COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN MUNICIPALITIES AND REGIONS
CONSEIL DES COMMUNES ET REGIONS D’EUROPE
CEMR position
Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution
and Ambient Air Quality Directive
Brussels, March 2006
Conseil des Communes et Régions d'Europe
*
Council of European Municipalities and Regions
15 Rue de Richelieu F-75 001 Paris
22 Rue d’Arlon B-1050 Bruxelles
tel : + 33 1 44 50 59 59
cemr@ccre.org - www.ccre.org
Tel : + 32 2 511 74 77
CEMR Position on
the European Commission’s
Ambient Air Quality Directive and
Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution
Introduction
1. The Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR) represents the interests of local and regional authorities federated in 47 national associations from 34 countries. The EU air quality legislation has
a considerable impact on local and regional authorities. Even though
the directives address the national level, in many member states the
implementation responsibility is to a great extent passed through to the
regional and local levels. Local and regional authorities have become
increasingly aware of the challenges as the legislation’s requirements
are entering into force.
2. CEMR welcomes the environmental and public health objectives of the
Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution. Air pollution can, in places, cause
environmental and public health problems, particularly in urban areas.
Local and regional authorities throughout the EU are committed to improve the quality of life of their citizens.
3. Local and regional authorities are already implementing many
measures to improve air quality, either as a result of requirements under national and EU legislation, but also on a voluntary basis through
their own policies (public transport, transport planning, energy management, clean vehicles etc.).
4. However there are some limitations to what local and regional authorities can achieve on their own in terms of air pollution abatement. Local
and regional governments have to pursue other objectives that also
contribute to the well-being and needs of citizens, such as economic
prosperity, mobility and jobs.
5. Local measures alone are not enough to attain all limit values for air
quality. Air quality is a European and a national problem. Exposure to
particulate matter must of course be reduced at the local level, but air
pollution has a strong transboundary dimension too. Improving air quality requires efforts from all actors. The new European legislation on air
quality should be linked to ambitious EU-wide measures. European
measures, directed in particular towards transport, are required without
any delay.
6. Many times obligations are put on the local and regional levels without
a thorough analysis of the implications and costs. Air quality legislation
is prepared between the European Commission and national govern-
2
ments, but the implementation is finally the responsibility, to a great extent, of the local and regional authorities. Local and regional authorities
need financial help to ensure a proper implementation of these costly
requirements and measures.
Implementation / Particulate matters
7. Local and regional authorities throughout the EU are experiencing difficulties implementing the EU air legislation. For instance, there are limits to what local and regional authorities can do to meet the limit values
on Particulate Matter 10 (PM-10). Indeed, in many cases the local contribution to the overall PM level is much lower than the background level, that comes from sources up to 500 km away as well as from natural
sources.
8. CEMR welcomes the possibility introduced by the draft directive to subtract natural sources from limit values. This, however, will not solve the
whole difficulty for local and regional authorities to reach the targets.
For instance, it has been calculated that in Vienna, 60% of the PM pollution is constituted of the regional background, whereas the local contribution accounts for 25% only. This is just one of many examples
among many EU cities.
Many cities have calculated that even if they managed to significantly
cut their PM pollution (e.g. through drastic and costly measures that
can have a considerable impact on the economic activity), they would
still breach the limit values on the bad days.
As an example, in the first half of 2005, Coburg (a German city with
43.000 inhabitants) has already exceeded the PM-10 limit values 12
times. The maximum exceedance has taken place at 3 a.m. one morning at a place which must be regarded as unproblematic with regards to
pollution from motorised traffic.
Dutch local authorities are implementing many measures (public
transport, low emission zones, diesel filters etc.) : in spite of this, there
is no significant immediate improvement of air quality.
9. PM pollution, when excessive, clearly has adverse health effects and
therefore needs to be tackled. CEMR welcomes the two steps approach proposed by the European Commission for gradually decreasing PM-2.5 pollution. Nevertheless we would favour the establishment of
one limit value only for particulate matters, in order to simplify the requirements and to improve the feasibility of the ambient air directive. It
is technically more practical for local authorities to measure one type of
particulate matter. Measuring two types would be much more costly.
CEMR thinks it would be more efficient to measure the PM type that
has the greatest impact on health.
10. CEMR believes the priority should be the PM-2,5 limit value, as this value refers to the substances that are most hazardous for public health.
3
Also, the PM-2,5 fraction contains more man-made particular matter; as
such it can better be influenced by administrative policies.
11. However, the limit value on PM-10 is already in force. CEMR would thus
like to propose to introduce a revision of the PM provision in 2012. The
experience of the existing PM-10 requirement will be evaluated, and it
will be decided if the limit value on PM-10 should be replaced by a limit
value on PM-2.5. This time will also allow to continue and deepen the
research on the impact of PM-10 and PM-2.5 on public health. The results of this research will provide a basis for deciding which type of particulate matter should be more efficient to control.
12. If the limit value for PM-10 remains in force after 2012, we would like to
propose the replacement of the daily limit value for PM-10 by a yearly
limit value.
