Clean Air Action Group (Levegő Munkacsoport)
CAAG
The Clean Air Action Group (CAAG) is one of the best-known non-governmental organizations in Hungary that deal with the protection of the environment.
ID: 351764810742-20
Lobbying Activity
Response to European climate resilience and risk management law
2 Sept 2025
According to the Global Risk Report 2025 of the World Economic Forum (https://reports.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Global_Risks_Report_2025.pdf), the top risk is misinformation and disinformation. Awareness of the causes of climate change and the necessary mitigation and adaptation measures is extremely low among the population and often among decision-makers, too. This situation is conspicuously reflected in the rise of populist forces all over Europe, which either deny that climate change is caused by humans or, more often, oppose the necessary measures with false arguments. The latter is also true for certain Member State governments; this is exemplified by their effort to postpone or at least water down the implementation of the emission trading system for buildings and road transport (ETS2). For example, they use the argument that ETS2 would hit vulnerable households the hardest, while the truth is that the current system highly favours the rich at the expense of the poor (https://www.euki.de/en/our-campaign-on-stop-subsidising-the-rich/), and the implementation of ETS2 with appropriate compensation for households would reduce social inequality (https://ceenergynews.com/voices/everyone-must-be-compensated-when-fossil-fuel-prices-rise/). Another, often expressed but false argument is that ETS2 would hurt the economy of the EU (or a Member State), while the truth is that postponing the ETS2 would only benefit extremely polluting established industries, waste public money (due to enormous opportunity costs and the continuation of providing harmful subsidies), and delay the inevitable transition to a better functioning economic system https://www.levego.hu/sites/default/files/Would_ETS2_hurt_the_economy_FINAL08-2025.pdf). The social media and, in several Member States, even the media is inundating the public with misinformation and disinformation. Tat the same time, the voices trying to dispel climate-related misinformation and disinformation are usually much weaker (especially on social media) than the voice of those spreading disinformation. If this tendency continues, the EUs climate policies are doomed to failure (see https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jun/19/climate-misinformation-turning-crisis-into-catastrophe-ipie-report). The lack of information is a major risk, too. For example, many people are not aware of even the simplest methods to keep their homes cooler during the summer heat. Environmental NGOs lack the funding to meaningfully counter the colossal misinformation and disinformation that is spread by certain business groups, media, and political forces. So, NGOs often feel like trying to extinguish a forest fire with a glass of water. We recommend the following: (1) European Commission should provide much more funding for awareness raising and combatting misinformation and disinformation; (2) it should urge progressive national governments to do the same; (3) the EU should implement the measures proposed by Martin Andree (https://ioplus.nl/en/posts/breaking-the-stranglehold-of-big-tech-why-media-monopolies-must-end---and-how-we-can-do-this-without-spending); and (4) climate misinformation and disinformation and fossil fuel lobbying should be criminalised (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jun/30/un-expert-urges-criminalizing-fossil-fuel-disinformation-banning-lobbying).
