tritech business plan

7/30/2019 Tritech Business Plan

1/55

BusinessBusinessBusinessBusinessPlanPlanPlanPlan

ForanEUEUEUEUEnvironmentalEnvironmentalEnvironmentalEnvironmentalTechnologiesVerification(ETV)TechnologiesVerification(ETV)TechnologiesVerification(ETV)TechnologiesVerification(ETV)

SchemeSchemeSchemeScheme

October2009

ReportpreparedbyBetaTechnology


2/55

Page2

Contact:

CarolineWadsworth

BetaTechnologyLimited

BarclayCourtDoncasterCarr

Doncaster

DN45HZ

Tel:01302322633

Fax:01302388800

Email:[email protected]

Website:www.betatechnology.co.uk


3/55

Page3

TableofContentsTableofContentsTableofContentsTableofContents

EXECUTIVESUMMARYEXECUTIVESUMMARYEXECUTIVESUMMARYEXECUTIVESUMMARY............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4444

INTRODUCTIOINTRODUCTIOINTRODUCTIOINTRODUCTIONNNN........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 6666

1.1.1.1. MISSIONANDOBJECTIVMISSIONANDOBJECTIVMISSIONANDOBJECTIVMISSIONANDOBJECTIVESESESES ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7777

2.1.MISSION -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7

2.2.OBJECTIVES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7

2.2.2.2. DESIGNOFANEUETVDESIGNOFANEUETVDESIGNOFANEUETVDESIGNOFANEUETVSYSTEMSYSTEMSYSTEMSYSTEM ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 8888

3.1.KEY LESSONS LEARNED FROM TRITECH-ETV -------------------------------------------------------------------8

3.2.CONCLUSIONS FROM THE INSTITUTE FOR PROSPECTIVE TECHNOLOGICAL STUDIES (IPTS) ----------10

3.3.3.3. ORGANISATIONANDMANORGANISATIONANDMANORGANISATIONANDMANORGANISATIONANDMANAGEMENTAGEMENTAGEMENTAGEMENT .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 17171717

4.4.4.4. MARKETANALMARKETANALMARKETANALMARKETANALYSISYSISYSISYSIS .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22222222

4.1.THE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES MARKET--------------------------------------------------------------- 22

5.5.5.5. STRATEGYSTRATEGYSTRATEGYSTRATEGY ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 27272727

5.1.SCOPE----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27

5.2.OPERATION ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30

5.3.PROMOTION ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 32

5.4.VERIFICATION METHODOLOGY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 33

5.5.APPROVAL OF TEST CENTRES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 35

6.6.6.6. FINANCIALPLANFINANCIALPLANFINANCIALPLANFINANCIALPLAN .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 36363636

6.1.BACKGROUND-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36

6.2.EU-ETVBUDGET---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38

7.7.7.7. IMPLEMENTATIONPLANIMPLEMENTATIONPLANIMPLEMENTATIONPLANIMPLEMENTATIONPLAN.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 40404040

APPENDIX1:VERIFICAAPPENDIX1:VERIFICAAPPENDIX1:VERIFICAAPPENDIX1:VERIFICATIONMETHODOLOGYTIONMETHODOLOGYTIONMETHODOLOGYTIONMETHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 42424242

APPENDIX2:APPENDIX2:APPENDIX2:APPENDIX2:COMPETENCEPROFILEFCOMPETENCEPROFILEFCOMPETENCEPROFILEFCOMPETENCEPROFILEFORAPPROVEDTESTCENORAPPROVEDTESTCENORAPPROVEDTESTCENORAPPROVEDTESTCENTRESTRESTRESTRES ........................................................................................................................ 55555555


4/55

Page4

EXECUTIVESUMMARYEXECUTIVESUMMARYEXECUTIVESUMMARYEXECUTIVESUMMARY

Innovativeenvironmentaltechnologiesareurgentlyneededtoprovidesolutionstothemajorenvironmental

challenges faced by Europe and the world, including: climate change, scarcity and unsustainable use ofresources and loss of biodiversity. However, new technologies face difficulties in convincing the first

customersandinvestorsoftheirmerits;theirdifficultytopenetratethemarketortobediffusedtopotential

customersisabarriertoeco-innovativecompaniesbenefitingfromtheirnewtechnologies,tousersintapping

intonewtechnologicalsolutionsandtopolicy-makersinachievingpolicygoalsrapidlyandcost-efficiently.

ThisBusinessPlanproposesaEU-wideEnvironmentalTechnologyVerification(EU-ETV)scheme,basedon

theresultsofarecentlycompletedpilotETVschemefundedthroughtheEUsLIFEprogramme(TritechETV)

andotherrecentstudiesofETVschemes.

TheproposedEU-ETVschemewouldprovide independentandcredible informationonnewenvironmental

technologies,onavoluntarybasis,byverifyingthatperformanceclaimsputforwardbytechnologydevelopers

andvendorsarecomplete,fairandbasedonreliabletestresults.Theobjectivesarethree-fold:

Tohelp developers andvendors,especiallySMEs,provideobjectiveand reliable evidenceon the

performanceofneweco-technologiesarrivingonthemarket,

Tosupporttechnologypurchasers(publicorprivate)basetheirdecisionsonsoundinformation,and

To facilitate the implementation of public policies and regulations in a more flexible way than

traditionalcommand-and-controlmechanisms.

TheEU-ETVsystemwouldbegininafewtechnologyareasandwouldenlargeitsscopeprogressively.Itis

proposedthatthefollowingareaswillformtheinitialscopeoftheEU-ETV:

1. Monitoringtechniques

2. Waterandsoilstreatmenttechnologies

3. Renewablesourcesofenergyandenergyefficiency

4. AirpollutionabatementincludingGHG

5. Cleantechnologiesincludingwasteandresourcerecycling

Together,thesetechnologyareasrepresentsome55%oftheLCEGSindustry.

Amanagementandorganisationstructureisproposedthatisbasedonconclusionsandlessonsfromrecent

studiesandbestpractice.TheEU-ETVwillbeoperatedonbehalfoftheEuropeanCommissionbyapublicly-

fundedCentral VerificationOrganisation (CVO), In this role, a public body would enhance the schemes

credibilityrelativetoaprivatesectorbody.TheCVOwillappointanumberofVerificationBodies(VBs)that

willbethematicallyfocusedaroundthekeytechnologyareaslistedabove.TheseVBscouldbeprivatesector

organisations and would require part public and part private financing public financing for the general

operationandoverheadsassociatedwiththeschemeandprivatefinancingintheformofacontributionby

vendorsto thecostsof verification.Verificationby theVBswillrequiretheuseof accreditedexperts inthe

formofVerificationPanels.

ThesizeandkeylocationsforeachofthetechnologysectorswithinthescopeoftheEU-ETVwillrequirea

flexible approach to the establishment of thematic VBs. It is envisaged that the following numbers andlocationsofVBswouldberequired:


5/55

Page5

No.ofVBs Locations

Monitoringtechniques 1 Centrallocation,perhapsBelgium

Waterandsoilstreatmenttechnologies 2to3 Germany,UK,France

Renewablesourcesofenergy&energyefficiency 4to5 Germany,UK,France,Spain,Italy

AirpollutionabatementincludingGHG 1 Centrallocation,perhapsBelgium

Cleantechnologiesincludingwaste&resourcerecycling 4to5 Germany,UK,France,Spain,Italy

TheverificationprocessintheEU-ETVschemewouldnotinvolvetesting.TheroleoftheVBswill

beinverifyingthedatathatarepresentedtotheVBbythevendor.However,theVBswillhavea

role in accrediting Testing Centres and ensuring that they comply with quality and technical

standardsmandatedbytheCVO.

TheEU-ETVschemewill incorporateahighdegreeofstakeholderinvolvementthroughTechnical

Groups andAdvisoryFora. Finally, it isenvisaged thateachMemberStatewouldhaveNational

Contact Points to act as an entry point for vendors, reducing geographical, language or

administrativebarriersbyexplainingtovendorstheETVconceptanditsbenefits.

ThebasicfeaturesoftheEU-ETVwouldbefixedinEUlegislationestablishingtheETVscheme.

The main documents defining the procedures followed by EU-ETV, in particular the list of

technologyareascoveredbyEU-ETV,theGeneralProtocolandQualityManagementSystem,and

specificprotocolswhereappropriate,shouldbeadoptedbytheCommissionusingusualCommittee

procedures where Member States experts are involved. Technical standards (ISO, IEC, CEN,Cenelec) will be used extensively where available, in particular for testing methods. Standards

developmentwillbeencouragedtoaccompanythedevelopmentofEU-ETVandfacilitateitswider

recognition,includingwithnon-EUprogrammes.

A comprehensive methodology for the verification process has been developed as part of the

Tritech-ETVprojectanditisproposedthatthismethodologybeadoptedintheEU-ETVscheme.

The processwould beweb-enabled in order to ensure efficiency and ease of operation for the

vendorsandfortheVBs.

AbudgetfortheoperationoftheEU-ETVhasbeenestimatedbasedonexperienceinnon-EUETV

schemesandtheTritech-ETVpilot scheme.TheEUBudgetwouldcover theadministrativecost

relatedtotheEU-ETVintheCommission(throughtheCVO),thecostsassociatedwithmeetingsof

the Technical Groups and the Advisory Fora, Verification Bodies administration costs and

subsidisationofverificationcosts,focusedonfacilitatingtheaccessofSMEstothesystem.Based

onthehypothesisthatthenumberofverificationswouldincreaseprogressivelyupto200overthe

firstfiveyearsofimplementationoftheEU-ETVscheme(atasettled-downrateof60peryear),the

costfortheEUbudgetisestimatedtobearound4millionEurosperyear4millionEurosperyear4millionEurosperyear4millionEurosperyear.

Finally,anoutlineimplementationplanispresented,focusingonthekeyactionsthatarerequiredtoestablishtheEU-ETVschemedescribedinthisBusinessPlan.


6/55

Page6

INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION

Sustainabledevelopmentisat thecoreoftheEuropeanUnions(EU)objectives.InOctober2003,

theEuropeanCouncil recognised thepotential synergies betweenenvironmental protection andeconomicgrowth,andsawenvironmentaltechnologiesasthekeytosuccessinbothoftheseareas.

With this in mind, the EU adopted the Environmental Technologies Action Plan (ETAP) early in

2004.Theactionplanaimstoharnessthefullpotential(ofenvironmentaltechnologies)toreduce

pressuresonournaturalresources,improvethequalityoflifeofEuropeancitizensandstimulate

economicgrowth1.Threemainareasof actionare proposed intheplan, including Getting from

ResearchtoMarketapriorityactionwithinthisisimprovingtesting,performanceverificationand

standardisationrelatedtoenvironmentaltechnologies.

