Referring to the concerns expressed at the WTO by China, the United States and Japan regarding the F-Gas Regulation, the Commission provided a series of responses and explanations. EPEE has prepared a comprehensive summary on the topic.
The Commission’s response to all the objections raised was very similar and based on the same arguments, so it will be reported at the bottom of the news only once. Furthermore, it appears that South Korea also submitted a comment, unfortunately not accessible on the WTO website.
JAPAN
Main topics
- Negative impact on trade
- Concerns about the impact on Japanese companies
- Disadvantages for imported equipment
- Doubts about the contribution to the reduction of greenhouse gases
- Lack of risk and impact assessment
- Alleged violation of WTO agreements
- Inclusion in the ban of fluorinated gases not present in the original proposal
Requests
- Carefully review the regulations to ensure alignment with the legal objectives of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and reducing Global Warming Potential (GWP).
- Conduct a comprehensive risk and impact assessment on the proposed regulations and affected equipment, considering the changes made through the trilogue process.
- Allow the use of low GWP refrigerants, such as hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs).
- Exempt low-GWP HFOs from the regulation and establish an appropriate timetable for the phase-in ban of high-GWP hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), keeping it open until alternative refrigerants with proven safety and energy efficiency are available.
CHINA
Main topics
- Concerns about the lack of transparency in the agreement on the Review of the F-Gas Regulation issued by the European Parliament and the Council.
- Two new additions include precautions on per- and polyfluorinated substances (PFAS) and a ban calendar lacking technology neutrality.
- Opposition to a total ban on the use of F-Gases, with particular reference to hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs), which are widely accepted globally.
Requests
- Removal of changes in the provisional agreement to align with the regulations initially notified and submitted to the WTO.
USA
Main topics
- Discrepancies in notifications between the Commission’s initial proposal and the Interim Agreement
- Requested clarification on the EU’s rationale for compliance dates, questioning whether a regulatory impact assessment had considered the international scientific community’s findings on climate, low-GWP alternatives and related technologies.
- Request for a public consultation on the proposed changes to HFC quotas and on the EU process for developing reports, amendments and timelines for their removal under Article 35.
- Concerns regarding potential conflicts between the F-Gas Regulation and the proposed REACH Annex XVII PFAS restriction, underlining the importance of avoiding contradictory or duplicative compliance requirements.
- Expression of US priorities in stopping illegal imports of HFCs, seeking information on how the EU addresses the challenges related to illegal trafficking.
Requests
- Requests for information on the EU plan, as well as consideration of the WTO TBT Inquiry Point, and request for clarification on the expected timescales for the adoption of the Provisional Agreement.
- Request for the EU to notify an addendum consistent with the TBT Committee Recommendation, considering possible trade implications.
- Asks for factors considered in identifying compliance dates, evaluation of alternatives to HFCs and reasons for Annex IV exemptions/extensions.
THE (GLOBAL) RESPONSE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION
- The EU notes that the proposal was adopted as Regulation (EU) 2024/5731, with amendments reflecting the legislative process and the nature of the notified draft.
- Restrictions have been introduced on alternative technologies using low-GWP fluorinated substances, in line with the precautionary principle, as well as to address concerns about substances such as PFAS and related substances, in line with the proposal presented by ECHA.
- The EU’s F-Gas policy has historically been precautionary, regulating substances such as HFCs even before global agreements such as the Montreal Protocol.
- The Regulation is based on extensive analysis, including impact assessments and consultations with industry players, considering both fluorinated and non-fluorinated alternatives.
- The restrictions in Annex IV of the Regulation target equipment and products with available alternatives, with transition periods for some sectors up to 2032, 2033 or 2035.
- Exemptions are provided for cases where safety standards or exceptional conditions make the use of fluorinated alternatives necessary.
- The Regulation includes different types of safeguards, such as the obligation for the Commission to monitor market developments and corrective actions: for example by increasing the quotas of HFCs, if deficiencies are observed in some relevant sectors and allowing exemptions from sectoral prohibitions on the basis of demonstrated exceptional energy efficiency gains, lack of suitable alternatives or disproportionate costs.
- The Commission calls on countries to focus on tackling illegal activities such as trading in fluorinated greenhouse gases.
For Latest Updates Follow us on Google News
