![\"\"](\"https:\/\/autosap.cz\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/petzl-250x250.png\")
<\/em><\/p>\n“The Member States’ position published today is a clear improvement on the European Commission’s original proposal. This was completely disproportionate, both in terms of the stringency of the requirements and the time for implementation. It has led to disproportionately high costs for the industry and customers, a reduction in supply, especially for small models, and all with minimal environmental benefits,”<\/em> said Zden\u011bk Petzl, Executive Director of the Automotive Industry Association.<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Another positive change is the retention of the exhaust emission limits and measurement method at Euro 6 level, at least for passenger cars. The EU already has one of the most comprehensive and stringent approaches to vehicle emissions of pollutants such as nitrogen oxides (NOx) and other particulates in the world. Thanks to state-of-the-art technology, tailpipe emissions are barely measurable.<\/p>\n We also welcome the extension of the Euro 7 deadline, although the limited time available for developing new models will still be a significant challenge. Despite the proposed modifications, Euro 7 will require high research and development costs for new components, especially for the global innovation of measuring brake and tyre scuff emissions.<\/p>\n Overall, moving forward with the proposal will better enable the industry to focus on the EU’s ambitious decarbonisation targets, i.e. the transition from combustion to electric vehicles, while preserving the affordability of vehicles and the competitiveness of our industry. This is particularly important at a time when, on the one hand, the industry continues to struggle with fragmented supply chains and, at the same time, faces the need to rapidly build entirely new and local battery production chains and other components for electric vehicles.<\/p>\n At this point in time, we therefore call on the European Parliament, in particular, to pursue a well-set course of discussion in its consideration of the standard so that the final form of the standard, once agreed with the Council, effectively reflects its real economic, social and environmental impact.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":13581,"parent":0,"template":"","categories":[241],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
\n