1 / 19

The Practical Implementation of Directive 2000/53/EC in EU Member States

The Practical Implementation of Directive 2000/53/EC in EU Member States. Based on the Report for the European Parliament on the End-of-Life Vehicles (ELV) Directive - Assessment of the current state of implementation by Member States, IEEP’s March ’07 manuscript.

jennis
Télécharger la présentation

The Practical Implementation of Directive 2000/53/EC in EU Member States

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Practical Implementation of Directive 2000/53/EC in EU Member States Based on the Report for the European Parliament on the End-of-Life Vehicles (ELV) Directive - Assessment of the current state of implementation by Member States, IEEP’s March ’07 manuscript Ross Bartley, Environmental & Technical Officer, European Ferrous Recovery & Recycling Federation’s European Shredder Group

  2. Austria Belgium Ireland Czech Republic Hungary Germany Italy UK Malta The Netherlands Sweden EU Member States covered in report

  3. Focus on:- Transposition of the Directive (by 21 April ‘02 or by Accession 1 May ‘04) Free Take Back (for all ELVs from 1 Jan ’07) Recycling Target Achievements (by 1 Jan ’06) Reuse and Recycling ≥ 80 wt.% Reuse and Recovery ≥ 85 wt.% Recall the Directives slow progress in both Parliament and Council, why?  More stringent arrangements for the take back  Producers made responsible for the cost of take back result  strong opposition by the carmakers

  4. …analysis… Recyclers Citizen Govt ESG

  5. …analysis… Recyclers Citizen Govt ESG

  6. …analysis… Recyclers Citizen Govt ESG

  7. …analysis… Recyclers Citizen Govt ESG

  8. …analysis… Recyclers Citizen Govt ESG Could compare with CY LU

  9. …analysis… Recyclers Citizen Govt ESG

  10. …analysis… Recyclers Citizen Govt ESG

  11. General Implementation of the Directive • Pioneer states: Sweden, Netherlands, Germany, Austria, but  significant difficulties, delays and setbacks in implementing in many countries, reasons  • Waste disposal arrangements vary significantly from one state to another • The Directive did not specify how the disposal of cars would be funded during the transition period of 2002-2007 • The requirements have increased the cost of car disposal • Administrative arrangements too complex (national systems or standards versus responsibility of the Regions or municipal authorities) • Reporting, procedures difficult / complex • “Disposal of carmakers’ products is not their core business” • Countries from the EU-10: recent adoption of “acquis communautaire”  do not have a high level of administrative resource

  12. Free take back • Article 5  the last owner of the vehicle could return the vehicle to a treatment facility at no cost (for all cars from 1 January 2007) • Transporting a vehicle to a disposal site = cost for cars unable to be taken to the site on their own power = administrative charges = barrier to complete take-up • Density of the disposal network varies from country to country  different levels of ambition in different Member States (new networks being built up, new sites licensed) • ! Best practice: a clearinghouse organisation to handle the flow of payments and documentation (PRO) • ! Best practice: a central fund (charges on new cars and second hand cars – from producers and importers)

  13. Achievements of Recycling and Recovery Targets • No reliable reporting in many countries that implemented late (eg % of material being used or recovered)

  14. Cars and car scrappage • EU-15 high disposable income so more luxury cars • EU-10 older average age vehicles, significant legacy issues • In some countries  scrappage by unlicensed operators • Some cars still abandoned rather than scrapped • Second-hand trade causes some illegal activities export of wrecked or stolen cars • some end-of-life vehicles ‘garaged’ rather than scrapped • Export of second-hand cars before reaching end-of-life important and growing feature of the European car market What will the MEPs learn from this report? Will they consider changing the Directive?

More Related