Verband der Keramischen Industrie e.V.
VKI
Der Verband der Keramischen Industrie vertritt bundesweit die wirtschafts-, sozial- und tarifpolitischen Interessen der ihm angeschlossenen Bereiche der feinkeramischen Industrie.
ID: 90846913643-65
Lobbying Activity
Response to Industrial Decarbonisation Accelerator Act
15 May 2025
Der VKI begrüßt grundsätzlich das Ziel der EU-Kommission, mit einem gezielten Rechtsrahmen die Dekarbonisierung energieintensiver Industrien zu unterstützen. Die Branche erkennt die Notwendigkeit an, den Transformationspfad hin zur Klimaneutralität zügig und wirksam zu beschreiten. Dabei ist jedoch sicherzustellen, dass Wettbewerbsfähigkeit, Versorgungssicherheit und technologieoffene Lösungen berücksichtigt werden. In diesem Sinne möchten wir folgende Punkte hervorheben: 1. Unverfügbarkeit von Wasserstoff (H) als zentraler Hemmschuh Für viele Prozesse der keramischen Industrie insbesondere in der Porzellan- und technischer Keramikproduktion stellt der Einsatz von Wasserstoff eine potenzielle Dekarbonisierungsoption dar. Derzeit ist Wasserstoff jedoch nicht in ausreichender Menge, zu wettbewerbsfähigen Preisen und mit entsprechender Infrastruktur verfügbar. Solange dies der Fall ist, darf der Einsatz fossiler Energieträger nicht regulatorisch ausgeschlossen oder wirtschaftlich unmöglich gemacht werden. 2. Forschung und Förderung alternativer Dekarbonisierungsoptionen Angesichts der Unsicherheiten beim Wasserstoffeinsatz müssen alternative Dekarbonisierungspfade wie die Elektrifizierung von Hochtemperaturprozessen stärker erforscht und gefördert werden. In der Porzellanherstellung wäre es beispielsweise denkbar, bestimmte Prozesse anteilig zu elektrifizieren und damit eine partielle Dekarbonisierung zu erreichen. Dabei kann es erforderlich sein, eine geregelte Ofenatmosphäre aufrechtzuerhalten, was zusätzliche technologische Anforderungen mit sich bringt. Für diese Ansätze fehlen bislang wirtschaftlich tragfähige und im industriellen Maßstab erprobte Lösungen. Es bedarf daher gezielter Forschungsförderung und Investitionsanreize etwa im Rahmen des EU-Innovation Fund oder zukünftiger IPCEI-Vorhaben. Entscheidend ist zudem, dass die Förderbedingungen so gestaltet sind, dass auch mittelständische Unternehmen Zugang erhalten, sofern diese bereit sind, in Demonstrationsanlagen oder Reallabore für neuartige, CO-reduzierte Produktionsprozesse zu investieren. Um das Investitionsrisiko abzufedern, sollte das mögliche Scheitern solcher Pilotprojekte als Bestandteil der Innovationsförderung anerkannt werden. Nur mit dieser Offenheit für technologiebezogene Unsicherheiten kann echte Innovation im Mittelstand entstehen. 3. Wettbewerbsfähige Energiepreise als Voraussetzung für Investitionen Die aktuell hohen und schwankenden Energiepreise wirken investitionshemmend. Um Planungssicherheit zu schaffen, braucht es garantierte Industriestrom- und Industriegaspreise, etwa über staatlich gestützte langfristige Lieferverträge (Carbon Contracts for Difference, CfDs) oder spezifische Strom- und Gaspreismodelle für energieintensive Industrien. Nur so können Investitionen in klimafreundliche Technologien wirtschaftlich tragfähig gemacht werden. 4. Beihilferahmen: Schutz vor Carbon Leakage Die Fortführung und Erweiterung bestehender Kompensationsmechanismen im CO-Preissystem ist unerlässlich. Der europäische Beihilferahmen muss sicherstellen, dass energieintensive Unternehmen weiterhin vor internationalem Wettbewerbsdruck durch ungleiche CO-Kosten geschützt werden. Dies umfasst u.a.: Den Erhalt von Beihilfen zur Strompreiskompensation, Einen robusten Carbon-Leakage-Schutz im ETS 2 (z.B. analog zur BECV), Verlässliche Übergangsfristen und klare Kriterien für Dekarbonisierungsverpflichtungen. Es muss in Zukunft darauf geachtet werden, dass die CO-Kosten bzw. das Preissystem nicht zu einem Standortnachteil werden. Fazit: Der VKI steht zum Ziel der Klimaneutralität, fordert jedoch realistische Rahmenbedingungen, die auf technologische Machbarkeit, wirtschaftliche Tragfähigkeit und internationale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit Rücksicht nehmen. Ohne eine ausreichende Verfügbarkeit von Wasserstoff und ohne gezielte
Read full responseResponse to Exemptions under RoHS for lead in glass or ceramic of electrical and electronic components
10 Feb 2025
