Photo: trans.iNFO

ACEA: Euro 7 Council position a “step in the right direction”, but cost pressures remain

The European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA) has offered its response to the agreement on Euro 7 reached by national ministers on Monday.

You can read this article in 2 minutes

The ACEA sees the new position as an improvement on the European Commission’s Euro 7 proposal – which the organisation had branded “entirely disproportionate”.

In the opinion of the ACEA, the original proposals would have driven high costs for industry and customers, with limited environmental benefits.

Commenting on the amended proposals, ACEA Director General, Sigrid de Vries, said the new Euro 7 proposals shall still “require huge additional investments” from industry:

“The Council’s aim to continue the effective Euro 6/VI tests is sensible. However, compared to what is in place today, Euro 7 is much broader for new cars, vans and, in particular, heavy-duty vehicles, requiring significant engineering and testing efforts. As such, it will require huge additional investments from our industry at a time when it is pouring all its resources into decarbonisation. Our industry is fully committed to tackling air pollution and climate change. We now call on member states, the European Parliament, and the Commission to work towards a Euro 7 regulation that will enable us to focus on these dual objectives while keeping vehicles affordable and our sector competitive.”

The ACEA added:

“The EU already has one of the world’s most comprehensive and stringent approaches to pollutant emissions from vehicles, such as nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particles. State-of-the-art technology means that exhaust emissions are barely measurable.”

Meanwhile, the IRU has also issued its response.

The IRU says that the Council’s general approach “considerably lowers the cumbersome and costly new testing requirements that were proposed by the European Commission, marginally straying away from existing Euro 6 regulations.” It adds that “fundamentally altering the testing conditions would require substantial investment, without significantly improving environmental benefits”.

“We welcome the Council’s decision to balance environmental performance with the cost of upgrading technologies. The benefits of the Euro 7 proposed by the European Commission would have been incremental and minor in comparison to the costs of enacting the standards,” said IRU EU Advocacy Director Raluca Marian.