Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2008)812 - Stage II petrol vapour recovery during refuelling of passenger cars at service stations - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2008)812 - Stage II petrol vapour recovery during refuelling of passenger cars at service stations. |
|---|---|
| source | COM(2008)812  |
| date | 04-12-2008 |
This legislative proposal aims at recovering petrol vapour which is emitted to the atmosphere during the refuelling of passenger cars at service stations (so called 'Stage II Petrol Vapour Recovery or PVR'). The emissions of volatile organic compounds contained in petrol contribute to local and regional air quality problems (benzene and ozone) for which Community air quality standards and objectives exist. Ground level ozone is a pollutant which crosses national borders and is also the third most important greenhouse gas. Benzene is a known human carcinogen.
The proposal has been prepared following commitments made by the College in:
- the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution i;
- the Commission's proposal to amend Directive 98/70/EC on petrol and diesel quality i which aims to facilitate a greater uptake of biofuels and bioethanol in particular by relaxing the vapour pressure requirements of petrol. The Commission recognised that this could lead to greater emissions of volatile organic compounds and indicated that Stage II PVR would be proposed to offset any increased emissions.
- a statement accompanying a new directive on ambient air quality i in which the Commission recognised the importance of tackling air pollution at source in order to attain air quality objectives and which proposed several new Community source-based measures including Stage II PVR.
Directive 94/63/EC aims to recover petrol vapour otherwise emitted to the atmosphere from the storage and distribution of petrol between terminals and service stations (so called 'Stage I petrol vapour recovery'). The petrol vapour displaced when a service station receives a new delivery of petrol is returned to the road tanker or mobile vessel and returned to the terminal where it can be redistributed.
The proposal is consistent with the Community's policies on air quality and the making further progress towards the attainment of levels of air quality that do not give rise to significant impacts on health and the environment as stipulated in the Community's Sixth Environmental Action Programme. The proposal is also in line with the three pillars of the Lisbon Strategy as this will encourage a greater demand and development of Stage II vapour recovery technologies.
A targeted consultation of key stakeholders took place by direct contact. These included, oil industry associations, Stage II PVR equipment manufacturers, environmental/transport NGOs, independent service station operators and motoring organisations amongst others. In addition, questions were also posted on the internet for the general public.
The responses spanned issues on health impacts of petrol vapour, the efficiency of Stage II equipment, the merits of automatic monitoring equipment and the cost effectiveness of the various options for installing stage II PVR equipment. These responses have been taken directly into account in drafting the key elements of the attached proposal notably in relation to service stations under residential accommodation, the lower cut-off for affected service stations and the automatic monitoring of in-service performance of equipment.
A summary of the questions and responses can be found at: ec.europa.eu/environment/air/transport/petrol
Expertise from the oil industry and Stage II PVR equipment manufacturers and from consultants who prepared estimates of the costs and benefits of options for Stage II PVR controls.
Statistical data on numbers and sizes of service stations coupled with cost estimates of Stage II equipment was used to calculate the overall costs of applying Stage II PVR controls over time as well as the amount of petrol vapour abated. The damage costs of the emitted petrol vapour were monetised using a simple average damage cost function based upon the impacts associated with ground level ozone. Impacts due to benzene were not quantified.
European oil industry associations, European Stage II PVR equipment manufacturers, environmental/transport NGOs, independent service station operators and motoring organisations.
Two separate consultants were asked to provide advice to the Commission on the costs and cost effectiveness of various Stage II PVR options. This information is summarised in two separate reports from 2005 and 2008. The latter report also relied upon recent information associated with the implementation of Stage II PVR in the Member States
Both reports are available on the Commission's web site: ec.europa.eu/environment/air/transport/petrol
The impact assessment looked at the costs and benefits of the following options:
1. Do nothing.
2. Install Onboard Refuelling Vapour Recovery (ORVR) in passenger cars and light commercial vehicles.
4. All new and substantially refurbished service stations with a throughput greater than 500 m3 of petrol per annum.
5. At all new and substantially refurbished service stations with a throughput greater than 500 m3 of petrol per annum and larger existing stations (i.e. with a throughput in excess of 3000 m3 per annum)..
6. Option (b) and service stations situated in or under residential accommodation.
7. Option (c) with automatic monitoring of all stage II equipment that would restrict petrol sales if the equipment is not functioning correctly.
