OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V.

DUH

Deutsche Umwelthilfe is an independent environmental, nature, and consumer protection organization working at national and European levels to promote sustainable living and economic practices.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Patrick Child (Deputy Director-General Environment) and

15 Dec 2025 · Nitrates Directive implementation in Germany

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament)

9 Dec 2025 · Chemikalienpolitik

Meeting with Martin Günther (Member of the European Parliament)

20 Nov 2025 · German state aid and LNG terminals

Meeting with Martin Günther (Member of the European Parliament) and WWF European Policy Programme and

18 Nov 2025 · Exchange

Meeting with Terry Reintke (Member of the European Parliament) and Amnesty International Limited and

17 Oct 2025 · EU Initiatives for Civil Society and Democracy

Meeting with Daniel Freund (Member of the European Parliament) and Amnesty International Limited and

17 Oct 2025 · NGO-Workshop

Meeting with Rasmus Andresen (Member of the European Parliament) and Naturschutzbund Deutschland e.V. and

17 Oct 2025 · Europaworkshop

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament) and Amnesty International Limited and

17 Oct 2025 · Europagruppe Grüne: Austausch mit NGOs

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament)

15 Oct 2025 · Methane emissions

Response to Revision of the EU rules on car labelling

10 Oct 2025

Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. (DUH) welcomes the revision of Directive 1999/94/EC as an opportunity to adapt the existing labeling system for passenger cars to technological developments and the requirements of climate-neutral mobility. The aim of the revision should be to present the energy consumption and efficiency of vehicles in a transparent, comparable, and consumer-friendly manner. It is crucial that the revised Directive reflects the actual energy efficiency of all types of drivetrains and prevents false incentives that lead to ever-larger and more energy-intensive vehicles. Please find attached our detailed feedback.
Read full response

Deutsche Umwelthilfe rejects any weakening of EU CO2 fleet standards

10 Oct 2025
Topic — Revision of EU CO2 emission standards for new cars and vans.
Message — DUH demands binding 2030 and 2035 CO2 fleet targets be maintained or strengthened with no loopholes. They oppose crediting biofuels or e-fuels and want PHEVs excluded from preferential treatment, arguing real-world PHEV emissions are 3-5 times higher than official values.1234
Why — This preserves regulatory certainty for environmental advocacy and prevents loopholes that would undermine climate policy.56
Impact — Automakers lose flexibility to use biofuels and PHEVs for compliance, forcing faster investments in full electrification.789
Read full response

German environmental group urges EU to prioritize natural refrigerants in heating strategy

9 Oct 2025
Topic — EU strategy to decarbonize heating and cooling through renewable energy and efficiency solutions.
Message — The organization requests the EU heating and cooling strategy prioritize natural refrigerants over fluorinated gases. They call for protecting the F-Gas Regulation, updating safety standards to allow higher fill quantities of flammable refrigerants, and encouraging member states to provide financial incentives for natural refrigerant heat pumps.123
Why — This would reduce environmental pollution from persistent PFAS chemicals released by fluorinated gases.456
Impact — Fluorochemical industry loses market share as natural refrigerants replace their F-gas products.78
Read full response

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges EU to accelerate global fossil fuel phase-out

10 Sept 2025
Topic — This consultation shapes the EU’s global climate and energy strategy for 2025-2029.
Message — The organization demands a rapid phase-out of fossil fuels and fossil hydrogen. They propose an international coalition to enforce binding methane standards on all energy imports. They also urge the EU to reject climate concessions for US energy exports.123
Why — These measures would improve climate stability and prevent long-term dependency on fossil fuel infrastructure.45
Impact — Fossil fuel exporters would lose market access if they fail to meet strict standards.67
Read full response

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges EU protection for civil society groups

2 Sept 2025
Topic — A new EU strategy to strengthen civil society engagement and fundamental rights.
Message — The group suggests a systematic impact assessment for all regulatory proposals to protect civil society space. They also demand a comprehensive EU protection system providing legal, financial, and psychosocial support.123
Why — Enhanced EU oversight would preserve their ability to monitor state compliance with environmental law.4
Impact — State actors seeking to fast-track projects without public participation would face resistance.5
Read full response

Response to Revision of the 'New Legislative Framework'

27 Aug 2025

As an environmental and consumer protection NGO, DUH want to emphasise the importance of addressing free riding via online platforms and online sellers in the NLF. In order to support the NLF's goal of creating future-proof product legislation, the wide legal loopholes in online trade should be closed by the following measures: 1) Online platforms and similar online selling business models must be included in the list of economic operators. 2) Such online platforms shall be obliged to ensure that there is always a liable economic operator in the EU who is fully responsible for the products sold through their services; if not, the online plattform should be fully liable. 3) If economic operators act as representatives for sellers from outside the EU, they should be authorised and subject to particular scrutiny to avoid the 'letterbox company' problem (as set out in the GPSR). If an authorised representative is representing multiple producers/sellers from outside the EU, they should be required to fulfil additional obligations, such as providing financial backing. 4) Additionally, online platforms shall have checking obligations (= which is not against the DSA) for environmental and consumer protection matters before a product is put online (e.g. EPR registration, energy label, etc.). Please see the novel and effective measure in Germany, where online platforms have to check an electronic product's EPR registration. This measure has led to a more than doubling of the total number of registrations, highlighting the overlooked scale of free riding. 5) Online platforms should be held accountable in such a way that they simplify market surveillance processes and reduce the burden on enforcement authorities by using their internal capabilities (e.g. internal Web-Crawlers, AI-Checking, etc.). If these legal loopholes in online trade are not closed, the current and future product legislation will continue to be undermined. This will promote economic inequality between EU and non-EU sellers, as well as between online and brick-and-mortar retailers. Ultimately, consumers and the environment continue to be harmed.
Read full response

Deutsche Umwelthilfe Rejects Chemical Recycling for Plastic Bottle Targets

19 Aug 2025
Topic — EU initiative establishing common rules for reporting recycled plastic in beverage bottles.
Message — The organization firmly rejects chemical recycling for counting recycled content in single-use bottles. They argue that only post-consumer plastic waste should be eligible to meet targets. Regulatory rules must prioritize mechanical recycling instead of less efficient technological alternatives.123
Why — This protects existing mechanical recycling markets by preventing competition from the chemical industry.4
Impact — Consumers lose transparency and risk being misled by products containing fewer recycled materials.5
Read full response

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges binding rules for electricity grid operators

5 Aug 2025
Topic — EU consultation on measures to modernize and expand energy grid infrastructure.
Message — The organization calls for binding rules to ensure grid operators provide efficient renewable energy access. They advocate for financial incentives to attract capital for necessary modernization.12
Why — The group would see their environmental goals realized through faster integration of renewable energy.3
Impact — Obstructive grid operators would lose their power to block renewable energy access.4
Read full response

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament)

16 Jul 2025 · Ecodesign-Regulation

Meeting with Eva Maria Carballeira Fernandez (Head of Unit Maritime Affairs and Fisheries) and ClientEarth AISBL and

15 Jul 2025 · Recommendations on how to address shortcomings in the ICES advice and requests

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges inclusion of waste incineration in EU ETS

8 Jul 2025
Topic — The consultation evaluates the EU Emissions Trading System to meet higher climate targets.
Message — DUH advocates for including waste incineration and landfilling in the EU carbon market. They propose starting in 2028 to prioritize recycling over burning valuable materials.12
Why — Including waste incineration would help the organization achieve its core goal of promoting recycling.3
Impact — Households would pay slightly more for waste services as carbon costs are passed on.4
Read full response

Deutsche Umwelthilfe Calls for Strict Limits on EU Biomass

23 Jun 2025
Topic — This consultation explores policies for a circular, regenerative, and competitive European bioeconomy.
Message — They demand prioritizing material biomass use over burning to ensure long-term carbon storage. The group urges phasing out crop-based biofuels and implementing rigorous life-cycle assessments.123
Why — Restricting biomass use would prevent overexploitation and help respect planetary boundaries.4
Impact — Biofuel producers would lose market access and financial support for soy-based products.56
Read full response

Meeting with Rasmus Nordqvist (Member of the European Parliament) and Seas At Risk

12 Jun 2025 · EU Oceans Pact

Meeting with Thomas Waitz (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

5 Jun 2025 · Animal Welfare Legislation

Meeting with Ilaria Flores Martin (Cabinet of Commissioner Jessika Roswall) and ClientEarth AISBL and

8 May 2025 · Bottom trawling in Natura 2000 sites

Meeting with Taru Haapaniemi (Cabinet of Commissioner Christophe Hansen) and European Environmental Bureau and Stichting Changing Markets

9 Apr 2025 · 1. Role of the CAP and ‘Vision for Food and Agriculture’ 2. Policy opportunities for methane emissions reduction

Meeting with Wopke Hoekstra (Commissioner) and

8 Apr 2025 · Discussion on tackling methane emissions

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament)

7 Apr 2025 · Event: Launch of the European Civil Society Observatory on Methane (CSO-M)

Meeting with Lena Schilling (Member of the European Parliament) and European Environmental Bureau

3 Apr 2025 · Enforcement of Environmental Law

Meeting with Oliver Schenk (Member of the European Parliament) and Germanwatch and

1 Apr 2025 · Prioritäten der europäischen Umweltpolitik

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges mandatory cost-covering prices for farmers

10 Mar 2025
Topic — Targeted amendments to EU regulations aimed at strengthening farmers' food supply positions.
Message — They demand a "mandatory EU-wide regulation for cost-covering pricing" to strengthen farmers' positions. They request "stricter rules for exemptions" and distance labels for "short supply chains." They reject a "blanket exception for cooperatives" to prevent undermining the "effectiveness" of rules.123
Why — Farmers can pass on costs associated with meeting higher environmental production standards.4
Impact — Large cooperatives would lose the ability to dictate prices to their members.5
Read full response

Meeting with Peter Liese (Member of the European Parliament) and European Society of Endocrinology

5 Mar 2025 · Austausch

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament)

5 Mar 2025 · Gespräch zur Zukunft der GAP

Meeting with Tiemo Wölken (Member of the European Parliament)

5 Mar 2025 · Car CO2 Emissions (Staff level)

Meeting with Jessika Roswall (Commissioner) and

17 Feb 2025 · European Commission Priorities

Meeting with Florika Fink-Hooijer (Director-General Environment)

4 Feb 2025 · Circular Economy, and more specifically (PPWR), (WEEE),(CRMA),(CPR), (ESPR), (GCD)

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament)

24 Jan 2025 · Alternative Antriebe nachhaltig gestalten – Planungssicherheit schaffen Die Umsetzung der europäischen Erneuerbare Energien-Richtlinie im Verkehr

Meeting with Manuela Ripa (Member of the European Parliament)

16 Jan 2025 · Offshore-Windenergie

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament) and Seas At Risk

15 Jan 2025 · Podiumsdiskussion: Wind and Waves – Advancing Offshore Wind and Solutions for Marine Sustainability

Meeting with Sebastian Everding (Member of the European Parliament)

15 Jan 2025 · Introductory meeting / EUDR

Meeting with Thomas Geisel (Member of the European Parliament)

14 Jan 2025 · Discussion on the automotive industry

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament) and Germanwatch and

11 Dec 2024 · Treffen mit DNR Mitgliedern

Meeting with Christian Ehler (Member of the European Parliament) and Greenpeace European Unit and

11 Dec 2024 · Climate, Energy and Industrial Policy

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament)

7 Nov 2024 · Treffen mit dem DUH

Environmental Action Germany warns against greenwashing fossil gas labels

25 Oct 2024
Topic — EU consultation on greenhouse gas emission methodology for low-carbon fuels.
Message — The group demands that products without emission data lose their low-carbon label after 2027. They also call for higher methane leakage estimates and the inclusion of hydrogen leaks.12
Why — Stricter standards would prevent fossil gas projects from unfairly capturing renewable energy investments.3
Impact — Gas importers lose the ability to market high-emission products as environmentally friendly using outdated data.4
Read full response

Meeting with Delara Burkhardt (Member of the European Parliament)

25 Sept 2024 · Circular Economy

Meeting with Peter Liese (Member of the European Parliament)

24 Sept 2024 · Climate policy

Meeting with Delara Burkhardt (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

24 Sept 2024 · Green Claims, PPWR

Response to Evaluation of the Common Fisheries Policy

6 Sept 2024

Dear Sir/Madam, Please find attached the Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. (Environmental Action Germany) general feedback on the consultation about the evaluation on the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation. We remain at your disposal for a more detailed information needed. Your sincerely, Dr. Claudia S. Romero-Oliva Policy Advisor for Marine Conservation
Read full response

Meeting with Jens Geier (Member of the European Parliament) and Environmental Investigation Agency

6 Sept 2024 · Exchange on the Methane Regulation and follow up initiatives

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges phasing out wood bioenergy incentives

11 Jul 2024
Topic — This evaluation assesses EU rules for carbon removals from land and forest sectors.
Message — The organization demands phasing out incentives for wood bioenergy to protect natural carbon sinks. They call on the Commission to challenge Member States failing to meet their targets.12
Why — The group would see more funding redirected toward large-scale ecosystem restoration projects.3
Impact — The bioenergy industry would lose subsidies and face significantly lower demand for wood.45
Read full response

Response to Minimum requirements for certification programmes and training attestations for RACHP equipment

10 Jun 2024

Die Deutsche Umwelthilfe dankt der Europäischen Kommission für die Ausarbeitung dieses Entwurfs zur Festlegung von Zertifizierungsanforderungen im Einklang mit der F-Gase-Verordnung (EU) 2024/573 sowie für die Möglichkeit zur Stellungnahme. Wir sehen die Durchsetzung von natürlichen Kältemitteln anstelle von F-Gasen als wichtigen Meilenstein in der Erreichung von Klimazielen bei gleichzeitiger Umweltfreundlichkeit durch Verzicht auf bedauerliche Substitutionen mit PFAS-Chemikalien. Dieser Wandel muss sich auch in aktualisierten Zertifizierungsanforderungen widerspiegeln. Zudem muss die Problematik des Fachkräftemangels ernst genommen werden. Wir schlagen dazu folgendes vor: #Artikel 10: Regelmäßige und zugängliche Fortbildungsmöglichkeiten# Eine kontinuierliche Fortbildung und berufliche Entwicklung sind von entscheidender Bedeutung. Fachkräfte sehen sich jedoch häufig mit Hindernissen konfrontiert, wie z. B. den Kosten für die Fortbildung und zeitlichen Beschränkungen. Um diese Probleme zu lösen, sollten regelmäßig Fortbildungskurse angeboten werden, die auf die Arbeitszeiten der Fachkräfte abgestimmt sind. Die Mitgliedstaaten sollten Online- und Virtual-Reality-Kurse fördern, die eine flexible Ausbildung zu Hause ermöglichen. Dieser Ansatz wird es den Fachkräften erleichtern, an Schulungen teilzunehmen, wodurch der Auffrischungsprozess beschleunigt und eine kontinuierliche Kompetenz im Umgang mit natürlichen Kältemitteln gewährleistet wird. #Artikel 8: Mehrsprachige und Online-Schulungen# Zertifizierungsstellen sollten Schulungen in mehreren Sprachen anbieten und für ausländische Fachkräfte zugänglich zu sein, insbesondere für Fachkräfte aus kleineren Ländern oder aus Grenzregionen. Auf diese Weise wird ein breiterer Zugang zu Zertifizierungen und Schulungen gewährleistet und eine einheitlichere und qualifiziertere Belegschaft gefördert. #Artikel 9(3): Erleichterung der Bewegungsfreiheit von Fachkräften# Der Mangel an qualifizierten Fachkräften z.B. im Wärmepumpensektor, wie er in Deutschland zu beobachten ist, hat zu einem Anstieg der Kosten geführt und könnte die Einführung von Wärmepumpen mit natürlichen Kältemitteln behindern. Um hier Abhilfe zu schaffen, sind Maßnahmen zur Förderung der Bewegungsfreiheit von ausgebildeten Fachkräften innerhalb der EU unerlässlich. Dies sollte mit einer zusätzlichen Klausel erleichtert werden, in welcher eine beglaubigte Übersetzung von Zertifikaten durch frei wählbare Übersetzungsdienste vereinfacht wird. Dies würde übermäßige bürokratische und finanzielle Belastungen sowie Protektionismus verhindern. #Artikel 3(2): Umfassende Ausbildung über natürliche Kältemittel# Wir befürworten, dass alle Schulungen und Zertifizierungen sowohl fluorierte Gase als auch Kohlenwasserstoffe umfassen. Sobald die neue Verordnung in Kraft tritt, sollte es keine Schulungen oder Zertifizierungen geben, die sich ausschließlich auf fluorierte Gase beziehen. Dieser umfassende Ansatz ist entscheidend für die Ausweitung des Marktes für natürliche Kältemittel, die für den Ausstieg aus fossilen Brennstoffen unerlässlich ist. Daher sollte der Text des Artikels dahingehend geändert werden, dass es heißt fluorierte Gase UND Kohlenwasserstoffe. #Artikel 10(a): Obligatorische Integration der Kohlenwasserstoff-Ausbildung# Wir betonen, dass Inhaber von Zertifikaten der Kategorien I und II gemäß Artikel 3(2) der EU 2015/2067 verpflichtet werden sollten, ein Upgrade auf das Zertifikat A zu absolvieren und dabei ihre Ausbildung mit Kohlenwasserstoffen zu integrieren.
Read full response

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges stricter carbon footprint rules for EV batteries

28 May 2024
Topic — The consultation defines methodology for calculating and verifying EV battery carbon footprints.
Message — The group demands prominent carbon labelling to guide consumers toward smaller, climate-friendly vehicle batteries. They also propose allowing renewable energy contracts only if they meet strict geographic and timing requirements.12
Why — Stricter reporting would help the group promote resource conservation and more sustainable consumption habits.3
Impact — Manufacturers of large electric SUVs lose the ability to market their batteries as environmentally superior.4
Read full response

Response to Application of the ‘do no significant harm’ principle to the Social Climate Fund and its possible future extension

28 May 2024

As a German environmental and consumer protection NGO, we want to highlight the importance of ambitious 'Do Not Significant Harm' (DNSH) criteria for circular economy in relation to circular building, renovation and demolition practices. The DNSH shall aim to incentivise resource-efficient and circular building practices, as well as sufficiency approaches that prioritise retrofitting and renovating buildings over demolition. The first is utilize all available resources before a building is demolished and rebuilt on the same site, unless it is demonstrably better for the environment to dismantle and rebuild. Moreover, incentives should be provided for the reuse of building components and only if reuse is not possible should measures for high quality recycling of Construction and demolition waste (C&DW) be taken. C&DW from buildings should be reprocessed into new building materials and not be lost in low quality construction measures for infrastructure or other backfilling practices. Therefore, a mandatory pre-demolition audit should be required as part of the DNHS criteria. We urge that any material recovery, including backfilling, should be excluded from the DNSH criteria and that only reuse and high quality recycling should be allowed to contribute to the minimum threshold (currently 70%). Furthermore, the level of ambition of the threshold should be increased as it currently only meets the legal requirement of Art. 11 of the Waste Framework Directive. As the DNSH on circular economy is the minimum set of criteria for circular construction practices - providing data that is crucial for circularity is an obvious minimum threshold to set. As the EU Construction Products Regulation (CPR) will not require information on the use of primary materials or recycled content in the near future, the DNSH criteria can be the right incentive to provide such information. The required information at the building and product level is: primary raw material inputs broken down by biomass, mineral raw materials, ores and fossil fuels over the entire life cycle (including production waste, raw materials from by-products of extraction, excavated materials from ores or chemicals used in production processes for intermediate products). Secondary material inputs should be reported in the same way as the breakdown of primary raw material inputs from extraction. Both material indicators are necessary to quantify the total material input of a building. This information benefits all actors in the building value chain and can be stored in a digital building logbook or a digital building resource passport, as is currently being developed in Germany. Data on primary and secondary resource input can also be used for future legislation on resource efficiency and circular economy in the building sector, as it allows benchmarking and setting thresholds in the near future. Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. (DUH) or Environmental Action Germany - is a non-profit environmental and consumer protection organisation founded in 1975. DUH campaigns for environmental protection and the careful use of natural resources in a variety of areas. The NGO develops opportunities for sustainable business practices and environmentally friendly products and provides a forum for exchange for many actors such as associations, politicians, citizens, companies, NGOs and many more. DUH currently employs over 200 people at several locations in Germany. In the area of decarbonisation and circular economy, DUH is committed to a sustainable lifestyle and economy that respects the ecological limits of our planet - in particular by prevention of use, using resources wisely, and disposing of waste in the most environmentally friendly way possible. DUH aims to promote the transition from the current "throwaway economy" to a truly decarbonized circular economy.
Read full response

Environmental group DUH rejects proposed weakening of nitrate limits

14 May 2024
Topic — The consultation concerns amending Annex III of the Nitrates Directive regarding manure-based fertilizers.
Message — DUH demands the withdrawal of the proposal to increase nitrogen limits for treated manure. They argue for a scientific reduction of limits to protect water and biodiversity.12
Why — The organization maintains its legal standing to challenge governments over failures to protect groundwater.3
Impact — Citizens lose clean drinking water as industrial livestock farms save on waste disposal costs.45
Read full response

Response to Car labelling evaluation

16 Apr 2024

Please find attached the feedback from Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. (DUH) on the evaluation of the Car Labelling Directive.
Read full response

Meeting with Michael Bloss (Member of the European Parliament)

12 Apr 2024 · Webinar EGRM Klimaklage

Meeting with Michael Bloss (Member of the European Parliament) and Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland e. V. and

9 Apr 2024 · NGO Exchange

Meeting with Tiemo Wölken (Member of the European Parliament) and Germanwatch and

18 Mar 2024 · 2040-Klimaziel, EP-Wahlen

Response to Evaluation of the National Emission reduction Commitments Directive

14 Mar 2024

Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. (DUH, Environmental Action Germany) welcomes the initiative of the European Commission to start the revision process of the National Emission Reduction Commitments Directive (NEC Directive EU/2016/2284) with a call for evidence since we see an urgent need for an update. Regarding the evaluation of the current status of implementation of the NEC Directive and its effectiveness, DUH states that an EU Directive that specifies reduction obligations for emission of air pollutants for the EU member states is indispensable. Having said that, new and stricter reduction targets for the period after 2030 are necessary to fulfil the goal of the zero pollution ambition in Europe. The objectives defined in article one of the NEC Directive are still valid and need to be addressed at EU level continuously. But the Directive and its objective need an update. Since 2016, better scientific evidence regarding negative effects of air pollution on peoples health, the environment and the climate is available, and the policy framework changed. Updated air quality guidelines from the World Health Organization were published, new European air quality regulations are under revision or already updated, the 8th Environmental Action Programme with new targets for 2030 and a long-term perspective towards 2050 was established and the evidence of synergies of air pollution reduction measures and climate protection measures increased significantly. Especially the relevance of short-lived climate pollutants is outstanding. The most important are black carbon (BC) as part of PM2.5 with a GWP20 of up to 3,200 and methane (CH4) with a GWP20 of 83 and precursor of tropospheric ozone. With new scientific evidence regarding health harming effects of air pollutants and the co-damages of certain pollutants like black carbon and methane for the climate, the directive needs to implement stricter reduction targets. Moreover, targets for additional air pollutants have to be included in the regulatory framework to comply with both the EU climate protection targets and the zero-pollution ambition. In particular, DUH sees the necessity for additional reduction targets for the following air pollutants: black carbon, methane and ozone. The directive is an effective tool, if the reduction targets draw up a steep, stringent, and linear decreasing path for the emission for every harmful air pollutant. Therefore, DUH suggests implementing stricter reduction targets with additional binding interim targets every 5 years. Futhermore, Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. sees an urgent need for stricter regulations to ensure that reduction obligations of air pollutant emissions are fulfilled on time: an improved legal framework with better enforcement procedures to decrease the risk of non-compliance and delays by member states is crucial. The enforcement of compliance must be secured with timely means of immediately effective infringement procedures and penalties at national and EU level. The implementation of strict deadlines for the submission of National Air Pollution Control Programmes has to be accompanied by an automatic procedure of prosecution notices to the responsible authorities/governments. In general, it should be noted that the NEC Directive has made an important contribution to the reduction of air pollutant emissions and thus also to the improvement of air quality in Europe and is a major pillar of the overall European clean air policy. However, in order to maintain the positive effect and actually achieve the goals of a pollutant-free environment and climate neutrality in Europe, the directive requires some substantial adjustments, which we have just listed. With a revision process now underway, this goal must be pursued faster and more ambitiously.
Read full response

Environmental Action Germany demands ecological focus in energy auctions

1 Mar 2024
Topic — This consultation concerns the design of qualitative criteria for renewable energy auction processes.
Message — The group demands that non-price criteria account for sixty percent of evaluation. They call for European harmonization of auction designs to include ecological standards. Additionally, they propose capping financial bids to prevent rising electricity costs.123
Why — Uniform rules would reduce administrative burdens for developers and improve investment security.4
Impact — Large fossil fuel companies lose their ability to dominate auctions using pure capital.5
Read full response

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament) and Biodynamic Federation Demeter International e.V.