Read full response28 May 2024
The introduction of ETS2 might lead to a substantial increase of climate-polluting substances if certain measures are not taken. Therefore, it is not sufficient to analyse whether the DNSH principle is applied to concrete investments and measures funded by the SCF, but the SCF must also be used to prevent undesirable drawbacks of the ETS2. ETS2 will cause an increase in gas prices (which is, undoubtedly a useful step in itself to reduce the use of gas), but this would incentivise the burning of biomass, mainly wood, which is extremely harmful to the climate and our health. Wood-burning results in up to 2.5 times more CO2 emission for a unit of energy output than burning gas (https://ecosystems.psu.edu/research/centers/private-forests/news/burning-wood-caring-for-the-earth). It also emits an enormous amount of black carbon (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/08/eco-wood-burners-produce-450-times-more-pollution-than-gas-heating-report), the second most important climate pollutant (https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2016/03/22/the-damaging-effects-of-black-carbon/). Moreover, as increased demand drives up firewood prices, illegal cutting of trees, which has already been occurring large-scale in several countries (https://www.footprintmag.net/illegal-logging-is-destroying-europes-last-remaining-virgin-forests/), will certainly surge. Even worse, the cases of illegal residential heating will also multiply (https://www.levego.hu/en/news/suffocating-in-the-smoke-of-waste-burning/). The burning of plastic, baled clothes, treated wood and other waste in households has already been extremely widespread in Eastern European and some Southern European countries (https://www.levego.hu/en/news/ellenezzuk-megis-egetunk/), and it is one of the main causes of illnesses and deaths caused by air pollution (https://www.levego.hu/en/campaigns/waste-campaign/). It is also a major contributor to climate change, as household waste burning emits up to 40 percent more black carbon than wood burning per unit of mass (https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/16135/2020/). To avoid such tragic consequences of ETS2, a substantial part of the SCF should be used for wide-scale awareness-raising campaigns to inform the public about the harmful effects of burning wood and waste, as well as about relatively cheap and quickly implementable methods to reduce household energy use. Especially in CEE countries, many people are not aware of the enormous damages caused by wood-burning and lack knowledge even about the simplest methods to reduce energy use (e.g. how to burn wood efficiently, or how to ventilate their home in a way that avoids wasting much energy). SCF must also be used to substantially strengthen the authorities controlling illegal burning and illegal wood-cutting. SCF should also provide substantial funding to strengthen civil society organisations working on the topic.
Read full responseResponse to Managing EU climate risks
14 Jan 2024
It is absolutely necessary to eliminate all subsidies that hinder adaptation. For example, no subsidies should be provided for any construction which would eliminate or damage green areas. At the same time, all environmentally harmful subsidies must be removed, among others, to free up sources for investments into adaptation, especially for improving the energy efficiency of buildings, protecting and maintaining green areas and creating new ones, and creating sustainable agricultural practices. Please also refer to our documents related to the topic, in particular: https://www.levego.hu/sites/default/files/nuclear-power-station-Paks-II-vs-energy-efficiency-CAAG.pdf https://www.levego.hu/sites/default/files/PPP_Commission_Consultation_CAAG_2023.pdf https://www.levego.hu/sites/default/files/PPP_Commission_Consultation_CAAG_2023.pdf http://levego.hu/sites/default/files/Hungarian%20Partnership%20Agreement%20proposal%20Climate%202021apr21.pdf http://levego.hu/sites/default/files/PA_NRRP_general_conditions_2021-03-11.pdf
Read full responseMeeting with Virginijus Sinkevičius (Commissioner) and
18 Nov 2022 · To discuss the recently adopted Commission proposal for the revision of the Ambient Air Quality Directives
Response to Amendments to emissions type approval testing procedures of light-duty vehicles (WLTP and RDE)
20 Jun 2022
It seems to be in time for the review of utility factors for the calculation of plug-in hybrid (PHEV) CO2 emissions. We needed some practical information about its usability in the transformation of road mobility to the era of Zero-emission vehicles. But the latest data from the International Council on Clean Transportation shows that plug-in hybrids emit on average between 3-5 times more CO2 than official type-approval figures. The average PHEV sold last year emit between 114-190 g/km of CO2 instead of the official 38g/km. This is bad for both the environment, consumers and the EU’s energy security. The artificially low PHEV CO2 values make it easier for carmakers to meet their CO2 standards thus undermining the number of truly low emission vehicles which need to be sold. The much higher-than-expected fuel consumption undermines EU efforts to wean the transport sector off Russian oil.
While the Commission's proposal for the update of PHEV utility factors reduces the gap between official and real-world PHEV emissions, the two-step approach proposed fails to fully close the gap until 2027. That date seems to be too late.
