The EU F-Gas Regulation

1,302 views
1,185 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,302
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
22
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The EU F-Gas Regulation

  1. 1. EPEE – The European Partnership for Energy and the Environment The EU F-Gas Regulation: The way forward By Andrea Voigt – EPEE Director General Disclaimer: The information contained in this presentation represents EPEE’s point of view and not in any way that of the European Union as such.
  2. 2. Who is EPEE ? The full value chain of the Refrigeration, Air Conditioning and Heat Pump sectorA major part of the European RAC & HP industry• > 200,000 employees in Europe• > € 30 billion turnover in Europe
  3. 3. EPEE’s mission is to promote: Environmental Compliance Energy Efficiency Safety Affordability
  4. 4. EPEE’s main current fields of activities• Promote Energy Efficiency – Ecodesign Directive – Energy Efficiency Directive – Eco Label and Energy Label – Energy Performance of Buildings Directive – Renewable Energies Directive …• The F-Gas Regulation and its revision – Maintain and strengthen the F-Gas Regulation – Support a technically and economically feasible phase-down• Raise awareness on Market Surveillance – Importance of properly enforcing and policing legislation• Promote an HVACR association network at EU level
  5. 5. Who is the EU? The three Institutions European Commission: Starts policy formulation • Sole right of Legislative Initiative • Enforces Community law • Administers & implements policies & legislation • Voice of the EU & negotiates international agreements European Parliament: Co-legislates with the Council • 736 elected national politicians from 27 Member States • Elected every five years – last elections in 2009 • Largest political group: conservatives • Largest delegations: GER, FR; UK; IT; SP; PL • MEPs work in Brussels, Strasbourg and home const. European Council: Co-legislates with the Parliament • Represents the Member States via Ministers and Permanent Representatives • Amends and adopts proposals • UK, FR, G (IT, SP, POL) = Key larger countries 5
  6. 6. Main EU initiatives & EPEE priorities DG Energy DG Climate Action DG Environment Commissioner Oettinger Commissioner Hedegaard Commissioner Potocnik The Roadmap for a The Energy Efficiency The Roadmap to a low ressource efficient Action Plan carbon economy in 2050 Europe ENERGY EFFICIENCY• Ecodesign • F-Gas Regulation • WEEE• EPBD • Renewable • RoHS...• Energy label ... Energies Directive..
  7. 7. More concretely:The EU 20 – 20 – 20 target
  8. 8. The current F-Gas Regulation: Main requirementsContainment & recovery Reporting obligations• Preventive tightness checks: • F-gas to be reported: Frequency depends on the amount of with main categories of F-gas contained applications• Leak detection systems: • Applies to: For applications containing 300kg or producers, importers and exporters more of F-gases of quantities > 1to• Record keeping (logbooks) • Member States to establish reporting systems.• Recovery, recycling or destruction LabellingTraining and certification • For new equipment:• Adequate training of personnel Chemical abbreviation of F-gas handling F-gases Weight of the refrigerant Kyoto protocol-covered• Mutual recognition in the EU Where applicable: product is• Minimum requirements only hermetically sealed. agreed upon in July 2007 • Further information in the manual (e.g. GWP)
  9. 9. Does it work?YES: It has already started to deliver ! 23 member states have set up training centres • > 20% emission rate reduction in the NL 20 member states have notified certification bodies • Approx. 20% emission rate reduction in the UK retail business 23 member states have notified penalties • Increased awareness of the need of tighter 16 member states > 50% and better designed certified companies components and Average in EU27 : 43.3% connections • Regular inspection and 16 member states > 50% certified personnel. maintenance accepted Average in EU27: 47.5% as being necessarySource: Ökorecherche; Data: as of July 2011
  10. 10. Will it reduce emissions? YES: substantially ! Source: - 46% - 44% - 28%Source: Commission report Oct 2011If all provisions of F-Gas Regulation and MAC Directive are fullyapplied, emissions will at least stabilise at todays levels
  11. 11. The predecessor of the F-Gas Regulation:The Dutch STEK scheme, in place since 1992 Higher productivity: Installers increase productivity of own activities due to high quality HVACR systems Cost savings: Higher reliabilty: Refrigerant, spare part and Manufacturers and installersenergy savings for owners due increased quality of equipment to regular maintenance & service Increased awareness: Reduced emission rates: Industry and operators understand the environmental From 20-25% to 3.5% impact of HVACR Cost of STEK: EUR 0.33 / hour / service engineer