16 Feb 2024 · Diskussionsveranstaltung "Die Gemeinsame Agrarpolitik der EU: Wo stehen wir - wo wollen wir hin?"

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament)

7 Feb 2024 · DUH-Veranstaltung "Gentechnikfreies Europa"

Response to 8th Environment Action Programme – Mid-term Review

26 Jan 2024

The NGO Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe, DUH) welcomes the publication of the Mid-term Review report regarding the progress of the 8th Environmental Action Programme of the European Union (8th EAP) and thanks for the opportunity to comment the report. The 8th EAP is a legally agreed-upon, overarching framework for action on EU environmental policy until 2030 aiming to progress towards the goal of a climate neutral continent by 2050. DUH considers it important that the implementation of ambitious targets like set in the 8th EAP are assessed through continuous monitoring and evaluation. As a matter of course, we expect this evaluation to reflect actual developments and that adaptive measures are taken if lack of compliance with that targets reveal. Therefore, DUH is concerned about the high number of indicators marked as unlikely but uncertain or very unlikely to fulfil the targets by 2030. In particular, the indicators identified in the report as unlikely to be met (GHG from LULUCF, Energy Consumption, Circular material use rate, area under organic farming and consumption footprint) are of high concern and should be given clear priority within the current actions (legislative procedures, implementation of strategy papers, implementation of measures, etc.). Furthermore, some indicators for which the achievement of the targets by 2030 is assessed as "very likely" are also misleading with regard to the actual process. A detailed feedback can be found in the attached document.
Read full response

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

17 Jan 2024 · Methane

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges drastic cuts to boiler emission limits

21 Dec 2023
Topic — Review of EU energy labelling and ecodesign requirements for solid fuel boilers.
Message — DUH demands the mandatory use of filters and stricter limits for particulate matter and ultrafine particles. They also seek to expand the regulation to cover larger boilers and water-only systems.123
Why — Stricter standards would lower premature deaths and align EU policy with international health guidelines.4
Impact — The coal and biomass sectors face significant operational restrictions and potential total bans.5
Read full response

Meeting with Alexandra Geese (Member of the European Parliament) and Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund and

15 Dec 2023 · Sozial-ökologische Transformation

Meeting with Daniel Freund (Member of the European Parliament) and OXFAM INTERNATIONAL EU ADVOCACY OFFICE and

15 Dec 2023 · Treffen mit Verbänden zur Europawahl aus dem sozial-ökologischen Bereich

Meeting with Erik Marquardt (Member of the European Parliament) and Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund and

15 Dec 2023 · Austausch Sozioökonomische Lage

Meeting with Michael Bloss (Member of the European Parliament) and Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund and

15 Dec 2023 · sozial-ökologische Transformation in Europa

Meeting with Anna Deparnay-Grunenberg (Member of the European Parliament) and Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund and

15 Dec 2023 · Sozial-ökologische Transformation

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament) and Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund and

15 Dec 2023 · Verbändetreffen sozial-ökologische Transformation

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament) and Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund and

15 Dec 2023 · Austausch zu Umweltpolitik

DUH demands stricter ecodesign rules for solid fuel heaters

14 Dec 2023
Topic — Reviewing EU ecodesign requirements for residential solid fuel local space heaters.
Message — The organization calls for mandatory electrostatic precipitators and catalytic converters on all stoves. They demand much stricter emission limits for particulate matter and particle numbers while proposing a total ban on coal burning. Additionally, they argue for improved testing procedures that include all burning phases and realistic fuel use.123
Why — Stricter standards would directly advance the organization's environmental and public health advocacy goals.4
Impact — Stove manufacturers and coal users would face higher costs and significant regulatory restrictions.56
Read full response

Deutsche Umwelthilfe Demands Stricter EU Circularity Rules for Cars

4 Dec 2023
Topic — The EU is revising legislation to ensure sustainable vehicle design and end-of-life management.
Message — The organization calls for mandatory durability standards and immediate recycled content targets for vehicles. They demand a ban on software that restricts independent repairs and third-party parts.123
Why — Stronger regulations fulfill their mission of promoting resource efficiency and protecting consumer interests.45
Impact — Automobile manufacturers would lose control over repair services and face higher production costs.678
Read full response

Response to Waste Framework review to reduce waste and the environmental impact of waste management

20 Nov 2023

Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. (DUH) welcomes that the Commission proposes to amend the Waste Frame-work Directive (WFD) and appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposal. Since DUH has been working intensively on food waste for years, we will focus on aspects related to food waste. DUH generally appreciates that the Commission recognizes the massive environmental impacts of food waste and that the Commission formulates the aim to reduce environmental and climate impacts. DUH also welcomes that the Commission proposes binding food waste reduction targets. However, DUH encourages the European Commission to formulate more ambitious targets that live up to the SDG 12.3 targets. Targets that are more ambitious are needed not least because the accompany-ing assessments and reports unequivocally state that member states have made too little progress in the past years. DUH recommends increasing the reduction targets to 50% from farm to fork (including primary produc-tion). With respect to food waste measurement, it needs to be ensured that the methodologies applied in the member states are reliable, comparable and subject to scientific evaluation. To prevent the generation of food waste in the first place, further legislation needs to be aligned (e.g. on date labelling and marketing standards). Please find our recommendations in the attached file.
Read full response

Meeting with Helmut Geuking (Member of the European Parliament)

20 Nov 2023 · EU-Verpackungsverordnung (PPWR)

Meeting with Malte Gallée (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and European Environmental Bureau and Environmental Coalition on Standards

16 Nov 2023 · End-of-Life Vehicles Regulation

Meeting with Peter Liese (Member of the European Parliament)

14 Nov 2023 · Austausch

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Climate Action Network Europe and

10 Nov 2023 · Methane

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Climate Action Network Europe and

5 Oct 2023 · Methane

Response to Energy labelling requirements for electronic displays

21 Sept 2023

DUH welcomes the initiative to review ecodesign and energy labelling requirements for electronic displays as this has the potential to decrease electronic waste and to set a new European standard when it comes to sustainability of devices. Up to 80 % of the environmental impact of those products is determined at the design phase. To improve the environmental performance of those products, as the Commissions draft for Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation claims as one of the main objectives, it is necessary to set ambitious ecodesign and energy labelling requirements regarding resource and energy efficiency of these products. With regards to the proposed eco-design and energy labelling for electronic displays, the DUH welcomes the assessment of the issues to be addressed by this review, in particular the scope of the regulation, the balance of stringency between larger and smaller products, the lack of information to consumers, the scope for improvement in material efficiency and the restriction of substances of concern. However, in DUH's view, there are significant opportunities for improvements in both drafts. Apart from the extension of the scope for electronic displays to signage displays, an extension of reliable actors and obligations is needed. Going further, resource efficiency of electronic displays will further be improved through requirements such as standardized and modular design, durability, availability and pricing of spare parts, availability of software updates as well as repairability, replaceability and recycled content targets. For detailed information, please refer to the attached position paper. Lastly, together with environmental NGOs and the repair community DUH also calls for stronger energy efficiency requirements in a Joint feedback (2nd document in file to this consultation under III. Energy Efficiency, p.2-6).
Read full response

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Climate Action Network Europe and

21 Sept 2023 · Methane

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament) and Deutscher Tierschutzbund - German Animal Welfare Federation and

8 Sept 2023 · Austausch zum Thema Gentechnik

Meeting with Malte Gallée (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur for opinion)

23 Aug 2023 · Meeting im Büro der DUH

Response to Guiding principles and criteria for the in-service verification of CO2 emissions from light-duty vehicles

11 Aug 2023

Die Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) begrüßt die Initiative der Europäischen Kommission Maßnahmen zu ergreifen, um das Verwenden von Abschalteinrichtungen und Manipulationen, die Einfluss auf das Emissionsverhalten von Pkw und leichten Nutzfahrzeugen im Realbetrieb auf der Straße nehmen, zu erschweren. Die Vergangenheit hat gezeigt, wie die Automobilhersteller die unzureichenden Kontrollen und das veraltete Zulassungsverfahren illegal auf Kosten der Umwelt und der Gesundheit der Bürgerinnen und Bürger ausnutzten konnten, ohne mit Sanktionen rechnen zu müssen. Neben den extrem hohen Schadstoffemissionen im Realbetrieb schönten die Hersteller auch die Verbrauchswerte und den Käuferinnen und Käufern wurden sparsame und saubere Fahrzeuge angepriesen. Mit der Einführung des WLTP-Zulassungsverfahrens (Worldwide harmonized Light Duty Test Procedure), den RDE-Messungen (Real Drive Emissions-Tests) sowie den verpflichtenden Nachmessungen der in Betrieb befindlichen Fahrzeuge durch die Marktüberwachungsbehörden der Mitgliedsstaaten werden bereits viele Messdaten erhoben. Zusätzlich müssen die Automobilhersteller die Spritverbräuche stichprobenartig bei den von ihnen in den Verkehr gebrachten Fahrzeugen kontinuierlich auslesen und den entsprechenden Behörden sowie der Öffentlichkeit zur Verfügung stellen. Die umfängliche und transparente Umsetzung dieser bestehenden Auflagen sollte höchste Priorität haben. Um weiteren Manipulationen vorzubeugen, ist es aus Sicht der DUH dringend notwendig, dass alle erhobenen Daten zusammengeführt, ausgewertet und überprüft werden. Sowohl die Messdaten der unterschiedlichen Testverfahren als auch die Auswertungen der zusammengeführten Daten müssen für die Zivilgesellschaft uneingeschränkt und kostenlos zugänglich gemacht werden. Sollten Auffälligkeiten bei den erhobenen Daten oder bei den Auswertungen auftreten, muss dem nachgegangen werden, weitere Überprüfungen erfolgen und gegebenenfalls geeignete Abhilfemaßnahmen sowie wirksame Sanktionen erlassen werden. Auch hier muss die Transparenz gewährleistet sein und die Auffälligkeiten, Maßnahmen und Sanktionierungen identisch wie bei den Messdaten und den Auswertungen öffentlich einsehbar sein. Zusammenfassend müssen aus Sicht der DUH die gesetzlich vorgeschriebenen Tests und Datenerhebungen korrekt durchgeführt werden. Die Daten der einzelnen Tests sowie die Auswertungen der zusammengeführten Daten müssen öffentlich und kostenlos einsehbar sein und geeignete Abhilfemaßnahmen sowie wirksame Sanktionen bei Nichterfüllung veranlasst werden.
Read full response

Response to Update of the reference to the reporting template for emission projections.

9 Aug 2023

Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) welcomes in principle the increased detail of the projection results to be reported, which is provided by the changes in (1) In Annex I, Table C "Projected Emissions by NFR Source Category", in response to LRTAP's revised reporting guidelines. The aggregation by NFR source category allows for a more accurate attribution of mitigation success and projected measures, and more clearly identifies the challenges where mitigation leverage needs to be applied. However, it is disappointing to see the ambition for greater detail qualified in the next sentence. It is understandable that in the absence of data, one has to resort to the next higher level of aggregation. But the conclusion must be that when data is missing, a data collection programme is set up and the data to be reported will be generated. Thus, in the future it will be possible to report in all areas according to the NFR source category.
Read full response

Response to European Critical Raw Materials Act

30 Jun 2023

Aus Sicht der Deutschen Umwelthilfe (DUH) muss der Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) eine zuverlässige Rohstoffversorgung mit den für die Dekarbonisierung und die grüne Transformation benötigten Materialien ermöglichen. Der CRMA soll sicherstellen, dass der Ressourcenbedarf bestmöglich minimiert wird und Rohstoffabbau und Weiterverarbeitung auf die ökologisch und sozial am wenigsten belastende Weise durchgeführt werden. Dafür müssen insbesondere die Kreislaufwirtschaft, Umweltschutz und Menschenrechtsstandards im Gesetzestext stärker berücksichtigt werden. Die DUH empfiehlt deshalb u.a. folgende Verbesserungen: 1. Adressieren des Nachfragemanagement. Der klimaneutrale Umbau unserer Gesellschaft erfordert den Einsatz großer Mengen an Ressourcen. Um die Abhängigkeit von strategischen und kritischen Rohstoffen zu mindern, muss ein langlebiges und kreislauffreundliches Design der Produkte aber auch der effiziente Einsatz von Materialien adressiert werden. Dafür braucht es verbindliche Ziele für die Reduktion des Materialfußabdrucks und einen nachhaltigen Konsum. 2. Besserer Schutz von Umwelt- und Menschenrechten. Bergbau ist ein Sektor mit hohem Risiko für Menschenrecht und Umwelt, weshalb menschenrechtliche und umweltbezogene Sorgfaltspflichten ein fester Bestandteil des CRMA sein müssen. Ein Verweis auf die CSDDD deckt die Nachhaltigkeit nur ungenügend ab, zumal kleinere Unternehmen nach aktuellem Stand davon ausgenommen sind. Auch die vorgeschlagene Rolle von Zertifizierungssystemen lehnen wir aus Umwelt- und Verbrauchersicht ab, da die Branche so einen Freibrief zur Selbstregulierung erhält und sogar andere Vorschriften wie die EU-Konfliktmineralien-Verordnung untergraben könnte. 3. Beschleunigung nicht zu Lasten bestehender Umwelt- und Sozialstandards. Der Schutz von Umwelt- und Menschenrechten darf nicht gegen die Beschleunigung von Projekten zur Rohstoffbeschaffung und -verarbeitung ausgespielt und durch den Status des überragenden öffentlichen Interesses umgangen werden. Schnellverfahren für Projekte verkürzen die Zeit für die Prüfung von Umweltauswirkungen und die Beteiligung der Bevölkerung erheblich. Neben klar definierten No-Go-Zonen für strategische Projekte bedarf es daher klarer Vorgaben für verbindliche und hochwertige Umweltprüfungen und Beteiligungsverfahren. Projekte müssen abgelehnt werden können, wenn keine Zustimmung der lokalen Bevölkerung vorliegt. 4. Stärkung der Kreislaufwirtschaft. Für eine nachhaltige Ausgestaltung der Rohstoffversorgung muss das Potential der Kreislaufwirtschaft vollständig ausgeschöpft werden. Ein vollständiger und wirksamer Rahmen sollte insbesondere auch die oberen Abfallhierarchieebenen stärken, z.B. durch effizienteren Rohstoffeinsatz, Wiederverwendung, Reparatur und ein langlebiges Produktdesign. Der CRMA sollte hierzu auch mit der Überarbeitung wichtiger anderer Rechtsakte verknüpft werden wie die Richtlinien über Elektro- und Elektronikaltgeräte und Altfahrzeuge sowie die Ökodesign-Verordnung für nachhaltige Produkte. Neben der Stärkung von Recyclinginfrastrukturen und dem Rezyklateinsatz muss auch die ordnungsgemäße Sammlung von Produkten mit kritischen und strategischen Rohstoffen massiv hochgefahren werden. 5. Stärkung der internationalen Zusammenarbeit. Der CRMA birgt die Gefahr, dass unfaire und ungerechte Strukturen fortgeschrieben werden, indem ressourcenreiche Länder als billige Rohstofflieferanten und Abnehmer von in der EU produzierten grünen Industrieprodukten dienen. Vielmehr sollten Handelsinstrumente dazu genutzt werden, den Aufbau von Wertschöpfung in Partnerländern zu unterstützen. Dazu müssen die Kriterien für strategische Partnerschaften gestärkt und ausgeweitet sowie Zugang zu Informationen und öffentliche Beteiligung bei den Verhandlungen, der Umsetzung und dem Monitoring sichergestellt werden. Detaillierte Ausführung zu den genannten Punkten und weitere Forderungen entnehmen Sie den angehängten Dokumenten. Anhang: CSO 3-Seiter & ECOS/DUH/rreuse Papier
Read full response

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges EU to fund only clean technologies

27 Jun 2023
Topic — The consultation addresses a framework for scaling up European net-zero technology manufacturing.
Message — Support should be limited to truly clean technologies while excluding nuclear and biomethane. They demand mandatory environmental and social criteria in public procurement and permitting procedures. Additionally, the act must prioritize demand reduction and product durability.123
Why — This ensures EU industrial policy aligns with environmental preservation and social justice.45
Impact — The nuclear power industry loses strategic status and access to public funding.67
Read full response

Meeting with Malte Gallée (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur for opinion) and Zero Waste Europe and

8 Jun 2023 · Definitions, quotas, system requirements – How reuse measures need to be designed within the PPWR?

Meeting with Grace O'Sullivan (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and RELOOP

7 Jun 2023 · Reuse in the PPWR (attended by an assistant)

Meeting with Bas Eickhout (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

6 Jun 2023 · Euro 7

Meeting with Ska Keller (Member of the European Parliament)

1 Jun 2023 · Bottom trawling in German coastal waters

Meeting with Tiemo Wölken (Member of the European Parliament)

25 May 2023 · Luftqualität und Luftverschmutzung

Deutsche Umwelthilfe warns against mandatory contracts for difference

17 May 2023
Topic — The EU is updating electricity market designs to stabilize prices and accelerate transitions.
Message — The group opposes making price-support contracts mandatory for renewables to prevent slowing green expansion. They suggest keeping parallel funding options and excluding nuclear power from the new rules.123
Why — This would safeguard renewable energy investments and prevent unfair market advantages for fossil fuels.4
Impact — Fossil fuel and nuclear companies would face stricter profit caps and lose public subsidies.5
Read full response

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges zero-emission mandate for trucks by 2030

17 May 2023
Topic — The European Commission is revising CO2 emission standards for new heavy-duty vehicles.
Message — The organization calls for a 100% CO2 reduction for trucks starting in 2030. They advocate for zero-emission city buses by 2027 and stringent interim goals. They also oppose loopholes for e-fuels and other so-called alternative fuels.123
Why — Stricter targets would help the organization achieve its core climate neutrality goals.4
Impact — Manufacturers of combustion engines would face stricter penalties and faster fleet transitions.5
Read full response

Meeting with Matthias Ecke (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur for opinion)

10 May 2023 · Euro 7

Meeting with Malte Gallée (Member of the European Parliament) and Minderoo Foundation Limited ATF The Minderoo Foundation Trust

4 May 2023 · Packaging and Packaging Waste

Reuse Alliance urges EU to prioritize refillable over single-use packaging

3 May 2023
Topic — The consultation defines sustainable investment criteria for the EU's circular economy objectives.
Message — They request that the taxonomy prioritize reusable packaging over single-use alternatives. They also propose expanding these criteria to include glass, metal, and paper. Finally, they suggest higher recycled content thresholds and banning chemical recycling.123
Why — New criteria would safeguard the market position of established German reuse system operators.4
Impact — Chemical recycling firms and compostable plastic producers would see their technologies labeled unsustainable.56
Read full response

Meeting with Nicola Beer (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

28 Apr 2023 · Critical Raw Materials Act (Meeting held by parliamentary assistant)

Meeting with Hildegard Bentele (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and ERAMET

25 Apr 2023 · Critical Raw Materials Act

Meeting with Tiemo Wölken (Member of the European Parliament) and Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland e. V. and

25 Apr 2023 · Aktuelle Themen der Klimapolitik

Meeting with Tiemo Wölken (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur for opinion)

18 Apr 2023 · Net-Zero Industry Act

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament)