For a technologyproducer, particularlywheretheyare anSME, it isoftendifficult toconvincea

potential investororpurchaser that theirproductdoesastheyclaimitdoes.Toovercomethese

barriers,severalverificationprogramshavebeenadoptedincountriesoutsideoftheEUinorderto

provide users of the technologies with greater certainty in their purchasing decisions. Such a

mechanism,thatindependentlyandobjectivelyvalidatestheperformanceofanewproduct,would

instilconfidenceinbothpurchasersandinvestors,andthushelpvendorstomakethestepbetween

pilotstageandcommercialisationoftechnologiesfaster.Theseschemeshavebecomeknownas

EnvironmentalTechnologiesVerification(ETV)systems.

NationalverificationprogramshavebeenrunningforalmosttenyearsintheUS,CanadaandSouthKorea.Japanstartedaprogramin2002,whichisstillinapilotphase.Manyothercountries,mainly

inAsia,havebeencontactedbytheNorthAmericansand,asaresult,Chinaisnowabouttolaunch

a national verification programme basedon the Canadian system. However, there is no similar

technology verification approach established in Europe, despite the fact that most stakeholders

considersuchaschemeonaEuropeanleveltobeofsignificantimportanceforthedisseminationof

environmentaltechnologiesandforthecompetitivenessofthisindustry.

Asa responseto this, theEuropeanCommissionhasbeenrunninga numberofprogrammes to

better understandhowa robust ETV scheme canbebest establishedacross Europe.One such

programme, Tritech ETV, has recently completed a pilot scheme for the verification of

environmental technologies under funding through the EUs LIFE programme. The main aim of

TritechETVwastoestablishaworkingmethodologyfortheverificationoftechnologiesinthefield

ofwaste water treatment, soil remediation and energy. A total of 15 technologies were verified

duringtheproject,themechanismsestablishedandevaluatedandtheresultsreportedtotheEC.

An EU-wide ETV system would verify the performance characteristics of new environmental

technologies through commonly recognised and transparent protocols. In thiscontext, to verify

1(StimulatingTechnologiesforSustainableDevelopmentAnEnvironmentalTechnologiesActionPlanforthe

EuropeanUnion,2004)


7/55

Page7

means to establish or prove the truth of the performance of a technology, under specific

predeterminedcriteriaorprotocolsandadequatedataqualityassuranceprocedures.Itisimportant

tonotethatverificationisnotthesameascertification;thescopeofverificationistheindependent

assessment of a vendors claims regarding the performance of their technology without makingfurthervalue-basedjudgementsof it.Ontheotherhand,certificationusually impliesaguarantee

thatthetechnologymeetsspecificstandards.Withnewtechnologies,suchstandardsmaynotyet

existandwhilecertificationinthesecaseswouldnotbepossible,verificationofclaimscanstillbe

made.

This Business Plan draws from the lessons learned during Tritech ETV, together with lessons

learnedfromotherEU-supportedprojectsinthisareaandfromanexaminationofinternationalbest

practice.TheBusinessPlanproposesamodelforanEU-wideETVsystemandanoutlinestrategy

andplanforitsimplementation.

1.1.1.1. MISSIONANDOBJECTIVMISSIONANDOBJECTIVMISSIONANDOBJECTIVMISSIONANDOBJECTIVESESESES

2.1.Mission

ThemissionofanEU-ETVschemewouldbe toprovide: (i) usersofenvironmental technologies

with confidence in the technology they are investing in, and (ii) vendors of environmental

technologieswithanaccreditation for their products.Ultimately,anEU-ETVschemewillmakea

substantialcontributiontothecompetitivenessoftheEUsenvironmentaltechnologiesmarketand

boostlevelsofinvestmentinthedevelopmentofnewtechnologies.

2.2.Objectives

TheobjectivesofanEU-ETVschemewouldbeto:

Remove key obstacles currently preventing the realisation of the full potential of

environmental technologies for protecting the environment, while at the same time

contributingtocompetitivenessandeconomicgrowth, EnsurethatoverthecomingyearstheEUtakesaleadingroleindevelopingandapplying

environmentaltechnologies,

Mobiliseallstakeholdersinsupportoftheseobjectives,and

Implement a scheme that has the minimum level of bureaucracy while assuring high

technicalandqualitystandardsandengagingwithawiderangeofstakeholdersatnational

andEuropeanlevels.

TheseobjectivessupporttheoverallaimsofETAP.


8/55

Page8

2.2.2.2. DESIGNOFANEUETVDESIGNOFANEUETVDESIGNOFANEUETVDESIGNOFANEUETVSYSTEMSYSTEMSYSTEMSYSTEM

ThedesignoftheEUETVSystemdescribedinthisBusinessPlanispredominantlybasedonthe

outcomesoftwokeystudiestheTritech-ETVPilotScheme,ofwhichthisPlanisanoutput,andcomprehensive analysis recently published by the IPTS. The EUETV System described in the

BusinessPlandrawsfromthekeylessonslearnedinthesetwostudies.

3.1.KeyLessonsLearnedfromTritech-ETV

ThereissignificantinterestfromtechnologydevelopersandpurchasersinETVschemesbased

onagenerallackoftrustinnewtechnologies.

Itisimperativetounderstandthewiderenvironmental,technicalandcommercialaspectsofa

vendorandtheirtechnologyi.e.totakeaholisticview.

TheexpertiseoftheVerificationBodiesandacompetentExpertGroupiscriticalduringtheclaim

definitionprocess.Inadditiontothedefinitionoftheclaims,theremaybeaneedforexpertsto

commentonthetestplanandverificationreport,especiallyifthereislittleornoexperienceofthe

verificationofthesimilartechnologies.Alistofqualifiedexpertsofdifferenttechnologyareas

shouldbeproduced.

Toensuretheavailabilityofcompetentexperts,asystemforcompensationoftheirexpenses

shouldbedeveloped.

ItisimportantforalloftheteststohavebeencompletedpriortoenteringtheETVscheme.

Availabilityofsuitableprotocolsshouldconsiderablyshortenthetimeneededtocompletethe

verificationprocess.However,therangeoftechnologiesiswideandthismaytakealongtimeto

achieve.

IftheETVsystemistosupportadecision,technologiesthatservethesamefunctionshouldbe

clusteredintooneprotocol,notjusttechnologiesusingthesametechnicalprinciples.

TheETVsystemmustbeefficientandflexibletominimisethetimerequiredbythevendorto

provideinputintotheprocess.

Itisessentialtocommunicatethebenefitsofthevendorbeinginvolvedinverification.

Atleastsmallenterpriseswillneedanationalcontactpoint.Someofthemmayhavelanguagebarriers.Itisalsoimportantthatthereisanopportunityforpersonalcontactsandtheinformation

abouttheverificationcomesfromanationalorganization.Ifpossible,thereshouldbeaccepted

testinglaboratoriesinallthecountriesinvolvedinthescheme.

ThebenefitsofEU-ETVasaEuropean-wideverificationschemeshouldbeemphasized.

Inadditionto(orbefore)verification,thesmallertechnologyvendorswouldneedsupportin

findingopportunitiesfortechnologypilotingand/ordemonstration.

ConsiderationshouldbegiventoprovidingadditionalsupporttoSMEs.


9/55

Page9

ToenableaquantifiableassessmentoftheeconomicimpactanETVschemethereisa

requirementtoestablishabaselineofinformationontheSMEswithinaregion.Thisinformation

mustbeheldcentrallyandperiodicallyreviewedtounderstandtheeconomicgrowth.

ImpactassessmentshouldbebuiltintotheEU-ETVscheme.

Fromtheperspectiveofvendors:

NationalContactPoint(NCP)smallvendorswillbenefitfromthenetwork-typeapproachthata

NCPcanoffer.ItwillalsoallowthevendortointeractmoredirectlywiththeEUETVgoverning

body.

Offeringincentivestothevendorsthiscouldbeachievedthroughpartfundingfortherequired

verificationtrials.VendorsmustbemadeawareandunderstandthebenefitsofanETVscheme.

Routetoverificationthereshouldbeaclearroutetoverification,mappedoutfromthestart

alongwiththeperceivedcostsinvolvedwiththeprocess.Thetime-scalesinvolvedintheprocess

shouldnotbeprohibitiveandshouldbewelldocumented.

Administrativeburdenvendorswillbetypicallyshortonstaffresourcesandthereforethe

administrativetasksinvolvedshouldbeminimised.

MarketingverificationcertificationandEUETVlogowillincreaseexposureforthevendorand

theschemeingeneral.

InternationalHarmonisationensureexposuretoawiderangeofmarkets.

Fromtheperspectiveofendusers:

Targetedmarketingmakingthebuyersawareofthebenefitsinvolvedinpurchasingaverified

technology.

EconomicimpactassessmentthebuyerandvendorwillbenefitfromunderstandinghowanEU

ETVhasimpactongrowth.

Qualitytheindependentverificationpartyandthetestfacilityshouldbeofhighqualitytoensure

anEUETVschemedemandsrespect.

Commercialcredentialstheidentificationofwiderimpactsthetechnologyhassuchas

commercialandenvironmentalimpactswillhelptheenduserwiththeprocurementbusiness

case.


10/55

Page10

OtherkeypointsarisingfromTritech-ETVwithregardto thedesignofasuccessfulEnvironmental

TechnologyVerificationSystemareasfollows:

The governments influential leadership is necessary at the beginning of environmentaltechnology development. Small environmental businesses lack abilities to develop new

technologiesandordinaryenterprisesarenotactiveininvestinginenvironmentaltechnology

development. Therefore, until the environment market grows to a certain size, the

governmentsinterventionisneededtosustainthetechnologicaldevelopment.

Public support is important. Environmental technologies are not for manufacturing, they

cannotproducevisibleresultsimmediatelyandoftenquantifiedresultsarenotmeaningful.

Withoutthesupportofcivilsociety,itmaybedifficulttosecuregovernmentfunding.

Environmentaltechnologydevelopmentprojectsmustreflectnationaldemandsaswell as

internationaldemandsforspecialenvironmentaltechnologiesandforecastfuturedemands.

Precise estimation of demandsmakes the efficient distribution and execution of budgets

possible,contributestotheenvironmentalsolutions,andsecureseasilyrelevantbudgetsin

thefuture.Togetanaccurateforecast for technologydemand,specialists inbroadareas

mustparticipateandsharerelevantinformation.

The environment market should be activated. Without this, technologies are useless.

Therefore it is important to create market environment for developed environmental

technologiestobeutilizedactively.Thisrequiresgovernmentalinterventionandsupport.Forexample,thesizeoftheenvironmentmarketcanbeextendedby tighteningenvironmental

regulations, providing loans and tax exemption for the installation of treatment facilities,

expandingthegovernmentspurchaseofenvironmentallyfriendlygoods.