Dear Sir or Madam, The Federal Association of the Ceramic Industry (BVKI) welcomes the opportunity to comment on the proposed amendment to Annex III of Directive 2011/65/EU (RoHS), particularly concerning the exemption for lead in glass and ceramic components of electrical and electronic equipment. Technical Necessity and Alternatives Lead remains an essential component in many high-performance electronic and sensor applications, particularly in areas requiring the highest levels of reliability, long-term stability, and specific electrical properties. Currently, there are no fully equivalent lead-free alternatives that provide the same mechanical, chemical, and functional characteristics. The proposed amendment to Annex III could result in the phase-out of proven technologies without the availability of practical replacement solutions. Research and Substitution Efforts The industry acknowledges the long-term need for substitution and is investing significantly in research and development to explore viable lead-free alternatives. However, these efforts involve substantial scientific and technical challenges. In addition to material development, extensive qualification processes are necessary to ensure that new materials meet the required specifications. At present, no solutions exist that allow for a complete substitution without significant performance losses in critical applications. Impact of the Proposed Amendment to Annex III on Industry The proposed amendment would have far-reaching consequences throughout the entire industrial value chain. Many technological processes and end products rely on ceramic materials containing lead, as their properties are crucial for functionality, safety, and durability. A transition without viable alternatives could: - Disrupt supply chains, - Interrupt innovation cycles, and - Weaken Europe's competitiveness in key industries, including electronics, automotive technology, medical technology, and sensor systems. Call for a Practical Transition Mechanism BVKI therefore calls for a reasonable transition period and a temporary extension of the exemption in Annex III to provide the industry with the necessary time to further develop and qualify alternative materials. Additionally, a clearly defined evaluation mechanism should be established to regularly assess progress in substitution research and provide a scientifically sound basis for future regulatory decisions. We appreciate your consideration of our statement and remain available for further technical discussions. Best Regards Dr.-Ing. Markus Küster Bundesverband Keramische Industrie e.V. - Referent Energie-, Klima- & Umweltpolitik - Ludwigsmühle 4| 95100 Selb | Deutschland T. +49 (0) 9287 808-25 | F. +49 (0) 9287 808-44 | E. m.kuester@keramverband.de | W. www.keramverbaende.de Warum die mittelständische Industrie faire Energiepreise braucht, erfahren Sie auf faire-energiewende.de web | facebook | twitter | linkedin Registernummer: R000851
Read full responseResponse to Revision of EU rules on food contact materials
28 Jan 2021
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
please find attached our position with regard to the Inception Impact Assessment.
Read full response25 Jun 2019
Der Verband der Keramischen Industrie vertritt die Interessen der deutschen Geschirrhersteller, sowohl industrielle Produzenten, als auch Manufakturen. Zusammen mit unserem europäischen Dachverband FEPF haben wir eine Antwort auf das inception impact assessment zum Fahrplan der EU Kommission zu Lebensmittelkontaktmaterialien erarbeitet, auf die wir in diesem Zusammenhang verweisen (sh. nachfolgenden Text). Darüber hinaus machen wir insbesondere darauf aufmerksam, dass für kunsthandwerklich hergestelltes Porzellan Sonderregelungen erforderlich sind, um das UNESCO Weltkulturerbe der Porzellanmalerei auf Geschirr am Leben zu erhalten.
FEPF comments on the Roadmap of the Inception Impact Assessment:
The tableware and earthenware sector (FEPF) welcomes the start of the “Impact Assessment on migration limits for lead, cadmium, and possibly other metals from ceramic and vitreous food contact materials”, with an inception impact assessment. We believe it is an important and necessary step, in order to assess the framework of the impact assessment. Regarding the proposed roadmap, we would like to highlight some key issues which need to be taken into consideration by the European commission.