15 Mar 2023 · Allgemeiner Austausch

Deutsche Umwelthilfe Demands Strict WHO Air Standards by 2025

14 Mar 2023
Topic — The European Commission is revising air quality standards for the European Union.
Message — DUH demands that air quality limits match WHO recommendations and become legally binding by 2025. They also call for stronger enforcement tools and mandatory penalties.12
Why — The group would achieve its health protection goals while reducing societal disease costs.3
Impact — Negligent authorities and polluting industries would face mandatory financial penalties and legal action.4
Read full response

Meeting with Michael Bloss (Member of the European Parliament)

14 Mar 2023 · Strommarktdesign

Meeting with Norbert Lins (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and Bundesverband der Deutschen Industrie e.V. and thyssenkrupp Steel Europe AG

9 Mar 2023 · AAQD

Meeting with Petros Kokkalis (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

28 Feb 2023 · Ambient Air Quality

Meeting with Michael Bloss (Member of the European Parliament)

27 Feb 2023 · Luftqualität, Ambient Air Quality Directive

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges rejection of expanded biofuel feedstock list

2 Jan 2023
Topic — The European Commission is updating the list of sustainable feedstocks for biofuel production.
Message — The organization calls for a fundamental revision of the proposal and the deletion of several categories. They argue that expanding the list risks market distortions, fraud, and harmful additional land use.123
Why — Tightening these rules helps the NGO ensure land is used for ecosystem restoration rather than fuel.4
Impact — Biodiversity and the climate suffer from increased land use pressure and associated greenhouse gas emissions.5
Read full response

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament)

23 Nov 2022 · Veranstaltung zu Antibiotika

Response to Evaluation of the 2012 Directive on waste from electrical and electronic equipment

3 Nov 2022

Dear European Commission, please see our attached position paper on Waste from electrical and electronic equipment evaluating the EU rules. Additional we appended a joint background paper on revision of WEEE directive that was published in March 2022 and a position paper on WEEE standards published in 2021, both together with other NGOs. Sincerely, Shalaja Weber
Read full response

Deutsche Umwelthilfe backs new hazard classes for persistent chemicals

18 Oct 2022
Topic — The European Commission is proposing new hazard classes within the CLP chemical regulation.
Message — The group strongly supports new hazard classes to protect human health and environment. They specifically call for classifying Trifluoracetate to protect drinking water quality. They also demand the Commission accelerate the restriction of persistent chemicals through REACH.123
Why — These changes would allow better communication of risks and trigger better control measures.4
Impact — The chemical industry would face new costs associated with stricter chemical management.5
Read full response

Meeting with Michael Bloss (Member of the European Parliament)

12 Oct 2022 · Luftreinheitsrichtlinie

Meeting with Delara Burkhardt (Member of the European Parliament)

12 Oct 2022 · Packaging

Meeting with Malte Gallée (Member of the European Parliament)

12 Oct 2022 · Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

29 Sept 2022 · Methane strategy

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges stricter repair and sustainability rules for phones

28 Sept 2022
Topic — The EU is consulting on new ecodesign and energy labelling rules for mobile devices.
Message — The group requests a six-month implementation period and ten-year availability for spare parts and software updates. They argue the price of spare parts must be included in the repair score.123
Why — Tighter rules would help the organization achieve its goal to decrease electronic waste across Europe.4
Impact — Manufacturers would lose the benefit of long transition periods and the ability to limit updates.5
Read full response

Meeting with Michael Bloss (Member of the European Parliament) and Germanwatch and Deutscher Naturschutzring, Dachverband der deutschen Natur-, Tier- und Umweltschutzverbände (DNR) e.V.

20 Sept 2022 · Fit-for-55, ETS

Meeting with Joachim Schuster (Member of the European Parliament)

7 Sept 2022 · Exchange of views on environment protection

Meeting with Jens Geier (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and BDEW Bundesverband der Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft e. V. and

31 Aug 2022 · Vorschlag einer Verordnung über die Verringerung von Methanemissionen im Energiesektor

Meeting with Delara Burkhardt (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

31 Aug 2022 · Deforestation

Response to Review of the Construction Products Regulation

12 Jul 2022

In the new CPR, art. 22(1) touches upon methodology but leaves the door open to the use of existing harmonised technical specifications, notably under EN 15804. The latter lays out the core rules of Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs), upon which product category rules are standardised and applied to cover product-specific aspects. However, EPDs are not able to deliver on the decarbonisation objectives posed by the CPR and ESPR, as well as horizontal whole-life-carbon measurements and reduction targets set at the building-level. As integration of fragments of PEF into standards is proving too slow of a process, I suggest to foresee the direct use of PEF to underpin the CPR. To ensure effective limits to embodied impacts are set, set mandatory thresholds limits and classes of performance for the environmental performance of construction products in construction work within standardisation requests. Ensure these go above the provided definition of state-of-the art (art. 4(4)), are future-proof, i.e. index to the EU’s climate goals, to justify the right to make green claims consistently over time and gradually phase out worst performers from the European Single Market. On the basis of the system described above, secure the timely development of Delegated Acts establishing a mandatory labelling system in substitution of existing standards covering B2C and B2B communication. As of the importance of communicating environmental assessment results, it will be essential to propose formats that strike a balance between granularity of information and ease of understanding for professional users and consumers. This will be essential to ensure sustainable products are pulled into the market. Annex I part D provides directly applicable product information requirements. Yet, the parameters proposed do not fully align with the inherent requirements on performance, as it is the case under the ESPR. In particular, art. 7 ESPR (b)(i) requires products to be accompanied by information on the performance of products in relation to an extended list of parameters referred to in Annex I (product parameters). Yet these do not align with the relatively short list of requirements set by the new CPR in its Annex I. To ensure full alignment, the CPR must mirror product parameters set in Annex I ESPR. Some of the missing essential product information parameters include: - Carbon footprint - Full bill of materials - Full list of chemical substances and composition - Microplastic release Disclosure and collection of information on these key impact categories is of primary importance, as it will constitute the basis for the setting of minimum inherent product performance requirements. I suggest to introduce a full list of product information requirements (Annex I part D) in the CPR based on the full list of inherent product requirements listed in Annex I part C. It would be good to ensure full alignment with the ESPR’s product information parameters, notably by introducing requirements on bill of materials, chemical content as well as microplastic release. Where needed, please ensure these parameters are specified by product category through legal acts in a timely manner. As there is a direct obligation for the CPR to align with the ambition of the ESPR, I propose to include in the CPR text provisions contained in Chapter V ESPR to ensure the timely development of the requirements contained in Annex I part C. Specifically, this entails the creation of a working plan (as of art. 16 ESPR) as well as a preparatory study identifying key environmental hotspots per product category. This will ensure prioritisation of products and a systematic process to address the wide range of product categories. Ensure these requirements take the form of minimum performance (embodied carbon,..) and functional (circularity, durability,..) requirements, meaning requirements clearly setting thresholds for market access for the relevant impact category set in Annex I part C
Read full response

Meeting with Markus Pieper (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

7 Jul 2022 · RED III

Meeting with Delara Burkhardt (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

6 Jul 2022 · deforestation

Deutsche Umwelthilfe urges complete phase-out of fluorinated greenhouse gases

29 Jun 2022
Topic — The consultation reviews EU regulations on fluorinated greenhouse gases to align with Green Deal objectives.
Message — The organization calls for a complete phase-out of all fluorinated gases to prevent the accumulation of persistent degradation products in ecosystems. They advocate for an accelerated phase-down based on maximum technical feasibility rather than proportionate costs. Additionally, they request bans on fluorinated gases in new equipment to promote sustainable, F-gas free alternatives.123
Why — They achieve their environmental goals by preventing long-term chemical contamination of soil and water.45
Impact — Chemical manufacturers face strict bans on their next-generation substitutes and associated revenue losses.678
Read full response

Response to Amendments to emissions type approval testing procedures of light-duty vehicles (WLTP and RDE)

20 Jun 2022

Deutsche Umwelthilfe (Environmental Action Germany) sees urgent need for action at EU level to adjust the utility factor (UF) for PHEVs In times of climate change and energy crisis, driven by Russia's invasion of Ukraine, we need even more a reduction of energy consumption and CO2 emissions in the transport sector. Sales of the supposedly more climate-friendly PHEVs are rising steadily, driven by tax benefits and buyers premi-ums. Manufacturers benefit from the officially low CO2 emission of PHEV to achieve the necessary lowering of their CO2 fleet targets. The EU's efforts to reduce CO2 emissions in the transport sector are having no effect on PHEVs, but rather the opposite is happening: PHEVs sold last year emit 90-105 g CO2/km for private use and 175-195 g CO2/km for company cars. The official value for these PHEVs is 37-39 g CO2/km in WLTP. Measurements by DUH's Emissions Control Institute show that PHEVs exceed the official value by more than 600 percent under real driving conditions on the road. CO2 values of up to 500 g/km were measured in the tests. On the one hand, this leads to significant-ly higher fuel costs for consumers, and on the other hand, the assumed reduction in CO2 emissions is not achieved through the use of PHEVs. The decisive factor for the high gap between the official CO2 value and the real value on the road for PHEVs is the so-called utility factor (UF), which is used in the calculation of the CO2 value for type approval and indicates the supposed all-electric operation of the PHEV. Currently, an electric driving share of 70-85 percent for PHEVs is used as a basis for the type approval procedure. Calculations by the ICCT show that company cars are only driven 11-15 percent purely electrically, and the share of electric operation in private use of PHEVs is also far below the 70-85 percent. This serious difference unfairly plays into the manufacturers' pockets, as it makes it much easier for them to achieve the CO2 standards and falsely lowers the CO2 fleet limit. DUH supports the proposal of the EU to update the UF. However, from DUH's point of view and after evaluation of the ICCT study as well as the calculations of Transport & Environment, the recently presented two-step procedure of the EU is not sufficient. By updating the UF as proposed by the EU, a gap will still remain and manufacturers will be further favored to reduce the CO2 fleet limit only on paper. To realise a more realistic CO2 emission value from PHEV, DUH supports the recommendation that is given by the mentioned ICCT study to replace parameter dn = 800 km with a more realistic value of dn = 4260 km as proposed by the ICCT. For the global climate and Europe's energy supply, stricter measures must be taken now to close the gap between the official CO2 figures and the real CO2 values of PHEVs as quickly as possible. For this, the UF 2027 proposed by the EU must be implemented as early as possible, from 2025 at the latest.
Read full response

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament)

31 May 2022 · Teilnahme Online Kolloquium "Der brasilianische Cerrado unter dem Druck europäischer Sojaimporte: Welchen Beitrag kann die EU-Verordnung gegen Entwaldung leisten?"

Deutsche Umwelthilfe demands stricter EU list for reserve antibiotics

17 May 2022
Topic — This consultation establishes a list of antimicrobials reserved solely for human medical treatment.
Message — The organization rejects the proposal for failing to protect health and ignoring WHO recommendations. They demand a ban on group animal treatments for critically important human antibiotics.12
Why — Stricter regulations ensure that life-saving medicines remain effective for treating human infections.3
Impact — Large-scale livestock producers and drug sellers would face restricted product usage and sales.4
Read full response

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament) and Germanwatch and WWF Deutschland

12 May 2022 · Austausch zum Thema Deforestation

DUH urges mandatory indicators for new EU forest monitoring law

6 May 2022
Topic — A proposed framework for gathering standardized data on European forest health.
Message — DUH calls for mandatory indicators to be included in the law to measure climate and biodiversity goals. They want harmonized national definitions to ensure forest management practices are objectively assessed across the EU.12
Why — Harmonized data would help the group monitor the effects of management on biodiversity.3
Impact — Forestry companies lose the ability to label intensive practices as sustainable without benchmarks.4
Read full response

Meeting with Maria Noichl (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur for opinion) and Germanwatch

3 May 2022 · Entwaldungsfreie Lieferketten

Meeting with Markus Pieper (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Germanwatch and

27 Apr 2022 · RED III

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament)

26 Apr 2022 · Teilnahme an DUH Tagung „Die Zukunft der Tiergesundheit - und die Frage der Reserveantibiotika im Stall“

Meeting with Bernd Lange (Member of the European Parliament, Committee chair) and Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland e. V. and

26 Apr 2022 · General exchange of view

Deutsche Umwelthilfe demands EU regulate methane in energy imports

12 Apr 2022
Topic — EU regulation setting binding rules to monitor and reduce energy sector methane emissions.
Message — They request extending the regulation to cover all fossil fuel imports and the petrochemical industry. They also advocate for monthly leak inspections and faster reporting timelines.123
Why — Stricter rules would help the organization accelerate the phase-out of all fossil fuel use.4
Impact — Energy companies and importers face higher costs from more frequent inspections and strict reporting requirements.56
Read full response

Meeting with Jens Geier (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

6 Apr 2022 · Exchange on the gas market directive

Response to Revision of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive 2010/31/EU

31 Mar 2022

Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe) welcomes the proposed recast of the EPBD, which is a pivotal element of the Fit for 55 Package. We believe that with the current proposal, the European Commission has made a step in the right direction by including some important elements, such as mandatory minimum energy performance standards or considering a life-cycle approach. However, more ambition will be needed at large to make the goals set for 2030 and 2050 a reality and to fulfil the commitments under the Paris Agreement. An ambitious EPBD revision cannot miss this opportunity and must set a clear pathway and framework for the building sectors' full decarbonization across its whole life cycle. Please find more detailed recommendations in the attached position paper.
Read full response

Meeting with Michael Bloss (Member of the European Parliament) and Heinrich Böll Stiftung e.V.

24 Feb 2022 · The Future Role of Gas in Europe, AFIR

Response to Waste Framework review to reduce waste and the environmental impact of waste management

22 Feb 2022

DUH welcomes the objective of the initiative to improve the overall environmental outcome of waste management in line with the waste hierarchy and the implementation of the polluter pays principle. Therefore, the introduction of further regulatory measures is inevitable. We would like to comment on the proposed policy options and make further suggestions regarding changes in the WFD. The summary of our propositions is as follows: On the proposed policy options: We highly appreciate the introduction of legally binding and mandatory waste reduction targets in the Waste Framework Directive (WFD), they should be implemented at least for residual waste, packaging waste and bulky waste. In line with the farm to fork strategy, food waste should be reduced by 50% until 2030. The bio-waste content in residual waste should be capped and waste prevention in the demolition and construction sectore needs to be adressed. To further strengthen waste prevention, it is necessary to implement regulation into existing or new EPR schemes, which provide incentives to prevent waste generation, such as an ecomodulation of fees and a duty of care principle. The separate collection of waste is a precondition for high-quality recycling, preparation for reuse and reuse. Therefore, recycling centers need to have a central role in testing, separation and storage of goods for reuse. Close-to home sharing systems and reuse business models need to be supported. Bulky waste needs to be collected in a non-destructive way and systems to ensure reuse implemented. EPR schemes should be extended to other product categories, such as building materials, textiles and furniture. Furthermore, online marketplaces and fulfilment service providers need to be made responsible for products sold via their platforms, by legal definition, subjecting them to comprehensive due diligence obligations and obliging them to show information about the manufacturer. Further suggestions for amendments of the WFD: An improvement of the definition of recycling is necessary, to ensure that only usable and safe material with sufficient quality that originates demonstrably from a post-consumer waste fraction is defined as “recycled”. The classification of chemical recycling as ‘chemical recovery’ and an exclusion of the mass balance approach should further improve the correct labelling of high-quality recycling processes. Composting and fermentation of bioplastics should be excluded from the recycling definition and backfilling excluded from the recycling rate calculation. Furthermore, not only do recycling targets need to be more ambitious, but targets for reuse introduced, e.g. for textiles, bulky waste and packaging. The construction industry is booming, which is creating great challenges in the area of environmental and resource protection. Extensive measures regarding construction material/construction and demolition material need to be introduced, such as an EPR, improved waste collection and recycling targets. With a share of 34 percent - 86 million tons in absolute terms in the EU-28 in 2017 - biowaste makes up the largest single fraction in municipal waste in the EU. Implementing strict rules on separate collection, a mandatory kerbside collection and an exclusion of biodegradable plastics are among the measures to be taken to harvest bio-waste’s full potential. Our detailed suggestions can be found in the attached PDF.
Read full response

Meeting with Andrea Vettori (Cabinet of Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius)

23 Nov 2021 · To discuss climate litigation, air quality standards and other topics

Response to Review of Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency

19 Nov 2021

Strengthening of the Energy Efficiency Directive DUH is calling for the adoption of a binding energy efficiency target of at least 45 % in the year 2030 (compared to the EU Reference Scenario 2007 or of at least 20 % in 2030 compared to the EU reference scenario 2020). This will help to achieve the 1.5°C target of the Paris Agreement, improve the energy security of the EU, create jobs, and reduce pollution. DUH calls for the introduction of binding national targets for 2030, which should replace the proposed national reference values to ensure the commitment and engagement of all member states. DUH supports the Commission´s proposal to provide a legal basis for the practical application of the Energy Efficiency First principle and to treat it as an overarching principle. From the DUH´s point of view, public buildings should be role models for the energy-saving potential. DUH supports the Commission´s proposal to introduce a requirement for the public sector to reduce its energy demand by at least 1,7%. DUH welcomes the Commission's proposal to expand the obligation of a 3% renovation rate for federal buildings to all buildings in public ownership. DUH supports the proposal to align the renovation obligation to the level of the lowest-energy building (NZEB) level. DUH is also advocating for deleting the possibility to credit alternative measures within Article 6 of the new EED proposal to ensure that Member States actually invest in their building stock and work towards the long-term reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. DUH has the opinion that the annual saving rate needs to be raised to at least least 2% starting in 2024. Measures that deliver long term energy savings must be encouraged over measures with short term savings. DUH supports the Commission´s proposal to exclude measures whose savings potential is linked to the combustion of fossil fuels. DUH is in favor that efficiency measures resulting from the use of fossil fuels will no longer count towards the fulfilment of the energy savings obligation from 2024. DUH supports the Commission's proposal, that combined heat and power plants (CHP) is not considered as part of an efficient district heating system in the long term. DUH sharply criticizes the permission of fossil fuel CHP promotion will be permitted until 2035 and that the problematic definition of "high-efficiency" CHP under Article 14 remains in place. A clear pathway towards a phase out of coal by 2030 at latest and fossil gas by 2035 needs to be reflected in the planning. The shares of renewable energy for the definitions of efficiency must have a 100% renewables based energy system by 2040. DUH calls for a revision of the regulations for fossil fuel subsidized CHP district heating to achieve a significantly faster exit from the fossil fuel CHP district heating and to ensure the stop of any promotion of such plants. Climate neutrality has to be the core objective of heating and cooling assessments and planning. A clear plan reflecting the phase out of coal by 2030 at latest and fossil gas by 2035 has to be introduced.
Read full response

Response to Revision of the Energy Tax Directive

18 Nov 2021

Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe, DUH) notes that the many tax exemptions in the Energy Taxation have led to a very disparate and complex energy tax landscape in Europe, which also hinders the integration of the internal energy market. A revision of the Energy Tax Directive is urgently needed, as despite the escalating climate crisis and the central role of taxation in combating it, the contents of the directive have not been updated since its adoption in 2003. Many of the tax exemptions allowed under the old directive constitute fossil fuel subsidies that are not compatible with the Do No Significant Harm-principle. Among the most important loopholes to be closed as soon as possible are the diesel privilege and the kerosene tax exemption, which are currently two of the highest fossil fuel subsidies granted by the German government. DUH welcomes the Commission’s proposal to remove most of these exemptions. However, the introduction of a minimum tax on kerosene and fuels used in shipping should be brought forward significantly and take effect as early as 2023 instead of 2032. In addition, DUH calls on the Commission to abolish tax benefits for fossil-based cogeneration, which are still permitted under the current proposal. Continuing to subsidize fossil cogeneration poses an obstacle to the heating transition as it makes it harder for renewable heating options to compete. DUH recognizes that the proposed restructuring of minimum tax rates according to the energy content of different fuels is an improvement over the status quo and provides an incentive to improve energy efficiency. We criticize, however, that the Commission missed a crucial opportunity to align minimum tax rates for the consumption of energy products with their GHG emissions – an option that was judged favourably in the Commission’s own impact assessment. In particular, minimum carbon tax rates would have been a better option to implement carbon pricing for heating and transport than the proposed new ETS. Incrementally increasing minimum tax rates based on CO2 content are reliable and can therefore more effectively create planning security for households, municipalities and companies than a new emissions trading system. The CO2 price created by the new ETS, on the other hand, will fluctuate and be susceptible to crises. In addition, the CO2 price would be the same in every member state, which raises social concerns due to different income levels. Since the higher fuel costs are passed on to consumers, the effects of a single carbon price for heating and transport fuels on energy-poor households would be amplified in poorer member states. The Energy Taxation Directive, on the other hand, only sets minimum tax rates which can be set higher according to national conditions. DUH stresses that social compensation e.g. via the Climate Social Fund is also essential in the case of CO2 pricing via the Energy Taxation Directive. CO2-based energy taxes have favourable characteristics in this regard as they bring predictable sums into public budgets, which can then be used for compensation payments such as heating subsidies or, for example, a per-capita climate dividend. More detailed feedback, including on other dossiers of the Fit for 55 package, can be found in the attached position paper.
Read full response

