sevilla 16 october 2007 – ecreinetwork, 2 nd interregional workshop 1 environmental technologies...

Sevilla 16 October 2007 – ECREINetwork, 2nd Interregional Workshop 1

Environmental Technologies

Verification Systems

Institute for Prospective Technological Studies

http://www.jrc.es/

Luis Delgado Sancho


Outline

ETAP

ETV

Existing systems, structure and costs

Market Survey

Scheme for an EU model

Upcoming ETV events


ETAP

Research to Market

Acting Globally Co-ordination

Market Conditions

TestingNetworks

Performance targets

TechnologyPlatforms

FundingMechanisms

Harmful SubidiesState Aids

R&DDemonstration

Funding& technology transfer

Indicators Best PracticeResponsibleInvestments

Environmental Technologies Action Plan

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/etap/index_en.htm

Improving testing, performance verification and standardisation related

to environmental technologies


To establish or prove the truth of the performance of a technology

under specific, predetermined criteria or protocols and adequate

data quality assurance procedures (from US ETV glossary)

Accelerate diffusion –market acceptance – of innovative technologies trough:– Independent validation of performance – Networking centres for the testing and verification of technologies– Develop commonly agreed protocols, possibly common certificates

European Network of technology performance verification

Verification:


IPTS study

EURODEMO

PROMOTE

AIRTV

TRITECH ETV

47 organisations

18 EU countries

5.5 M€ EC contribution

8.5 M€ total cost

Existing ETV systems, European related systems Market Survey, Models for EETVS

TESTNET

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20102004

European ETV initiatives

Soil and groundwater remediation technologies

Collect and process information on technology demonstration

Water technologies and clean production technologies including monitoring

Soil and groundwater remediation technologies

Air emission reduction technologies

Soil remediation, waste water, energy

http://www.eu-etv-strategy.eu/


Environmental Technology Verification - Definitions

What is ETV?

Build confidence to buyers

Independent 3rd party verification

Protocols/test plans designed to suit specific technologies

Stakeholder input

No single definition of ETV


Environmental Technology Verification - Definitions

What ETV is not?

ETV is NOT certification (ISO, CEN, National systems…):

ETV does not verify against a standard (or minimum performance requirements), but can use standards and modify them

ETV does not necessarily use laboratories/personnel that are certified for specific tests/tasks

ETV does not supervise sound manufacturing


Available in the Market

Certification

Self Declarations

ETVR&D

No need for certification, but need for credible

performance data

Compliance to standards

No standards exist

Early research

Prototypes, Demonstration

The “positioning” of ETV


US ETV and ETV Canada – two different “philosophies”

Vendor

ETV system

ETV Managing

Organisation

Verification and

Testing

Organisation

Vendor

Testing

laboratory

ETV Managing

Organisation

Verification

Organisation

ETV system

US ETV objective

Testing done “inside” the system

Allows easy comparison

Stakeholder input very important

Protocol/Test plan development

ETV Canada flexible

Testing done “outside” the system

Strongly producer/vendor oriented

Uses previously established data


The US ETV system : structure

ETV system

Vendor

ETV Team

Establishment of general protocols and quality system

Review of quality

Oversight of verification organisations

Review of final verification report

Verification Organisations

Development of test protocols and test plans

Execution of verification tests

Preparation of verification report

Stakeholder Groups

Set verification priorities

Review protocols and operating procedures

http://www.epa.gov/etv/


The US ETV system : Costs

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year

M$

Vendor contribution

Center support costs

Verification costs

Total Costs

~ 380 verified technologies

Vendor contribution to costs was 8-13 % for years 2002-2005

Verification costs 3-5 times more than Centre support costs (’99–’04)

Total costs and Vendor Contribution


The US ETV system : average per technology verification costs

Technology categoryaverage verification cost (k€)

Number of verified technologies (until 2005)

Air pollution control 65 67

Monitoring 50 132

Drinking water treatment 95 64

Groundwater/surface water protection and wastewater treatment 135 28

Coatings and coating equipment 135 15

But the costs are very technology specific. Big differences in costs can be encountered even inside the same technology category


The ETV Canada system : structure

ETV systemEnvironment Canada

Program policy

ETV Canada

Collection of vendor claims and data

Identification of the Verification entity

Review of the final Verification report

Award of the Verification certificate

Verification Entities

Verification of supporting data

Comparison of data to claims

Preparation of the Verification report

Independent Laboratories

Execution of tests

Generation of data to verify the claimsVendor

http://www.etvcanada.com/


The ETV Canada system : Costs

Verification cost 18-21 k €

Vendor contribution 11-14 k€

Additional service for mini-market survey (optional)

3-5 k €

Testing (not included in the verification, paid by the vendor)

up to 71 k€

~ 50 verified technologies

The vendor pays ~ 60% of the verification costs

This amount does not include the tests/protocol development etc. costs that are paid directly to the testing laboratory

There are no protocols/test plans developed by ETV Canada, but with the optional step of the “mini-market survey” recommendations can be given


Other ETV systems, Japan, South Korea…

The Japan ETV system was inspired by the US ETV. This program is separated into a government sponsored scheme and a vendor financed scheme. Each verification project starts inside the first scheme but has to transfer to the second after a fixed period of time.

The South Korea ETV program is the only one which offers two separate certificates. The certificate of designation is awarded when the vendor can provide sufficient data to support his technology and the certificate of verification when the vendor cannot provide this data and the system has to verify the performance. Verified technologies benefit from a point system to be used in public procurement bids and special attention is paid to SME's with specific funds and loans.