Firstly, as a general comment, the document lacks crucial definitions on (1) limit values; (2) legislative scope and (3) the test method. What are the definitions of traditional, artisanal and culturally valuable products and (4) what will be the derogations for these product categories? And, (5) definition of the list and limits of any additional “heavy metals” that could be included in the revised legislation. Regarding this last point, we would like to highlight that the roadmap fails to recognise the difference between naturally occurring elements in clay and other naturally occurring minerals and materials (such as aluminium) and intentionally added elements (such as lead or cadmium). It should also be noted that some elements are present as natural trace elements.
Secondly, regarding the limits, it will be important to assess the impact of different migration limits, particularly if phase 2 elements are included. We consider that more evidence is needed on the studies and the limits used to define if a health effect occurs. Especially since the JRC actively selected samples created ad-hoc with significant over glazed concentrations of lead and cadmium so that the kinetics of reactions could be established and are therefore not a fair representation of the ware production in the European Union. Moreover we would like to point a factual error in the Roadmap, the JRC did not test 6000 samples (as mentioned on page 2) as the number 6000 refers to a measurement value (“Between 2013 and 2017 the JRC's European Reference Laboratory for FCMs (EURL-FCM) generated over 6000 data points on hundreds of samples provided by industry”). We would like to remark that the aim of JRC was limited to study the kinetics of reactions with no intention to evaluate any limits values.
The EC will also need to take into consideration whether there will be enough laboratories available to handle the potential increase in testing costs. We also understand the JRC is currently conducting a project on bakeware, regarding the testing methodology. It should be clarified how this will be integrated into a ceramic regulation.
Thirdly, the same level of compliance between European and imported goods should be a key priority for the European Commission as they represent more than 80% of the internal market. Indeed, while our internationally operating members have to respect the judicial requirements on FCM rules of the European and other markets, it is not clear to what extent the existing rules have been enforced at a customs level.
Fourthly, the impact on employment and job losses should not be underestimated. Ceramic industries are strongly integrated locally. Our companies contribute to the economic, cultural and social fabric of the territories. We th
Read full response5 Feb 2019
BVKI, the confederation of the associations of the German Fine Ceramic Industry (sanitary ware, table & decorative ware, technical ceramics and abrasives) welcomes this public consultation under the Better Regulation initiative on the classification of Titanium dioxide (TiO2).
In addition to its wide spread use as a white pigment in glazes, TiO2 is also present, up to 4%, in a number of naturally occurring minerals that are used in the ceramic industry. TiO2 is also an essential raw material for the production of different types of technical ceramics and abrasive products.
The proposal for classification and labelling of TiO2 is inappropriate from the toxicological and epidemiological perspective. The criteria for classification are not met. In addition, it is highly questionable if the CLP regulation legally allows a classification based on non-substance specific effects.
Consequently, the BVKI is against the inclusion of TiO2 in the 14th ATP.
The hazard described for TiO2 (“general particle effects”) is not specific to the substance itself, but applies to all substances in powder form known as “Poorly Soluble particles with Low Toxicity” (PSLTs) and is limited on risks at the workplace. Therefore, any decision taken on TiO2 will set a precedent for this entire group of substances.
Germany/the German authorities had made the alternative proposal to harmonize the different general dust limits which are currently applied in Europe instead of including TiO2 in the 14th ATP. This approach of harmonization addresses effectively and adequately the potential effects of TiO2 and other PSLTs on European workers health. On the contrary, the proposed classification of TiO2 under CLP would have no direct benefit on the health and safety of workers.
Furthermore, a classification of TiO2 would have far-reaching and significant unintended consequences: For example, every waste with a TiO2 content of 1% or more would have to be treated as "hazardous waste”. This would apply to a variety of waste streams, in the special case of ceramics on construction waste and any broken porcelain. For such waste streams a classification would drastically reduce the options for recycling and increase costs to the economy and consumers. Such classification would also have significant negative effects on food contact materials made of ceramic.
The proposed warning label for liquid and solid mixtures (in Annex II CLP regulation) is misleading, disproportionate and therefore also rejected.
Conclusion
As a result, the proposed classification of TiO2 would have serious and disproportionately problematic effects on all other European or national regulations which are based on the CLH classification of a material. This would impact the classification of raw materials and body preparations in the ceramics industries, without improving the protection of health and environment. Consequently, it is essential not to include TiO2 in the 14. ATP.
The German proposal to harmonize the different general dust limits currently applied in Europe would be more effective for worker’s health and is an essential step towards better European occupational safety standards.
BVKI fully supports the general and specific comments submitted by the Titanium Dioxide Manufacturers Association (TDMA), the Association of the German Chemical Industry (VCI) as well as the comments submitted by Cerame-Unie.
Read full response