Response to Revision of the Renewable Energy Directive (EU) 2018/2001

18 Nov 2021

Environmental Action Germany (DUH) notes that the RED has over the past 10 years stimulated the use of climate- and environmentally-damaging biofuels in the transport sector and biomass in electricity and heat generation, thus contributing to higher GHG emissions, biodiversity loss and deforestation. Unfortunately, the Commission's proposal fails to correct existing incentives that led to bioenergy becoming the largest "renewable" energy source in the EU. On transport, the proposal continues the devastating EU biofuel policies of the past. High targets for “advanced” biofuels and RFNBOs threaten to drive new unsustainable feedstocks and practices. RED III must urgently end the focus on bio-based fuels and instead support the transition to electric mobility as the most efficient technology. It should: 1. Phase out all crop biofuels, incl. intermediate crops, by 2025 at the latest; end the use of palm and soy immediately. 2. Reduce the GHG intensity target accordingly to well below 13%. ICCT calculations show this would save more than twice the emissions compared with the EC proposal. 3. Maintain the 1.75% target for „advanced“ biofuels, review Annex IX A. Feedstocks such as energy crops, forestry residues etc. must be excluded, as their use as fuel violates the cascading principle, drives land use change and/or harms biodiversity. High targets, incl. for aviation/shipping, threaten to cause significant displacement effects and emissions. 4. Limit Annex IX B feedstocks to EU sources to avoid fraud; maintain the cap. 5. Set stringent standards for RFNBOs, restricting their use to relevant sectors such as long-distance aviation and shipping. The RFNBO target must be harmonised with aviation/shipping targets to avoid driving the use of inefficient e-fuels in road transport. Stringent sustainability standards are needed, incl. only using green H2 from additional renewable electricity. 6. Expand the crediting of renewable electricity, e.g. to include private EV charging. Concerning electricity and heat generation, the proposal risks an increase of biomass burning. About half of the wood harvested in the EU is already burned for energy, including valuable logs and wood from unknown sources. This is unsustainable as it damages ecosystems and human health. Scientific evidence shows that the combustion of biomass fuels climate change as newly planted trees can take centuries to grow and recapture the CO2 released by burning old trees. With the RED revision, biomass should be clearly distinguished from actually renewable energy sources such as wind or solar. Applying the cascading principle, only biomass from wood product manufacturing and post-consumer wood (secondary woody biomass) should be considered as renewable energy. Wood that comes directly from the forest (primary woody biomass) should be removed from the list of eligible fuels in Art. 3. Art. 29 (1) states that electricity and heating produced from municipal solid waste (MSW) shall not be subject to the GHG emissions saving criteria for biomass. If, in the current reform of the ETS, the exemption in Annex I of the Emissions Trading Directive (2003/87/EC) for the incineration of municipal solid waste is removed, the sustainability criteria of this Directive for setting an emission factor of zero would apply under Annex IV (2003/87/EC). In consequence, the incineration of biowaste in waste incineration plants would not only be counted as climate-neutral but also cost-neutral in terms of certificates, contradicting Art. 3(3)(1)(a)(ii). In contrast to incineration, the fermentation and composting of organic waste can make an important contribution to relieving the burden on the climate. Waste incineration plants produce 95 million tons of CO2 annually in the EU. The generation of energy and heat from MSW should not be counted as renewable energy according to Art. 7. More detailed feedback is provided in the attached position papers.
Read full response

Response to Revision of Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive

18 Nov 2021

The revision of the AFIR offers the opportunity to set an important course for a change of engines towards a sustainable transport sector. We support the rapid development of the infrastructure in order to enable a faster conversion to electric motor operation. However, in the current draft, the uniform minimum expansion targets are already set as specifications before a sufficient analysis of requirements for the charging infrastructure in the member states is available. DUH calls for the actual necessities to be determined first before setting targets, therefore targets can depend on the results of the analysis. Furthermore, the Commission misses the opportunity to set terms for a sustainable use of the infrastructure and therefore to assure the compliance with the overall net-zero-target. With regard to the massive costs for the infrastructure at least setting sustainable standards, like using renewable, non-fossil fuels only should be obligatory. Instead, the draft does not include specifications for the operation of charging stations for electrically powered vehicles, such that they are to be supplied exclusively with renewable electricity sources, nor have clear criteria been anchored for the exclusive use of green hydrogen produced from renewable electricity sources. This means that high investment costs are imposed by law without ensuring that these investments contribute to climate protection and the achievement of the legally binding reduction target. The ecological and climate-friendly value of the entire charging infrastructure is thus doubtful. The high investment costs for the member states associated with the development of the infrastructure create a high degree of dependency for the investment to pay off; the infrastructure must be used appropriately. Since only very small quantities of green hydrogen will be available in the next few years, the massive expansion of the hydrogen infrastructure creates enough capacity for the use of non-regenerative produced hydrogen and leads to a de facto establishment of its use. At the same time, this creates a precondition for the use of hydrogen for vehicles, although other approved and market-ready technologies for vehicles already exist. Therefore, concrete specifications are desperately needed for the use of infrastructure to exclude fossil fuel sources for sure. The use of green hydrogen and PtX fuels from renewable electricity must be limited to sectors where there are no other alternatives. DUH calls the European Parliament and Council to improve the legislation and to implement legally binding sustainable standards that assure the exclusive use of renewable, non-fossil fuels in this regulation. With regard to heavy-duty transport, the focus should be predominantly be set on electric solutions, due to much higher efficiency. This includes above all the shift to railroads. Railroad transport and battery-electric trucks have priority over the use of PtX fuels in the heavy-duty transport sector. Overall, the Commission's proposals for achieving the net-zero-target do not take sufficient account of the potential of rail transport. Expansion of the rail network, shifting freight to railroads, electrification, closing gaps and better interconnection of nodes throughout Europe are basic components for the climate-friendly transformation of the transport sector. Finally, the draft regulation fails to find a solution for the vast costs caused by the extensive development of the infrastructure. Instead of involving the industries whose business models rely on this infrastructure, for example for the sale of new vehicles or for CO2 savings in their supply chains, by assuming monetary and organizational obligations, the costs for the transformation process in the transport sector are communitized. DUH calls for a mandatory cost sharing of alternative fuel infrastructure by companies at European level if they benefit from this infrastructure.
Read full response

Meeting with Markus Pieper (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Naturschutzbund Deutschland e.V.

18 Nov 2021 · RED III

Meeting with Jens Geier (Member of the European Parliament)

17 Nov 2021 · Exchange on Fit for 55

Response to Updating the EU Emissions Trading System

8 Nov 2021

Immediate social concerns and unclear climate benefits Environmental Action Germany (DUH) welcomes pricing in climate damage costs in the transport and building sectors, where emissions reductions are slow at best. We are concerned, however, that the introduction of a new emissions trading system is not the right instrument. The abolition of fossil subsidies and reliable carbon pricing through the energy taxation directive, or a more flexible EU-level obligation to introduce national carbon pricing systems, would be better suited. The costs of the new ETS would not be incurred by automotive companies and homeowners, where they would encourage emissions reductions. The certificate prices will likely be passed on to consumers via higher fuel prices and heating bills, which will place a disproportionate burden on poorer households. Purchasing power is distributed very unevenly in the member states: e.g. in Germany it is almost twice as high as in Bulgaria. Nevertheless, the same CO2 price would apply for consumers in both countries. We are concerned that the proposed Climate Social Fund will not be able to counterbalance these effects. Only 25% of the income from the new ETS, instead of 50% as originally foreseen, will flow into the new fund and the intended uses are not formulated clearly enough to ensure that the most affected population groups will be reached. Funneling a part of the auctioning revenues to the Innovation Fund is highly problematic, because it is a de facto redistribution from consumers to industry, which already benefits from free allocation of ETS certificates. Extremely high prices would be necessary to encourage decisions such as a vehicle change or an energy building renovation, and such prices would not be reached for years. In 2016, when the proposal for emissions trading for transport was discussed, independent analysis pointed out that certificate prices of 370 to 440€ would be needed to have the same effect as the emissions standard of 95 g CO2/km for passenger cars which applies from 2021 (see attached position paper). The CO2 avoidance costs of energy renovation measures are estimated to be even higher. There is also a risk the new ETS will replace more ambitious national CO2 pricing schemes such as the German emissions trading system (Brennstoffemissionshandelsgesetz). The ETS 2.0 proposal risks more effective instruments being watered down Because the various “Fit for 55” initiatives are being negotiated as a package, there are high political risks associated with the divisive ETS 2.0 proposal. In particular, the urgently needed agreement on a strengthened ETS 1.0 could be delayed, as the new ETS was proposed as part of the overall ETS Directive. The CAR could also be weakened as the European Council has not yet given its approval to the new effort sharing proposal (and in particular its binding nature). In addition, important regulatory instruments such as the CO2 emissions standards for vehicles could be undermined. German automotive associations and political parties (e.g. FDP, CDU) have already called for these standards to be abolished as “double regulation”, with the aim of making emissions trading the sole "lead instrument" in the transport sector. Housing associations have similarly begun attacking Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS) for buildings, which the Commission is planning to propose with the EPBD revision later this year. Strong regulation is needed for transport and buildings, otherwise valuable time is lost to initiate a transition in in these sectors. DUH calls on the Commission to consider reintroducing the new ETS as a separate proposal, rather than as part of the overall ETS directive. This would enable the instrument to be negotiated separately and limit the potential fallout for other dossiers. A more detailed position paper on the Fit for 55 package in German language is attached.
Read full response

Response to Strengthing the Market Stability Reserve linked to the review of the EU Emissions Trading System

8 Nov 2021

Set an effective price signal for an early coal phase-out Environmental Action Germany (DUH) stresses that the ETS is an essential tools to set an effective price signal for an EU-wide coal phase-out by 2030 and thus to achieve the Commission's own scenario of a coal-free electricity mix. To this end, the amount of certificates should ideally be reduced to 70% by 2030, rather than 61% as proposed. The ETS should also be strengthened through a one-time deletion of 450 million certificates (rebasing) and a significant increase in the linear reduction factor. To ensure an effective price signal, a CO2 minimum price that increases over time should also be introduced, which is not yet included in the Commission's draft. That such an instrument is necessary is shown, for example, by the fact that the certificate price temporarily dropped back to 15 euros during the corona crisis. The design of the MSR should also be strengthened. The draft plans to delete 24% annually of a total of over 400 million certificates in the MSR. This threshold is still too high, because 400 million certificates correspond to almost half of Germany's annual CO2 emissions. There could thus still be surpluses in the certificates market in 2030. Make industry pay its fair share Another major point of criticism is the retention of the generous allocation of free certificates to industrial installations. The ETS has already reduced emissions in the electricity sector, but the steering effect of the instrument for industry is weakened considerably by this. It seems particularly unfair that industry continues to receive free emission certificates, while consumers would be required to pay higher heating and fuel costs under the proposed new ETS for heating and transport. DUH calls on the Commission to stick to the original expiration of free allocation date by 2030. Extending free allocation prevents fair, market-based CO2 pricing for industry over many years and is fraught with many uncertainties, since the final design of the CBAM, which is to be adopted as a new carbon leakage protection mechanism, is not yet known. Include CO2 emissions of waste incineration plants The Commission also missed the opportunity to delete the previous exemption for the incineration of municipal waste in Annex I of the Emissions Trading Directive. This exception undermines the urgently needed development of a circular economy and climate protection efforts. With over 95 million tons of CO2 equivalents annually, waste incinerators in the EU are fueling climate change. The amount of greenhouse gases emitted is comparable to the emissions from more than 13 coal-fired power plants per year. The incineration of municipal waste not only pollutes the climate, but also creates toxic residues such as slag and filter dust, which have to be disposed of underground. Putting a CO2 price on waste incineration, which would be easy to implement by including waste incinerators in the ETS, on the other hand, creates economic incentives to avoid waste, improve the separate collection of recyclable materials and to increase the total amount of recycling. In addition, better technical pre-sorting of mixed waste would be promoted. DUH also points out that the emission factor zero must not be set for organic waste when waste incineration is included in the ETS. When burning biowaste, important minerals such as nitrogen and phosphorus are lost as possible plant nutrients, which could be secured by fermenting and composting this waste. A more detailed position paper on the Fit for 55 package in German language is attached.
Read full response

Response to Revision of the CO2 emission standards for cars and vans

8 Nov 2021

DUH welcomes the opportunity to submit feedback on the European Commission (EC) proposal for revised car CO2 standards. Road transport emissions have been rising over the last 30 years. Without fast and significant reductions in passenger car emissions, the EU won’t be able to meet its own climate targets, let alone the 1.5°C limit. DUH welcomes that the EC sets a path for the complete phase-out of combustion engine cars and vans. However, the pace is far too slow, as calculations by the ICCT (1) show: With the EC proposal, road transport emissions in 2030 would still be above 1990 levels. This means that the sector would effectively contribute nothing to the economy-wide EU climate target of -55% in 2030 compared to 1990. A major problem is that the EC's proposal does not tighten the CO2 standards at all before 2030 so that very limited effort will be required by carmakers up to 2029, with practically no additional emission cuts. But emissions must fall significantly this decade to retain a chance of staying within the 1.5°C limit. Therefore, more stringent CO2 standards in and before 2025 are urgently needed. The EC proposal also leaves several loopholes of the current regulation untouched, even though these mainly reward the sale of heavy and high-emitting cars. In particular, plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) will continue to be credited with unrealistically low CO2 values and receive special benefits through the ZLEV factor. However, in real-world operation, PHEVs emit on average two to four times more CO2 than on paper. DUH recommends the following (see attached): • Set significantly tighter reduction targets in the short term to avoid stagnation until 2030. • End new registration of combustion engine cars by 2030 at the latest. • Set annual CO2 targets instead of 5-yearly ones: The current 5-year intervals have resulted in emissions stagnating or even increasing in the intermediate years. To ensure steady CO2 reductions in the future, annual limits are needed. • Introduce an absolute CO2 cap for each new car: As the regulation considers CO2 fleet averages, a high-emitting car can on paper be “compensated” by additional electric cars or PHEVs. This calculation trick does not help the climate. DUH calls for the introduction of an absolute CO2 cap for all new passenger cars of 120 g CO2/km in real-world operation. • Ensure realistic emission values, in particular for PHEVs: The on-board fuel consumption data, which carmakers supply to the EU as of this year, must be made publicly available and used to ensure that CO2 limits are complied with on the road. This is particularly important for PHEV whose official CO2 values are unrealistically low. • Prepare for introducing efficiency standards for electric vehicles: With the market shifting towards BEV, the regulation must be adapted to include standards for electric vehicles and set incentives for efficient, low-consuming electric cars. • Immediately abolish the ZLEV factor: The ZLEV factor means that manufacturers can weaken their CO2 limits by ensuring certain shares of PHEV/BEV in their fleet. The EC’s proposal to end this loophole in 2030 comes too late. • Abolish the bonus for heavy vehicles: The so-called mass adjustment means that the heavier a manufacturer's fleet, the weaker the CO2 limit for that manufacturer. This weight bonus is a counterproductive incentive that fuels the SUV boom. • Keep fuels out of the regulation: DUH welcomes the EC’s decision not to include credits for e-fuels, a proposal which would severely undermine the integrity of the CO2 regulation and delay real emission cuts. Even with these measures, the transport sector is set to eat up most of the EU’s remaining 1,5°C budget (2). Strong additional measures are needed to enable a comprehensive mobility shift away from private cars and towards active and public transport. (1) https://theicct.org/publications/fit-for-55-review-eu-sept21 (2) https://theicct.org/blog/staff/eu-carbon-budget-apr2021
Read full response

Response to Land use, land use change and forestry – review of EU rules

8 Nov 2021

The already adopted EU climate protection law with a net climate target enables the economy to compensate its emissions with natural sinks. DUH had already criticized the watering down effect for the 2030 target and called for the introduction of a separate target for the conservation and expansion of sinks. As this law already passed without a separate target, it is now all the more important that the LULUCF Regulation will be reliably designed to ensure the effectiveness of the new net target. The Commission's proposal for amending the LULUCF Regulation calls for the introduction of nationally binding targets for 2026-2030 to increase net CO2 removals from land use and forestry. DUH supports the increase in mitigation targets for land use, as this will provide a strong incentive to protect existing sinks and restore forests, peatlands and other natural ecosystems. However, delaying this until 2026 wastes valuable time. DUH therefore demands to introduce increased reduction targets before 2026 in order to achieve reductions in the LULUCF sector as soon as possible and to avoid shifting the bulk of the mitigation burden into the future. Due to the high risk that natural sinks can be destructed as a consequence of climate change within a very short time, for example due to drought and wildfires, additionally a higher reduction target is essential. The newly introduced sanction mechanism for the member states is a reasonable approach, because reductions that are not achieved in time are accompanied by additional obligations and thus higher efforts. Planned loopholes in the LULUCF regulation, such as the possibility of transferring from another member state and the planned flexibility mechanism with the effort sharing regulation should be removed from the legislative proposal in order to strengthen the steering effect of the sanction mechanism. Merging the agriculture (incl. agriculture with fertilization and livestock), forestry and land use sectors into the AFOLU sector from 2031 onwards is risky and not recommended, thus it’s allowing the accounting of the sink function and greenhouse gas reduction of these sectors, i.e. including non-CO2 emissions (e.g. methane) from agriculture in the reduction efforts under this regulation. By including agriculture with LULUCF in the new AFOLU sector, its emissions, including non-CO2 emissions (e.g., methane), can be offset via land use changes such as afforestation. However, this sink function of natural lands must not be used to frivolously downscale emissions from agriculture, thereby preventing the much-needed transformation in the agricultural economy. This risks weakening incentives for emissions reduction in agriculture, where effective measures are already well known and reliable in their mitigation effect. Moreover, the sink capacity of forests and soils and their future development due to climate change is uncertain. Using these sinks as the basis for calculating carbon stocks in LULUCF makes the calculation of the share of the overall climate balance very unreliable. Already today, large parts of Central Europe's forests are in poor condition. It is therefore imperative to push forward the protection of natural sinks and to secure this process with binding targets. However, it must be avoided that exactly this leads to reducing reduction efforts in other sectors by offsetting emission burdens between other sectors and LULUCF. DUH therefore opposes the merging of LULUCF and agriculture and calls for the LULUCF net sink performance target to continue to be accounted for separately from other sectors.
Read full response

Response to Food waste reduction targets

29 Oct 2021

Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. - DUH) strongly welcomes the initiative to propose legally binding targets to reduce food waste in the EU. Concerning the scope of the policy scenario, DUH urgently recommends to promote Option S1, establishing a target covering the whole supply chain from farm-level production to the final consumer. This will be in line with the holistic approach of the farm to fork strategy. Food waste indeed occurs at all stages across the value chain, and a target covering only consumer and retail food waste would exclude most food waste in the EU from the scope of the binding targets and may lead to food waste being shifted from one level to another. Moreover, data availability on food waste and loss at the primary production level needs to be improved. Currently, there is no comprehensive information available in the EU, which however will be necessary to make the correct baseline assumptions. Regarding the “expression” of the target and “way the targets are set for Member States”, to meet the EU-wide reduction target of at least 50%, a target for member states to reduce their food waste expressed as % compared to the 2020 baseline year could be an acceptable option (Option E1). In addition, options E2 in combination with a T1/3 hybrid can be feasible. This would allow for all MS to have a legally binding target to reduce their FLW to a uniform kg per capita food waste, set at a level to ensure EU-wide 50% FLW reduction by 2030. With regard to step 2, we strongly recommend for the Commission to model at least a 50 percent reduction target. Taking into account SDG 12.3, according to which the retail and consumer sector worldwide must reduce their food waste by 50% by 2030, it is recommended to choose a corresponding scenario. DUH therefore, suggest for the impact assessment to analyse Option 3, but at a clear benchmark of at least 50 percent instead of modelling a range between 40 – 50 percent. The pre-assessment by the European Commission, stakeholder opinions and current scientific findings already align on the fact that societal impacts of reducing food waste will be largely positive. However, as higher reduction rates may be more difficult to implement und some Member States are unclear on how to achieve the target, a feasibility assessment of establishing more ambitious target by 2030 will be a valuable contribution to the current debate. Lastly, the impact assessment is an import opportunity to assess and compare the most effective measures in order to achieve SDG 12.3 at a sufficient speed. We expect that modelling will show that voluntary commitments will not deliver sufficiently fast reduction results. We therefore recommend to include in the modelling the potential effects of regulation to deliver more ambitious reduction levels. This will provide a better basis for decision at MS level on which actions to choose. The following regulations could be implemented and evaluated, of which some already apply in certain EU member states, but there is a potential for further expansion: food waste measurement obligations for food businesses above a certain size; a binding food waste hierarchy that prescribes how food should be handled in terms of avoiding waste; and strengthened unfair trading practices. DUH welcomes the fact that the impact from other EU policies, will be assessed as these may indirectly affect food waste generation. To date, the European Commission has not undertaken any evaluations on the impact of the different CAP reforms on the generation of food waste. The continuous use of CAP market intervention measures instead of production limits for example should be the focus here, as well as the overall impact on prices impacting consumption behaviour. Additionally, unfair trading practices, liability rules, tax regulations, and food hygiene regulations should be taken into account.
Read full response

Meeting with Virginijus Sinkevičius (Commissioner) and

29 Oct 2021 · To discuss with the NGOs the perspectives for the 2022 annual fishing opportunities ahead of international consultations and the December AGRIFISH Council.

