Sitting of Wednesday, 28 November 2001

Purvis (PPE-DE), draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy. - The Industry Committee accepts the desirability of moving to zero sulphur in petrol and diesel. The hotter burn of modern vehicle engines delivers higher efficiency and thereby cuts CO2 emissions. However, the resulting increase in nitrogen oxide has to be dealt with by catalysts and the virtual elimination of sulphur renders the catalysts effective in dealing with these. A further benefit is a reduction in the emission of particulates, so the Industry Committee is in favour of the Commission proposal.

A majority vote in the committee demanded a rather faster implementation than the Commission proposed even if some of us were concerned at the Commission's assertion that this will, in fact, produce a net increase in CO2 emissions. So please tell us, Commissioner, if you stand by your warning or whether you can accept the quicker implementation requested by both the Environment and the Industry Committees.

We would also point out that the EU standard of 10 parts per million of sulphur contrasts with an American standard of 15 ppm of sulphur. This will make it difficult for us to import fuels from the USA in an emergency. We would also suggest that the Commission instigate research into the implications of ultra-fine particle emissions from gasoline diesel injection engines.

The question of fuel quality for non-road and off-road machinery is still outstanding. We understand that proposals on this matter will be forthcoming in 2002. This is surely urgently needed but we urge the Commission to give full consideration to the interests of those in industry and agriculture who operate such machinery.

We give this proposal a fair wind. Indeed, the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy would suggest that the Commission hoists a spinnaker and speeds up its implementation. Is the Commissioner prepared to accede to this demand?