Measures and funding
13. Because of the clear limitations to what can be done at the local level;
given the importance of the regional background level; and in order to
ensure a fairer share of the efforts, there is a need for EU-wide
source based measures. As examples of such measures, CEMR
calls for a fast adoption by the European institutions of stringent Euro 6
standards1 (emission standards for heavy duty vehicles), for EU economic instruments (e.g. fuel taxes), for the introduction of strict emission values on NOx for ships, etc.
14. CEMR welcomes the adoption of the new Euro V standards2 on light
vehicles’ emissions in December 2005, as announced in the Thematic
Strategy. CEMR is satisfied that sport utility vehicles would now be covered by the norms, and that the higher standards would require diesel
vehicles to be fitted with particulate filters. CEMR has concerns, however, about the NOx limits3, which are not very stringent. CEMR calls on
the EU institutions, in the co-decision procedure, to strengthen the Euro V and to make provisions for their enforcement as soon as possible.
15. Measures to decrease air pollution are costly and require specific
knowledge for the municipalities and regions. In the first instance it is
necessary that the EU does not forbid but support national funding. For
example, subsidies for clean motors and retrofit installations (soot filters which were initially not installed in cars) should not be hindered by
the EU state aid regime.
1
2
see also point 26
see also point 26
3
diesel cars sold in the EU from 2008/9 must emit no more than 200mg/km of NOx, whereas US standards from 2007 set a maximum of 87mg/km
4
Secondly, the directive should include recommendations to national
governments as to financially support local and regional authorities for
the implementation of ambitious policies, particularly in the most polluted areas that require priority actions.
16. Furthermore, financial funding from the European Union is necessary
for measures to improve the air quality. Member states should ensure,
in their national strategies, that structural funds are made available for
local policies against air pollution, including public transport. Financing
should notably target the most polluted areas.
17. Improving air quality requires efforts from all actors, not just local and
regional authorities. Changes in lifestyles and industrial patterns must
be promoted at all levels if we want to substantially decrease air pollution. Local and regional authorities have already been developing numerous initiatives (actions as part of Local Agenda 21 and Aalborg
Commitments, public information campaigns, educational actions etc.)
aiming to push citizens to adopt more sustainable lifestyles. Producer
responsibility is an important principle, that CEMR has always promoted, for the development of cleaner products; it should be further developed as regards the car industry (see also point 26). Furthermore, the
EU and national governments should pursue the establishment of a
framework that encourages more sustainable consumption and production patterns.
Flexibility
18. CEMR welcomes the flexibility introduced by the Ambient Air Directive
for what concerns objectives to reduce PM-2.5.
19. Given the current difficulties to reach the PM-10 limit values, in force
since the 1st of January 2005, CEMR also welcomes the extension
possibility of the deadline for reaching the PM-10 limit values. Nevertheless, we would like the maximum extension to be set at five years after
entry into force of this directive and not only until the 31 December
2009 as proposed in the directive proposal.
20. EU air quality legislation should allow to prioritise measures for areas
where people are actually endangered. Limit values which are intended
to protect peoples’ health (such as the particulate matter limit value)
should only be applicable in areas where people are exposed for a
longer period of time.
Non-deterioration
21. The directive proposal puts forward a rather rigid non deterioration
principle (article 12) that could risk to be counter-productive. Indeed, it
can literally freeze the development of new activities, particularly in ar-
5
eas that suffer from long period of excess of the limit values (in many
cases because of the regional background). CEMR proposes an approach that leaves some flexibility inside a zone as long as the air quality objective is maintained for the whole zone.
22. CEMR proposes the introduction, inside a zone or agglomeration in exceedance of pollutants’ limit values, of “sensitive areas” (most populated areas where people are exposed to pollution for longer periods). Actions should focus on curbing pollution in the sensitive areas. For doing
so it should be allowed to have pollution variations inside a zone or agglomeration in the case of activity transfer or development.
23. This method will ensure that it is still possible to build new infrastructures that can allow to reduce exposure to air pollutants in most populated areas (for instance, build new roads around populated areas in
order to reduce traffic and pollution in these areas).
In the Netherlands, the “per saldo” principle applies to national air
quality legislation. This ensures flexibility in the type of measures to be
implemented and where to implement them as long as as a whole the
average air quality objective is attained.
Policy coherence
24. Some EU policy objectives appear to be contradictory. The Lisbon
agenda rightly promotes economic growth. Nevertheless, today economic growth is still accompanied by road transport growth. The current review of the Transport White Paper shows that the objectives of
shifting part of the road transport to more sustainable modes of
transport and of decoupling economic growth from transport growth
are not attained. In fact, it seems that the decoupling objective will progressively be abandoned. In its response to the public consultation for
the mid-term review of the Transport White Paper4, CEMR recommends that, although mobility as a whole should not be contained, the
objective to decouple road transport growth from economic growth
should be maintained.
25. The EU finances, through the structural funds and the accession funds,
large transport infrastructure (motorways, roads, ports etc.) and promotes trans-european axis, that include railways but also the main
roads and motorways. On the other hand, the EU asks local and regional authorities to decrease air pollution. CEMR would like to see EU
policies taking a more integrated approach in order to be more coherent.