The proposed utility factor for 2025 omits data on the usage of company cars, this is not justifiable given that company cars make up to 71% of new PHEV sales in the EU and on the average drive the least electric powered kilometers. Only incorporating the usage of company cars in the proposed 2027 utility factor results in a continuing and unnecessary gap of 25g/km between official and real world PHEV CO2 between 2025 and 2027. It is expected that this will result in close to 3 million PHEVs sold in the EU with artificially low CO2 emissions during this period. This is unnecessary as the gap between real-world and official PHEV CO2 emissions can already be closed fully in 2025. This timescale is technically feasible and gives car makers more than two years to adjust their production plans to ensure that they comply with their CO2 targets. As the recent semiconductor crisis has shown carmakers can adjust their plans quickly when required.
So it would be very useful to bring the utility factor proposed by the Commission for implementation in 2027 forward to 2025. The change will close the gap between official and real-world PHEV CO2 by 2025 and ensure that car makers do not continue to unfairly benefit from artificially low CO2 emissions. For the climate, consumers and for the EU’s energy security it is imperative that the gap is fully closed as quickly as possible, there is no justifiable reason to delay that until 2027.
In addition, we agree with the planned review of utility factors based on data from onboard fuel consumption meters in 2024 and 2026. However, to ensure that official CO2 emissions continue to reflect real-world values a biannual review of PHEV utility factors is necessary.
Read full responseResponse to Revision of the CO2 emission standards for cars and vans
6 Nov 2021
A Levegő Munkacsoport (LMCS; Clean Air Action Group) örömmel értesült róla, hogy az Európai Bizottság nekilát a személyautók és kisteherautók széndioxid-kibocsátását szabályozó rendelkezések felülvizsgálatának, és javaslatot készül tenni az EP-nek és az Európai Tanácsnak.
A személygépkocsikra vonatkozó 2020/21-ben érvénybe lépett uniós CO2-kibocsátási előírások eredményesek voltak. Az új személygépkocsik CO2-kibocsátásának példátlan, 18 százalékos csökkenése következett be a 2019-es évihez képest, nem utolsósorban az EV-k egyre növekvő kínálatának és értékesítésének is köszönhetően. (2021 első felében 16%-os lett a piaci részesedésük).
A Levegő Munkacsoport örömmel fogadta az Európai Bizottság javaslatát a robbanómotoros személyautók és kisteherautók teljes kivezetésére a piacról 2035-től. Ez valóban a legkésőbbi időpont, amellyel biztosítható az új személyautók európai piacának összhangja az EU-nak a zöld megállapodással kapcsolatos saját céljaival, különösen pedig azzal, hogy 2050-re elérjük a klímasemlegességet. A BloombergNEF elemzése szerint megfelelő politikai támogatással (beleértve a magasabb CO2-célkitűzéseket), a hagyományos személygépkocsik és kisteherautók 2030 és 2050 között minden európai országban fokozatosan kivonhatók a forgalomból.
A megvalósítás idővonala
Számít azonban, hogy a gépkocsikínálat milyen ütemmezéssel jut el 2035-re a teljesen nulla emissziós kínálatig. A 2020-as években a BEV-ek nagy piaci részesedésének elérése előfeltétele annak, hogy a gyártási költségek megfelelő mértékűre csökkenjenek és ezáltal kialakuljon a minél többek számára megfizethető elektromos autók kínálata. Ebből a szempontból a 2025-re és 2027-re kitűzött célok ambíciózussága kiemelkedő jelentőséggel bír a 2035-re kitűzött 100%-os nulla emissziós kínálat eléréséhez. Az akkumulátoros elektromos járművek értékesítésének el kellene érnie 2025-ben a 22, 2027-ben a 37 és 2030-ban a 67 százalékos piaci részesedést. Tekintve, hogy a klíma védelme érdekében is a lehető leggyorsabban és legerőteljesebben kellene csökkenteni az új robbanómotoros gépkocsik széndioxid-kibocsátását, sajnálatosnak és újragondolandónak tartjuk, hogy az EB csak 2030-tól vezetné be az új kibocsátási szabványokat. Különösen sajnálatos a jelenlegi gyenge, mindössze 15%-os 2025-ös CO2-célkitűzés érintetlenül hagyása. Ez ugyanis csak korlátozott erőfeszítésekre képes sarkallni az autógyártókat egészen 2028-1029-ig, ami akár alá is áshatja az új 2030-as, a gazdaság egészére vonatkozó -55%-os üvegházhatású gázkibocsátási célt.
