Europe's refiners in acid crackdown

European refiners are busy wrestling with the European Commission over fuel specifications, but other planned legislation may prove just as big an issue. The European Petroleum Industry Association (Europia) said the European Union Acidification Strategy is likely to cost the industry 7 billion ecus/year ($6.5 billion/year) from now to 2010. The European Parliament recently debated a move to tighten fuel specifications still further, despite legislation having already been agreed to by

March 23, 1998

3 min read

David Knott
London
[email protected]

European refiners are busy wrestling with the European Commission over fuel specifications, but other planned legislation may prove just as big an issue.

The European Petroleum Industry Association (Europia) said the European Union Acidification Strategy is likely to cost the industry 7 billion ecus/year ($6.5 billion/year) from now to 2010.

The European Parliament recently debated a move to tighten fuel specifications still further, despite legislation having already been agreed to by refiners, auto manufacturers, and the European Commission (OGJ, Jan. 12, 1998, p. 21).

The parliament failed to pass these draconian measures, but refiners expect a rough ride ahead. As Michel Flohic, deputy secretary general of Europia explained: "For politicians, these issues are sexy."

While the attempt to persuade the EC to enact cost-effective air quality measures has been made very public, the less well-known acidification strategy legislation is expected to be just as great a concern.

EU industry emitted more than 16 million metric tons of sulfur dioxide, 13 million tons of nitrogen oxides, and 3 million tons of ammonia in 1990. The EC has set targets to reduce these acidifying agents by 66%, 48%, and 15%, respectively, by 2010.

Power struggle

Existing and planned EC legislation will ensure industry meets these acid targets, says Europia, but refiners fear politicians may stir up trouble.

"As with the air quality legislation," said Flohic, "Europia promotes a rational approach, which sets out to ask how can we achieve the EU's environmental objectives in a cost-effective way.

"This principle should apply to other environmental developments, too. Unfortunately, these days, there is always a danger regarding what the European Parliament may propose.

"This doesn't mean that, in the end, the decision will be that bad, or that we will end up far from the rational approach. But it is a fact of life that MEPs (members of the European parliament) are pushing hard on such measures.

"This is part of a big game regarding the balance of power between the different EU institutions. There is no doubt that the European Parliament wants to assert its rights on some issues."

Acid measures

The main emissions sources are: industrial combustion, Sox; road transport and combustion, Nox; and agriculture, ammonia.

The countries thought to be most at risk of environmental damage to soil, vegetation, fresh water, and buildings from acidifying agents are Sweden, Finland, U.K., the Netherlands, and Germany.

Some of the legislation to control emissions of acidifying agents overlaps with air and fuel legislation, while rules specifically aimed at reducing acidifying agent emissions are on the way.

"Clearly," said Flohic, "the potential impact of the acidification strategy is big. This is a concern to many petroleum companies. Some even believe the cost could be higher than for the new gasoline and diesel standards.

"Europia has always said its members are fully prepared to do whatever is necessary to improve the environment, providing there is a demonstrable need. In the end, though, we have to hope that reason will prevail."