  12. 12. A practical example onimplementation: Hungary • Hungarian Monitoring & Certification Body • > 7600 certified personel; 1200 certified companies; > 2000 registered operators; > 22000 registered refrigeration circuits • ODS and F-Gas regulations merged into one global registration and certification system • Web-based registration and certification system • Barcode-ID and circuit labelling • Online track-keeping of all services (leakage checks, maintenance, etc.) • Access to the database by authorities
  13. 13. Lessons learned so far…1. Co-operation between national governments and the industry is essential • A recipe for success (i.e. the UK, Hungary, Slovakia, the Netherlands). • It is essential to ensure that the obligations of the F-Gas Regulation are communicated to all those affected and are being understood correctly. • The UK F-Gas Support is a prime example for successful communication: removes hurdles and stimulates compliance2. The implementation of a complex piece of legislation such as the F-Gas Regulation takes time: • It took 5 years for the STEK system to be fully understood and implemented by all actors in the Netherlands.  Several of the implementing measures under the F-Gas Regulation (labelling, training) only entered into force in 2008.
  14. 14. Lessons learned so far…3. Containment works• Unfortunately there is a lack of available data -- little time has passed since the implementation of the F-Gas Regulation.• STEK showed a major improvement in leakage: From 25% emissions to 3,5% emissions in 7 years time with even lower emissions percentages known today (in 2011, VRF systems in the Netherlands reached less than 0.5% emissions).• AREA (contractors) /EPEE survey: When and where the F-Gas Regulation has been implemented correctly contractors observe a clear decrease in refrigerant emission rates.• The F-Gas Regulation has clearly lead to better awareness among users.
  15. 15. Lessons learned so far…4. The bigger picture… • The HVACR industry is extremely diverse: Any regulatory measure needs to take into account this diversity. • The choice of a refrigerant depends on a range of factors: Climate, application, energy efficiency, safety, cost, technical viability, direct and indirect emissions, etc. • Implementation takes time: The EU has 23 official working languages and 27 Member States with their own national legislative regimes.
  16. 16. Lessons learned so far…5. The F-Gas Regulation has boosted innovation • New alternatives have been developed (HFOs) • Improvements in HFC technology (lower GWP), e.g. cascades, micro-channel, etc. • Other sectors using HFCs are keen to be included under the F-Gas Regulation (i.e. refrigerated transport sector). Some countries have done so already (FR, NL, ES)
  17. 17. The revision of the F-Gas Regulation Art. 10 of the F-Gas Regulation 842 / 2006:• By 4 July 2011, the Commission shall publish a report based on the experience of the application of this Regulation.• Where necessary, the Commission shall present appropriate proposals for revision of the relevant provisions of this Regulation. Ökorecherche COMMISSION REPORT  report Experience with 842/2006 & Need for further actionQ4 2011 Stakeholders YES: Revision  NO: RevisionQ1 2012 Öko-Institut report COMMISSION REPORT Impact assessment on different policy optionsQ2 2012 Stakeholders COMMISSION legislative proposal
  18. 18. The Commission Report:Public Consultation launched until Dec 19Key points: Suggestions to further reduce emissions:1. It is still too early to quantify the effect of the Regulation’s containment and 1. Drive transition to technologies with lower recovery provisions GWP. Savings potential up to 70 mt CO2eq: – Phase-down: cost estimated to be < 20€/to CO2eq – Bans2. If all provisions are fully applied in all – Voluntary agreements Member States, the Regulation & the MAC Directive would stabilise EU-27 2. Improve containment and recovery emissions at today’s levels of 110 provisions: million tonnes of CO2eq – despite the – Cost effectiveness questioned: 41€/to CO2eq growing use of HFCs – Full implementation required – Extension to transport refrigeration considered3. In the context of the overall EU-objective to cut emissions by 80-95% by 2050, 3. Improve monitoring stabilising the F-Gas emissions at – Extend to pre-charged products and equipment today’s level is not adequate. More imported or exported from EU efforts are required. – Enhance MS reporting systems for emission data 4. Take account of latest scientific information4. The Commission supports global – Fluids to be considered action under the MP to phase-down – GWP values to be considered (4th IPCC) HFCs
  19. 19. The importance of the global contextSource: ÖkorechercheHFC market growth takes place in the developping world !