Tekintve, hogy a szabályozásban sokféle rugalmassági tényező segíti az autógyárakat az előírt CO2 kibocsátási korlát betartásában, előfordulhat, hogy a csökkenés mértéke a gyakorlatban még csak el sem éri a 15 százalékot, sőt akár három százalékra is lemehet. Ezért a nulla emissziós eladásokhoz kötött ZLEV
referencia-bónuszt 2025-től el kell törölni. A tömegkorrekciós tényező is elavult, azt is újra kell gondolni.
Read full response26 Nov 2020
ESR versus ETS
The idea to put the land transport’s fuel to the ETS system is not expedient. This measure could not mitigate the fuel consumption, but neither the increase of it. The Handbook on the external costs of transport Version 2019 – 1.1 ( https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/9781f65f-8448-11ea-bf12-01aa75ed71a1 ) says that the climate change avoidance costs are between 60 €/t CO2 equivalent and 498 €/tCO2 equivalent. From this figures the Handbook calculates 1,12 eurocents/km for the climate change external costs for petrol cars which could be collected as a part of the road toll. Counting with 100 g/km CO2 emission it is 11,2 eurocents for 1 kg CO2 emission, or 112 EUR/tCO2. Now the price is 25 EURs of one tonne CO2e emission allowance in the ETS. As we know there are plans in the EU to change the Eurovignette directive and use the CO2 emission of trucks as a base of road toll. The suggested change, the involvement of land transport fuels to the ETS, could make this change impossible.
To mitigate the mobility we need to connect the CO2 emission and the burden in the users’ minds. The mobility behaviour is not fuel price sensitive. The “you drives X kilometres and pay Y euros for the CO2 emission” is a clear message, as it is shown in some road toll tests. But “a variable part of what you pay for the fuel is spent by the oil company on the ETS allowance” is very obscure.
The ESR idea is better. The member states has targets in decreasing the CO2 emission, and they can choose their own tools to reach it. For example the introduction of road toll which is a good tool to a new financing model of road network in the era of electric power too. Moreover the nowadays system with the banning of CO2 emission of vehicles is very important to encourage car factories to expand their electric-powered supply, and to reduce their supply of internal combustion models. This system must be kept.
(this is the official opinion of the Clean Air Action Group Hungary; Transparency Register Public ID number : 351764810742-20)
Read full responseResponse to Post 2020 light vehicle CO2 Regulation(s)
25 Mar 2018
The proposed annual rate of improvement (15% reduction by 2025 and 30% by 2030) is less ambitious than the current regulations and is not sufficient to curb the growing emissions from the European vehicle fleet.This regulation should set a range of at least 50-60% reduction by 2030 subject to a review in 2022 to confirm the target.
The required CO2 reduction in 2025 should be increased to 20% and is paramount to ensuring timely investments and innovation in Europe.
Years of the Dieselgate emissions scandal in Europe have exposed the weak and obsolete testing regime and highlighted the need for on-road, transparent and independent tests to ensure compliance in the real world. The current proposal offers the unique chance to ensure lowering and eventually closing the gap between real world emissions and lab CO2 values once vehicles are already in circulation. Instead of using fuel consumption meters merely for ‘monitoring purposes’ of a possible gap, a much more robust system would be to complement the type approval laboratory test with an on-road check before vehicles are placed on the market (Real World Test for CO2), as already done for air pollution, accompanied by in-use checks enforcement using fuel consumption meters once cars are in use. By requiring manufacturers to optimise vehicles’ fuel efficiency on the road, not for the laboratory, the gap between both values can be reduced and eventually closed.