The detailed evaluation of the options is included in the Impact Assessment accompanying this proposal. It will be available at the following web site: ec.europa.eu/environment/air/transport/petrol
Contents
- LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL
- BUDGETARY IMPLICATION
- 1.1. General context
- 1.2. Existing provisions in the area of the proposal
- 1.3. Consistency with other policies and objectives of the Union
- 2. CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES
- 2.1. Consultation of interested parties
- 2.1.1. Consultation methods, main sectors targeted and general profile of respondents
- 2.1.2. Summary of responses and how they have been taken into account
- 2.2. Collection and use of expertise
- 2.2.1. Scientific/expertise domains concerned
- 2.2.2. Methodology used
- 2.2.3. Main organisations consulted
- 2.2.4. Summary of advice received and used
- 2.2.5. Means to make advice available to the public
- 2.3. Impact assessment
- 3. Install PVR Stage II equipment at
- 3.1. Summary of the proposed action
- 3.2. Legal basis
- 3.3. Subsidiarity principle
- 3.4. Proportionality principle
- 3.5. Choice of instrument
The proposal would oblige the installation of Stage II petrol vapour recovery equipment (i) at new and refurbished stations above 500m3 throughput per annum of petrol; (ii) require retrofitting of existing stations with a throughput above 3000 m3 by 2020; and (iii) require all new or substantially refurbished stations situated under residential accommodation to equip with Stage II controls irrespective of size; (iv) no obligation to install automatic monitoring of Stage II PVR equipment but permit a longer period between inspections if it is installed.
It is clear that obliging the larger existing stations to install Stage II controls before 2020 imposes additional costs but also delivers substantially greater emissions reductions albeit with a slightly worse cost-effectiveness. However, the costs are relatively modest for both options and of the order of €20-30 million per annum in 2020.
Whilst it is not possible to calculate directly the costs associated with installing Stage II PVR at all stations situated under residential accommodation, the illustrative calculation shows that the costs of a scheduled retrofit of a small service station would be similar to the average for the other options considered. However, the costs of an unscheduled retrofit are substantially higher and do not justify the imposition of a time limit. However, in the 10 years following adoption of any new Directive on Stage II PVR, over two thirds of such stations would have been expected to have undergone a scheduled refurbishment. The proposal would also maximise the fact that service stations sited under residential accommodation must already install Stage I PVR irrespective of their size.
Whilst automatic monitoring would certainly guarantee the delivery of the intended benefits in practice, there is uncertainty over the costs of such systems and whether there are not simpler and cheaper systems that can deliver as well. This conclusion was supported by the findings of ENTEC report which determined a 50% worsening in cost-effectiveness for the mandatory inclusion of automatic monitoring i. However, there should be less need for periodic inspection which would represent a cost saving for those installing automatic monitoring equipment.
Article 175 of the Treaty is the appropriate legal basis given the clear environmental nature of the proposal.
The subsidiarity principle applies insofar as the proposal does not fall within the exclusive competence of the Community. The objectives of the proposal cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States alone for the following reasons:
- Ground level ozone is a transboundary air pollutant formed in situ in the atmosphere from precursor emissions of volatile organic compounds (e.g. petrol vapour) and nitrogen oxides. Emissions of petrol vapour in one country can lead to air quality problems in neighbouring countries. Coherent action by all Member States is therefore required in tackling ground level ozone.
- The directive governing the quality of petrol and diesel sold in the EU has Article 95 of the Treaty as its legal basis and applies uniformly across the EU. The Commission has proposed a relaxation of the vapour pressure requirements of petrol in order to promote a greater use of bioethanol. This could however lead to greater emissions of volatile organic compounds even in those countries where Stage II PVR controls are already implemented. As such, Community action is required to address this potential increase in VOC emissions.
The proposal does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve the objective of ensuring the reduction of petrol vapour emissions from refuelling activities. Only the minimum technical parameters are specified whilst leaving the detailed choice of technologies and means to the discretion of the Member States.
A proposal for a directive is most appropriate. There are several technological ways in which Stage II PVR can be implemented in practice. In addition, a substantial number of Member States already have national legislation for Stage II PVR in place. There is no need to change the approach taken by these Member States although numerical values for one or more technical parameters may need to be revised. As such, a directive would maximise the discretion of the Member States on how best to implement the proposal, whilst also leaving the possibility for Member States to impose stricter controls in the event that these are needed in response to air quality problems.
There are no implications for the Community budget.