Ladies and gentlemen,
Our package, adopted today, includes an explanatory Communication, a directive on weights and dimensions and two regulations – one on rail capacity, the other on the accounting of greenhouse gas emissions from transport services. We are talking about cleaner lorries, consistent greenhouse gas emission calculations, and more trains on our tracks, including popular – and romantic – night trains.
I will start with the revision of the weights and dimensions directive.
Today, around 53% of freight is carried by road in the EU, and we will continue to need lorries. Just think back to the COVID pandemic, when they continued delivering vital goods when planes were grounded and ships were struggling with crew issues.
But we need to make road freight transport cleaner. One way to do this is by revising the Weights and Dimensions Directive to include incentives for using zero-emission vehicles, and for encouraging intermodal transport.
The current Weights and Dimensions Directive sets the maximum weight, length, width and height for heavy-duty vehicles. Today’s proposal revises these rules: we will allow an additional weight of 4 tonnes for standard zero-emission vehicles, as well as for those in intermodal operations. This means 44 tonnes for a standard zero-emission lorry and 48 for a zero-emission lorry used in intermodal operation. We remain technologically neutral. Should the market opt for hydrogen-based solutions, we propose technical adjustments to host tanks behind the cabin without losing load capacity.
Once the technology develops and zero-emission propulsion systems become lighter, cleaner vehicles will actually benefit from additional payload in comparison to conventional ones. Larger lorries also mean the same amount of cargo can be carried in fewer trips. We expect over 91 million fewer trips per year as soon as 2030 and a massive 1,600 million fewer trips in 2050.
The revision of the Directive goes beyond the weight and length values. It is also harmonising the rules. Let me give you an example. Someone owns a company in Denmark producing beer. In Copenhagen, they load a lorry with 60 tonnes, the maximum allowed weight in their country. The beer is destined for Helsinki, so it must cross Sweden. Even though Sweden and Finland accept 60-tonne lorries, my 60-tonne loaded lorry can only go as far as Sweden, given that under current rules, larger lorries can only cross one border. And even getting as far as Sweden would only be possible because Denmark has a bilateral agreement with Sweden. In Sweden, my cargo would need to be transferred to two standard lorries to reach Helsinki, increasing CO2 emissions, and requiring an extra driver.
The revised directive will simplify things: all countries will have to accept any lorries whose loaded weight respects their national maximum and so, the beer can be transported from Copenhagen to Helsinki in one go.
Another example concerns the transportation of abnormal loads. If you want to transport, for example, a piece of a wind turbine, which can’t be divided into smaller pieces, from Romania to Austria, you probably need – and this is an estimate – at least 10 different permits from 10 different local and regional authorities. Our proposal introduces one single contact point per Member State for transport operators, making life easier for those needing these types of permits.
These “greening” measures will be paired with more efficient and effective targeted controls to ensure compliance with the rules on maximum weights of heavy-duty vehicles, which will reduce counter-competitive practices, enhance road safety, and protect infrastructure.
The second proposal is for an entirely new regulation, which we have named CountEmissionsEU. We all know the gimmicks on the internet that purport to calculate your emissions from a flight or a road trip. While it might be fun to check your green credentials online, the method behind the calculator, the data accuracy, and the calculus formula might not be accurate.
Through this proposal, we offer a standardised formula, a way of calculating emissions based on an ISO standard – an international standard – for use by transport companies, operators, and providers. It is not mandatory, but it is a first step towards putting some order, structure, and truth into what companies might communicate about their emissions. Basically, we take into account the emissions necessary for fuel production and distribution and the emissions produced when the vehicle is moving. Still, the general formula is very complex, and a number of factors, from the type of load to the journey and its length will be taken into account.
Many logistics companies are already asking their transportation subcontractors to provide data on emissions. That makes our tool very timely. And it is only fair that all companies play under the same rules.
A quick word on the data and how they work. Some companies already gather primary data on their emissions. Others, especially smaller ones, can’t afford that, and we will not impose an extra cost on small and medium-sized enterprises.
Still, they need to be able to calculate emissions.
The European Environmental Agency, working with a project funded under Horizon Europe, will build a database of standard emission default values. Relevant third-party data can be included once checked by the Agency. The resulting lengthy and complicated formulas will be the basis for the eventual online calculators. And while the formulas are complicated, the tool will be user-friendly: just like the online gimmicks, but accurate.
And this leads us to the last proposal on the table today – the Regulation on the use of railway infrastructure capacity within the single European railway area.
This proposal will greatly impact cross-border trains, which are mostly freight trains – in fact, 50% of freight trains cross borders! But freight will not be the only beneficiary.
The romantic concept of night trains is popular among young and not-so-young European travellers. And from a regulatory perspective, we can do more to help.
Organising long-distance train travel means finding train paths that match on the two sides of a border. Arranging this after infrastructure managers have already allocated most of the capacity to domestic trains is very difficult, and any capacity left is likely to be of poor quality – think long waiting times and unnecessary detours.
With this regulation, we will ask infrastructure managers to plan use of capacity well in advance and to coordinate the planning of cross-border paths. We are also asking for procedures to be harmonised, for a standard methodology to define priorities, and for rail operators to be able to apply for cross-border capacity in a single place using interoperable IT tools.
As much as we love night trains, they stand second in line in terms of beneficiaries from this legislation. Our main focus is, indeed, freight. Of the total goods transported between EU countries in 2021, only 11.9% are carried on tracks.
Today, European railways are fragmented. Each country has its own annual planning. There is a coordination on corridors, but freight is still mixed in with passenger trains and also needs to travel beyond the corridors. What we want is for infrastructure managers to identify – together – what cross-border traffic needs, to set aside the needed capacity, and to allocate it together through simplified procedures. We will also ask them to coordinate maintenance work to minimise disruption on the lines.
We won’t create a new institution, but we will reinforce the existing network of infrastructure managers, putting an operational entity in charge of coordinating the planning of rail slots and cross-border traffic. We will also require all infrastructure managers to apply the same set of rules, and to declare national traffic priorities in full transparency. For example, certain regions might run predominantly regional trains in the mornings because of the commuters.
One point I find worth emphasising is that Railway undertakings will be able to request capacity at any time, based on market needs, instead of having to file requests within the rigid timelines of an annual process. In exchange, they will no longer be able to reserve capacity ‘just in case’, and then cancel it later without consequences.
The proposal introduces incentives for both infrastructure managers and rail undertakings to respect these commitments. A freight operator not using their slots will lose them for the future, and will have to pay compensation for the capacity unused. An infrastructure manager not providing the agreed path will have to make every effort to reroute trains, and to compensate the freight operator financially.
All of this will minimise deviations from plans. Deviations that result in costs, delays and sometimes cancellations. Everybody will benefit from more reliable and punctual rail services.
This is, in a nutshell, what we are proposing today. I will be happy to take your questions.