The proposal has big potential to reduce the emissions of light-commercial vehicles and stimulate a market for electric vans. The Commission's own assessment argues that a -40% reduction would be optimal (but the proposal suggests only -30%).
An earlier review in 2022 (not 2024) of the proposal would allow to adjust the 2030 target to the uptake of ZEVs in the early 2020s and Member States achievements in reaching their 2030 targets.
Electro-mobility is the vehicle technology of the future. While global car makers will go electric, in particular China, Europe cannot remain a “Diesel island”. This regulation should therefore clearly state that by 2035, all new vehicles sales need to be zero emission, to allow the EU to meet its decarbonisation targets by 2050, and remain a globally leading green economy.
Read full responseMeeting with Thomas Zerdick (Cabinet of First Vice-President Frans Timmermans)
9 Jan 2018 · The situation in Hungary
Meeting with Thomas Zerdick (Cabinet of First Vice-President Frans Timmermans)
29 Mar 2017 · Situation in Hungary
Meeting with Bernd Martenczuk (Cabinet of First Vice-President Frans Timmermans)
17 Jan 2017 · Civil Society in Hungary.
5 Dec 2016
ANSWER TO THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION REGARDING THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION ABOUT RDE 3RD PACKAGE
Clean Air Action Group Hungary
The Clean Air Action Group (CAAG) is mainly agree with the Transport & Environment (T&E) in the importance of tackling particulate emissions from Gasoline Direct Injection cars and strengthen the RDE test procedure.
So we are particularly concerned by their issues:
- The extension of RDE to measure PN emissions must be implemented without delay under the proposed timetable, i.e. 2017 for new types and 2018 for all new vehicles. Any slippage of either of these dates is unacceptable and would lead to delaying urgent investment needed to ensure the growing fleet of direct gasoline injection petrol cars meets the Euro 6 limit on the road.
- Both the actual RDE test results and the maximum declared values for manufacturers must be made available in the public database in line with the Commission proposal. Any weakening of these important access to data provisions will seriously undermine RDE 3 and public information. There are orders of magnitude difference in emissions for vehicles fitted with gasoline particle filters and not, and drivers should be provided with this information.
Clean Air Action Group considers the current draft text of the proposed 3rd RDE package to be the minimum acceptable to be effective. If there is any further weakening of the text during discussions in TCMV on the 20th December, CAAG with many other stakeholders, including possibly the European Parliament; will have legitimate concerns as to the suitability of the new regulation and whether we should seek to have it rejected. There are several areas of potential improvements that should be made to the text, ideally now, or certainly before the 2nd step of RDE is introduced in 2020. These are:
- Addressing ultra-fine particles (sub-23-nm) something the Commission recognises in recital 14. Further work is needed to extend measurement to these most dangerous to health emissions in order to include them by 2020 at the latest.
- The approach used to account for higher cold-start emissions (point 27 in annex 2) should be replaced with a more accurate weighting process of their fair share in an average urban trip. Furthermore the possibility to use an up to 30s idling period between the engine start and the first movement of the vehicle (point 25 in annex 2) is a loophole to severely underestimate cold-start emissions of gasoline engines, and should be closed.
- As regards regeneration events, T&E asks the TCMV to remove the possibility to use Engine Control Unit (ECU) data for detection of such evens to ensure RDE results cannot be manipulated by carmakers (point 19 of annex 2). The exhaust temperature should be used instead. We welcome recital 17 that allows updates of Ki factors to be closer to real-world situations, but the Commission should establish a public database with more realistic values from independent tests.
- The conformity factors should be reviewed annually.
CAAG believes that the above changes will ensure that the on-road emissions tests are robust and accurately represent vehicles’ performance on the road.
Read full response