IPTS Market Survey : the interviewed panel

Europe USA Canada Total

Vendor 17 13 8 38

Buyer/User 4 0 0 4

Public Authorities

10 0 0 10

Other Stakeholders

10 0 0 10

ETV-related programs

8 4 1 13

Total 49 17 9 75

Carried out between 02/2006 – 06/2006

Questionnaires and telephone interviews

Strongly focused on technology producers

The majority of the producers had previous experience with an ETV system


IPTS Market Survey : key findings – stakeholder expectations

A European ETV system is considered as a useful tool, provided bureaucracy is kept to a minimum and high technical level is guaranteed. It is expected to supersede existing, national procedures for technology evaluation.

Through European-wide recognition it should be able to eliminate any need for duplication of effort and tests throughout Europe. Harmonization with other non-European ETV programs is a factor of success.

Priority should be given to innovative, commercially available technologies with a positive environmental impact. Prototypes may be considered inside a limited scope framework.


SMEs are the type of companies that are expected to benefit the most from an

ETV system, since they are considered as innovation oriented and at the

same time they have limited financial, logistic or testing capabilities. It was

however stressed that bigger companies should be welcomed as well.

The different ETV or ETV related systems offer a large range of procedural

choices (US ETV-type, ETV Canada-type) and vendors' opinions are divided.

The meaning of the verification award (logo) that differs in every system and

how this is interpreted by potential buyers was mentioned as an important

issue that is possible to improve.




The ETV system has to be totally independent. The respondents see it as a public or private organization, supervised by a public body.

The cost is an issue of the utmost importance for the vendors. As many stakeholders as possible should financially contribute to the system. Financial help is a strong incentive for vendors to go through the verification process.

The ETV system should remain voluntary but strategies have to be developed to motivate the vendors to participate to it, without the system becoming mandatory.


The market survey revealed a contradiction in the way the respondents envisage the ETV system:

The vendors did not associate any increase in sales or any additional market penetration to the effects of the ETV system. Despite of that, almost all the respondents declared that ETV was worth the time and money spent. They did associate the presence of the ETV logo next to their mark as a contribution to the positive image of their company and admitted that they gained in recognition and in credibility.

The effects of ETV verification are difficult to detect. Vendors are reluctant to attribute part of their sales to the ETV logo; they prefer to attribute them to their product's own performance. Plausibly, both the product's performance characteristics and the ETV logo influence at the same time the purchase decision.

IPTS Market Survey : key findings – expected impact


IPTS Market Survey : key findings – willingness to pay

The practice followed until now by the existing ETV systems (US ETV and to a lesser extent Canada ETV) is that the vendor contributes only for a small part to the total costs necessary for the realization of the verification. The rest is supplied by the government and by other stakeholders.

The vendors' willingness to pay is directly related to the access to national markets, without having to go through additional national systems. They stated that they are willing to pay if the verification enables them to enter any national market in Europe, with no need of additional testing in national systems.

Vendors consider that they should not be charged for the development of generic protocols.

In general, in voluntary schemes, vendors expect to receive substantial public funding.


ETVS model : different possibilities

Verification tools

EU ETV Team

Promotion

Execution of tests/verification

Execute tests using predefined protocols and test plans

Verify the data

Network of national/regional/local

“ETV points”

Review and approval of verification report

Awarding certificate/logo

Review of applications

Dissemination of results

Write verification report

Appoint thematic verification

organisations (VO)

Stakeholders group(s)

Auditing the VOs(Quality Management)

Designate and coordinate the stakeholders group(s)

Test labs / verification centres

Thematic VO

Vendor

ETV Team

Promotion

Execution of tests/verification

Execute tests using predefined protocols and test plans*

Verify the data

Network of national/regional/local

“ETV points”

verification report

Awarding certificate/logo

Review of applications

Dissemination of results

Write verification report

Appoint thematic verification

organisations (VO)

Stakeholders group(s)

Auditing the VOs(Quality Management)

Designate and coordinate the stakeholders group(s)

Define quality management plan

Develop verification tools

Define quality management plan

Develop verification tools

Decides on program scope, objective and strategyDevelops program level protocolsAudits, evaluatesVerifies cost effectiveness

Xxxx

XXX

Xxxx

Organisation

Component of program

Task

Organisation involved in

Organisation responsible for

Establish test plans*

Establish protocols*

Define minimum performance requirements (if relevant)

Appoint Test Lab or Verification Centre

*Technology testing is done inside the ETV system


Application phaseClaim definition and review

First review of available data and assessment whether further tests are

needed

Assessment phaseFinal review of data

Drafting of verification report

Testing phaseElaboration of test planImplementation of tests

Test report

If further tests needed

Contact phaseVendor contacts a Verification Center

directly or through a contact point

Publication phaseAward of verification certificatePublication of synthesis report



EU EPVSecretariat

TestingLaboratories

ContactPoints

Vendor

Thematic Verification

Centres

Contact Phase



needed




Test report









needed




Test report





EU EPVSecretariat

TestingLaboratories

Vendor


CentresClaims andexisting Data

Application Phase


ContactPoints




needed




Test report





EU EPVSecretariat

TestingLaboratories

ContactPoints

Vendor


Centres

Testing Phase





needed




Test report





EU EPVSecretariat

TestingLaboratories

ContactPoints

Vendor


Centres

Assessment Phase





needed




Test report





EU EPVSecretariat

TestingLaboratories

ContactPoints

Vendor


Centres

Publication Phase

ETV logo



Upcoming ETV events

European Forum on Eco-Innovation:

Boosting Eco-technologies through Verification

November 26-27 – Ministry of Sustainable Development, Paris

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecoinnovation2007/2nd_forum/index_en.htm

3rd International Forum on Environmental Performance Verification 'Engaging the Developing World'

within the Pollutec fair, November 28, Paris

http://www.pollutec.com

sevilla 16 october 2007 – ecreinetwork, 2 nd interregional workshop 1 environmental technologies...

Documents