Policies for promoting environmental corporations are also important. Environmental

businesses play a key role in forecasting demands for environmental technologies,

developingthemandsellingthem.However,mostearly-stageenvironmentalcompaniesare

smallinsizeandtheyhavedifficultiesgettingintothemarket.Thereforeitisdesirableforthe

governmenttopromotevariouspoliciesinordertoenhanceenvironmentalcompaniesown

managementandresearchcapacities.

3.2.ConclusionsfromtheInstituteforProspectiveTechnologicalStudies(IPTS)

The Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) recently published a report on

EnvironmentalTechnologyVerificationSystems 2.Thestudyundertookananalysisofinternational

bestpracticeandaEuropean-widesurveyamongststakeholders.Withregardtotheexisting,non-

European,programmes,thesebelongtoeithertheUSA(SouthKorea,Japan)orCanadian(China,

2SpyridonMerkourakis,IgnacioCalleja,LuisDelgado(JRC/IPTS),ArletteOafrain,SophieLaurent(JITEX),

EnvironmentalTechnologiesVerificationSystems,JRC38236(2007).


11/55

Page11

Bangladesh,NewJersey)models.IPTScomparedtheoperationofthesetwomodels,illustratedin

Figures1and2,andthekeyconclusionsareasshowninTable1.

Figure1Figure1Figure1Figure1:SimplifiedviewoftheUSETVsystem:SimplifiedviewoftheUSETVsystem:SimplifiedviewoftheUSETVsystem:SimplifiedviewoftheUSETVsystem

Figure2Figure2Figure2Figure2:SimplifiedviewoftheETVCanadasystem:SimplifiedviewoftheETVCanadasystem:SimplifiedviewoftheETVCanadasystem:SimplifiedviewoftheETVCanadasystem


12/55

Page12

TabTabTabTable1le1le1le1::::KeyconclusionsfromIPTSregardingtheUSAandCanadianmodelsKeyconclusionsfromIPTSregardingtheUSAandCanadianmodelsKeyconclusionsfromIPTSregardingtheUSAandCanadianmodelsKeyconclusionsfromIPTSregardingtheUSAandCanadianmodels

USAModelUSAModelUSAModelUSAModel CanadianModelCanadianModelCanadianModelCanadianModel

FocusFocusFocusFocus Marketsectorfocusoperatedthrough

specializedVerificationOrganisations

(VOs)

Technologyfocused.

VerificationVerificationVerificationVerification

ProcessProcessProcessProcess

Verificationoccurs"inside"thesystem-

VOsdecide,withstakeholderandvendor

feedback,thetypeofteststhatwillbe

neededandtheoperationalconditionsthat

willbeapplied.

Thetechnologyistested,oftentogether

withothersimilartechnologiesunderthe

sameconditions.Theresultingperformance

dataaremadepublicallyavailable,alongwiththetestprotocolsandtestplans.There

isnoguaranteethatthetechnologywill

performtothesamelevelunderthesame,

ordifferent,conditionsofuse.

Thesystemonlyverifiespre-existingdata,The

systemcangiveadvicetovendorsbutitdoesnot

definethetypeofteststobeexecuted.Thedata

wouldhavebeenproducedbyanindependent

laboratorypriortosubmissionforverification,

Thesystemcanverifythatthetestsweredone

accordingtosoundscientificandengineering

practice.

Thesystemismorevendor-driventhantheUSAmodelastheverificationisadaptedtothe

vendor'sclaims.

Thetechnologydatasubmittedbythevendorare

examinedbythesystemandthesystemverifies

thatthevendorsclaimsaresupportedbythose

data.Thereisnoguaranteethatthetechnology

willperformtothesamelevelatthesameor

differentconditions.

AccesstoAccesstoAccesstoAccessto

ResultsResultsResultsResults

Allverificationrelateddatatestplans,test

protocolsandverificationresultsare

publiclyaccessible.Thesystemistherefore

transparentandenablescomparisonstobe

madebetweencompetingtechnologies.

Onlytheclaimsarepublished;thetestprotocols

andthedatasuppliedbythevendorarenot

madepublicallyaccessible.

CostsandCostsandCostsandCostsand

TimescalesTimescalesTimescalesTimescales

Longerprocessandmoreexpensivethan

theCanadianmodelastestsareperformed

withinthesystem.However,thefeeis

subsidisedbyagovernmentalcontribution

(whichvariesfromcasetocase).

Astherearenotestsperformed,thewhole

procedureisfaster,andthefeethatthevendor

paysislower,thanintheUSmodel.However,

thevendorwouldhavealreadypaidforthetests

(orwillpayforadditionaltests)thatarenot

includedinthecostsoftheverificationprocedure.

AdditionalAdditionalAdditionalAdditional TheUSmodelcreatesnewknowledgeand

performanceinformationforthemarket.

Thereisextensivestakeholderinvolvement

and,whilethisistimeconsuming,itdoes

enhancethecredibilityofthesystem.

TheCanadianmodeldoesnotproducenew

informationitsimplyusespreviously

establisheddatainordertocorroborateclaims.

Stakeholderinputisminimalthekeyinteraction

isbetweenthevendorandtheETVsystem.

KeyconclusionsfromthemarketsurveyconductedbytheIPTSareassummarisedinTable2.


13/55

Page13

Table2Table2Table2Table2::::KeyconclusionsfromtheIPTSmarketsurveyKeyconclusionsfromtheIPTSmarketsurveyKeyconclusionsfromtheIPTSmarketsurveyKeyconclusionsfromtheIPTSmarketsurvey

FeedbackfromrespondentsandKeyLessonsFeedbackfromrespondentsandKeyLessonsFeedbackfromrespondentsandKeyLessonsFeedbackfromrespondentsandKeyLessons

UsefulnessofETVinUsefulnessofETVinUsefulnessofETVinUsefulnessofETVin

relationtoexistingrelationtoexistingrelationtoexistingrelationtoexisting

systemssystemssystemssystems----

harmonizationharmonizationharmonizationharmonization

AnEU-ETVsystemwouldbeusefulprovided:

1. Bureaucracyiskepttoaminimum,and

2. Ahightechnicallevelisguaranteed.

AEuropean-widesystemwouldremovetheneedfortechnologyapprovalsineach

country.However,themeaningofverificationandoftheETVlogowouldneedtobe

clearlycommunicatedtoavoidconfusionwithcurrentnationalandlocaltechnology

approvalsystemsaroundEurope.

Cooperationandcollaborationwiththeexistingverificationprogramsintheworld

(USA,Canada)wouldbevaluable.

FactorsofsuccessFactorsofsuccessFactorsofsuccessFactorsofsuccess

requirementsofETVrequirementsofETVrequirementsofETVrequirementsofETV

Theschemeshouldbesimple,fastandaffordableforthevendors.

Theschemeshouldbewidelyrecognised,bothinEuropeandworldwide,asareliable

tooltoassessthequalityandperformanceofanenvironmentaltechnologyandshould

bebasedonaprocedureoftechnicalexcellence.

TheEU-ETVschemeshouldbeapublic/privateinitiativethepublicparthelping

achieverecognitionandtheprivatepartprovidingthefundsandassuringthatthe

systemisclosetothemarket.Thesystemshouldstartoffasapublicinitiativein

whichtheEUandMemberStatestakepart.

PrioritizationofPrioritizationofPrioritizationofPrioritizationof

technologiesandthetechnologiesandthetechnologiesandthetechnologiesandthe

questionofquestionofquestionofquestionof

prototypesprototypesprototypesprototypes

Theprogramshouldbeopentoalltechnologies,butprioritycouldbegiventosome

environmentaltechnologiesonthebasisthat:

Thetechnologieshaveenvironmentalimpact,

Thereisaclearneedinthemarket,

Thetechnologiesarenewandinnovative,and

Thetechnologiesarenotcoveredbycurrentstandardsofregulations.

However,heterogeneityinEuropeneedsbetakenintoaccountindefiningpriority

technologyareas.

Inadditiontocommercially-readyproducts,prototypescouldbeaccepted.Thiscould

helpsmallcompaniesthatcannotperformtheirtestsin-housetolearnabouttheir

productthroughtestingdonebyathirdpartyusingwell-recognisedETVtest

protocols.However,itisnotedthattestingprototypesisoutofthescopeofexisting

ETVschemessinceprototypesareboundtoevolveandnullifyperformancedata

gatheredatearlierstagesofdevelopment.Verificationofaprototypealsoshouldnot

leadtoawardinganETVlogo,andtheverificationreportshouldnotbepublished.

SMEsversuslargeSMEsversuslargeSMEsversuslargeSMEsversuslarge

companiescompaniescompaniescompanies

Theprogramshouldbeopentoallcompanies,SMEsorlargegroups,whether

Europeanornot.However,specifictreatmentcouldbeappliedtoSMEs(through

financialsupportandguidance)andtonon-Europeanvendors(whoshouldnot

receivepublicfunds).

CredibilityCredibilityCredibilityCredibilityMarketMarketMarketMarket

recognitionrecognitionrecognitionrecognition

RecognitionoftheETVschemefromthemarketisacrucialissue.ThebestETV

Teamisgenerallyconsideredtobeapublicbody.AprivatebodyplayingtheroleoftheETVTeamcouldbecredibleprovideditistotallyindependent.


14/55

Page14

TestinglaboratoriesmustbeaccreditedbytheEU-ETVsystem,anessentialcriteria

beingtheirindependence.Foreachtechnologygroup,thereshouldbemorethanone

accreditedlaboratorytoavoidmonopolyanddelayinproducingtestdata.

FortheVerificationOrganisation(VO),tobecredible,itshouldnotbedirectlyinvolved

intheperformancetestingitself,anditshouldhaveverygoodexpertiseinthe

technologyareaitisfocusedon.Practicalconsiderations,ortheavailabilityofthe

adequateexpertise,mayjustifythemergeroftheVOandtheTestingLaboratoryin

oneentity,dulyauditedbytheETVsupervisingorganisation.

Besidesthevendors,itisimportantthatthemostrelevantstakeholdersofeach

technologycategorytakepartinthesystem:MemberStates,buyers,users,

academia,tradeassociations,etc.

TestProtocolsTestProtocolsTestProtocolsTestProtocols Thetestprotocolsshouldbeestablishedbyindependentexperts,usingexistingprotocolsasastartingpointwhenpossible.Theirdevelopmentshouldbepaidforby

thepublicpartofthesystem(i.e.notbythevendor).However,thiscouldbeexpensive

forinnovativetechnologies,whicharetheonesthatwouldbeexpectedtobenefitthe

mostfromEU-ETV.