Response to Policy framework on biobased, biodegradable and compostable plastics

27 Oct 2021

Dear Sir or Madam, Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe - DUH) is a non-governmental environmental and consumer protection organisation in Germany. We are politically independent, recognised as a non-profit organization and entitled to bring legal action. DUH supports all sustainable ways of life and economic systems that respect ecological boundaries. In the area of recycling management, DUH advocates waste prevention, responsible consumption and sustainable waste management. We welcome the EU Commission’s initiative to develop a policy framework on biobased, biodegradable and compostable plastics since a clear policy framework is urgently needed. Please find our detailed feedback in the attached document. Due to the very high environmental relevance of the issue, we kindly ask you to consider our suggestion. Please do not hesitate to contact us in case of any questions. Kind Regards, Viktor Miruchna miruchna@duh.de
Read full response

Response to RoHS exemption for mercury in cold cathode fluorescent lamps and external electrode fluorescent lamps

8 Jul 2021

Dear Sir or Madam, In the past years, we Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe - DUH), have campaigned massively for the implementation of the Directive 2011/65/EU (RoHS Directive) in Germany. Among other activities, we tested whether the legal mercury limits were compliant for lamps, due to a lack in control by German authorities. In the checked samples, we regularly found values exceeding the compulsory mercury thresholds, especially in the case of products imported via online marketplaces. Via strong campaigning and many successful lawsuits we were able to make a significant contribution to reduce the unnecessary use of mercury and thus protecting the environment and consumers. In the course of the current review process of the RoHS Directive, we would like to state our concerns regarding the exemption of specialized lamps containing very high mercury levels. These lamps are still used in the industry, such as cinema projectors, UV lamps in water sterilization & air filters or ink curing. Very high mercury levels in various lamp categories such as discharge lamps, cold cathode & external electrode fluorescent lamps and other specialized lamps may fall under the current exemption and therefore are allowed to use unlimited amounts of mercury (e.g. Annex III No. 4f). The mercury concentrations in these lamps are up to 100-1000 times higher than in regular lamps – and therefore request particular attention. If mercury has to be used in such lamps for technical reasons and no functional substitutions, such as LED technology, are yet applicable nor available, strictly framed exceptions to the ban on the use of mercury are acceptable in our view. What is not acceptable, however, are the missing responsibilities for collection and disposal of the high-level mercury lamps matching the high exposed risk of these lamps. The official numbers from 2020 by the German Stiftung EAR indicate that the current collection rate in the category 3 (Lamps) for the B2B sector is only about 10%. Due to insufficient adoptions in many member states of the Directive 2012/19/EU (WEEE 2 Directive), manufactures only have to provide collection options – with no further definition. As a result, in this member states the waste producers pays the high transport costs for waste containing pollutants. Therefore, this circumstance incentivizes an incorrect disposal to save costs – shown in the numbers. Regulating the collection and disposal responsibilities of these high-risk mercury lamps similarly to everyday lamps, as it is done based on the WEEE 2 Directive, is insufficient. Granting new exemptions without extended responsibilities for collection and disposal to prevent environmentally harmful leakage of mercury is neglecting the high risk these lamps expose. We propose to introduce new responsibilities for manufacturers of high-level mercury lamps into the RoHS Directive exemption to a) ensure, b) verify, and c) report the collection and recycling of their produced lamps accordingly. Thus, the lamp manufactures shall be responsible to guarantee a “closed loop” of these lamps with high mercury concentrations. Explicitly, the manufactures shall verify and report the lamps placed on the markets and their collection. Moreover, the manufactures shall provide free collection services at the place of installation or site of operation as part of their responsibility. Only implementing such mandatory procedure can facilitate a safe and effective collection in order to prevent wrong disposal by users. These measures will end further unacceptable practice of incorrect disposal and its inherently environmental harmful contaminations. Due to the very high environmental relevance of the issue, we kindly ask you to consider our suggestion. Please do not hesitate to contact us in case of any questions. Yours sincerely, Viktor Miruchna miruchna@duh.de Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. | Bundesgeschäftsstelle Berlin | Hackescher Markt 4 | 10178 Berlin
Read full response

Response to RoHS deleting exemptions for mercury in double-capped linear fluorescent lamps for general lighting purposes

7 Jul 2021

Dear Sir or Madam, In the past years, we Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe - DUH), have campaigned massively for the implementation of the Directive 2011/65/EU (RoHS Directive) in Germany. Among other activities, we tested whether the legal mercury limits were compliant for lamps, due to a lack in control by German authorities. In the checked samples, we regularly found values exceeding the compulsory mercury thresholds, especially in the case of products imported via online marketplaces. Via strong campaigning and many successful lawsuits we were able to make a significant contribution to reduce the unnecessary use of mercury and thus protecting the environment and consumers. In the course of the current review process of the RoHS Directive, we would like to state our concerns regarding the exemption of specialized lamps containing very high mercury levels. These lamps are still used in the industry, such as cinema projectors, UV lamps in water sterilization & air filters or ink curing. Very high mercury levels in various lamp categories such as discharge lamps, cold cathode & external electrode fluorescent lamps and other specialized lamps may fall under the current exemption and therefore are allowed to use unlimited amounts of mercury (e.g. Annex III No. 4f). The mercury concentrations in these lamps are up to 100-1000 times higher than in regular lamps – and therefore request particular attention. If mercury has to be used in such lamps for technical reasons and no functional substitutions, such as LED technology, are yet applicable nor available, strictly framed exceptions to the ban on the use of mercury are acceptable in our view. What is not acceptable, however, are the missing responsibilities for collection and disposal of the high-level mercury lamps matching the high exposed risk of these lamps. The official numbers from 2020 by the German Stiftung EAR indicate that the current collection rate in the category 3 (Lamps) for the B2B sector is only about 10%. Due to insufficient adoptions in many member states of the Directive 2012/19/EU (WEEE 2 Directive), manufactures only have to provide collection options – with no further definition. As a result, in this member states the waste producers pays the high transport costs for waste containing pollutants. Therefore, this circumstance incentivizes an incorrect disposal to save costs – shown in the numbers. Regulating the collection and disposal responsibilities of these high-risk mercury lamps similarly to everyday lamps, as it is done based on the WEEE 2 Directive, is insufficient. Granting new exemptions without extended responsibilities for collection and disposal to prevent environmentally harmful leakage of mercury is neglecting the high risk these lamps expose. We propose to introduce new responsibilities for manufacturers of high-level mercury lamps into the RoHS Directive exemption to a) ensure, b) verify, and c) report the collection and recycling of their produced lamps accordingly. Thus, the lamp manufactures shall be responsible to guarantee a “closed loop” of these lamps with high mercury concentrations. Explicitly, the manufactures shall verify and report the lamps placed on the markets and their collection. Moreover, the manufactures shall provide free collection services at the place of installation or site of operation as part of their responsibility. Only implementing such mandatory procedure can facilitate a safe and effective collection in order to prevent wrong disposal by users. These measures will end further unacceptable practice of incorrect disposal and its inherently environmental harmful contaminations. Due to the very high environmental relevance of the issue, we kindly ask you to consider our suggestion. Please do not hesitate to contact us in case of any questions. Yours sincerely, Viktor Miruchna miruchna@duh.de Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. | Bundesgeschäftsstelle Berlin | Hackescher Markt 4 | 10178 Berlin
Read full response

Response to RoHS exemption for mercury in fluroscent lamps for other general lighting and special purposes

7 Jul 2021

Dear Sir or Madam, In the past years, we Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe - DUH), have campaigned massively for the implementation of the Directive 2011/65/EU (RoHS Directive) in Germany. Among other activities, we tested whether the legal mercury limits were compliant for lamps, due to a lack in control by German authorities. In the checked samples, we regularly found values exceeding the compulsory mercury thresholds, especially in the case of products imported via online marketplaces. Via strong campaigning and many successful lawsuits we were able to make a significant contribution to reduce the unnecessary use of mercury and thus protecting the environment and consumers. In the course of the current review process of the RoHS Directive, we would like to state our concerns regarding the exemption of specialized lamps containing very high mercury levels. These lamps are still used in the industry, such as cinema projectors, UV lamps in water sterilization & air filters or ink curing. Very high mercury levels in various lamp categories such as discharge lamps, cold cathode & external electrode fluorescent lamps and other specialized lamps may fall under the current exemption and therefore are allowed to use unlimited amounts of mercury (e.g. Annex III No. 4f). The mercury concentrations in these lamps are up to 100-1000 times higher than in regular lamps – and therefore request particular attention. If mercury has to be used in such lamps for technical reasons and no functional substitutions, such as LED technology, are yet applicable nor available, strictly framed exceptions to the ban on the use of mercury are acceptable in our view. What is not acceptable, however, are the missing responsibilities for collection and disposal of the high-level mercury lamps matching the high exposed risk of these lamps. The official numbers from 2020 by the German Stiftung EAR indicate that the current collection rate in the category 3 (Lamps) for the B2B sector is only about 10%. Due to insufficient adoptions in many member states of the Directive 2012/19/EU (WEEE 2 Directive), manufactures only have to provide collection options – with no further definition. As a result, in this member states the waste producers pays the high transport costs for waste containing pollutants. Therefore, this circumstance incentivizes an incorrect disposal to save costs – shown in the numbers. Regulating the collection and disposal responsibilities of these high-risk mercury lamps similarly to everyday lamps, as it is done based on the WEEE 2 Directive, is insufficient. Granting new exemptions without extended responsibilities for collection and disposal to prevent environmentally harmful leakage of mercury is neglecting the high risk these lamps expose. We propose to introduce new responsibilities for manufacturers of high-level mercury lamps into the RoHS Directive exemption to a) ensure, b) verify, and c) report the collection and recycling of their produced lamps accordingly. Thus, the lamp manufactures shall be responsible to guarantee a “closed loop” of these lamps with high mercury concentrations. Explicitly, the manufactures shall verify and report the lamps placed on the markets and their collection. Moreover, the manufactures shall provide free collection services at the place of installation or site of operation as part of their responsibility. Only implementing such mandatory procedure can facilitate a safe and effective collection in order to prevent wrong disposal by users. These measures will end further unacceptable practice of incorrect disposal and its inherently environmental harmful contaminations. Due to the very high environmental relevance of the issue, we kindly ask you to consider our suggestion. Please do not hesitate to contact us in case of any questions. Yours sincerely, Viktor Miruchna miruchna@duh.de Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. | Bundesgeschäftsstelle Berlin | Hackescher Markt 4 | 10178 Berlin
Read full response

Response to RoHS exemption for mercury in other low pressure discharge lamps

7 Jul 2021

Dear Sir or Madam, In the past years, we Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe - DUH), have campaigned massively for the implementation of the Directive 2011/65/EU (RoHS Directive) in Germany. Among other activities, we tested whether the legal mercury limits were compliant for lamps, due to a lack in control by German authorities. In the checked samples, we regularly found values exceeding the compulsory mercury thresholds, especially in the case of products imported via online marketplaces. Via strong campaigning and many successful lawsuits we were able to make a significant contribution to reduce the unnecessary use of mercury and thus protecting the environment and consumers. In the course of the current review process of the RoHS Directive, we would like to state our concerns regarding the exemption of specialized lamps containing very high mercury levels. These lamps are still used in the industry, such as cinema projectors, UV lamps in water sterilization & air filters or ink curing. Very high mercury levels in various lamp categories such as discharge lamps, cold cathode & external electrode fluorescent lamps and other specialized lamps may fall under the current exemption and therefore are allowed to use unlimited amounts of mercury (e.g. Annex III No. 4f). The mercury concentrations in these lamps are up to 100-1000 times higher than in regular lamps – and therefore request particular attention. If mercury has to be used in such lamps for technical reasons and no functional substitutions, such as LED technology, are yet applicable nor available, strictly framed exceptions to the ban on the use of mercury are acceptable in our view. What is not acceptable, however, are the missing responsibilities for collection and disposal of the high-level mercury lamps matching the high exposed risk of these lamps. The official numbers from 2020 by the German Stiftung EAR indicate that the current collection rate in the category 3 (Lamps) for the B2B sector is only about 10%. Due to insufficient adoptions in many member states of the Directive 2012/19/EU (WEEE 2 Directive), manufactures only have to provide collection options – with no further definition. As a result, in this member states the waste producers pays the high transport costs for waste containing pollutants. Therefore, this circumstance incentivizes an incorrect disposal to save costs – shown in the numbers. Regulating the collection and disposal responsibilities of these high-risk mercury lamps similarly to everyday lamps, as it is done based on the WEEE 2 Directive, is insufficient. Granting new exemptions without extended responsibilities for collection and disposal to prevent environmentally harmful leakage of mercury is neglecting the high risk these lamps expose. We propose to introduce new responsibilities for manufacturers of high-level mercury lamps into the RoHS Directive exemption to a) ensure, b) verify, and c) report the collection and recycling of their produced lamps accordingly. Thus, the lamp manufactures shall be responsible to guarantee a “closed loop” of these lamps with high mercury concentrations. Explicitly, the manufactures shall verify and report the lamps placed on the markets and their collection. Moreover, the manufactures shall provide free collection services at the place of installation or site of operation as part of their responsibility. Only implementing such mandatory procedure can facilitate a safe and effective collection in order to prevent wrong disposal by users. These measures will end further unacceptable practice of incorrect disposal and its inherently environmental harmful contaminations. Due to the very high environmental relevance of the issue, we kindly ask you to consider our suggestion. Please do not hesitate to contact us in case of any questions. Yours sincerely, Viktor Miruchna miruchna@duh.de Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. | Bundesgeschäftsstelle Berlin | Hackescher Markt 4 | 10178 Berlin
Read full response

Response to RoHS exemption for the use of mercury in other discharge lamps for special purposes

7 Jul 2021

Dear Sir or Madam, In the past years, we Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe - DUH), have campaigned massively for the implementation of the Directive 2011/65/EU (RoHS Directive) in Germany. Among other activities, we tested whether the legal mercury limits were compliant for lamps, due to a lack in control by German authorities. In the checked samples, we regularly found values exceeding the compulsory mercury thresholds, especially in the case of products imported via online marketplaces. Via strong campaigning and many successful lawsuits we were able to make a significant contribution to reduce the unnecessary use of mercury and thus protecting the environment and consumers. In the course of the current review process of the RoHS Directive, we would like to state our concerns regarding the exemption of specialized lamps containing very high mercury levels. These lamps are still used in the industry, such as cinema projectors, UV lamps in water sterilization & air filters or ink curing. Very high mercury levels in various lamp categories such as discharge lamps, cold cathode & external electrode fluorescent lamps and other specialized lamps may fall under the current exemption and therefore are allowed to use unlimited amounts of mercury (e.g. Annex III No. 4f). The mercury concentrations in these lamps are up to 100-1000 times higher than in regular lamps – and therefore request particular attention. If mercury has to be used in such lamps for technical reasons and no functional substitutions, such as LED technology, are yet applicable nor available, strictly framed exceptions to the ban on the use of mercury are acceptable in our view. What is not acceptable, however, are the missing responsibilities for collection and disposal of the high-level mercury lamps matching the high exposed risk of these lamps. The official numbers from 2020 by the German Stiftung EAR indicate that the current collection rate in the category 3 (Lamps) for the B2B sector is only about 10%. Due to insufficient adoptions in many member states of the Directive 2012/19/EU (WEEE 2 Directive), manufactures only have to provide collection options – with no further definition. As a result, in this member states the waste producers pays the high transport costs for waste containing pollutants. Therefore, this circumstance incentivizes an incorrect disposal to save costs – shown in the numbers. Regulating the collection and disposal responsibilities of these high-risk mercury lamps similarly to everyday lamps, as it is done based on the WEEE 2 Directive, is insufficient. Granting new exemptions without extended responsibilities for collection and disposal to prevent environmentally harmful leakage of mercury is neglecting the high risk these lamps expose. We propose to introduce new responsibilities for manufacturers of high-level mercury lamps into the RoHS Directive exemption to a) ensure, b) verify, and c) report the collection and recycling of their produced lamps accordingly. Thus, the lamp manufactures shall be responsible to guarantee a “closed loop” of these lamps with high mercury concentrations. Explicitly, the manufactures shall verify and report the lamps placed on the markets and their collection. Moreover, the manufactures shall provide free collection services at the place of installation or site of operation as part of their responsibility. Only implementing such mandatory procedure can facilitate a safe and effective collection in order to prevent wrong disposal by users. These measures will end further unacceptable practice of incorrect disposal and its inherently environmental harmful contaminations. Due to the very high environmental relevance of the issue, we kindly ask you to consider our suggestion. Please do not hesitate to contact us in case of any questions. Yours sincerely, Viktor Miruchna miruchna@duh.de Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. | Bundesgeschäftsstelle Berlin | Hackescher Markt 4 | 10178 Berlin
Read full response

Response to Revision of EU legislation on registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals

31 May 2021

The Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. (DUH) strongly supports the ambition in the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability to introduce 1) endocrine disruptors, 2) persistent, mobile and toxic and 3) very persistent and very mobile substances as important categories of chemical substances of very high concern within REACH. Moreover, DUH agrees that the focus on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) needs to be strengthened because of their extensive negative impacts regarding contamination of soil and water, related illnesses and societal and economic costs. In particular, DUH sees a problematic increase in the use of hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs) as substitutes for hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) restricted by the Regulation (EU) No 517/2014 because of high Global Warming Potentials (GWPs). Verifiably, low GWP HFOs break down into degradation products like trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) which is a registered substance under the REACH regulation (CAS number 76-05-1) and classified as very persistent in the environment and very mobile in the aquatic environment. DUH wants to refer to the recent publication of the Umweltbundesamt (Persistent degradation products of halogenated refrigerants and blowing agents in the environment: type, environmental concentrations, and fate with particular regard to new halogenated substitutes with low global warming potential (2021), accessible via https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/en/publikationen/persistent-degradation-products-of-halogenated) that highlights the problematic increased concentrations of TFA in rain- and drinking water as well as formulates a solution approach that relies on halogen-free alternatives. Following the ‘do no harm’ principle of the European Green Deal, the DUH demands the immediate ban of PFAS like HFOs if halogen-free alternatives are available and reinforced effort to research innovations to ensure a global PFAS phase-out in the foreseeable future.
Read full response

Response to New EU urban mobility framework

25 May 2021

The Roadmap for the planned New Urban Mobility Framework shows European Commissions (EC) awareness of the importance of major changes within the transport sector for meeting climate targets and a safer, healthier and sustainable urban surrounding. The EC acknowledges the fact, that urban mobility is one of the main sources for CO2 emission and air pollution as well as the reason for a great share of injuries and deadly accidents in European urban areas. Hence, Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) supports the overall objective of the initiative to create safe, accessible, inclusive, smart, resilient and zero-emission urban mobility. Furthermore, DUH calls for a framework that not only promotes, support and raises the awareness on the importance of changes in the urban mobility infrastructure, but rather supplements this promotion with explicit measures to achieve a substantial reduction in harmful air pollutants and emissions mainly caused by motorized individual urban mobility. Therefore, binding regulations, their enforcement as well as reliable funding for implementation of the measures are necessary. The New Mobility Framework must protect its citizens from dangers inherent in the current car centered transport system, instead of focusing simply on false solutions (e.g. alternative fueling) to maintain the status quo. Passing stricter emission regulations and implementing the WHO recommendation for air quality limit values for instance. In addition, significant investments in reconstruction of public infrastructure in favor of active (cycling, walking) and public transport are necessary. This is the most effective and efficient way to reduce air pollution and climate effecting emissions like CO2 in the transport sector. To reshape urban mobility towards sustainability, public space needs to be redistributed away from private cars. Cycling infrastructure needs to be adapted to wider specialized vehicles for transporting children and goods and to accommodate different speeds by allowing easy overtaking without having to swerve into motorized traffic. Sidewalks have to be wide enough for the use of wheelchairs and stroller. Lowered kerbs and safe crossing aids must enable safe mobility for all people: young, old or with physical disabilities. All these measures can only be implemented if the public space allocated to motor vehicle traffic and, hence, the mileage of motorized individual traffic, is significantly reduced. This simultaneously reduces air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, thus leads to increase of healthier and sustainable urban environment. To speed up the change in infrastructure the implementation of pop-up bike lanes, that became famous during the Covid-19 pandemic, has been proven effective and cost-efficient. In Berlin 27 km of pop-up bike lanes were installed and cycling increased by 15 % citywide, while general mobility has decreased in 2020. Additional safety is provided by equalizing the speed of road users. A general speed limit of 30 km/h in urban areas ensures fewer emissions and fewer accidents. Local public transport is the heart of every sustainable urban mobility infrastructure; therefore, a dense network of lines with high frequency, including connections with the suburbs is mandatory. Sufficient funding to avoid expensive ticketing should cover the cost intensive efforts of a well-functioning public transport system with subways, trams and busses. As public transport must be accessible for all citizens, a fair pricing, especially for regular use like a nationwide low cost flat rate ticket is necessary to increase the attraction. Attractive, dense and frequent public transport in combination with safe infrastructure for active transport will significantly reduce the number of people relying on their cars. In combination with restrictions on motorized individual traffic, this can lead to a strong decrease in car traffic and simultaneously ensure sustainability and mobility for all people.
Read full response

Response to Action plan to conserve fisheries resources and protect marine ecosystems

12 May 2021

All life on earth depends on the ocean. It provides us with oxygen, food, energy, and it has already captured an enormous amount of heat and carbon. Destructive fishing is the biggest threat to the oceans health, therefore we need to eliminate destructive fishing methods, significantly reduce fishing pressure, improve gear selectivity to protect sensitive species and mitigate bycatch in order to preserve marine biodiversity in EU waters. The EU seabed is the most bottom-trawled in the world, more than five times the global average (Amoroso, R. O. et al. (2018)), and 80% of EU coastal areas are disturbed by trawling (European Environment Agency). Bottom-towed gear is widely used in the EU, including in sensitive coastal areas and even inside Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), with some studies indicating a higher intensity of trawling inside than outside designated areas (Dureuil, M et al. (2018)). The Action Plan must include that bottom-towed fishing needs to end inside MPAs and other sensitive areas immediately, while setting a clear target for the reduction of all bottom-trawling by 2025 at the latest. Currently, fisheries regulations within German MPAs are non-existent. Even seven years after the deadline has past, Germany is not complying with its obligations under the Flora-Fauna-Habitat Directive for conserving the natural habitats and wild animals and plants, for the completion of necessary EEZ Natura 2000 management plans and protection measures, including fisheries. Furthermore, as part of the implementation of the MSFD in Germany, no-take zones need to be established to serve functions including providing reference areas (see MSFD Recital 39), protecting species, habitats, and ecological processes. So far, there are no no-take zones in the German EEZ. In order to fulfil the environmental targets and objectives of the EU biodiversity strategy, it is necessary to create areas from which all human activities, including fisheries, are banned (no-take zones). These no-take areas need to be large enough to achieve the MSFD conservation goals with respect to the food web (Descriptor 4), biodiversity (Descriptor 1), and seabed integrity (Descriptor 6). Member States must face real consequences if they further delay fisheries regulations and protection measures within MPAs. In this regard, the Action Plan must set specific legally binding targets and define clear deadlines for the implementation. A central pillar of the Action Plan must be to eliminate the threat that overfishing poses to the critical role the ocean plays in regulating the climate and serving as a carbon sink. The latest STECF common fisheries policy (CFP) monitoring (2021) report concludes that 65 fish stocks in EU waters are still overfished and 42 remain below safe biological limits. Ecosystem based fisheries management and stock recovery plans are urgently needed. Stock recovery plans must include effective measures such as temporal closures for all Members States for the same time period. Furthermore, environmental criteria need to be considered when allocating national catch quotas. The EU must provide guidance to Member States on criteria and a rating process that can assist in transitioning European fleets to low impact fishing by allocating quota to fleet segments that have low carbon emissions, have no impact on the seabed and avoid bycatch of sensitive species. Harmful fisheries subsidies such as fuel subsidies for trawlers need to end. All EU funding must only contribute to reach environmental targets of biodiversity strategy, MSFD and CFP. Enshrining a just transition to low-impact, localised fisheries and value chains will have far-reaching positive impacts on ocean health, the climate and our coastal communities. The Action Plan is a timely opportunity to fill policy gaps and realise our moral obligation to ensure EU fisheries adapt to changing circumstances and comply with our climate laws and international biodiversity commitments by 2030.
Read full response

