Safety requirements for electrical heat pumps, air conditioners, and 
dehumidifiers  

IEC EN 60335-2-89  Safety requirements for commercial refrigerating appliances  

EN 1127-1 

Explosive atmospheres — explosion prevention and protection 

EN 60079 

EN 13463 

Requirements for electrical systems used in potentially explosive 
atmospheres; a broad set of standards some of which are very 
relevant to refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pumps 

Non-electrical equipment for use in potentially explosive 
atmospheres 

The most relevant standards for refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pumps are EN 378, as 
well as the product standards IEC EN 60335-2-40 (for air-conditioning systems) and IEC EN 
60335-2-89  (for  integral  and  remote  commercial  refrigeration  appliances)  which  take 
precedence over EN 378. EN 378 has just recently been revised. Its parallel standard at the 
international level is ISO 5149. At international level, amendments to standards IEC 60335-2-
40 and IEC 60335-2-89 are currently being discussed in the relevant IEC committees. Once a 
new  version  of  these  standards  has  been  agreed,  the  parallel  European  standards  IEC  EN 
60335-2-40  and  IEC  60335-2-89  are  likely  to  be  modified  accordingly.  The  responsible 
standardisation technical committees for these standards at a European level are CEN/TC 182 
"Refrigeration  systems,  safety  and  environmental  requirements"  and  CLC/TC  61  "Safety  of 
household and similar electrical appliances".  

2.2  Information communicated by Member States on national codes, standards and 

legislation 

4 

 
 
 
On  the  basis  of  a  survey6,  a  majority  of  Member  States  did  not  identify  relevant  national 
codes,  standards  or  legislation  that  go  beyond  the  legislation  and  standards  at  a  European 
level. In particular, Member States did not specify any national codes or legislation impeding 
the use of climate-friendly alternative foam blowing agents. Member States also did not report 
any significant national restrictions going beyond European requirements for refrigeration, air 
conditioning  and  heat  pumps  related  to  the  use  of  ammonia  or  CO2,  even  though  some 
stakeholders  identified  some  restrictive  rules  on  ammonia  use  in  France.7  Some  Member 
States  also  report  restrictions  related  to  the  use  of  flammable  alternative  refrigerants, 
such as hydrocarbons and HFOs:  

• 

Italy, France and Spain reported a number of national decrees that severely restrict the 
use of flammable refrigerants for use in air conditioning equipment in certain types of 
public access buildings. These requirements go well beyond the rules permitting such 
uses by European and international standards such EN 378 or ISO 5149.  

•  Sweden reported that additional risk assessments are required for the use of flammable 

refrigerants, leading to additional time and cost constraints. 

• 

In many Member States local building codes and fire regulations as well as transport8 
and storage-related codes can severely restrict the use of flammable refrigerants. 

Restrictions are inconsistently applied across national territories. Particularly in federal states 
barriers  may  exist  at  lower  levels  of  government  that  are  difficult  to  identify  and  address. 
Some codes at a regional or local level may be unnecessarily strict, and rules applied locally 
by safety authorities often leave room for interpretation, which can hinder the widespread use 
of flammable refrigerants.  

Germany  reported  that  national  rules  for  hydrocarbons  are  actually  less  restrictive  than  the 
standards at European or international level.  However many end-users prefer following the 
more restrictive European standards. 

2.3  Barriers posed by codes, standards and legislation  

2.3.1.  Barriers for the use of ammonia and CO2 as refrigerants 

Codes, standards or legislation at either a European or national level do not seem, for the most 
part, to pose a significant barrier to the use of ammonia or CO2 as a refrigerant. They ensure 
the safe use of these refrigerants while allowing for a greater market penetration of systems 
and equipment using these substances. Experts agree that ammonia is a refrigerant to be used 
with care but that adherence to the requirements in current safety standards such as EN 378 
are  an  appropriate  way  forward.  Further  national  prescriptions  do  not  seem  to  be  overly 

6 Response rate: 24 Member States representing 95% of EU population 
7 See 1st meeting of Consultation Forum, 10 September 2015: 
http://ec.europa.eu/clima/events/articles/0106_en.htm 
8 Including for the use inside tunnels 

5 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
restrictive  in  most  Member  States.  Similarly,  for  equipment  using  CO2  the  requirements  in 
current  safety  standards  such  as  EN  378  and  the  Pressure  Equipment  Directive  provide  an 
appropriate framework for the safe use of such systems in the future.  

2.3.2.  Barriers for the use of flammable refrigerants: hydrocarbons and HFOs 

Limiting the charge size (i.e. the amount of refrigerant used) of equipment has been the main, 
practical way of minimising risks for all flammable refrigerants in the past. Traditionally the 
approach  in  standards  on  charge  sizes  has  been  very  conservative  and  the  allowed  charge 
sizes  were  kept  at  very  small  amounts,  e.g.  150  grams.  These  charge  size  constraints 
commonly  used  in  existing  standards  limit  the  use  of  flammable  refrigerants  for  many 
equipment types, applications and locations. 

The recent revision of EN 378 introduces a new flammability category for HFCs and HFOs. 
In  this  category  EN  378  allows  higher  maximum  charges  as  well  as  permitting  the  use  of 
these  substances  in  a  larger  range  of  applications  and  locations.  Furthermore,  a  “risk 
management  approach”  allows  manufacturers  to  deploy  considerably  larger  refrigerant 
charges if certain risk management measures are put in place or considered in the design of 
the  equipment.  While  these  revisions  go  some  way  towards  easing  the  use  of  HFOs, 
significant barriers remain for the use of hydrocarbons. 