CostsCostsCostsCosts CostisamajorissueforvendorswhomaygothroughtheETVprogram,

Asuggestedpricerangebetween5,000(notincludingtestsETV

Canadian-typeverification)and25-30,000(includingtestsUSETV-type

verification)wasoftencited.Butitisafunctionofwhetheritismandatorytogo

throughETVornot.

Alargesourceofthecostofverificationforvendorsislinkedtothetesting

requirements.Generally,vendorsfeelthattheverificationshouldbesubsidized,

particularlyforveryinnovativetechnologiessincetheycontributetotheimprovement

oftheenvironment.

Akeyissueishowtomotivatevendorstogothroughtheverificationprocess,without

itsbecomingmandatory.TheETVsroleinthemarkethastobemadeclear.

ThechoiceoftheThechoiceoftheThechoiceoftheThechoiceofthe

testinglaboratorytestinglaboratorytestinglaboratorytestinglaboratory

Twoopposingviewsweregivenregardingchoiceofthetestinglaboratorieseither

thevendorshouldorthevendorshouldnotbeabletopickthelaboratorytodothe

testing.Behindthischoiceisthequestionofhowthetestinglaboratoriesareaccreditedandmonitored.Thereforeitseemsimportanttoaccredittesting

laboratoriesandtoregularlyauditthem.AstrongVO(suchastheUSverification

centrethatsometimesperformsmostofthetests)isalsoapossibility.

SubsidiesSubsidiesSubsidiesSubsidiesfinancialfinancialfinancialfinancial

supportsupportsupportsupport

Financialhelpwillbeastrongincentiveforvendorstogothroughtheverification

process.SMEsareakeytargetofETVastheyareofteninnovativebutwouldfindit

difficulttopayforverification.However,whetherSMEsshouldhavespecialpublic

supporttogothroughETVisquestionable.

However,sizeofcompanyisnottheonlyfactorthatshouldbeconsideredasfaras

potentialsubsidiesareconcerned,withotherfactorsbeingimportantsuchas:

Theenvironmentalimpactofthetechnology,


15/55

Page15

Theinnovativeaspect,and

Thesustainabledevelopmentqualityofatechnology.

MandatoryversusMandatoryversusMandatoryversusMandatoryversus

voluntaryschemesvoluntaryschemesvoluntaryschemesvoluntaryschemes

AnyactionbyMemberStatesthatprovidesanadvantagetoverifiedenvironmental

technologieswouldencouragethemarketandineffectmaketheschemeresemblea

mandatoryone.However,somevendorsstressedthatanEU-ETVshouldnotbe

compulsoryand,ifitwere,thenitshouldbefullysubsidized.

FinanciersFinanciersFinanciersFinanciers Allstakeholdersshouldcontributefinancially:notonlytheMember

States,theECandthevendor,butalsotrade/industrialassociations,users,

regulators,environmentalgroups,publicauthoritiesetc.Thecontributionof

stakeholderscouldtakedifferentformsfromfinancingtheverificationtoprovidingthe

facilities,equipmentandstaffforthetests.

TheIPTSproposedamodelfortheimplementationofanEU-ETVsystem,describingapotential

organisationalstructureforanEU-ETVsystem,basedontheprinciplethatisshouldpredominantly

relyonexistingstructures.ThemodelforeseesacentralEU-ETVteamtolaythefoundationsofthe

system(scope,objectives,strategiesandprotocols).AlthoughtheIPTSdonot judgewhetherthis

entityshouldbeprivateorpublic,themarketsurveyindicatedthatthecredibilityofthesystemwould

beenhancedifthisentitywereapublicbody.

ThevendorwouldinteractattheleveloftheThematicVerificationOrganisation(VO).ANetworkof

National ETV contact points could beestablished toact asanentry point for vendors, reducing

geographical,languageoradministrativebarriersbyexplainingtovendorstheETVconceptandits

benefits.ETVcontactpointscouldbeestablishedinallMemberStates.


16/55

Page16

Figure3Figure3Figure3Figure3::::ModelproposedbytheIPTSModelproposedbytheIPTSModelproposedbytheIPTSModelproposedbytheIPTS

EU-ETVTeam

Coordinateandsupervisetheverificationprocess,

Beresponsibleforcompliancewiththeobjectivesandqualitymanagement

procedures, Designate thematic verification organisations (VOs), depending on the

prioritytechnologyareasaddressedbytheprogram.

AudittheVOsandverifythattheirproceduresandoutcomescomplywith

theprogramrequirements.

Communicateprogramactivities,progress,outputsandrecommendations.

Awardcertificatesandlogostosuccessfulvendors.

Thematic

Verification

Organisation(VO)

Developtestplansandprotocols.

Identify technology vendors in their thematic areas that are potentially

interestedintheprogram.

Reviewvendorapplications

Carry out tests, appointother TestingLaboratories(TLs) toperform the

tests,ordesignateVerificationCentres(VCs)toverifythevendorclaims.

VerifytheaccreditationofanyTLsorVCsutilised.

Reviewandapprovetheverificationreports.

Collaboratewith thematicstakeholdersgroups,for scientific or technical

support, for guidanceonmarket needs or selection of qualified testinglaboratories,orforpromotionorreviewpurposes.

TestingLaboratory

(TL)

Help in developing the specific

protocols and test plans appropriate

totheirscope.

Execute the tests, respecting the

protocols and quality management

procedures.

Writetheverificationreport.

VerificationCentre

(VC)

Iftechnologytesting isrequired

andiftheThematicVOdoesnot

havethenecessaryexpertise

If claim verification is required

andiftheThematicVOdoesnot

havethenecessaryexpertise

Examinethevendordataandverifyif

they support the accompanying

claims, respecting theprotocols and

qualitymanagementprocedures.

Propose to the vendor that testsbe

repeatedif the qualityofthedata is

notsufficient.

Writetheverificationreport.

Thematic

Stakeholder

Group(SG)

Help with the development and review of the verification tools, test

protocols,testplansandqualitymanagementplans.

HelptheThematicVOwithtechnologyprioritizationandTC/VCselection.


17/55

Page17

3.3.3.3. ORGANISATIONANDMANORGANISATIONANDMANORGANISATIONANDMANORGANISATIONANDMANAGEMENTAGEMENTAGEMENTAGEMENT

TheorganisationoftheEU-ETVdescribedinthisBusinessPlanhasbeendevelopedalongthelines

oftheconclusionsfromthestudiessummarisedinSection3.TheverificationstructureisillustratedinFigure4.

Figure4Figure4Figure4Figure4::::VerificationstructurefortheEUVerificationstructurefortheEUVerificationstructurefortheEUVerificationstructurefortheEU----ETVETVETVETV

The basic features of the EU- ETV would be fixed in EU legislation establishing the scheme. The

main documents defining the procedures followed by the EU-ETV, in particular the list of technology

areas covered by ETV, the General Protocol and Quality Management System, and specific

protocols where appropriate, should be adopted by the Commission using usual Committee

procedures where Member States experts are involved.

Nominate members,

give mandate

Provide

advice

Peer-review,drafts joints

rocedures

Nominates

VBs

Accredits and

monitors VBs

European

Commission

Central Verification

Organisation

(CVO)

Verification BodyVerification BodyVerification Bodies

(VBs)

Verification Panels

Member States

Technical Groups

Advisory Forum: Technology purchasers and

users, stakeholders

Applies

Test Centres

Accredits


18/55

Page18

Technical standards (ISO, IEC, CEN, Cenelec) will be used extensively where available, in

particular for testing methods. Standards development will be encouraged to accompany the

development of ETV and facilitate its wider recognition, including with non-EU programmes.

The role of each of the bodies identified in Figure 4 will be as follows:

CentralVerificationOrganisation(CVO)

TheCentralVerificationOrganisation(CVO)hastheultimatecontroloftheEUETVschemeforthe

whole ofEurope and corresponds broadly to the EU-ETVTeam identified in the IPTSmodel in

Figure3.WhiletheVerificationBody(VB)willgatherallthenecessaryinformationandcompletethe

verificationprocess,thisverificationreportwillbesentthroughtotheCVOforafinalreviewandthe

verificationcertificate/stampwillthenbeissuedwhereappropriate.TheCVOwilltherefore:

CoordinateandsupervisetheEU-ETVscheme,

BeresponsibletotheEuropeanCommissionforcompliancewiththeobjectivesandquality

managementproceduresoftheEU-ETVscheme,

DesignateVBs,dependingontheprioritytechnologyareasaddressedbytheprogramme.

AudittheVBsandverifythattheirprocedurescomplywiththeprogramrequirements.

Communicateprogramactivities,progress,outputsandrecommendations.

Awardcertificatesandlogostosuccessfulvendors.

TheCVOwill alsohaverole incooperatingandcollaboratingwith other verificationprogrammes

aroundtheworld.

VerificationBody(VB)

It isenvisaged that severalVerification Bodieswillbeset uptocontrol theETV scheme across

individualEuropeannationsandacrosssectors(thematicfocus).TheVBswillliaisebetweenthe

technology vendor and the CVO during the verification process (the vendor will not havedirect

communicationwiththeCVO).TheVBwillberesponsibleforidentifyingandallocatingappropriate

testcentresalongwith theverificationpanelofexpertsforindividual technologies.All thevendor

details and commercially sensitive information made available to the VB will remain wholly

confidential andwill not be available in the public domain. The VBs correspond broadly to the

ThematicVerificationOrganisationsidentifiedintheIPTSmodelinFigure3.

VerificationBodies would bedesignated byMemberStates for a specific technology area,after

accreditationbytheCVO toensure that theVBsmeet the requirementsofETV, andmonitoring

continuously their qualifications. It should be stressed that there would not be necessarily one

VerificationBodyperMemberState:theaimisrathertohaveasmallnumberofVBs,forexample2

or3foreachofthetechnologyareasaddressed,competentforthewholeEuropeanUnion.

VerificationBodieswilloperateVerificationPanels.Theroleoftheverificationpanelsistovalidate

thevendorclaims.Theverificationpanelwillbemadeupof (aminimumofthree)expertsselectedfrom apredeterminedpool,each havinggone through a robust screening process.The experts


19/55

Page19

selectedwillhaveparticularexpertiserelatingtothetechnologyunderverification.Withinthepanel

therewillbeexpertsfromindustry(publicsectorandprivatesector)andalsoacademic/technical

experts. The role of thepanel is to assess theenvironmental claims made by the vendor. The

vendormayhaveincludedindependenttestingofthetechnologytosupporttheclaimsmade.Theverificationpanelmaydeemthatthetestinginformationisnotsufficientlyrobustorhasnotbeen

undertakenbyanETV-approvedtestcentreandmaythereforerequestfurthertestingtoensurethat

theclaimscanbeverified.

TheVerificationBodieswilltherefore:

Developtestplansandprotocols.

Identifyvendorsintheirthematicareasthatarepotentiallyinterestedintheprogram.