Response to Guidance on REDII forest biomass sustainability criteria

28 Apr 2021

Die operativen Richtlinien nichts tun, um grundlegende Schwächen der RED II zu beheben, nämlich die fehlende Unterscheidung zwischen Rohstoffen, die zur Minderung des Klimawandels beitragen (sekundäre Biomasse) und solchen, die den Klimawandel verstärken (primäre Biomasse). Diese Mängel müssen in der RED II zwingend behoben werden. Aus unserer Sicht enthalten die operativen Richtlinien aktuell mehrere bedenkliche Elemente. 1. Die Kriterien scheinen nicht für den Kontext, in dem sie gelten, konzipiert worden zu sein. Die Mehrheit des Holzes, das in der EU verbrannt wird, stammt aus Ländern, die alle Gesetze haben, die in Artikel 3 und 5 gefordert werden. Nur gegen wenige gibt es Vertragsverletzungsverfahren, da diese für die EU ein letztes Mittel sind und sehr selten vorkommen. Dadurch ist die große Mehrheit des Holzes, das in der EU verbrannt wird, automatisch gesetzeskonform. Das heißt aber noch lange nicht, dass all diese Bioenergie nachhaltig ist, weder aus Sicht der Biodiversität noch aus Sicht des Klimaschutzes. Sehr viele Fallbeispiele von zerstörerischen Erntepraktiken zur Versorgung von Bioenergieanlagen würden nach diesen Kriterien weiterlaufen, denn leider sind diese zerstörerischen Praktiken in dem Land, in dem sie stattfinden, legal. Aus diesem Grund bedeutet die Einhaltung der so genannten "Nachhaltigkeitskriterien" nach Artikel 29 (6) und (7) nicht per se, dass die Waldbiomasse nachhaltig ist. Vielmehr bedeutet es, dass sie in Übereinstimmung mit bestimmten Mindestkriterien erzeugt wird, die sie für die in Artikel 29 Absatz 1 Buchstaben a, b und c RED genannten Zwecke geeignet machen. Dies ist wichtig, um nicht die falsche Vorstellung zu vermitteln, dass jede Waldbiomasse, die diese Kriterien erfüllt, per se "nachhaltig" ist. 3. Die Leitlinien verlangen weder von den Mitgliedsstaaten noch von den Prüfern, die Praktiken der Betreiber vor Ort zu prüfen, es sei denn, es gibt starke Bedenken wie zB bei Ländern mit fehlenden einschlägigen Gesetzen oder in Vertragsverletzungsverfahren. Nirgendwo in Artikel 7 wird von den Mitgliedsstaaten verlangt, irgendeine der bereitgestellten Informationen zu überprüfen. Ähnlich heißt es in Artikel 30 der REDII lediglich: "Die Mitgliedstaaten verlangen von den Wirtschaftsteilnehmern den Nachweis, dass die in Artikel 29 Absätze 2 bis 7 und 10 festgelegten Kriterien für die Nachhaltigkeit und die Einsparung von Treibhausgasemissionen erfüllt wurden", sowie andere, zu wenig verbindliche Anforderungen wie "Die Mitgliedstaaten ergreifen Maßnahmen, um sicherzustellen, dass die Wirtschaftsbeteiligten zuverlässige Informationen vorlegen". Diese unverbindlichen Anforderungen sollten verbindlicher und präziser ausformuliert werden, um die Einhaltung von Nachhaltigkeitskriterien auch in der Praxis sicherzustellen. 4. Die Leitlinien verweisen auf die Möglichkeit für Wirtschaftsbeteiligte, Berichte von Nichtregierungsorganisationen zu nutzen, um die Umsetzung von Gesetzen zu überprüfen. Solange aber diese Berichte nicht auch von einer nationalen oder internationalen Regierungsorganisation aufgegriffen und umgesetzt werden, bleiben diese wirkungslos. Darüber hinaus implizieren die Leitlinien, dass eine ordnungsgemäße Durchsetzung von Gesetzen nachgewiesen werden könnte, wenn es keine Informationen über einen "erheblichen Mangel an Durchsetzung" gibt. Da jedoch NRO-Berichte nicht als offizielle Informationen gelten und Regierungsorganisationen ihre Informationen nur selten auf NRO-Berichte stützen, ist es falsch anzunehmen, dass das Fehlen von Informationen über einen "erheblichen Mangel an Durchsetzung" tatsächlich ein Beweis für eine mangelnde Durchsetzung ist.
Read full response

Response to Revision of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive 2010/31/EU

22 Mar 2021

Doubling the renovation rate is key for Europe to reach its increased climate targets, to kickstart a green recovery and to provide healthy and comfortable places to live and work. We therefore strongly endorse the Renovation Wave agenda. We welcome the upcoming EPBD revision, which is essential to reaching the Renovation Wave’s aims, complemented by a strengthened EED and RED. Since the existing legislative framework has proved insufficient, we strongly support Option 3 outlined in the Inception Impact Assessment. Options 1 and 2 amount to giving up on bringing the building sector in line with EU climate and efficiency targets and are thus completely unacceptable. We suggest focusing on the following elements of the EPBD which promise to have the highest impact on renovation activity and climate protection: 1. Minimum energy performance standards: We strongly support the introduction of binding minimum energy performance standards (MEPS) for the worst-performing existing buildings. A European MEPS framework should give flexibility to Member States to adapt to local conditions but must be robust enough to ensure a significant increase in renovation activity even if a country decides to implement only what is strictly required by the Directive. It must be ensured that Member States can embed their MEPS in financial and technical support programmes to enable compliance and safeguard social fairness, augmented by favourable State Aid rules and European assistance. 2. Energy Performance Certificates and data availability: A revision of energy performance certificates (EPCs) should upgrade their quality across Europe, allowing them to be widely used as tools to determine building performance for MEPS classification. National EPC databases must be required to be far more accessible to enable transparent monitoring, benchmarking, and analysis. Beyond the EPCs, energy and carbon performance data of all publicly-owned buildings should be transparently published on a central web portal in each member state. 3. Prioritising renovation over new construction: The embodied energy, CO2 and other resources contained in already existing buildings should not be discarded needlessly. The EPBD should establish a binding requirement for public authorities to conduct lifecycle assessments when considering whether to renovate the buildings they own or to demolish them in favour of new construction. In addition, the EPBD should require member states to strongly incentivise energy renovations rather than new buildings. Currently, the reverse is often the case. In Germany, 60 percent of the main funding instrument “CO2-Gebäudesanierungsprogramm” finance new buildings rather than energy renovations. 4. Regulatory standards for embodied energy: The Inception Impact Assessment states that circularity principles “also requires consideration”, which is very weak language. We are concerned that no substantive policy proposals seem to be foreseen and that actual progress on building circularity will only come with the next EPBD revision in 2026, which would then still take years to be agreed and implemented by Member States. As a first step, the EPBD revision should already define regulatory standards limiting the embodied energy of new buildings. These would not immediately have to be binding; they could initially be optional and give access to preferential financing, or only apply to public buildings. Such standards would create additional incentives for the use of low-carbon and sustainable construction materials and create a basis for including circularity in energy renovation funding schemes. To establish a truly circular and climate-neutral building stock, the upcoming revision of the Construction Products Regulation should introduce accompanying measures targeting the production side, such as recycling quotas and CO2-intensity limits for building products as well as an extended producer responsibility across all phases of a product’s life cycle.
Read full response

Response to Revision of EU rules on Gas

10 Mar 2021

Deutsche Umwelthilfe / Environmental Action Germany welcomes the opportunity to comment on the initiative at this stage. This legislation is essential in leveling the playing field between natural gas, hydrogen, other gases and renewable electricity. Natural gas currently enjoys significant regulatory advantages. While green hydrogen, renewable electricity etc. must fulfill sustainability criteria, natural gas has no such criteria and does not internalize all external and environmental costs – e.g. those stemming from upstream methane emissions. This distorts the market in favour of natural gas and places renewable energy at a disadvantage, particularly in the heating sector. DUH sees this initiative as instrumental in leveling this imbalance and creating a truly competitive decarbonized gas market. DUH would prefer: A mandatory methane procurement standard requiring EU shippers and gas buyers to purchase 100% of their gas volumes by producers performing at 0,2% methane intensity standard, introduced as of 1 January 2025, or pay taxes and levies. Such an instrument needs to be part of this gas market reform in order to keep the EU on track for climate neutrality by 2050. In our view, EU gas market rules are the ideal tool to address upstream methane emissions, as they are well understood and generally followed by third countries exporting to the EU. Regulation for low-carbon gases, such as hydrogen produced from natural gas, has to take into account their full economic, environmental and societal costs. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) involves high production costs, is unpopular, not carbon-free or safe, and later CO2 leakages cannot be ruled out completely. A new market design should not set price signals that incentivize blue hydrogen or any other hydrogen that is not produced via renewable-electricity-run electrolysis (green hydrogen). In addition, Carbon Capture and Utilization (CCU) raises questions such as location, CO2 pipelines etc. that are, at the moment, even more uncertain than open questions on hydrogen networks. Technologies involving carbon capture should have no room in a decarbonized gas market. The production of green hydrogen, in turn, should not compete with the production of renewable electricity that could be used directly, e.g. in heating and transport. Surplus green electricity will not be available in high quantities, so the expansion of renewable energy must be ramped up in parallel to establishing hydrogen production capacities. Additionality is key. If additionality is not accomplished, electrolysers should only run when excess green electricity is available. While this initiative deals with pipelines, networks and gas markets, there needs to be coherence with other pieces of regulation. This concerns especially the Renewable Energy Directive when it comes to the taxonomy of gases, definitions of energy and overall targets, and the Guidelines on State Aid for Environmental Protection and Energy when it comes to promotion schemes. DUH would like to underline the importance of aligning all relevant legislative acts to jointly serve climate neutrality and respect the “do no significant harm” principle. In general, the gas market reform must appreciate that gas demand will fall in the coming decades due to energy efficiency, electrification and better integration of European energy markets. In this context, DUH supports integrated infrastructure planning and energy (system) efficiency. The gas market reform is imperative in tackling GHG emissions by paving the way towards a decarbonized gas market. The EU Commission has to use this opportunity to present a strong initiative that is compatible with the Paris Agreement and promotes sustainable alternatives to the continued use of fossil gas. The path to 2030 and 2050 is getting shorter and climate-tipping points need to be avoided at all cost now. There is simply no room left to delay emission reductions any longer.
Read full response

Response to Modernising the EU’s batteries legislation

1 Mar 2021

Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH – Environmental Action Germany) is a recognised environmental and consumer protection association in Germany that has been actively campaigning for the preservation of natural resources and consumer concerns since 1975. DUH is politically independent, non-profit, has the right to sue and is active at national and European level. Critical consumers, environmental organisations, politicians, key organisations from industry and the media are important partners. In the area of circular economy, DUH advocates for a sustainable economy in which products are ecologically designed, consciously consumed and disposed of in an environmentally sound manner. Here, the prevention of waste as well as its collection, reuse and recycling play a special role. DUH can rely on a staff of about 140 employees and a broad network of technical, legal and communication experts. We look back at many years of experience with the topic of batteries, whether in the mobility sector or in electronics. Information on our work can be seen on our websites on batteries, mobility and electronic devices. Also, our Position Paper (September 2020) and various press releases regarding our work on batteries mirror our expert knowledge and experience. Our main comments on the European Commission’s Proposal for a Regulation concerning batteries and waste batteries are the following: 1. Battery Production - Even prior to the Carbon Footprint entering into force, green electricity should be mandated for the production of all batteries. 2. Repair & Reuse - All types of batteries must be easily replaceable; - Repair instructions, spare parts and software-updates should be made available for all batteries and the applications in which the batteries are used; - The battery management system must be available, readable and modifiable for reuse of the battery; - Industrial, automotive or EV batteries must be checked for second life before they are recycled. In cases where reuse is technically and economically feasible and where there is a market for the reused battery, the battery has to be reused. 3. Collection - The collection targets for portable batteries from 2030 must be raised; - Specific collection targets for batteries for ‘light means of transport’ should be created; - There must be an extensive area-covering, free of charge and consumer friendly network of collection points ensured; - A deposit-return system should be introduced for portable batteries and batteries for ‘light means of transport’; - There should be an ambitious collection target or at least an incentive for returning industrial, automotive and EV batteries. 4. Due diligence - Batteries may only be imported and waste batteries may only be exported when proven that equivalent standards on environmental protection and health and safety as in the EU are met. Together with the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), Transport & Environment (T&E) and European Environmental Citizens Organisation for Standardisation (ECOS) we are working on a full position paper, which will be released soon. A draft of this will be submitted to the Commission by T&E. In this regard, we would like to share with you our position paper on the German federal law on batteries (Batterie-Gesetz). Although this is a German law there are many parallels to the batteries directive and numerous recommendations can be derived from it.
Read full response

Response to Proposal for a legislative act on methane leakage in the energy sector

25 Jan 2021

Deutsche Umwelthilfe / Environmental Action Germany welcomes the opportunity to comment on the initiative at this stage. Regulating methane emissions in the oil, gas and coal sectors is indeed a powerful tool and necessary in mitigating GHG emissions and meeting climate targets. DUH would like to underline the importance of applying upcoming legislation to the entire supply chain of the oil, gas and coal industries, including domestic sources and gas imports from third countries. Only if all measures apply to EU imports, wholesale and retail, the impact of methane emissions on the global climate can truly be addressed. The initiative should lead to binding EU legislation instead of simply using a third-party system. The proposed OGMP is voluntary and focused on estimated emissions, without any monitoring or verification. DUH appreciates the initiative also covering emissions from the coal sector as well as emissions from oil and gas used as feedstock. This should pertain to naphtha as well. DUH sees the combination of MVR and LDAR as key to reducing methane emissions globally. Actual measurements are key as well as access to data for verification purposes. In addition, the initiative should include a ban on venting and flaring as well as methane emissions limits. The latter need to accompany any MVR, LDAR and ban on venting and flaring as they pertain to the entire value chain. Methane emissions limits will trigger simple mitigation of leakages by way of already existing technologies at not net cost - which industry still does not yet fully implement. DUH suggests a methane levy setting a default value where data is lacking. In addition, any policy must also allow for new technologies in MRV and LDAR (e.g. aircraft, satellites) to address e.g. super-emitters and include a type of certification. Finally, the legal basis for the initiative should be Art. 192 TFEU instead of Art. 194 as the objective and content of the initiative clearly serve environmental protection.
Read full response

Response to Protecting biodiversity: nature restoration targets

2 Dec 2020

Die DUH unterstützt die Bestrebungen der EU-KOM, ein Rechtsinstrument vorzuschlagen, das verbindliche EU-Ziele für die Wiederherstellung der Natur festlegt. Angesichts des Nicht-Erreichens des bisherigen freiwilligen Ziels der Wiederherstellung von Ökosystemen ist ein legislativer Ansatz erforderlich. Das neue Gesetz sollte zusätzlich zu den einschlägigen EU-Richtlinien erlassen werden mit einem stufenweisen Ansatz als zielgerichtetes Wiederherstellungsgesetz, gefolgt von einer umfassenderen Ökosysteminitiative. Vorrangige Zielsetzung des Rechtsinstruments sollte die Umkehrung des Verlusts der biologischen Vielfalt sein, was zur Wiederherstellung von Lebensräumen, der Funktionsfähigkeit von Arten und Ökosystemen, der Konnektivität und der Resilienz von Landschaften in der gesamten EU führt. Unterstützend sollte das Wiederherstellungsgesetz zur Eindämmung der Klimakrise und zur Klimaanpassung beitragen und Synergien zwischen der Biodiversitäts- und Klimakrisenagenda schaffen. Der dauerhafte Schutz und die Verbesserung der wiederhergestellten Lebensräume müssen über ein Verschlechterungsverbot gewährleistet werden und dazu beitragen, andere EU-Ziele, z.B. neue Schutzgebiete, zu erreichen. Dazu sollte rechtsverbindlich als klares und quantifizierbares gebietsbezogenes Ziel formuliert werden, 15 % der Land- und Meeresfläche (mindestens 1 Mio. km² Meeresfläche der EU (diese ist an die AWZ der EU27 anzupassen) bis 2030 wiederherzustellen sowie 15 % der Flüsse wieder frei fließend zu machen. Um einen klaren Umsetzungspfad vorzugeben, sollten die MS mit klaren Fristsetzungen verpflichtet werden, wissenschaftlich fundierte nationale Wiederherstellungspläne zu erstellen, in denen sie Maßnahmen festlegen, die eine Vielzahl von Ökosystemen in ihrem Hoheitsgebiet abdecken. Diese sollten sowohl aktive als auch passive Wiederherstellungsmaßnahmen umfassen, welche gezielt Eingriffe fördern, die natürliche Prozesse wiederherstellen (Rewilding). Die Pläne sollten klare quantitative Ziele und Kriterien in Bezug auf Standorte, Gebiete, Arten, zu verwendende finanzielle Instrumente, Anforderungen an eine aktive Beteiligung der Öffentlichkeit, Fristen usw. enthalten. Sie müssen auch aufzeigen, wozu die Maßnahmen beitragen werden, nämlich - Erhöhung der Konnektivität des Natura-2000- und des umfassenderen Schutzgebietsnetzes - Erreichen des Ziels, 10% der Land- und Meeresfläche der EU streng zu schützen - Unterstützung der Ziele der Natura2000-RLen, der WRRL und der MSRL, wobei die bestehenden rechtlichen Anforderungen im Rahmen dieser Richtlinien ergänzt werden sollen. Strengere Ziele sollten Vorrang haben. - Unterstützung der Klimaanpassung bzw. Eindämmung der Klimakrise - Beitrag zur Erholung der wildlebenden Bestäuber und dass die Maßnahmen zu einer signifikanten Veränderung im Management führen, nicht zuletzt auch um "Greenwashing" zu vermeiden Als Beispiele für Maßnahmen kommen in Betracht: - Beseitigung von Barrieren aus Flüssen zur Wiederherstellung der Fischwanderung und der Flüsse mit freiem Durchfluss - Wiederherstellung von Sumpfgebieten und Dünensystemen durch Sperrung der Entwässerung, Verlagerung des Hochwasserschutzes, Änderung der Beweidung usw. - Einrichtung von Nullnutzungszonen zur Wiederherstellung der Fischbestände und Verbot der Grundschleppnetzfischerei zur Wiederherstellung der Lebensgemeinschaften am Meeresboden Die Wiederherstellungspläne sollten dann von der Kommission bewertet werden. Schließlich sollte das Rechtsinstrument eine EU-Verpflichtung zur Kofinanzierung der wirksamen Wiederherstellung schaffen und die MS dazu verpflichten, ihre Wiederherstellungspläne mit einem Investitionsplan aus EU-, nationalen und privaten Finanzierungsquellen abzustimmen. Andere EU-Initiativen, einschließlich der reformierten GAP und der Umsetzung der Strategie "Farm to Fork" sowie der GFP sollten zusätzlich zu den Maßnahmen im Rahmen des neuen Rechtsinstruments auch die Wiederherstellung der Natur in der gesamten EU unterstützen.
Read full response

Response to Updating Member State emissions reduction targets (Effort Sharing Regulation) in line with the 2030 climate target plan

26 Nov 2020

To comply with the Paris Agreement, the EU’s 2030 climate target must be raised to at least 65%, supported by a functioning and effective climate policy architecture. The EU outlines three options for the future of the Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR). While some options are worse than others, none are appropriate and effective for delivering the necessary emission reductions. Maintain the existing architecture and align the ambition of the ESR and ETS with the Paris Agreement DUH advocates for maintaining the existing climate architecture and raising the ambition in both the ESR and ETS. If any form of emission trading is established for the road transport and building sectors, binding national targets under the ESR should still be maintained and increased significantly to meet a raised EU climate target. The ESR has proved an effective tool to incentivize national climate action, driving domestic policies such as low-emission zones, investment in charging infrastructure and building renovation and ambitious taxation reform in some countries. At EU level, member states have backed ambitious EU measures (e.g. car CO2 standards) to achieve their national ESR targets. Option 1 – Repeal the ESR entirely: This option is completely unacceptable. Repealing the entire ESR at a moment when climate ambition urgently needs to be ramped up would be extremely counterproductive and would jeopardise both national and EU climate policies. • If national targets are scrapped, members states (MS) would no longer be responsible for reducing emissions in non-ETS sectors. In many MS, the binding ESR targets and associated threat of fines are key drivers of domestic climate policies. These must be ramped up to achieve the 2030 climate target. If the ESR is repealed, national policies are at risk of being weakened. • EU climate policies will be in serious jeopardy. Without binding national targets, the EU Council will be less likely to adopt ambitious EU sectoral measures such as tighter car CO2 standards. Emission trading cannot deliver the necessary emission reductions in sectors such as transport and buildings. DUH does not support establishing emission trading for these sectors. • Abatement costs for transport and building emissions are much higher than the current ETS carbon price. Analysis shows that, under an extended ETS, additional emission reduction in road transport will be practically zero in 2030 and less than 10% in 2050 (see attachment) due to inelastic demand. The Commission’s analysis shows that shifting road transport into the ETS achieves less than more regulatory policy options such as tightening car CO2 standards and encouraging modal shift. • Carbon pricing alone is insufficient to address market barriers to deploying clean energy solutions at scale. In road transport, it does not incentivise manufacturers to switch to fully electric vehicles. The fuel price increase will instead hit low-income populations the hardest, without addressing these barriers. For buildings, tenants faced with higher carbon prices don’t have the ability to choose alternative heating or invest in insulation. Option 2 – Keep the current ESR scope in addition to emission trading: This option is less damaging but still undesirable. It is doubtful how efficient and sustainable it is to regulate sectors such as transport and buildings in parallel through both the ESR and either an extended ETS or a separate emissions trading system. This would likely prompt complaints of an “unfair double regulation” of these sectors, undermining existing regulatory instruments such as car CO2 standards even while keeping the sectors under ESR scope. Option 3 – Maintain in the ESR only the sectors not covered by the ETS: This option faces similar issues as option 1. This option also significantly reduces the accountability of MS in case current non-ETS sectors are removed from the ESR scope. As explained above, this cannot be compensated by emission trading
Read full response

