Battery Regulation Again
This article will be about regulations again. Not because it’s such easy or nice matter, but because it’s happening as we speak. The Circular Vehicle Regulation Proposal is currently under amendment and the Battery Regulation is being introduced in national systems.
Regulations do not have to be implemented in national systems, they work directly, but national systems need to be adapted to EU regulations. And unfortunately, no matter how clear the intentions of the makers and parliament are, Member States always see room for interpretations. This means still differences between countries and sometimes even severe differences.
In case of the Battery Regulation it seems the lack of a clear definition of ‘prepare for reuse’ already causes troubles for battery reuse. Why? Because in some (but certainly not all) countries, their ministries explain that taking out a battery from an ELV (waste) is preparation for reuse. Assessing the SoH (state of health) of a battery is prepare for reuse. And ‘prepare for reuse’ makes one a producer. No matter if the battery is not repaired or if it will be reused for the same goal as traction battery in a vehicle it was designed for, as a producer, full EPR applies to this battery.
ATFs that sell batteries for reuse are of course not producers and as the battery isn’t changed/repaired/modified, or sold for another application, this explanation of the Regulation only causes prevention of the highest level of recycling, being reuse. The EC gives the following explanation: as long as the battery is part of an ELV, the ELV Directive and later the Circular Car Regulation applies. The moment an ATF takes out the battery, the Battery Directive applies, but as the Battery is not a waste battery, but ready for reuse, it can be sold for the same purpose without switched EPR. This is clear explanation and it makes sense. But it seems hard to convince some of the member states.
EGARA sees this kind of laws and interpretation as counterproductive. The EU is all about sustainability, about circular economy, about environment, about CO2 saving, about recycling an about reuse, but sometimes it seems only important on paper rather than in practice. ATFs selling used good batteries is making the footprint of this battery and the receiving vehicle much smaller. It’s easy and it makes sense. But if it means the EPR is switched, it means it’s made impossible. Just to be clear: EGARA does advocate to not just sell any battery to just anyone. We advise to check the battery with all methods we know of (some organisations already offer rather good equipment to say more about a battery’s SoH than just looking, smelling and feeling, which is also nice info for the workshop and consumer) and only sell to known workshops that will use the battery for another run in a vehicle. Selling batteries to private persons that tinker their own home energy storage devices is what we should avoid in all cases.
We are not alone in this, CECRA (European organization of independent workshops) is struggling with a similar problem. They risk being regarded as producers in case of battery repair. Think of replacing a bad module or BMS (battery management system). These seem normal repairs on EVs, but the laws are too strict. The battery regulation or at least possible interpretations of it are biting it’s own tail. CECRA is of opinion that ‘Right to repair’ is on their side. We hope this will also work out in our case with reuse.
The Battery Regulation is already there, the Circular Vehicle Regulation will probably be next summer. We hope alignment of the 2 will happen and we hope both will be set up more realistic and non-multi-interpretable to actually be sustainable and circular.
We keep you posted!
Recent Comments