Reviewvendorapplications

OperateVerificationPanelstoverifythevendorclaims.

VerifytheaccreditationofanyTestCentresutilisedbyvendors.

Reviewandapprovetheverificationreports.

Collaborate with Technical Groups for scientific and technical support, for guidance on

marketneedsandforpromotionorreviewpurposes.

TechnicalGroups

Inorderto harmonise theprocedures followedbyVBs competent for the sametechnologyarea,

TechnicalGroups would be set up by the Commission with Member State experts, in order to

organise thepeer-review ofVBsandpreparetechnicalguidanceorprotocolswhereappropriate.TheTechnicalGroupscorrespondbroadlywiththeThematicStakeholderGroupsidentifiedinthe

IPTS model in Figure 3. An Advisory Forum could give advice to the Commission and to the

Technical groups, in particular from a customer's and stakeholder's perspective. The Technical

Groupswilltherefore:

HelptheVBswiththedevelopmentandreviewoftheverificationtools,testprotocols,test

plansandqualitymanagementplans.

HelptheVBwithtechnologyprioritizationandTestCentreaccreditation.

TestCentres

These must be both accredited (by the VBs) and independent. The technology vendor should

identifyETVapprovedtestcentresattheearlystagesoftheirproductsdevelopmentasthiswill

minimisecostandavoidduplicationofanytestingdowntheline.TheVBcanhelpthevendorselect

themostappropriatetestcentrefortheirtechnology.

NationalContactPoint(NCP)

NCPswill provide the vendor will an initial point ofcontact toobtain informationabout the ETV

scheme,thestructure,andtheverificationprocessthatisundertaken.TheNCPisanontechnical

contactthatwillprovidepointersandanadditionalinterfacebetweenthevendorandtheappropriateVB.


20/55

Page20

AnoverviewoftheoperationofthisstructureisshowninFigure5.

Figure5Figure5Figure5Figure5:Anoverviewoftheverification:Anoverviewoftheverification:Anoverviewoftheverification:Anoverviewoftheverificationprocessprocessprocessprocess


21/55

Page21

TheproposedsystemincorporatesthekeyconclusionsandlessonslearnedfromtheIPTSstudy

andtheTritech-ETVpilot:

TheEU-ETVincorporatesacentralbody,theCVO,tooperatetheschemeonbehalfoftheEuropeanCommission, similar to the ETV Teams in the US andCanadianmodels. It is

proposedthattheCVObeapubliclyfundedbodydedicatedtooperatingtheschemeinline

withtheconclusionsoftheIPTSmarketstudy.Apublicbodyinthisrolewouldenhancethe

schemescredibilityrelativetoaprivatesectorbody.

TheEU-ETVwillincorporateVerificationBodiesthatarethematicallyfocused.TheseVBs

couldbeprivatesectororganisationsandwouldrequirepartpublicandpartprivatefinancing

public financingfor thegeneraloperationandoverheadsassociatedwiththeschemeand

privatefinancingintheformofacontributionbyvendorstothecostsofverificationandin

operatingtheVerificationPanels.

In common with the Canadian ETV model (and contrary to the US ETV model), the

verificationprocessintheEU-ETVschemewouldnotinvolvetesting.TheroleoftheVBswill

beinverifyingthedatathatarepresentedtotheVBbythevendor.However,theVBswill

havearoleinaccreditingTestingCentresandensuringthattheycomplywithqualityand

technicalstandardsmandatedbytheCVO.

TheEU-ETVschemewillincorporateahighdegreeofstakeholderinvolvementthroughthe

TechnicalGroupsandAdvisoryFora.Inthisregard,theschemedrawsfromakeystrength

oftheUSETCmodelrelativetotheCanadianmodelandalsoaccordswiththeThematic

StakeholderGroupsintheIPTSmodel.

It isproposedthat theEU-ETVschemeacceptsonly commercially-readytechnologiesfor

verification,ratherthanprototypes.AlthoughtheIPTSsurveyidentifiedsomeadvantagesin

allowingprototypestobeverified,itisconsideredthatprototypeverificationwouldgenerally

bemeaninglessasprototypesevolveinacommercialproduct.

InasimilarfashiontotheIPTSmodel,itisenvisagedthateachMemberStatewouldhave

National Contact Points to act as an entry point for vendors, reducing geographical,

language or administrative barriers by explaining to vendors the ETV concept and its

benefits.


22/55

Page22

4.4.4.4. MARKETANALYSISMARKETANALYSISMARKETANALYSISMARKETANALYSIS

4.1.TheEnvironmentalTechnologiesMarket

A2002ECreportonEnvironmentalTechnologyforSustainableDevelopment3tookasthedefinition

of eco-industries as all activities whichproduce goods and services tomeasure,prevent, limit,

minimiseorcorrect environmental damage towater, air and soil,aswellasproblemsrelated to

waste,noiseandecosystems.Basedonthisdefinition,threecategoriesofactivitiesweredefined:

1. Pollution management of both a preventive or remediative nature (such as reducing

emissions,reducingenvironmentalriskorclearingupenvironmentaldamage),

2. Cleaner (integrated) technologies and products - activities that continuously improve,

reduceoreliminatetheenvironmentalimpactofgeneraltechnologies,and

3. Resourcemanagement(suchasrenewableenergyandwatersupply).

In1999,theoverallturnoveroftheEU-15eco-industrysectorwasestimatedat183billion(2.3%of

EUGDP),employingsome1.6millionpeople.TheturnoveroftheEU-15eco-industriesrelatingto

pollutionmanagement,cleanertechnologiesandproductswas127billion(equivalentto1.6%of

GDP), employing around 1 million people. From 1994 to 1999, turnover for the pollution

managementandcleanertechnologiesandproductssectorsinEU-15grewbyanaverageof5%

perannuminrealterms(comparedwithanaveragegrowthofaround2.5%inGDP).Employmentin

thissectorgrewfasterthanturnover,atarateofbetween6and7%perannum4.

Thesamereportnotedestimatesofthesizeoftheglobalmarketforenvironmentaltechnologiesof

around550billion,withtheEUmakingupapproximatelyonethirdofthismarket.TheUSA,EU

andJapandominatedtheglobalenvironmentalmarketaccountingfor85%ofit.

A five-year update of these figures, from1999 to2004, hasalsobeen reported5. TotalEU eco-

industryturnoverin2004wasestimatedat227billion,frompollutionmanagementandresource

managementactivities.Pollutionmanagement consistsof nine eco-industrysectors thatmanage

materialstreamsfromprocessesmanagedbyhumans(thetechnosphere)tonature,typicallyusing

endofpipetechnology.Italsoincludescleanertechnologiesandproducts,whicharementionedin

thedefinitionsasequipment.Inorderofturnover:

SolidWasteManagement&Recycling(52.4billion),

WasteWaterTreatment(52.2billion),

3 European Commission, Environmental technology for sustainable development, COM(2002) 122 final

(2002)4 Ecotec Research and Consulting Ltd, Analysis of the EU Eco-industries, their employment and export

potential",(2002).5Eco-industry,itssize,employment,perspectivesandbarrierstogrowthinanenlargedEU,DGEnvironment,

September2006.


23/55

Page23

AirPollutionControl(15.9billion),

GeneralPublicAdministration(11.5billion),

PrivateEnvironmentalManagement(5.8billion),

Remediation&CleanUpofSoil&Groundwater(5.2billion), Noise&VibrationControl(2billion),

EnvironmentalResearch&Development(0.11billion),and

EnvironmentalMonitoring&Instrumentation.

Resourcemanagementincludesfiveeco-industrysectorsthat takeamorepreventiveapproachto

managingmaterialstreamsfromnaturetothetechnosphere:

WaterSupply(45.7billion),

RecycledMaterials(24.3billion), RenewableEnergyProduction(6.1billion),

NatureProtection(5.7billion),and

Eco-construction.

Table 3:Table 3:Table 3:Table 3: Total Turnover, Pollution Management and Resource ManagementTotal Turnover, Pollution Management and Resource ManagementTotal Turnover, Pollution Management and Resource ManagementTotal Turnover, Pollution Management and Resource Management ExpenditurExpenditurExpenditurExpenditures byes byes byes by

Country,2004Country,2004Country,2004Country,2004

Totalemployment,directandindirect,ineco-industriesin2004wasestimatedtobe3.4million,2.35

millionfrompollutionmanagementactivitiesand1.04millionfromresourcemanagementactivities.Overall,eco-industryjobsaccountedfor1.7%ofEU-25employment.


24/55

Page24

Total2004turnoversforthePollutionManagementandResourceManagementsectorsbyCountry,

arepresentedinTable3.

Morerecently, astudyconductedby InnovasfortheUKsDepartment forBusinessEnterprise&

RegulatoryReform(BERR)on theLowCarbonandEnvironmentalGoodsandServices(LCEGS)

industry present some interesting figures6. The report defines the LCEGS sector as including

solutions for problems such as air, noise, and marine pollution, land and water contamination,

environmental analysis, waste management and recycling and now, renewable energy and

emerginglowcarbonactivities.

The globalmarket value for the LCEGS industryfor2007/8was estimated tobearound 3,350

billion,significantlygreaterthanthefigureforenvironmentaltechnologies,estimatedintheEcotec

report for 1999. The global market is forecast to grow by 45% from 2007/8 to 2014/15, with apotentialglobalmarketvalueof4,860billion.TheinternationalbreakdownisshowninTable4.

Table4:InternationalbreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSTable4:InternationalbreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSTable4:InternationalbreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSTable4:InternationalbreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSindustryindustryindustryindustry

RegionRegionRegionRegion MarketvalueMarketvalueMarketvalueMarketvaluebnbnbnbn**** %globaltotal%globaltotal%globaltotal%globaltotal

AsiaandFarEast 1,263 37.7

Americas 1,008 30.1

Europe(incl.Non-EU) 912 27.2

Africa 126 3.8

Oceania 41 1.2 3,3503,3503,3503,350 100.00

*ConvertedfromUKPoundsSterlingatanexchangerateof1.1EurostothePound

AsiaandtheFarEasthave37.7%ofthevalueoftheglobalLCEGSmarket.Thisisfollowedbythe

AmericasandthenEurope.Together,thesethreeregionsaccountfor95%oftheglobaltotal.Africa

andOceaniaaccountforonly5%oftheglobaltotal.

ThereportfurtherbreaksdowntheglobalmarketvalueoftheEnvironmental,RenewableEnergy

andEmergingLowCarbonsectors,asshowninTable5.