Response to Revision of the CO2 emission standards for cars and vans

26 Nov 2020

The car CO2 standards represent the primary EU policy instrument driving the transition to zero-emission road transport. Current standards are not in line with the Paris Agreement, and several elements of the regulation limit its effectiveness. These shortcomings must now be addressed, and the overall ambition significantly increased to set road transport on a rapid path to zero emissions within the next few years. Set much more stringent annual standards in the 2020s, reaching zero in 2030 To contribute to the increased 2030 climate target, it is not enough to tighten only the 2030 limit value. The car CO2 targets must be significantly increased in the 2020s and the limit value should drop to zero by 2030. The 5-year targets allows CO2 emissions from new cars to grow in between and should be replaced by annual targets which decline each year. Ensure the limits are met on the road Limit values need to be enforced in the real world to be effective. The average gap between official and actual CO2 emissions of cars has grown for years, stabilising at 39% since 2017. WLTP introduction has reduced the discrepancy, but official values still don’t represent real emissions and it is expected that the gap will grow again. The revised regulation must enshrine the requirement for real drive emission (RDE) tests (in addition to fuel consumption meters which will only provide retrospective information). RDE testing is already established for air pollutants. Set an absolute CO2 limit value per vehicle and tighten it annually The limit values currently only regulate fleet averages. As long as manufacturers sell enough (partially) electric cars, they can continue selling highly motorized, polluting SUVs and premium limousines without any upper emission limit. This system is no longer tenable. An absolute CO2 limit value should be introduced which applies to each vehicle. Fully electric cars have to observe an absolute limit on their energy consumption. Phase out sales of new combustion vehicles EU-wide by 2030 & enable member states to do so earlier The EU’s Climate Target Plan recognises that sales of combustion vehicles must be phased out to meet climate targets. An EU-wide phase-out date should be set no later than 2030. Type approval provisions must be adjusted to allow member states to go for earlier phase-outs. End special treatment for PHEV Half of current EV sales are plug-in hybrids (PHEV) that - even on a charged battery - emit much more CO2 than official values suggest. Measurements and analysis by DUH, ICCT and T&E have shown that PHEV emissions exceed official figures on average 2-4 fold and under certain conditions up to 12-fold. PHEV sales are incentivised by low official CO2 values and Super Credits. The future regulation must end all special treatment for PHEV. Realistic CO2 values are required which respect absolute limit values both in combustion and electric mode. Close counterproductive loopholes Due to flexibilities, the current 95 g/km limit is really only a 108 g/km limit (6.3 g/km for super-credits, 3.4 g/km for the phase-in, 2.3 g/km for mass adjustment, 1.3 g/km for eco-innovations; T&E). These flexibilities weaken the targets, undermine real-world reductions and need to be phased out urgently. Mass adjustment especially is not justifiable as it provides perverse benefits to manufacturers of heavier cars: selling electric SUVs has a bigger positive effect on fleet emissions than selling small electric cars. Don’t undermine CO2 standards by crediting alternative fuels Fuels should continue to be governed by separate legislation such as RED. Crediting alternative fuels in the standards undermines the incentive for carmakers to produce lower-emitting cars, weakening an effective instrument in favour of ineffective pseudo solutions such as biofuels (unsustainable or available only in very limited quantities) or synthetic fuels (inefficient, costly, unavailable for the next 10 years and needed in other sectors).
Read full response

Response to Updating the EU Emissions Trading System

26 Nov 2020

ETS reform as part of a package to collectively increase climate ambition Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) notes that even with a 2030-climate target of 55%, Europe remains off track to reach the Paris Agreement 1.5°C objective. Emission cuts of at least 65% are required for the EU to fully honor its international commitments. A holistic approach towards the entire policy architecture is needed to deliver the necessary emissions reductions in a socially fair and cost-effective manner. The ETS is but one element and needs to be complemented by a significantly strengthened set of climate and energy policy measures. An effective regulatory architecture The respective targets of both the ETS and ESR have to be strengthened significantly to contribute to an increased EU target. The Commission has proposed several options how to implement this across the sectors covered by both regulatory acts. DUH supports an extension of the ETS to shipping and international aviation. However, we want to emphasize that any extension of the ETS to road transport and/or buildings is utterly inadvisable. Current ETS prices are far too low to trigger mitigation actions such as building renovation or switching away from combustion vehicles. Extending the ETS in this way would also call into question binding national reduction targets under the ESR. Any form of emissions trading for buildings and road transport must therefore be separate from the ETS. Incentivizing GHG reductions in these sectors through the Energy Taxation Directive would be a more effective and reliable option. Adjusting the ETS cap Rebasing the cap and increasing the linear reduction factor (LRF) are crucial to increase the effectiveness of the ETS. The ETS cap continues to exceed real emissions, building up a structural surplus that the market stability reserve (MSR) alone cannot address. The Commission estimates that this gap amounted to 250 million allowances in 2019. In order to ensure that the cap better reflects real emissions, it should be adjusted through a one-off reduction of 250 million allowances as early as possible. Increasing the linear reduction factor The later a revised LRF is applied, the higher it will have to be. The German Öko-Institut has calculated that to meet a 2030-target of 55%, the LRF would need to be set at 4,11% if introduced in 2021, and at 6,02% if introduced in 2026. The LRF should therefore be raised as soon as possible. Phase-out of free allocation of permits 94% of industrial emissions under the ETS are covered by free pollution permits, despite recommendations from the EU Court of Auditors to reform the system of carbon leakage protection. Given the lack of evidence on carbon leakage, the current handout of free allowances needs to stop. The ETS should shift towards 100% auctioning across all covered sectors, in particular if a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) is adopted. Strengthen the resilience and responsiveness of the EU ETS The previous trading period has shown that the market has not been sufficiently responsive to external shocks, leading to surpluses that lower the carbon price. For this reason, a steadily rising carbon floor price should be introduced and cancellation of allowances in case of additional national measures should become mandatory. The MSR should also be strengthened with a higher intake rate and automatic cancellation of allowances that remain in the reserve for more than 5 years. Ensure that ETS revenues are fully used to accelerate the transition towards climate neutrality 100% of ETS revenues should be used to promote climate protection. In particular, no financial support should be given to natural gas or nuclear energy production. Any funding for biomass and bioenergy must be subject to stringent sustainability criteria and accurate c
Read full response

Response to Revision of the Renewable Energy Directive (EU) 2018/2001

21 Sept 2020

To reach the Paris Agreement objective of limiting global warming to 1.5°C, EU Member States need to phase out fossil fuels and transition to a 100% renewables-based energy system by 2040. The current 2030 EU RES target of 27% is not in line with this effort. Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) therefore calls on the European Commission to propose a binding target for the RES share in gross final energy consumption of at least 50% by 2030. The 2018 RED revision introduced a protected status for citizen energy projects, which was a very positive step. Citizen energy plays a vital role in strengthening local support for RES installations. These rules should be revised to provide stronger incentives for larger community energy projects. Currently, small RES installations intended for own consumption are freed from electricity charges up to a capacity of 30 kW per installation, regardless of how many consumers the installation supplies. The threshold should be applied per consumer instead, to incentivize the realization of community energy projects with a capacity higher than 30 kW. The revision of the RED aims to kick-start the deployment of renewable hydrogen. DUH welcomes this in principle, but stresses that support must only be given to green hydrogen. Support to blue hydrogen would undermine the low-carbon transition. Green hydrogen will be a scarce resource and should only be used where no alternatives are available, such as in industry, long-distance aviation and shipping. Use in road transport or heating would be wasteful. Strict sustainability standards are necessary for fuels such as hydrogen and e-fuels. They must be produced only with renewable electricity and CO2 captured from the air. As long as there are still relevant fossil shares in the electricity mix, substituting them with e-fuels can significantly increase emissions overall. Such indirect effects must be considered as part of a sustainability assessment (see attached position paper). The RES transport target of 14% by 2030 can be an important lever to promote transport decarbonisation. But so far, it has incentivised unsustainable crop biofuels which drive global deforestation and whose climate performance falls far short of the RED’s GHG savings requirements. When indirect land use change is accounted for, all vegetable oil biodiesel feedstocks generate higher GHG emissions than fossil fuel. Despite the 2015 iLUC reform, use of soy and palm oil as biofuel feedstocks has increased significantly in the EU in the past 5 years. The RED revision must implement a full phase-out of crop biofuels as soon as possible, starting with palm and soy in 2021. Crop biofuels must be removed entirely from the RES target. The RED sets a sub-target for advanced biofuels in transport. However, the current framework risks severe negative environmental impacts by promoting inappropriate feedstocks and neglecting necessary sustainability safeguards. The RED Annex IX must be reviewed in line with the best available science to remove unsustainable feedstocks (such as crude tall oil, pre-commercial thinnings, round wood, pulp wood and tree stumps) whose use for biofuel production risks significant displacement emissions, driving deforestation and other negative environmental impacts. Strict safeguards must ensure that any use of agricultural and forestry residues does not compromise soil fertility, carbon sequestration or biodiversity. Promotion of UCO should be limited to domestically available volumes under robust verification and monitoring systems. Due to limited volumes, advanced biofuels are not a scalable solution to reduce transport emissions. Revision of the RES transport target must shift the focus towards the use of renewable electricity. The RED should include an obligation for all member states to implement a credit mechanism that ensures fuel suppliers can purchase renewable electricity credits to meet their obligations.
Read full response

Response to Review of Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency

21 Sept 2020

Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) would like to stress that currently, the EED, like the other elements of the Clean Energy for All package, are inconsistent with the ambition of the Paris Agreement, as action in the next 10 years will be decisive in reaching the 1.5°C objective. We fully support the initiative to revise the EED and stresses that the ambition level needs to increase significantly. A 65% reduction in greenhouses gases compared to 1990 is needed to stay within reach of the 1.5°C goal, according to climate science. The 2030 energy efficiency target, like the renewable energy target, must rise accordingly. The existing target of 32.5% should be increased to at least 45%. To ensure delivery, the overarching target, like the national contributions, should be made binding. In many countries, delivered energy savings fall short of the minimum required and are insufficient to achieve the national targets. Enforcement of energy efficiency obligations has not been effective and some rules are not stringent and ambitious enough, despite the Impact Assessment accompanying the Commission’s proposal on the 2016 EED review showing that higher levels of ambition deliver greater benefits, such as greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions, lower dependency on energy imports, job creation and improved health. The EED revision needs to address current issues of eligibility and additionally of Article 7 measures. New EU measures will be introduced as part of the European Green Deal, e.g. on carbon pricing in other sectors, vehicle standards and building renovation. An impact assessment is needed to assess how these measures interact with the Article 7 energy saving obligation. The Commission should ensure clear and accurate reporting on the progress of implementation of the measures foreseen. This is even more important, considering the information gaps in many of the notifications of the NECPs submitted by Member States regarding the details of the measures and how the expected energy savings under Article 7 will be delivered. Finally, the contribution of Article 7 towards the EU climate goals should be guided by a forward looking perspective. The scope of the 3% renovation requirement in Article 5 needs to be extended to all public buildings, without regulatory loopholes, while the possibility to follow an alternative approach to renovations should be deleted. This is important to finally realize an effective role model function of the public sector. Further measures for the renovation of other sections of the building stock alongside with provisions for financial and technical support to help overcome implementation barriers should be considered. It is also crucial to ensure that the renovation of the building stock is carried out in a socially compatible way. Additionally, the EED requests energy bills, which are easier to understand and contain all relevant billing information. Implementation of this Article has not yet been implemented sufficiently in all member states. Fossil fuel technologies used in buildings for heating and cooling should be excluded from all public funding as they fundamentally work against the switch to renewable heating. In particular, the heating and cooling provisions of the EED (Article 14) which to a large extent promote combined heat and power (CHP) generation, often operated on fossil fuels, needs to be revised to only allow public support for renewable heating. CHP support often leads from a switch from coal to gas, which is not compatible with climate neutrality, and actively hinders a renewable transition in the heating sector. (For more detail see attached document) Europe needs a comprehensive approach that aims to significantly reduce energy demand, phase out fossil fuels and move towards a 100% renewable energy system. In this context, the coherence with other EU initiatives that are currently ongoing such as the EU strategy on smart sector integration and the Renovation Wave is crucial.
Read full response

Response to Modernising the EU’s batteries legislation

8 Jul 2020

Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. - DUH) - Feedback on Batteries - modernising EU rules The promotion of environmental-friendly batteries in the fast growing EU market is of crucial importance for a sustainable development and resource management. The Inception Impact Assessment already captures important aspects and opportunities to create and ensure minimal standards for environmental quality and social equality. Nonetheless, the overall goal should challenge the current state of the art and enforce the production of sustainable batteries through transparency and eco-design measures along the entire life cycle, which include minimal standards for longevity, reuse, recyclability, recycled content and the reduction of hazardous substances. In order to promote the introduction and usage of secondary raw materials recycling technologies need to be improved. Therefore, the revision of the current Battery Directive 2006/66/EC shall include at least the following measures: 1. Higher collection targets are of utmost importance to ensure a safe and environmental-friendly treatment and recycling of waste batteries in the EU. We propose a target of 65 % from 2021 and 85 % from 2023. The collection targets must be differentiated by battery types. 2. Producers must provide mandatory information and full transparency for costumers and other stakeholders (e.g. recycling industry) throughout the entire life cycle, including sourcing and supply chain, statements on longevity, reusability, recyclability, recycled content and content of hazardous substances. In addition, producers and collection systems must provide public information on the quantities of batteries placed on the market as well as collected batteries. 3. Due to the high risk of explosion and fires from high-energy batteries (in particular lithium batteries), the collection and treatment must be ensured by deposit-return or reward systems. 4. The Directive shall include eco-design measures for batteries in order to promote a sustainable product design. These measures should include mandatory minimum requirements concerning longevity, recyclability, recycled content and content of hazardous materials. 5. Non-rechargeable batteries should be replaced by reusable batteries. 6. Minimum requirements for extended producer responsibilities (EPR) obligations must be implemented, also including international players and online sales who are placing batteries on the European market and therefore must be registered in the EU. 7. The improvement of collection and treatment of waste batteries must always be accompanied by comprehensive consumer information. 8. The reuse of batteries, especially industrial batteries from electro mobility, should be defined through mandatory reuse targets, ensuring a second life/reuse for these batteries. 9. Given the fact that mining activities cause irreversible environmental and severe social impacts worldwide, ambitious recycling targets must be defined for all common as well as a range of the most important and critical minerals such as lithium and cobalt. This measure is also necessary to support the EU secondary raw materials market, hence, will contribute to an independence from raw materials. 10. Lastly, the revision of the Battery Directive should provide clear definitions (e.g. industrial batteries, second life/reuse, hazardous substances) and updated concepts for a more sustainable management of batteries in the EU.
Read full response

Response to Strategy for smart sector integration

8 Jun 2020

Mit Blick auf die Klimaziele bis 2050 kann die vollständige Substitution fossiler Brenn- bzw. Kraftstoffe in den Sektoren Verkehr und Wärme nur durch zusätzlichen Strom aus erneuerbaren Energien (EE) erreicht werden. Die Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) begrüßt daher das Vorhaben der Sektorintegrationsstrategie. Diese sollte sich an folgenden Leitlinien ausrichten, um eine Fehlsteuerung zu vermeiden: - Da Strom aus EE nicht unbegrenzt zur Verfügung stehen wird, kann die Sektorenkopplung nur dann ihren Beitrag zum Klimaschutz leisten, wenn der Endenergiebedarf des Gebäudesektors um 50% und der des Verkehrssektors um 70% bis 2050 zurückgehen. Diese wichtige Voraussetzung findet in den Vorschlägen der Kommission bislang viel zu wenig Beachtung. - Eine Nutzung von EE-Strom in den Sektoren Wärme und Verkehr ist nur dann sinnvoll, wenn mehr CO2 vermieden wird, als im Strommix emittiert wird (2019 waren es in Deutschland 401 Gramm CO2/kWh). Gegenwärtig ergibt sich daher nur für wenige Anwendungen wie strombetriebene Wärmepumpen, batterieelektrische Fahrzeuge und im Schienenverkehr ein Klimanutzen. - Erst wenn die stromspezifischen CO2-Emissionen erheblich gesenkt werden, haben weitere Sektorintegrationsmaßnahmen einen Klimanutzen. Dafür muss der EE-Ausbaupfad deutlich angehoben und die Kohle- und Gasverstromung reduziert werden. Für die vollständige Dekarbonisierung muss der Strom spätestens 2050 zu 100% erneuerbar sein. - Aufgrund des hohen Energieaufwands der Herstellung sowie geringerer Wirkungsgrade gegenüber der direkten Stromnutzung ist der Einsatz synthetischer Kraftstoffe auf Basis von Power-to-Gas (PtG) und Power-to-Liquid (PtL) erst ab EE-Anteilen von nahezu 100% bei der Strombereitstellung ökologisch sinnvoll. Als Flexibilitäts- bzw. Speicheroption sind PtG und PtL aber möglicherweise schon in einem Stromsystem mit 60 bis 80% EE-Anteil von Bedeutung. - Angesichts begrenzter Verfügbarkeit von EE-Strom sollten synthetische Kraft- und Brennstoffe nur dort zur Anwendung kommen, wo die direkte Nutzung erneuerbarer Energien bzw. erneuerbaren Stroms nicht möglich ist. Hierzu zählen die Stahl- und chemische Grundstoffindustrie, industrielle Hochtemperaturprozesse sowie Luft- und Seeverkehr. Für PKW oder die Beheizung von Gebäuden sind diese Kraftstoffe zu schade. - Die zukünftige Rolle von Wasserstoff ist mit großer Sorgfalt zu bewerten. Die Strategie muss blauem Wasserstoff, der durch CO2-Abspaltung aus fossilem Erdgas entsteht, eine klare Absage erteilen. Blauer Wasserstoff ist aus Klimasicht keinesfalls gleichwertig mit grünem Wasserstoff: Es entstehen bis zu 218g CO2-Äqv. pro kWh blauen Wasserstoffs. - Es ist eine grundlegende Verkehrswende nötig. Im Individualverkehr sollte ein attraktiverer Rahmen für batterieelektrische Fahrzeuge geschaffen werden indem die Zulassung reiner Verbrenner ab 2025 verboten wird. Zudem müssen ambitionierte CO2-Grenzwerte sicherstellen, dass die Emissionen der Fahrzeuge reduziert werden. Die Nutzung von Autos und insbesondere von Verbrennern in den Städten muss über Citymaut, Umwidmung des Straßenraums für Rad und Öffentlichen Verkehr, Parkraumbewirtschaftung und –verknappung, etc. unattraktiv gemacht werden. Batterieelektrische Fahrzeuge müssen deutlich effizienter werden. Dazu müssen Standards definiert werden und effiziente E-Autos fiskalisch und regulatorisch gefördert werden. Die Elektrifizierung der Schiene muss deutlich beschleunigt werden. - In Wärmenetzen spielt die Nutzung erneuerbaren Stroms über Wärmepumpen nach wie vor eine untergeordnete Rolle. Es dominieren fossile Wärmequellen. Für die Dekarbonisierung des Wärmesektors muss die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit von erneuerbarer Wärme im Vergleich zu fossiler (KWK)-Wärme gesteigert werden. Zudem müssen Wärmenetze für die Aufnahme von erneuerbarer Wärme (geringeres Temperaturniveau) umgerüstet werden.
Read full response

Response to Commission Communication – "Renovation wave" initiative for the building sector

8 Jun 2020

Improving the energy performance of buildings is crucial to reach climate neutrality by 2050. We warmly welcome the Renovation Wave as it will support achieving the EU’s climate and energy targets while delivering a significant contribution to economic recovery in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. According to a recent forecast, up to 280,000 jobs could be created by 2050 in Germany alone by realizing a climate-neutral building stock. The Renovation Wave must be based on ambitious targets and concrete, adequately funded measures. The European Recovery Fund offers a unique opportunity to kickstart the initiative, but we also need a sustained rise in energy renovation. The following points should be considered: • Consistently implementing and applying the “Energy Efficiency First” principle in the building sector is fundamental to reducing the EU’s energy dependency and CO2 emissions. Renovation rates in Member States are chronically too low. The landlord-tenant dilemma still remains unsolved as well as the problems of low-income and aged home owners. This will need to be addressed by legal reforms as well as well as incentives and support schemes to tackle specific issues of these groups. The barriers mentioned in the roadmap are key issues to resolve, including by reforms in the Member States. • The Commission (EC) should rigorously enforce the legislation related to the energy performance of buildings. Ensuring the ambitious implementation of the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) is a very important first step. Germany, for instance, still does not meet the EPBD requirement that new buildings be nearly zero-energy buildings. Due to long investment cycles, buildings constructed in Germany today will thus have to be renovated again before 2050, with unnecessary additional costs. The EC should also rigorously enforce of the obligation to renovate public buildings in line with the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED). The objectives and milestones in the long-term renovation strategies should be assessed at an early stage in order to ensure that the Member States are on the right trajectories towards the EU climate neutrality objective and fully implement EED and EPBD requirements. • The public sector needs to be a role model for increased energy efficiency. All buildings owned and/or occupied by public authorities should be covered in the 3 % renovation target, regardless of their size including schools and hospitals. The loophole allowing governments to choose alternative measures should be closed. • The consultation is mainly focused on removing barriers, reducing costs and incentivising investment. However, social aspects have to be clearly embedded. The renovation of buildings must make also a contribution to affordable housing. Energy-poor households must be able to benefit from energy savings rather than being disadvantaged by higher rents. Direct subsidies and grants should be favored as key financial instruments and it should be ensured that access is as unbureaucratic as possible. The design of Energy Performance Certificates (EPC) should be improved and their comparability across MemberStates strengthened. Accompanying information measures (e.g. free advice on renovation) are necessary to stimulate the volume and depth of renovation needed. • The focus should shift from efficiency in operation towards a full life cycle perspective of buildings. With increasing energy efficiency, the importance of energy used for the production, construction and disposal ("embodied energy") of buildings and construction materials is growing. This accounts for around 8 % of GHG emissions in Germany. The design of new and renovated buildings should also meet the requirements of the circular economy. Special attention must be therefore paid to embodied energy of construction materials. Timber construction and ecological building materials in particular should be promoted over conventional approaches.
Read full response