26. A significant part of local atmospheric pollution comes from road
transport. Local and regional authorities play an important role in the
development of alternative modes of transport: they promote and man4
http://www.ccre.org/prises_de_positions_detail_en.htm?ID=48
6
age public transport as well as non-motorised modes (cycling and
walking). They can also develop programmes that aim to reduce traffic,
and are already doing so in many cases5. Nevertheless, local and regional government cannot directly influence the polluting emissions of
private vehicles. In order to effectively and significantly reduce air pollution, local and regional authorities need to be supported by an appropriate legislative and regulatory framework that involves other key sectors too, notably the car industry (but also other industries and agriculture). Emission standards for cars, especially diesel-motors, need to
become more stringent in a more rapid way. The introduction of the Euro V in 2007 and the adoption of the Euro VI standard should be enforced as soon as possible. This latter standard should apply to vans
as from 2011 and to heavy-duty vehicles as from 2012. It is imperative
that soot filters are made mandatory for all new diesel vehicles from
2007.
27. Local and regional governments also in many occasions face obstacles in the legal and financial frameworks when they want to introduce
air pollution abatement measures (reduction of national subsidies and
investments for public transport; internal market, state aid or public
procurement rules that prohibit certain local or national measures etc.).
For instance, Community state aid rules have prevented the Dutch
government from introducing subsidies to equip cars with diesel filters.
It is imperative that the EU and national regulatory and financial
frameworks should facilitate the implementation of air quality legislation.
Guidance
28. Member states and the EU must provide help and guidance to local
and regional authorities on the implementation of EU air quality legislation. Indeed, local and regional authorities need more detailed and
more practical guidance on the measures they can take to reach the
objectives of EU air quality legislation.
29. There is no detailed guidance relating to the effectiveness of measures
aiming at the reduction of motorised traffic for the objective of decreasing air pollution. It should be ensured that such documents reach the
local level, in the national language. Local authorities decision and policy makers need practical guidance. There should be a better link between the results of scientific research and urban practitioners. There
is a need for practical urban air quality management tools.
5
you can find many examples on how local authorities promote public transport, non motorised modes, and traffic reduction programmes on the CEMR manifesto “Achieving sustainable
mobility in Europe’s towns and municipalities” at:
http://www.ccre.org/bases/T_599_21_3524.pdf
as well as on the ELTIS case study database:
http://www.eltis.org/case_study.phtml?Id=&mainID=458&id=458&lang=en
7
Enforcement
30. The European Commission should ensure that air quality legislation is
enforced equally across the EU. Cities and countries that strive to respect the binding EU limit values on pollutants will bear the risk of being penalised in terms of extra costs if others do not take these requirements so seriously. A level playing field is indispensable.
Low emission zones
31. Many EU cities, on their own initiative, have introduced or are preparing low emission zones. CEMR would welcome an EU initiative to support exchanges of good practises in order to spread experiences. Nevertheless, CEMR does not recommend any binding provision: varying
local conditions and priorities call for the principle of subsidiarity to apply.
Technical issues
32. In large agglomerations it is very difficult to take measures across administrative borders. The city of Paris, for instance, has in the recent
years developed important transport and traffic policies in order to improve air quality. The administrative organisation makes it very difficult,
however, to coordinate actions at the regional level with the neighbouring communes. As a result, air quality in Paris has not improved as
much as expected.
33. There is still a need to harmonise the measuring site networks in order
to bring ranking lists of limit value exceedances in cities or regions to
an even level, which would allow for viable comparisons.
34. Recent studies have shown that wood-burning heating appliances are
responsible for up to 50% of ultra-fine (PM-2.5) particulate emissions in
Denmark, 60% in Norway, and 40% in Finland. Under the new biomass
action plan, the EU aims to increase the use of wood energy. CEMR
supports this initiative. Nevertheless, it should be accompanied with
new emission standards for boilers and fireplaces. Furthermore, CEMR
recommends that member states and the European Commission develop more active policies for the promotion of district heating
and combined heat power (CHP). Indeed, large wood fuel boilers used
in district heating are more efficient, better controlled and thus safer to
human health than small domestic ones. The national and EU regulatory frameworks (competition rules, taxation) should remove any obstacles hindering the development of local district heating. Opportunities
for such a development in the land use planning phase should be encouraged too.
8
Specific conditions
35. The city of Graz has evaluated that, on the days with pollution peaks,
even if it stopped all road transport, the PM-10 limit value would still be
exceeded. This is notably due to the fact that Graz is situated in a valley. Local conditions and topography should be better taken into account by EU legislation.
Dialogue with local and regional authorities
36. Even if the directive is addressed to member states, ultimately local
and regional authorities are responsible for its application. CEMR appreciates to have been invited to participate in the CAFE programme
and meetings. However, networks of local and regional authorities such
as CEMR were invited as stakeholders. A stronger collaboration, on a
more formal basis and mandate, between the European Commission
and the local and regional authorities would improve the legitimacy and
the quality of European policy and would ease transposition at the national level.
* * * * *
9