Table5Table5Table5Table5:GlobalmarketvalueofLCEGSbysector:GlobalmarketvalueofLCEGSbysector:GlobalmarketvalueofLCEGSbysector:GlobalmarketvalueofLCEGSbysector

MarketvalueMarketvalueMarketvalueMarketvaluebnbnbnbn %globaltotal%globaltotal%globaltotal%globaltotal

Environmentalsector 723 21.6

RenewableEnergysector 1,034 30.9

EmergingLowCarbonsector 1,593 47.5

Total 3,350 100.00

6Innovas/BERR.LowCarbonandEnvironmentalGoodsandServices:anindustryanalysis.6March2009.


25/55

Page25

The traditional Environmental sector accounts for 21.6% of the global market value. This is a

smallersharethaneitherofthenewerRenewableEnergyandEmergingLowCarbonsectors,with

30.9%and47.5%oftheglobalmarketvalue,respectively.ItisclearthattheRenewableEnergyand

EmergingLowCarbonsectorsarenolongeronthefringeofenvironmentalproductsandservices,butarebothlargerandfastergrowingthanthetraditionalEnvironmentalsector.

Intermsofindividualtechnologies,theseareshowninTable6.

Table6:BreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSTable6:BreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSTable6:BreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSTable6:BreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSindustryindustryindustryindustrybytechnologiesbytechnologiesbytechnologiesbytechnologies

MarketvalueMarketvalueMarketvalueMarketvaluebnbnbnbn %globaltotal%globaltotal%globaltotal%globaltotal

AlternativeFuels 620.3 18.51

BuildingTechnologies 429.5 12.82

Wind 386.6 11.54

AlternativeFuelsforVehicles 374.1 11.17

Geothermal 304.0 9.07

Water&WasteWaterTreatment 260.3 7.77

RecoveryandRecycling 205.3 6.13

Photovoltaic 156.2 4.66

WasteManagement 155.4 4.64

Biomass 154.2 4.60

EnergyManagement 80.4 2.40

AdditionalEnergySources 39.8 1.19

CarbonFinance 34.8 1.04

AirPollution 31.0 0.93

ContaminatedLand 29.5 0.88

EnvironmentalConsultancy 25.9 0.77

RenewableConsulting 16.7 0.50

CarbonCapture&Storage 14.6 0.44

Hydro 14.0 0.42

Noise&VibrationControl 6.9 0.21

EnvironmentalMonitoring 4.8 0.14

MarinePollutionControl 3.9 0.12

Wave&Tidal 2.2 0.06TOTALTOTALTOTALTOTAL 3,3503,3503,3503,350 100.00

The smallest subsector is Wave andTidalwith 0.06% of the global total, followed by Marine

PollutionControlwith0.12%.Overall,manufacturingactivitiesaccountfor32%oftheglobalmarket

value.

The report focusedon theUKmarket and found that the sizeoftheLCEGSsector intheUKis

105.6billion,with54,835activecompanies,ofwhich17,303areinvolvedinmanufacturing,and

881,000 jobs.Around91.5%of the companies inthesector areSMEs.TheUKturnoverfor the

LCEGSsectorrepresentsabout12.85%ofthatforEuropeasawhole.BasedontheassumptionthattheUKmarketstructureistypicalofthatforEurope,wecanestimatethatthenumberofactive


26/55

Page26

companiesintheEuropeintheLCEGSindustryisaround427,000,ofwhich135,000areinvolved

inmanufacturing.

ThebreakdownoftheLCEGSindustryfiguresbyEUcountryisshowninTable7andillustratedinFigure6.About60%oftheindustryislocatedinGermany,UK,France,SpainandItaly.

Table7:BreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSindustrybyETable7:BreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSindustrybyETable7:BreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSindustrybyETable7:BreakdownofmarketvalueoftheLCEGSindustrybyEuropeancountryuropeancountryuropeancountryuropeancountry

Country Value bn % Cum %

Germany 140 15.4% 15.4%

United Kingdom 117 12.9% 28.3%

France 102 11.2% 39.5%

Spain 92 10.1% 49.5%

Italy 90 9.9% 59.4%

Netherlands 28 3.1% 62.5%Poland 26 2.9% 65.4%

Belgium 18 2.0% 67.4%

Sweden 15 1.6% 69.1%

Austria 15 1.6% 70.7%

Greece 13 1.4% 72.1%

Romania 11 1.2% 73.3%

Portugal 10 1.1% 74.4%

Czech Republic 10 1.1% 75.5%

Denmark 10 1.0% 76.5%

Finland 9 1.0% 77.5%

Hungary 9 1.0% 78.5%Ireland 7 0.8% 79.3%

Rest of Europe (Incl. Non-EU) 188 20.7% 100.0%

Totals 912 100%

Figure6:DistributionoftheLCEGSindustrybyEuropeancountryFigure6:DistributionoftheLCEGSindustrybyEuropeancountryFigure6:DistributionoftheLCEGSindustrybyEuropeancountryFigure6:DistributionoftheLCEGSindustrybyEuropeancountry

Germany

United Kingdom

France

Spain

Italy


27/55

Page27

5.5.5.5. STRATEGYSTRATEGYSTRATEGYSTRATEGY

5.1.Scope

TheEU-ETVwouldaccepttechnologiesreadyforcommercialisation, ideallyintheearlystagesof

commercialisation,inbusiness-to-businessrelations (notconsumerproducts): industrial products,

equipmentsandprocesses.Technologiesatdesignordevelopmentstagewouldnotbeacceptedas

theirperformancemaynotberepresentativeofcommercialisedtechnologies.AsnotedinSection3,

testing prototypes is also outside of the scope of existing non-European ETV schemes since

prototypes are bound to evolve and nullify performance data gathered at earlier stages of

development.

The EU-ETV system would begin in a few technology areas and would enlarge its scope

progressively. As highlighted in Table 2, priority should be given to some environmental

technologiesonthebasisthat:

Thetechnologieshaveenvironmentalimpact,

Thereisaclearneedinthemarket,

Thetechnologiesarenewandinnovative,and

Thetechnologiesarenotcoveredbycurrentstandardsofregulations.

Onthisbasis,thefollowingareas(andexamples)willformtheinitialscopeoftheEU-ETV:

6. Monitoringtechniques

Airemissionssensors,analysersandmonitors,

Watermonitoringtechniques,includingtestkits,probes,analysers,

Soilsmonitoring,pollutiondetectionandmeasurement,samplingdevices.

7. Waterandsoilstreatmenttechnologies

Drinkingwatertechniques,suchasfiltrationordisinfection,

Wastewatertreatment,separationtechniques,nutrientreduction,disinfection,

Soilsremediationtechniques.

8. Renewablesourcesofenergyandenergyefficiency

Micro-turbines,Fuelcells,Biomassburnersandboilers,

CombinedHeatandPower,Heatpumps,coolingsystems,

Photovoltaicsystemsandequipments,solarwaterheaters,

Windenergyequipments,seaenergysystemsandequipments(tidal,wave).

9. AirpollutionabatementincludingGHG

Abatementofpollutionfromstationarysources,indoorairqualityproducts,

Technologiesrelatedtothecombustionoffossilfuels(mobilesourcesdevices), Technologiesrelatedtothecombustionofwaste,


28/55

Page28

Technologies,equipmentsandsystemsforCarbonCaptureandStorage.

10.Cleantechnologiesincludingwasteandresourcerecycling

Buildingsmaterials,energyefficiencyinbuildings, Cleanerorlow-carbonindustrialprocesses,coatingequipments,

Environmentaltechnologiesinagriculture,

Separationorsortingtechniquesforsolidwaste(vehicles,plastics,metals),

Recyclingtechniquesforbatteriesandaccumulators,forchemicals.

The global and Europeanmarket values for these technologyareascan beestimated from the

figuresgiveninTable6,asshowninTable8.

Table8Table8Table8Table8:Estimatedmarketvalue:Estimatedmarketvalue:Estimatedmarketvalue:Estimatedmarketvaluesoftheprioritytechnologyareassoftheprioritytechnologyareassoftheprioritytechnologyareassoftheprioritytechnologyareas

GlobalmarketvalueGlobalmarketvalueGlobalmarketvalueGlobalmarketvaluebnbnbnbn EuropeEuropeEuropeEuropemarketmarketmarketmarketvaluevaluevaluevaluebn*bn*bn*bn*

Monitoringtechniques 4.8 1.31

Waterandsoilstreatmenttechnologies 289.8 78.83

Renewablesourcesofenergyandenergyefficiency 713.2 193.99

AirpollutionabatementincludingGHG 45.6 12.40

Cleantechnologiesincludingwasteandresourcerecycling 790.2 214.93

TotalTotalTotalTotal 1,843.61,843.61,843.61,843.6 501.46501.46501.46501.46

*Basedon27.2%oftheglobalmarket

Together, these technology areas represent some 55% of the LCEGS industry. Based on thecompany numbers estimated in Section 5, the number of companies in each of the priority

technologyareasinEuropewouldbeestimatedasshowninTable9.

Table9Table9Table9Table9:Estimatednumbersofcompaniesintheprioritytechnologyareas:Estimatednumbersofcompaniesintheprioritytechnologyareas:Estimatednumbersofcompaniesintheprioritytechnologyareas:Estimatednumbersofcompaniesintheprioritytechnologyareas

NocompaniesinEuropeNocompaniesinEuropeNocompaniesinEuropeNocompaniesinEurope NoNoNoNoofmanuofmanuofmanuofmanufacturingfacturingfacturingfacturing

companiesincompaniesincompaniesincompaniesin

EuropeEuropeEuropeEurope

Monitoringtechniques 612 193

Waterandsoilstreatmenttechnologies 36,822 11,619

Renewablesourcesofenergyandenergyefficiency 90,614 28,593AirpollutionabatementincludingGHG 5,793 1,828

Cleantechnologiesincludingwasteandresourcerecycling 100,396 31,680

TotalTotalTotalTotal 234,234,234,234,237237237237 77773,9133,9133,9133,913

Itisthereforeestimatedthatsome74,000companies,thosethatareinvolvedinthemanufactureof

LCEGStechnologiesintheprioritytechnologysectorsidentified,couldbetargetedbytheEU-ETV

scheme.Ofthese,some60%wouldbeexpectedtobelocatedinGermany,UK,France,Spainand

Italyandsome90%ofthemwouldbeexpectedtobeSMEs.

Basedonthesefigures,andthosepresentedinSection5,thebreakdownofnumbersofcompanies

byEUMemberStatesisshowninTables10and11.


29/55

Page29

Table10:EstimatednumbersofcompaniesintheprioritytechnologyareasTable10:EstimatednumbersofcompaniesintheprioritytechnologyareasTable10:EstimatednumbersofcompaniesintheprioritytechnologyareasTable10:Estimatednumbersofcompaniesintheprioritytechnologyareas

Country No. CompaniesNo. Manuf.