Meeting with Marius Vascega (Cabinet of Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius)

2 Jun 2020 · Circular Economy Action Plan, waste, packaging waste prevention, single-use Plastics Directive, Eco-design Directive, Air Quality,

Response to 2030 Climate Target Plan

15 Apr 2020

Das Zielniveau muss im Einklang mit dem 1,5-Grad-Ziel sein Die bisherigen Zusagen unter dem Pariser Klimaabkommen reichen bei weitem nicht aus, um die Kli-makrise aufzuhalten. Um das 1,5-Grad-Ziel noch erreichen zu können, wäre laut UNEP Emissions Gap Report vom Oktober 2019 eine jährliche Treibhausgasreduktion von 7,6% notwendig. Das bedeutet ein 2030-Reduktionsziel von mindestens 65% für die EU. Im Licht der historischen und globalen Verantwortung der EU ist es absolut zentral, dass die Folgen-abschätzung für ein neues 2030-Klimaziel auch Pfade berücksichtigt, die zu einer Reduktion von min-destens 65% führen und Klimaneutralität schon deutlich vor 2050 erreichen. Deshalb fordern wir auch, dass in der Folgenabschätzung ein eigener Zielpfad zu einem Energiesystem auf Basis von Ener-gieeffizienz und 100% erneuerbaren Energien modelliert wird. Der Klimaschutz darf auch angesichts der aktuellen Krisensituation nicht aus den Augen verloren werden. Der Green Deal ist die Strategie für den Aufbau einer zukunftsfähigen klimaneutralen Wirt-schaft in Europa und muss als Leitfaden für den Wiederaufbau nach der Coronakrise dienen. Nur so können wirtschaftliche Entwicklung, Arbeitsplätze und Klimaschutz in Einklang gebracht werden. Da-mit Planungssicherheit entsteht, sind gerade jetzt ein ambitioniertes 2030-Ziel und ein starkes EU-Klimagesetz nötig, das konkrete Zwischenziele und einen unabhängigen wissenschaftlichen Beirat enthält. Die Transformation in allen Sektoren weiter voranbringen Mit der vollständigen Umsetzung der aktuellen EU-Klima- und Energiegesetzgebung wird laut Zahlen der EU-Kommission lediglich eine Treibhausgasminderung von etwa 45% erreicht. Die anstehenden Reformen des relevanten Acquis (inkl. Emissionshandel, Lastenteilungsentscheidung, LULUCF-Verordnung, CO2-Standards für PKW und Nutzfahrzeuge, Energieeffizienzrichtlinie, Erneuerbare-Energien-Richtlinie, Energiesteuerrichtlinie) sowie alle neuen Politikmaßnahmen müssen das deutlich ambitioniertere 2030-Klimaziel unterstützen. Jeglichen Versuchen, die Ambitionssteigerung dieser Instrumente zu verlangsamen oder abzuschwächen, muss die Kommission entschieden entgegentre-ten. Eine ETS-Ausweitung auf Gebäude und den Straßenverkehr ist hier jedoch ein Irrweg. Dies würde be-stehende Instrumente und Verpflichtungen unterminieren. Eine Lenkungswirkung wäre aufgrund der hohen CO2-Vermeidungskosten in diesen Sektoren fraglich. Darüber hinaus muss die Kommission klare sektorale Strategien zur Dekarbonisierung entwickeln, die auch Aktionspläne zur Umsetzung und Finanzierung enthalten. Insbesondere die Renovation Wave und die Smart Sector Integration Strategy müssen unverzüglich konkretisiert und mit Fördermitteln ausgestattet werden. Im Einklang mit dem Do-No-Harm-Prinzip darf zudem die Abhängigkeit Europas von fossilen Brenn-stoffen nicht weiter zementiert werden. Wir fordern eine verbindliche Verpflichtung auf europäischer Ebene, keine neue fossile Infrastruktur zu finanzieren. Die internationalen Verpflichtungen zur Ab-schaffung fossiler Subventionen sollten als Beitrag zu einem verschärften 2030-Ziel unverzüglich um-gesetzt werden. Kreislaufwirtschaft und Klimaschutz gehen Hand in Hand Zur Erreichung der Klimaschutzziele ist auch eine Transformation der Abfall- in eine Kreislaufwirt-schaft notwendig. Hierzu muss europaweit die Deponierung von Wertstoffen und unvorbehandelten Siedlungsabfällen endgültig der Vergangenheit angehören. Durch die verbindliche Förderung der Abfallvermeidung, Wiederverwendung von Produkten und Ver-packungen sowie Vorgaben zum Öko-Design und zum Einsatz von Recyclingmaterialien können ganz erhebliche Klimaschutzpotentiale realisiert werden. Der von der EU-Kommission vorgelegte Aktions-plan zur Kreislaufwirtschaft enthält hierzu erste gute Ansätze, bleibt an vielen Stellen jedoch zu un-verbindlich und unkonkret. Für die angekündigten Regelungen müssen zügig konkrete Gesetzesvor-schläge mit überprüfbaren quantitativen Zielen vorgelegt werden.
Read full response

Meeting with Virginijus Sinkevičius (Commissioner) and

8 Jan 2020 · European Green Deal and the planed implementation of circular economy and biodiversity initiatives of the European Commission

Response to High and low Indirect Land-Use Change (ILUC) - risks biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels

7 Mar 2019

Die Neufassung der Richtlinie über Erneuerbare Energien zielt darauf ab, die Unterstützung für lebensmittelbasierte Biokraftstoffe nach 2020 zu begrenzen und die Unterstützung für die am stärksten emittierenden Biokraftstoffe auf dem EU-Markt bis spätestens 2030 einzustellen. Der aktuelle Entwurf des delegierten Rechtsakts ist nicht zielführend und nicht ausreichend strikt, um Klimaschutz und den Schutz der Biodiversität angemessen zu gewährleisten. Der Vorschlag könnte im Gegenteil dazu führen, dass auf dem EU-Markt im Vergleich zum heutigen Verbrauch gleich viele oder sogar noch mehr palmölbasierte Kraftstoffe verwendet werden. Die Globiom-Studie (http://www.globiom-iluc.eu/) für die Europäische Kommission ergab, dass Biodiesel aus Palmöl dreimal klimaschädlicher ist als herkömmlicher Diesel, während Sojaöl-Diesel zweimal schädlicher ist. Trotz eines Rückgangs des Einsatzes von Palmöl in Konsumgütern (Lebensmittel, Kosmetika usw.) steigt der Palmölverbrauch aufgrund der energetischen Nutzung weiter an. Die EU ist der zweitgrößte Importeur von Rohpalmöl in der Welt. Die Mehrheit der in die EU eingeführten Palmöle (51%) wird derzeit subventioniert, um "erneuerbaren" Kraftstoff herzustellen. Europa verbraucht rund 4 Millionen Tonnen Rohpalmöl für die Dieselproduktion und ist damit der führende (wenn auch weitgehend unbeachtete) Verbraucher von Palmöl in Europa. Auf der Grundlage der neuesten verfügbaren Daten kam die Nicht-Regierungsorganisation Transport & Environment (T&E) zu dem Schluss, dass Soja und Palmöl sowie deren Nebenprodukte in die Kategorie der Biokraftstoffe mit hohem ILUC-Risiko aufgenommen werden sollten, da sie mit einer erheblichen Ausdehnung auf kohlenstoffreichen Habitaten verbunden sind und aus den Zielen für erneuerbare Energien auslaufen sollten. In Bezug auf die Risikokategorie mit niedrigem ILUC-Risiko kam T&E zu dem Schluss, dass die zu diesem Zeitpunkt vorliegenden Erkenntnisse kein funktionsfähiges und ausreichend robustes System für die Zertifizierung vorsehen, und empfahl der Kommission, diese Option für Biokraftstoffe mit hohem ILUC-Risiko zu beenden Der von der Europäischen Kommission veröffentlichte Entwurf eines delegierten Rechtsakts umfasst Palmöl in der Kategorie der Biokraftstoffe mit hohem ILUC-Risiko, da es seit 2008 eine massive Zunahme der Bestände mit hohem Kohlenstoffgehalt (durchschnittlich 45 %) verzeichnet. Dies ist ein wichtiges Anliegen und stellt eine bahnbrechende Entscheidung dar. Die Wahl einer 10%-Schwelle verhindert jedoch, dass Soja in diese Kategorie fällt, obwohl seit 2008 8% des Soja-Anbaus mit der Freisetzung von CO2-Emissionen einherging. Palmöl und Soja wurden in verschiedenen Initiativen (z.B. der Amsterdamer Erklärung) als forstwirtschaftliche Risikogüter identifiziert, und die Einstufung von Soja als "hohes ILUC-Risiko" würde mit diesen Kriterien übereinstimmen. Was die niedrigen ILUC-Risikokriterien betrifft, so hält der Entwurf des delegierten Rechtsakts diese Option leider für Biokraftstoffe mit hohem ILUC-Risiko offen. Sie umfasst weitreichende Ausnahmeregelungen in Bezug auf "ungenutzte" Flächen und für Kleinbauern, die zu keiner Verbesserung der aktuellen Situation führen könnten. So kam das ICCT (International council for clean transportation) beispielsweise zu dem Schluss, dass bis 2030 bis zu 5 Millionen Tonnen Palmöl auf kohlenstoffarmen Flächen in Indonesien und Malaysia produziert werden, die nach dem Gesetzentwurf als "geringes ILUC-Risiko" gelten würden. Dieses Land wird benötigt, um den gestiegenen Bedarf an Nahrungsmitteln, Futtermitteln und chemischen Produkten zu decken, so dass seine Verwendung für Biokraftstoffe indirekt noch zu einer weiteren Expansion des Ölpalmenanbaus beiträgt. Deshalb empfehlen wir 1. eine niedrigere Schwelle für die Einstufung von Kulturen in die Kategorie "mit hohem ILUC-Risiko" und damit die Aufnahme von Soja in diese Kategorie 2. alternativ die Anpassung der Kriterien für ein niedriges ILUC-Risiko
Read full response

Response to Regulatory measure on the review of energy labelling for household washing machines and washer-driers

21 Nov 2018

We would like to support the draft Ecodesign and Energy Labelling regulations and particularly the new energy efficiency formulas, which are less linear and steep with capacity, thus avoiding the current encouragement to ever larger capacities. We also welcome the provisions to avoid programmes with too stretched durations, with a preference for the cap on duration in Ecodesign over indication on the energy label. With regard to resource efficiency, the proposals to make repair and recycling of washing machines easier have been substantially weakened compared to previous versions of the texts, and, consequently, we urge decision-makers to increase the regulation ambition. - Stretch the energy label scales The proposed energy labelling scales have small class widths, especially in the top classes. This jeopardises the possibility of the labels to last for at least 10 years and makes it too easy to jump one class up through limited product adjustment or using tolerances. We call for stretching the scales to a more adequate level, with truly challenging A and B classes. - Improve the duplication of programmes clause We fully support restricting the use of programme names such as normal/daily/standard/regular, but recommend reintroducing the wording from the previous regulatory draft, mentioning also the use of the term cotton. - Improve the label design The label designs and descriptions are missing the grey F and G classes that should apply after April 2024. We strongly advise to remove the circle with the word “eco 40-60°”, since we doubt that its meaning will be understood, and we see a very significant risk that consumers believe it certifies the product is in some way “eco-friendly”. We regret that no icons have been envisaged that could help consumers buy more durable, reparable products, such as the free warranty period offered by the manufacturer or spare parts availability. - Lower delay start allowance and better regulation of networked modes The power limit for the delay start condition has been set to much too high a value (6 W) and should be limited at 1 W or less. In addition, the provisions on networked standby should allow the user to deactivate networked connections. - Strongly reinforce provisions on resource efficiency Spare parts should be available during the average product lifetime, i.e. 12 years. They spare should not be restricted to professional repairers but should be open to retailers, repairers and consumers. The list of spare parts should be extended to include batteries. A maximum delivery time of one week should be specified. Further, we call on the reintroduction of the unrestricted access to appliance repair and maintenance information to independent operators, supported by an explanatory section to the definition of “independent operator” as in the Regulation EC715/2007 on the availability of vehicle repair and maintenance information. Finally, while the previous drafts foresaw an easy access to a list of key parts for repair, the latest Commission proposals only foresee that dismantling shall be facilitated to extract the list of materials and components referred to in Annex VII of the WEEE Directive. This is a big step backwards in terms of reparability of products, and we call on the reintroduction of the previous provision. Our detailed comments are available through this link: https://www.coolproducts.eu/s/Final-recommendations-on-Washing-Machines-Nov-2018.pdf
Read full response

Response to Review of ecodesign requirements for household washing machines and washer-driers

21 Nov 2018

We would like to support the draft Ecodesign and Energy Labelling regulations and particularly the new energy efficiency formulas, which are less linear and steep with capacity, thus avoiding the current encouragement to ever larger capacities. We also welcome the provisions to avoid programmes with too stretched durations, with a preference for the cap on duration in Ecodesign over indication on the energy label. With regard to resource efficiency, the proposals to make repair and recycling of washing machines easier have been substantially weakened compared to previous versions of the texts, and, consequently, we urge decision-makers to increase the regulation ambition. - Stretch the energy label scales The proposed energy labelling scales have small class widths, especially in the top classes. This jeopardises the possibility of the labels to last for at least 10 years and makes it too easy to jump one class up through limited product adjustment or using tolerances. We call for stretching the scales to a more adequate level, with truly challenging A and B classes. - Improve the duplication of programmes clause We fully support restricting the use of programme names such as normal/daily/standard/regular, but recommend reintroducing the wording from the previous regulatory draft, mentioning also the use of the term cotton. - Improve the label design The label designs and descriptions are missing the grey F and G classes that should apply after April 2024. We strongly advise to remove the circle with the word “eco 40-60°”, since we doubt that its meaning will be understood, and we see a very significant risk that consumers believe it certifies the product is in some way “eco-friendly”. We regret that no icons have been envisaged that could help consumers buy more durable, reparable products, such as the free warranty period offered by the manufacturer or spare parts availability. - Lower delay start allowance and better regulation of networked modes The power limit for the delay start condition has been set to much too high a value (6 W) and should be limited at 1 W or less. In addition, the provisions on networked standby should allow the user to deactivate networked connections. - Strongly reinforce provisions on resource efficiency Spare parts should be available during the average product lifetime, i.e. 12 years. They spare should not be restricted to professional repairers but should be open to retailers, repairers and consumers. The list of spare parts should be extended to include batteries. A maximum delivery time of one week should be specified. Further, we call on the reintroduction of the unrestricted access to appliance repair and maintenance information to independent operators, supported by an explanatory section to the definition of “independent operator” as in the Regulation EC715/2007 on the availability of vehicle repair and maintenance information. Finally, while the previous drafts foresaw an easy access to a list of key parts for repair, the latest Commission proposals only foresee that dismantling shall be facilitated to extract the list of materials and components referred to in Annex VII of the WEEE Directive. This is a big step backwards in terms of reparability of products, and we call on the reintroduction of the previous provision. Our detailed comments are available through this link: https://www.coolproducts.eu/s/Final-recommendations-on-Washing-Machines-Nov-2018.pdf
Read full response

Meeting with Andrew Bianco (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella)

17 Sept 2018 · Nitrates Directive

Meeting with Kathiana Ghio (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella)

19 Jul 2018 · Circular Economy Package

Meeting with Kathiana Ghio (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella)

18 Apr 2018 · Air quality

Response to Improving the emissions legislation for Light Duty Vehicles

5 Apr 2018

The Environmental Action Germany (DUH) welcomes this public consultation regarding the draft regulation on the RDE 4th package and WLTP 2nd act. In general, DUH calls on the European Commission (EC) to cut red tape in the current test procedure and market surveillance provisions in order to increase transparency and comprehensibility and not make testing unnecessarily expensive. For example, the criteria for vehicle selection for in-service conformity (ISC) testing should be simplified for the purposes of reflecting real-world vehicle use. In addition, the current certification procedure foresees a number of tests that have no environmental benefit (e.g. smoke test or Type 5 test) and that need to be reviewed by the EC. DUH supports complementing current ISC checks by manufacturers with market surveillance activities at the member state level through type-approval authorities and other parties such as accredited laboratories. However, DUH strongly deplores that there is absolutely no mention to independent third party testing in the final draft despite being decisive to ensure compliance, as Dieselgate has clearly shown. Instead, the EC only refers to “accredited laboratories and technical services” and does not safeguard the independence of the tests. DUH welcomes the EC proposal to standardize and make on-board fuel and energy consumption measurement (OBFCM) devices compulsory. However, we call on the EC to establish provisions on data collection and data use and to ensure that third parties have access to the collected data. The data should not only be used to establish a monitoring framework for real-word fuel and energy consumption but also for compliance purposes, i.e. to address the gap between type-approval and real-world values. Collecting real-world fuel and energy consumption data is also relevant to monitor the charging behavior of plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEV). The data collected should be used to adjust the utility factors of PHEV periodically. Moreover, DUH demands to set an accuracy requirement of ±4%, as initially suggested by the EC and recommended by the JRC, instead of the current ±5%. The introduction of OBFCM devices replaces by no means the need for on-road CO2 emissions tests at type-approval. It is not possible to rely on the data collected by these devices to effectively root out test manipulations during type-approval as this data will only be available once the vehicles are already in use. DUH calls on the EC to stipulate the short-term introduction of on-road tests for CO2 emissions that build the basis of the future type-approval procedure and compliance with CO2 standards. DUH supports the introduction of transparency provisions that allow independent re-testing and therefore we welcome the provision to make two transparency data lists available to the public, in electronic form and free of charge. Further, we support the obligation of Grating Type-Approval Authorities (GTAA) to publish compliance assessment results and remedial measures and welcome the annual publication of an ISC report. However, we demand that test results of individual vehicles within an ISC procedure are made public as soon as the tests are completed and not to unnecessarily delay their disclosure until the publication of the GTAA´s report or the closure of the ISC procedure.
Read full response

Response to Post 2020 light vehicle CO2 Regulation(s)

23 Mar 2018

Introduced in 2009, CO2 standards for light-duty vehicles (LDVs) have proven to be a key plank of EU climate protection efforts in the transport sector. The proposed post-2021 CO2 targets, however, fall substantially short of the standards´ potential to cut CO2 emissions from road transport cost-effectively. In view of the challenging EU 2030 binding targets, the Commission (EC) cannot forgo the crucial benefits of ambitious standards and miss the opportunity to set a cost-effective path to curb CO2 emissions from EU LDVs. Further, lenient EU targets for road vehicles would force member states to implement far less cost-effective mechanisms to meet their national climate protection goals in the transport sector resp. other sectors. In fact, the proposed reduction targets are less ambitious than the current 2021 standard. The required annual reduction rate is both in absolute and relative terms below the one required between 2015 and 2021. Besides, for the first time the EC has proposed percentage reduction targets instead of absolute values. This poses a threat to the actual benefits of the new regulation as the baseline, which depends on the ratio of WLTP to NEDC test results in 2020, is subject to gaming. Manufacturers will aim at maximizing their respective conversion factors by, for example, reporting inflated WLTP CO2 emissions values. ICCT estimates that the average ratio could be twice the value that is justified by the technical differences between both procedures. In light of the above, the Environmental Action Germany (DUH) calls on the EC to set absolute CO2 targets of 70 g/km for 2025 and 40 g/km for 2030. These targets imply percentage reductions of about 35% and 70% compared to 2021, respectively, and set the much needed course for decarbonizing passenger cars and vans by 2050. These figures bring the highest societal net benefits according to the ICCT and they are in line with the demands of the European Parliament and the German Federal Environmental Agency, among others. Ambitious targets are key in terms of adding momentum to the deployment of zero and low emission vehicles (ZLEV), which is now at a tipping point. The EC should pick up on this technological leap and opt for a steeper CO2 reduction pathway than in the preceding regulations which boosts the technology transition. Instead, the proposal rewards manufacturers for selling ZLEV in numbers that do not exceed their own announcements, while it does not foresee any penalties for not meeting the proposed ZLEV sales targets. At the same time, the regulation, which at the moment only considers tailpipe CO2 emissions, should react early to the technology shift and take into account well-to-wheel energy consumption of vehicles, in the medium term. This will provide an incentive for improving the efficiency of electric cars that is not given under the current standards. The future regulation should consider this aspect already today. Further, the EC fails to put forward an effective proposal for closing the gap between official and real-world CO2 emissions values. Despite all the improvements with the introduction of the WLTP, a laboratory-based procedure cannot prevent manufacturers from optimizing vehicles´ fuel consumption for the given laboratory conditions instead of for the road. We therefore call on the EC to stipulate the short-term introduction of on-road tests for CO2 emissions that build the basis of the future type-approval procedure and compliance with CO2 standards. As a transitional step, the EC should set a not-to-exceed-limit of ten percent between official figures and the CO2 values deduced from the existing RDE tests for air pollutants. The proposed collection of fuel consumption data by means of fuel consumption meters should not only be used for monitoring purposes but as basis for in-use compliance checks too. Re. vans, the EC should be consistent with its own analysis and set a -40% reduction target instead of the proposed -30%.
Read full response

Response to Evaluation and potential revision of the EU tyre labelling scheme

9 Aug 2017

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, wir bitten um Beachtung der Stellungnahme der Deutschen Umwelthilfe e.V. (DUH) zum Vorhaben. Mit freundlichen Grüßen Agnes Sauter Leiterin Verbraucherschutz
Read full response

Response to Real-Driving Emissions in the EURO 6 regulation on emissions from light passenger and commercial vehicles (RDE3)

8 Dec 2016

Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe, DUH) welcomes the Commission’s proposal on the 3rd RDE package – as well as this public consultation – as a timely step in the right direction to tackle particulate emissions from Gasoline Direct Injection cars and strengthen the RDE test procedure. However, we are particularly concerned by two issues: - Firstly, 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. - Secondly, 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. DUH 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, DUH and 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, DUH 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 so-called “conformity factors” should be reviewed annually to achieve a perspective abatement of that factor. DUH 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

Meeting with Friedrich-Nikolaus von Peter (Cabinet of Commissioner Violeta Bulc)

2 Mar 2016 · Decarbonisation

Meeting with Juergen Mueller (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella) and Consumer Watchdog

23 Feb 2016 · Air Quality Enforcement