  20. 20. The F-Gas Regulation and its revision: Benefits & objectivesThe F-gas regulation: The revision:Its main benefits:• Strong EU-wide legal EPEE‘s objectives: framework• Lower emissions via 1. Full implementation of containment the Regulation• Monitoring of emissions• Freedom of refrigerant 2. A realistic and choice for highest efficiency, balanced global safety, and lowest phase-down emissions. 3. No sacrifice on energyIn the longer term: efficiency, safety and• Pushes innovation affordability• High-skilled workforce• Improved quality of equipment, education and training
  21. 21. EPEE‘s priorities on top of the current F-Gas Regulation…• Improving awareness, surveillance and control  Assignment of trained control bodies in the member states  Awareness campaigns at operator level  Controls at installer level• Broadening of the F-Gas Regulation’s scope  Controls at retail sales channel level  Include transport refrigeration• Recovery and reuse of HFCs  Incentives for installers and operators, e.g. deposit schemes  Allow recovery and transportation of HFCs by certified companies• Harmonization of certification  Harmonized CEN standard EN 13313  Create EU wide databases• Leakage rate targets  Harmonized CEN standard EN 15834  EU methodology to determine relative refrigerant loss
  22. 22. The EPEE roadmap for emission reductionLow carbon economy Phase down 2020targets Improvement Full implementation
  23. 23. A one size-fits-all solution ?… There is no perfect refrigerant !
  24. 24. Phase-Down: A soft landingTODAY 2020 2030 2050
  25. 25. Phase-Out: A high-risk command and control policyPhase-down Phase-outWhat is it? What is it?A gradual reduction Makes products illegalThe benefits: The risks:• Achieves climate goals • Technology prescriptve• Allows for flexibility and • Jeopardizes 2020 & future targets affordability – Heat pumps & geothermal• Fosters innovation plants use f-gases• Strengthens competitiveness – Loss of energy efficiency• Conserves resources • Undermines competitiveness• Promotes recycling • Can lead to unsafe practice• Can be a global solution • Plant closures & job losses in EU• Encourages containment • High costs to society principle set by F-gas policy
  26. 26. EPEE’s five main recommendations for legislators1. EPEE calls for a holistic approach with a focus on overall CO2 emissions2. Four attributes (Safety, Environment, Economy and Energy Efficiency) must be taken into consideration when making decisions3. Energy efficiency is key for industry and society4. A realistic and balanced phase-down provides regulatory certainty on CO2 equivalents => along with energy efficiency mandates, this ensures success for 2020 and for future targets5. No prescriptive bans or GWP cut offs as these are counter productive for energy efficient systems
  27. 27. Thank your for your attention ! For more information, please contact: EPEE – The European Partnership for Energy and the Environment: www.epeeglobal.org Avenue des Arts 46 1000 Brussels secretariat@epeeglobal.org a.voigt@epeeglobal.org

×