The  following  barriers  for  flammable  refrigerants,  in  particular  for  hydrocarbons,  require 
particular attention: 

•  The  European  level  standards  identified  above  unnecessarily  restrict  charge  sizes 
beyond  what  is  needed  to  guarantee  a  safe  use  of  the  equipment.  In  particular  the 
charge size limits for human comfort cooling and below ground charge limits appear 
overly restrictive.  

•  Risk minimisation approaches in system design and use are not sufficiently considered 
for all flammable refrigerants to determine safe charge size. Although individual risk 
assessments  for  a  certain  equipment  type  are  possible  within  existing  rules,  this 
implies additional expenses for manufacturers. Instead, the market generally chooses 
to look at the overall, more restrictive rules prescribed by standards as a benchmark. 

•  Stakeholders in the Consultative Forum emphasised that making changes to standards 
to facilitate the uptake of climate-friendly alternatives is a challenge in itself, as:  

−  Updates  of  standards  are  usually  made  at  intervals  of  5  years  or  longer.  Thus 

making the necessary changes in a timely manner is a real challenge.  

−  Product standards such as EN 60335-2-40 and EN 60335-2-89 are based on IEC 
standards  that  are  set  at  international  level.  Hence  EU  companies  and  policy 
makers can only partly influence the outcome.   

− 

In  addition  to  the  considerable  time  needed  to  agree  changes  at  the  international 
level,  the  time  lag  between  agreeing  international  amendments  and  having  them 
reflected  in  the  European  product  standards  is  often  another  1-3  years.  This  is  a 

6 

 
 
 
very serious issue since product standards take precedence over general standards 
such as EN 378.  

−  SMEs  find  it  difficult  to  find  the  resources  to  participate  in  the  lengthy  and 
resource-intensive  standard-setting  processes  and  only  a  few  experts  on 
hydrocarbons are currently involved in these processes.  

−  Providing  data  and  conducting  the  necessary  risk  assessments  that  would  enable 
companies  to  market  innovative  solutions  using  climate  friendly  alternatives  is  a 
challenge, in particular for SMEs.  

−  Transparency  and  understanding  of  the  complex  standardisation  process  are  low 

for non-participants, thus it is difficult to influence the outcome.  

−  The perception of risk can be distinct from the actual risk and is often not based on 
empirical  evidence.  End-users  may  be  reluctant  to  have  flammable  refrigerants 
installed  and  manufacturers  are  wary  of  liability  laws  and  public  perception, 
especially  if  equipment  is  not properly maintained. The issue of risk is generally 
divisive as it can be used to promote the commercial interests of one technology 
versus another. 

• 

In  some  EU  Member  States  there  are  national  codes,  standards  and  legislation  that 
simply ban flammable refrigerants in certain applications. These create severe barriers 
for their use as alternatives to HFCs.  

2.3.3.  Foam blowing agents 

No major barriers created by standards or legislation at either a European or national level in 
relation to the use of climate-friendly alternatives to foam blowing agents were identified. The 
main barriers to the introduction of alternative foam blowing agents are their price, bearing in 
mind  that  blowing  agents  represent  a  significant  proportion  of  the  total  cost  of  foam  raw 
materials, and the time and costs related to product development and testing.9  

3.  CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS 

On the basis of input from Member States' authorities and consultations with stakeholders it 
can be concluded that standards (at international, European and national level) regarding the 
use  of  flammable  refrigerants  appear  to  be  an  important  barrier  to  the  uptake  of  climate-
friendly alternatives to HFCs. 

To facilitate the achievement of the EU HFC phase-down and emission reductions in the EU 
and third countries as required by the Paris Agreement in the most cost-efficient way, these 
barriers  should  be  addressed  with  urgency  as  already  anticipated  (based  on  preliminary 
findings)  in the recent EU Strategy on Heating and Cooling.10 Also for this reason the present 

9  Some stakeholders insisted however that the process of amending standards takes considerable time and 
resources and also has an impact on the commercialisation of new insulation products 
10 COM(2016) 51 final: https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-51-EN-F1-1.PDF 

7 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
review has been launched immediately following the entry into force of Regulation (EU) No 
517/2014.  

In particular, the analysis points towards a need for: 

•  European standardisation organisations to facilitate the update of relevant standards at 
the European level. All stakeholders involved including industry and Member States 
are  also  strongly  encouraged  to  contribute,  including  to  parallel  activities  at  the 
international level. 

•  Companies  and  researchers  to  collect  data  and  evidence  enabling  better  risk 
minimization approaches for all flammable refrigerants and to make such information 
available to the relevant standard committees.  

•  Member States that have restrictive national codes, standards or legislation to consider 
a  review  in  the  light  of  technical  developments  that  would  allow  the  safe  use  of 
alternative  refrigerants.  Stakeholders  also  pointed  out  that  green  public  procurement 
approaches  could  help  boost  the  market  for  alternative  technologies  and  showcase 
their safe use. 

In addition, the Commission envisages the following actions: 

•  A  request  to  the  European  standardisation  organisations  in  support  of  updating 
relevant standards at the European level, ensuring a technology neutral and consistent 
approach.  In  particular,  there  is  a  need  to  maximise  charge  sizes  without 
compromising  safety  as  well  as  allowing  a  more  general  use  of  risk  management 
approaches for all refrigerants. A mandate for this request is under preparation. 

•  Facilitating  at  an  international  level  an  exchange  of  information  on  standards,  their 
review and related processes between Parties to the Montreal Protocol, standardisation 
bodies, industry as well as other stakeholders involved in standard setting.  

8