Companies

Germany 36,059 11,378United Kingdom 30,163 9,518

France 26,257 8,285

Spain 23,541 7,428

Italy 23,174 7,312

Netherlands 7,312 2,307

Poland 6,775 2,138

Belgium 4,689 1,480

Sweden 3,841 1,212

Austria 3,742 1,181

Greece 3,332 1,052

Romania 2,725 860Portugal 2,679 845

Czech Republic 2,561 808

Denmark 2,442 771

Finland 2,326 734

Hungary 2,326 734

Ireland 1,868 590

Rest of Europe (Incl. Non-EU) 48,425 15,280

Totals 234,237 73,913

Priority Technology Areas

These figures illustrate the fact that a flexible approach needs to be taken with respect to thespecification, number and location of the Verification Bodies. In particular, the Monitoring

Techniques technology area appears to be rather small (and this should, perhaps be validated

further),andwouldwarrantonlyasingleVBcoveringthewholeoftheEU.Ontheotherhand,the

Clean Technologies area (includingwaste and resource recycling) is clearly a large theme that

wouldwarrantanumberofVBsbasedinthekeycountrieswithlargesectorsinthisarea.

Basedontheseanalyses,thefollowingsuggestionscanbemadewithregardtothenumbersand

locations of VBs. Where areas have multiple VBs, these could focus on sub-sectors of the

technologiesortakeacomprehensiveviewoftheirsectorsandbemoregeographicallyfocused.

No.ofVBs

Locations

Monitoringtechniques 1 Central location, perhaps

Belgium

Waterandsoilstreatmenttechnologies 2to3 Germany,UK,France

Renewablesourcesofenergy&energyefficiency 4to5 Germany, UK, France,

Spain,Italy

AirpollutionabatementincludingGHG 1 Central location, perhaps

Belgium

Cleantechnologiesincludingwaste&resourcerecycling 4to5 Germany, UK, France,Spain,Italy


30/55

Page30

Table11:EstimatednumbersofcompaniesineachoftheprioritytechnologyareasTable11:EstimatednumbersofcompaniesineachoftheprioritytechnologyareasTable11:EstimatednumbersofcompaniesineachoftheprioritytechnologyareasTable11:Estimatednumbersofcompaniesineachoftheprioritytechnologyareas

Country Monitoring Water/SoilsTreat RenewableEnergy Air Pollution Clean Tech.

Germany 30 1,789 4,402 281 4,877

United Kingdom 25 1,496 3,682 235 4,079

France 22 1,302 3,205 205 3,551

Spain 19 1,168 2,874 184 3,184

Italy 19 1,150 2,829 181 3,134

Netherlands 6 363 893 57 989

Poland 6 336 827 53 916

Belgium 4 233 572 37 634

Sweden 3 191 469 30 519

Austria 3 186 457 29 506

Greece 3 165 407 26 451

Romania 2 135 333 21 368

Portugal 2 133 327 21 362

Czech Republic 2 127 313 20 346

Denmark 2 121 298 19 330

Finland 2 115 284 18 315

Hungary 2 115 284 18 315

Ireland 2 93 228 15 253

Rest of Europe (Incl. Non-EU) 40 2,402 5,911 378 6,549

Totals 193 11,619 28,593 1,828 31,680

Number of Manufacturing Companies in each Technology Area

5.2.Operation

Fromthepointofviewoftheapplicant,technologydeveloperorvendorpresentingatechnologyto

ETV, the main relationship will be with a Verification Body (VB) competent for the relevant

technologyarea(inhisoranotherMemberState).NationalContactPoints(NCPs),establishedby

Member States,may facilitate the first contactsand advise applicants,especially SMEs, on the

appropriateness and best use of ETV for their specific project. TestCentres will be involved if

additionaltestsarerequiredtoverifytheclaim.

Fromtheperspectiveoftheapplicant,thegeneralorganisationof theschemecanberepresented

asinFigure7.

Twoimportantaspectsshouldbenoted:

TheETVprocesswillbebasedonvendorsclaims,notpre-definedcriteria,buttheclaims

willbereviewedtoensurethattheycanbeverifiedbyquantitativemethods,thattheyrelate


31/55

Page31

to themain environmental impacts in a life-cycle approach and that they are useful for

technologyusersandpurchasers(enablingcomparisons),and

ThetestingphasewillnotbeincludedintheEU-ETVsystem(similarlytotheCanadianETVmodel); as such, the applicant would provide reliable, independent test results in the

applicationphase;iffurthertestsareneeded,theapplicantwillbefreetochoosetheTest

Centre provided that quality and independence of tests are ensured (i.e. it has been

accreditedbytheVB).

FigureFigureFigureFigure7777:Anoverviewofthe:Anoverviewofthe:Anoverviewofthe:Anoverviewoftheorganisationoftheschemefromtheperspectiveoftheapplicorganisationoftheschemefromtheperspectiveoftheapplicorganisationoftheschemefromtheperspectiveoftheapplicorganisationoftheschemefromtheperspectiveoftheapplicantantantant

ThegeneralprocedureenvisagedfortheEU-ETVsystemcanberepresentedinFigure8.

ThefinalresultofverificationwouldbeaVerificationStatementsummarisingthetechnologyand

performanceclaim that has been verified, the conditionsunderwhich the claim isvalidand theprocedures followed, and all information necessary to understand the Statement. Thiswould be

usedinbusiness-to-businessrelationsandwouldberecognisedinallEUMemberStatesandby

publicadministrations.In future,mutualrecognitionofETVprogrammescouldmake itpossible to

haveETVStatementsrecognisedglobally.

It isproposed that the EU-ETV scheme bea voluntary scheme,at least at the outset. Thiswill

enabletheschemetosettledowntoalargedegreeandfortheCVOandVBstobetterunderstand

theircapacityconstraintsinrunningthescheme.Itisalsoconsideredthat,oncerunning,theEU-

ETVschemewillimpartacompetitiveadvantagetoverifiedtechnologiesandthereforethatmarket

forceswillencouragevendorstoparticipateintheschemeasamatterofcourse.

Verification

procedures

Registration ofverification

statements

If additional tests

needed

Optional (to

establish contact)

Commission

Verification Body

Technology

Vendor

Contact

oint

Testing

Laboratory


32/55

Page32

FigureFigureFigureFigure8888:Anoverviewofthe:Anoverviewofthe:Anoverviewofthe:Anoverviewoftheschemefromtheperspectiveoftheapplicantschemefromtheperspectiveoftheapplicantschemefromtheperspectiveoftheapplicantschemefromtheperspectiveoftheapplicant

5.3.Promotion

Thepromotionoftheschemewillfalltoseveralorganisationsandpromotionalactivitieswouldneed

tobecoordinatedcarefullytoensurethatconsistentmessagesarepresentedtothemarket.Inthe

firstinstance,promotionoftheEU-ETVwouldbetheresponsibilityoftheCVO,actingonbehalfof

theEuropeanCommission.Astheschemebecomesestablished,itisenvisagedthattheVBswill

takeamoreproactiveroleinpromotionintheirareasoftechnologyfocus,actinginconjunctionwith

the TechnicalGroups thatwill beset up. Finally, the NCPs ineachMember Statewill haveanimportantroletoplayinpromotingtheEU-ETVwithintheirowngeographicalterritories.

Claim definition and review

Verification Body reviews claim,

available data and assesses whether

further tests are needed

Assessment phase

Final review of data

Drafting and review of verification

re ort

Testing phase

Elaboration of test plan

Implementation of tests

Test report

If further tests are needed

Publication phase

Approval and publication of Verification

Statement

Contact phase

Vendor contacts a Verification Body

directly or through a contact point

Application phase

Vendor provides all relevant

information, including available test

results and a draft claim


33/55

Page33

5.4.VerificationMethodology

A comprehensive methodology for the verification process has been developed as part of theTritech-ETVprojectanditisproposedthatthismethodologybeadoptedintheEU-ETVscheme.

The processwould beweb-enabled in order to ensure efficiency and ease of operation for the

vendorsandfortheVBs.

5.4.1.Introductiontothemethodology

Theprimaryobjective of theverificationmethodologyis togather theenvironmental claims fora

specifictechnologywhicharemadedirectlybythetechnologyvendor.Itwillalsobeimportantto

gatheranyevidencethatthetechnologyvendormayhaveobtainedregardingaspecificclaim.In

additiontocapturingtheenvironmentalclaimsaboutatechnology,theverificationprocesswillbe

setup tocapturecommercial,environmentalandtechnical information relating to the technology

undergoingverification.

Thevendorwillbeexpectedtocompleteaseriesofgenericquestionsregardingthecompanyand

technology, and also input additional information regarding the commercial viability of their

technology, the environmental impact, and the technical robustness. It is understood that some

vendorswillnotbeabletoprovidealltheinformationthatisrequestedinthequestions,failureto

completeeveryquestionwillnotresultinoverallfailurefromtheverificationprocess.

In the first instance, the claims put forwardand completionof themodelwill formallyact asanapplicationtotheETVscheme,andalsoprovideinformationwhichisnecessarytoselectwhether

thevendorisatthecorrectstageofdevelopmenttoparticipate.

Thecoreofthemodelwillbeaweb-baseddocumentmadeaccessiblethroughasecureEU-ETV

website and vendors will be given a username and password to allow the document to be

completedoveranumberofvisits.Thecommercial,environmentalandtechnicalinformationwillbe

gatheredasinformationtosupporttheenvironmentalclaimsmadebythevendorandwillremain

underconfidentialitythroughouttheprocess.Thesupportinginformationwillbeusedbytheexpert

VerificationPanelaspartof thenecessaryduediligenceduringtechnologyverification.Gathering

alltheinformationat thisstagewillreducetherequirementforthevendortobeincontactwiththe

VerificationPanelthereforeacceleratingthevalidationprocess.

The results from each section of the model give an overview of the overall commercial,

environmentalandtechnicalcredentialsofthetechnology.Theinherentcommercial,environmental

and technical aspects of the technologywill be vetted during the verification process to ensure

technologiesthathaveanoverallnegativeimpactareflaggeduptotheVerificationBody.

5.4.2.Selection

ToensurethattherobustnessoftheEU-ETVschemeismaintained,eachtechnologyvendorthatislookingtoentertheEU-ETVschemewillneedtogothroughapre-determinedselectionprocess.


34/55

Page34

Theselectionprocesswillensurethattechnologyvendorsareonlyenteringtheschemewhenthey

areatthecorrectstageofdevelopmentandarecommerciallyready.

The vendor will be required to complete a range of commercial, technical and environmentalquestionsthatarecriticaltotheEU-ETVscheme.Thisformstheapplicationontotheschemewhile

providing the VerificationBodywith the necessary information toselectwhether the vendor can

enterthescheme.

Oncethevendorissuccessfultheywillbeaskedtocompletemoredetailedprobingquestionsabout

their company and the specific technology, the vendor will also be asked to document the

environmentalclaimsthattheyarelookingtohaveverified.Thisinformationwillthenbeusedby

theVerificationPanelthroughthemainclaims-basedverificationprocess.

