As it was reported earlier in the week, the European Parliament delayed yesterday a vote on new car pollution limits, prompting the auto industry to ask for urgent clarification on the matter.
A proposal to veto the draft decision to raise diesel car emission limits for nitrogen oxides by up to 110 percent when the real driving emissions test procedure is introduced was debated by members of the European Parliament on Monday. And, as it was reported by Reuters, a vote on new car pollution limits has been pushed for the next plenary session of the Parliament, due at the beginning of February. In a summary of the talks, it is said the Parliament’s Environment Committee argues that the Members should veto plans to relax the limits because this would undermine the enforcement of existing EU standards. Some Members called on the European Commission to put forward a revised proposal, as well as plans for a stronger type-approval system for vehicles in the EU. Others stressed the need to put the real drive emissions test procedure into effect quickly, in order to bring down emission levels. In her concluding remarks, the European Commissioner for Internal Market and Services Elzbieta Bienkowska said that vetoing the proposed measures would only prolong today’s unsatisfactory car testing regime.
Following the debate on real-driving emissions, the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA) released a statement in which it reiterated that it fully agrees with the need for emissions to more closely reflect real-world conditions. “We urgently need to have a new test method to bridge the gap between the current laboratory testing of pollutant emissions, as defined by law, and the very different conditions experienced on the road,” Erik Jonnaert, ACEA Secretary General, said. “Despite the challenges in the latest proposals, the industry urgently needs clarity now so manufacturers can plan the development and design of vehicles in line with the new tests requirements,” Jonnaert stated. “Any delay to this legislation would leave little time to make the necessary changes and ultimately would just push back the benefits for the environment,” he added.