Exigences en matière d'éco-conception applicables aux produits consommateurs d'énergie

Publié: 08 mars 2006Mis à jour: 25 juin 2012

Les législateurs européens ont conclu un accord en avril 2005 sur une proposition dont l'objectif est d'augmenter l'efficacité énergétique de tous les appareils ménagers fonctionnant à l'électricité. Avec cette proposition, la Commission a tenté de rendre la conception des produits comme les sèche-cheveux, les ordinateurs, les réfrigérateurs ou les équipements de bureau plus écologiques et de réduire les émissions de gaz à effet de serre, qui sont considérés comme responsables du réchauffement climatique. 

Milestones

Policy Summary

The production, distribution, use and end-of-life management of products is associated with impacts on the environment (consumption of natural resources and energy responsible for global warming, waste and release of hazardous substances).

In order to reduce these impacts in the product design phase, the Commission proposed a framework directive on setting eco-design requirements for energy-using products (EuP) on 1 August 2003.

The directive paves the way for the definition of eco-design specifications on a product-specific basis. It is a combination of DG Enterprise's proposals for an EEE (eco-design for Electrical & Electronic Equipment) Directive and proposals by DG Energy and Transport for an EER (Energy Efficiency Requirements) Directive. These proposals were merged into one at the end of 2002.

Enjeux

On 13 April 2005, the Parliament gave its go-ahead to a last-minute compromise agreement reached with the EU Council of Ministers on the proposed eco-design framework directive (EurActiv, 14 April 2005).

An important aspect of the compromise is that self-imposed measures by industry will be given priority over regulation if they are deemed to be more efficient. This will be assessed by the Commission at an early stage after it has consulted a special stakeholders' forum bringing together representatives of industry, member states and NGOs. 

The actual measures will be taken on a product-by-product basis by the Commission under the supervision of a designated panel of EU member state experts as part of the so-called fast-track comitology procedure. 

The measures, to be decided over the next two years, will define energy performance for each product and the related labelling to enable consumers to make informed choices. They will also carry information to encourage consumer responsibility in contributing to energy savings.

On one of the most controversial points in the negotiation, it was finally agreed to uphold the internal market (art. 95 of the EC Treaty) as the sole legal basis of the directive. In practice, this means that member states will not be allowed to impose stricter environmental rules of their own accord as would have been the case if the environmental provisions of the treaty had been applied. This provision will make sure products are harmonised and more easily traded across all EU countries.

The agreed directive:

The comitology procedure does not give room to the Parliament to decide on the setting of eco-design requirements. However, the directive foresees that each implementing measure will be accompanied by an explanatory memorandum, an impact assessment and stakeholders' consultation.

There will not be obligations for all energy-using products, but only for those meeting criteria such as environmental impact and the volume of trade in the internal market and clear potential for improvement, for example where market forces fail to make progress in the absence of a legal requirement.

Implementation measures can include generic eco-design requirements designed to improve the overall environmental performance of a product. Others may relate to a selected environmental aspect of the product (such as energy consumption during use) which is quantified and therefore measurable.

This directive will follow the Commission's 'new approach' to internal market regulation and promote the use of standards to improve the environmental performance of products (see EurActiv LinksDossier on an Integrated Product Policy [IPP]).

The Commission expects that the adoption of this framework directive will push industry to conclude voluntary commitments.

Réactions

The European Parliament had initially called for more stringent measures when they backed the report by Astrid Thors (ELDR, Finland) in first reading. MEPs had voted for parts of the directive to fall under the EU Treaty's environment provisions. But this could have forced manufacturers to have to adapt to different environmental requirements across EU countries and the amendment was finally rejected.

However MEPs did agree on a list of products that should be tackled first. These include heating, lighting and office equipment as well as consumer electronics. Energy losses from stand-by switches are also to be reduced for all products.

The Energy Council  reached a  common position on 30 November 2004. It accepted 23 of the 78 amendments the Parliament had proposed in its first reading.

The Greens/EFA group in Parliament hailed the deal as a victory for Parliament. "Almost all of the directive's relevant provisions […] were imposed by the Parliament," said MEP Claude Turmes (Greens, Luxembourg).

Business federations argued that whenever market forces prove to be effective in achieving environmental goals, no implementing measure should be laid down. They expressed doubts about the involvement of stakeholders and the enforceability of generic requirements and recalled the importance of clarifying the link between the various legislative initiatives, such as integrated product policy (IPP) and the directives on waste from electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) and restriction of the use of hazardous substances (RoHS).

Orgalime - a federation representing the mechanical, electrical, electronic and metalworking industries - also called for priority to be given to voluntary measures. It called for a proper involvement of industry from the very start of the process of considering implementing measures and opposes mandatory life cycle analysis (LCA).

WWF's European Policy Office criticised the agreement for lacking ambition. According to head of climate and energy unit Dr Stephan Singer, the "biggest loophole of the new law" is that it allows self-regulation by industry as an alternative to the so-called implementing measures which are to be adopted under the directive on a case by case basis. Singer describes the voluntary agreements and the lack of independent verification on their implementation as "an invitation to cheat". On the positive side, WWF said it appreciated the Commission's will to implement measures to reduce energy losses from appliances being in stand-by mode, "which waste the most power".

European household equipment manufacturers have welcomed the agreement's specifications on voluntary initiatives. CECED said industry self-commitments have delivered impressive results and helped maintain European manufacturers as world leaders in the field.  But CECD warned against any discrepancies in implementation and called on the Commission and the member states to ensure that the rules are properly enforced.