5.4.3.ProcessThemodelisdesignedtogatheralltherelevantsupportingdatathattheVerificationPanelrequire

whenassessingatechnology;afullypopulatedmodelwillacceleratetheverificationprocessasall

informationisavailable.Somevendorsmaynothaveallthedatatocomprehensivelypopulatethe

model. This will not penalise the vendor but further information may be requested once the

verificationprocessisunderway.

ThedetailedprocessisdescribedinAppendix1.Themodelismadeupofaseriesofquestionsthat

fallintofourmaincategories:

Personal,

Commercial,

Environmental,and

Technical.

Eachsetofquestionshasbeendesignedtowithdrawinformationaboutthevendorandthespecific

technology. Although the Verification Panel has the principal role of verifying the environmental

claimsassociatedwiththetechnology,thequestionsrelatingtothecommercial,environmentaland

technicalattributesofthetechnologyhavebeenestablishedtoenabletheVerificationPaneltohave

awiderunderstandingofthevendorandtechnologyassupportthroughtheverificationofclaims.

Themodelhasbeendevelopedwithanelementofscoring,toallowforanobjectiveaspecttothe

model.Eachvendorhasdifferentcharacteristicsand,therefore,thereisnodesiredscorethatmust

bemet tobe considered for the verificationcertificate. The vendorwillbeaskedtocomplete as

manyquestionsaspossible.Acomprehensivemodelwillgenerallyreducetherequiredtimeforthe

VerificationPaneltomakeadecision.

Once the Verification Panel has been through all the information gathered within the model, a

decisionwillbemadeastothelevelofverificationrequiredfortheenvironmentalclaimsmade.ThevendormayhavealreadybeenthroughsignificanttestingatanaccreditedTestCentreandthedata


35/55

Page35

gatheredinthemodelalongwithatestcertificatemaybesufficienttoallowtheVerificationPanelto

makeadecisiononverifyingtheenvironmentalclaims.

The scoring matrix will be accessed only by the Verification Panel. The scoring matrix will beautomaticallypopulatedwhenthevendorcompletesthesectionsof themodel.Thescoringmatrix

willautomaticallypopulatetheanswerstoanyquestionsthathaveadefinitiveanswer.Thereare

manyquestions that allow the vendor toenter free text. The scoring isnot designed to takean

objectiveviewofalltheanswersgivenastheVerificationBodywillhavetheexpectedattributesto

assesstheanswersaccordingly.Thescoringmatrixgivesdetailsofhowmanypointsareavailable

perquestiontoallowtheVerificationPaneltoassessthescoringcapabilities.

The scores assigneddocumentwillalsobeaclosed document that can onlybeaccessedbya

VerificationPanel.Thescoresassigneddocumentisasimplerversionofthescoringmatrix,which

will justgive thescores thatthetechnologyhasreceived,givingno reference toalltheavailableresults.TheVerificationPanelcanusethescoresassigneddocumentasaquickreferencepoint;

thisdocumentalsocalculatesthefinalscoringthatthetechnologywillreceive.

AddingcertainweightingcriteriatoaquestionisawaytohelpidentifytotheVerificationPanelthe

mostpertinentquestionswhichholdthemostcredibility.Theweightingwillbeautomaticallyapplied

tothescoringtogivethevendormorecreditforachievingaspecificlevel.

5.5.ApprovalofTestCentres

TestCentreswillbeaccreditedbytheVerificationBodies (VBs)and theVBswillalsoundertake

ongoingmonitoringandauditofTestCentrestoensurethattheycontinue tocomplywithquality

andtechnicalstandardssetbytheCVO.

ThecompetenceprofileenvisagedforTestCentresisgiveninAppendix2.

Aprocess for calling forTestCentresto expressan interest inbeing accredited for theEU-ETV

schemewillneedtobeundertakenduringtheinitialimplementationphase.


36/55

Page36

6.6.6.6. FINANCIALPLANFINANCIALPLANFINANCIALPLANFINANCIALPLAN

6.1.Background

The IPTSstudy looked in detail at the costs ofoperating theUSETV scheme andsomeof the

analysisisusefulforinformingthedevelopmentofafinancialmodelfortheEU-ETVscheme.

ThetotalcostsintheUSETVsystemovertimeareshowninFigure9.

Verificationcostsinclude: technology solicitation and selection, development of technology

specific testandqualityassurance plans, technology testing,quality

assuranceandevaluationanddevelopmentofverificationreportsand

statements.

Centresupportincludes: stakeholderactivitiesandmeetings,developmentandmaintenanceof

thequalitymanagementsystem, technologyprioritization,evaluation

andoutreach,privatization(i.e.subcontracting)andothergeneraland

management costs. The costs attributed to stakeholders do not

includeanyremuneration,sincethestakeholdersvolunteertheirtime.

In some cases technology prioritization costs are included in the

stakeholder related costs. Evaluation and outreach costs include

informationdiffusioncosts.

Figure9Figure9Figure9Figure9::::TotalcostsandvendorcontrTotalcostsandvendorcontrTotalcostsandvendorcontrTotalcostsandvendorcontributionintheUSETVsystemibutionintheUSETVsystemibutionintheUSETVsystemibutionintheUSETVsystem

Theriseincostsatthebeginningrelatetowhenthesystemwasbeingsetupandthiswasfollowed

by a relatively stable period from 1999 to 2004. The fall in costs in the later period relate to a


37/55

Page37

diminutionof thesystem'sfunds.Thecostsexpendedbyvendors(excludinginkindcontributions)

varybetween10%and18%oftheverificationcosts.

WithregardtotheEU-ETVscheme,therelevantperiodtofocusonisthatfortheperiod1999to2004,duringwhichthecostswererelativelystable.

Figure10shows theaveragedistributionofcentresupportcosts duringthisperiod.Onaverage,

33% of the costs werededicated to information diffusion.28% tostakeholder relatedexpenses.

21%togeneralandmanagementcostsandtheremaining18%wassharedbetweenprioritization,

qualitymanagementandprivatization(i.e.subcontracting).

Figure10Figure10Figure10Figure10::::AveragedistributionofcentresupportcostsintheUSETVsystemAveragedistributionofcentresupportcostsintheUSETVsystemAveragedistributionofcentresupportcostsintheUSETVsystemAveragedistributionofcentresupportcostsintheUSETVsystem

Withregardtoverificationcosts,Figure10showshowthesearedistributedacrossvariousactivities

in the US ETV system during the stable period. Testingwas always themost expenseelement

(35%), followedby thedevelopmentofverificationreports (20%), testplans (18%)andprotocols

(16%).Technologysolicitationandselection,andauditcostsweretheleastexpensive,at6%and

5%oftotalverificationcosts,respectively.

TheUSETVsystemisausefulcomparisonfortheEU-ETVsystemduetothesimilarsizesofthe

USandEUeconomiesandoftheUSandEULCEGSindustries.Inparticular,thecentrecostsfor

theEU-ETVsystemwouldbeexpectedtobebroadlysimilartothoseexperiencedbytheUSETV

system, though the Member State structure in the EU may impose some higher overheads.

Nevertheless,itisreasonabletoassumethatthecentrecosts(relatingtothecostsoftheCVOand

overheadactivitiesoftheVBsintheEU-ETVscheme)wouldbeexpectedtototalaround2million2million2million2millionperyear.peryear.peryear.peryear.


38/55

Page38

WithregardtoverificationcostsfortheEU-ETVscheme,thesecannotbeimmediatelycompared

with the USETV system since the latter scheme incorporated testing aspart of the verification

processwhereastheEU-ETVschemewillnot.Inaddition,thedevelopmentofverificationreportsintheUSETVsystemwouldbeexpectedtobehigherthanitwillbeintheEU-ETVschemesincethe

USschemerequiredverydetailedverificationreportsthatwereeditedandpublishedandpublicly

accessible. Taking out the testingelement (35%)and allowing for lowercostsof the verification

reporting,itcanbeseenthattheverificationcostsareslightlyhigherthanthecentrecosts,andit

wouldbereasonabletoassumethattheverificationcostswouldtotalaround2.5millionperyear.2.5millionperyear.2.5millionperyear.2.5millionperyear.

Figure10Figure10Figure10Figure10::::AveragedistributionofverificationcosAveragedistributionofverificationcosAveragedistributionofverificationcosAveragedistributionofverificationcostsintheUSETVsystemtsintheUSETVsystemtsintheUSETVsystemtsintheUSETVsystem

Intotal,byFebruary2007,morethan380verificationshadbeencompletedintheUSETVsystem.

6.2.EU-ETVBudget

Experience in theUSETVandCanadianETVsystemsand in theTritech-ETVpilotschemehas

shown that the cost of verifications vary a great deal depending on the technology area, the

complexityofthetechnologyitselfandtheavailabilityornotoftestresultsofgoodqualityfromthe

beginning.Based on theseexperiencesandon (non-ETV) systems in the EU, preliminary costs

estimatesareintheorderof50,000to90,50,000to90,50,000to90,50,000to90,000000000000perverification.Thisincludesallfixedcostsofthe

system(costsofstafftorunthesystem,costofestablishingprotocolsandqualitysystems)butit

doesnotincludetesting,whichwouldbeundertakenoutsideofthesystemandwithhighlyvariable

costs.Basedonanaverageof70,000perverification,andassumingabedded-downrunrateof60

verificationsperyear,thecostperverificationexcludingthecentrecostswouldbearound40,0040,0040,0040,000000

perverification.Itwouldbeexpectedthattheapplicantswouldmakeacontributiontothesecostsas


39/55

Page39

afeefor theverificationservice.Theobjectiveis tolimitthisfinalcosttoapplicantsfinalcosttoapplicantsfinalcosttoapplicantsfinalcosttoapplicantstotheorderoftotheorderoftotheorderoftotheorderof

15,15,15,15,000000000000perverification.

Basedonthesefigures,abudgetfortheoperationoftheEU-ETVcanbeestimatedasshowninTable12.ThisgivesanestimateofthecoststotheEUbudgetanditassumesthatcostsrelatedto

Member States administration (notifying and accreditation bodies, participation in EU-ETV

committeeandtechnicalgroups)andthesetting-upofcontactpointsforSMEswouldbeborneby

MemberStatesbudgets.

The EU Budget would therefore cover the administrative cost related to the EU-ETV in the

Commission(throughtheCVO),thecostsassociatedwithmeetingsoftheTechnicalGroupsand

theAdvisoryFora,VerificationBodiesadministrationcostsandsubsidisationofverificationcosts,

focusedonfacilitatingtheaccessofSMEstothesystem.

Basedonthehypothesis thatthenumberofverification

tritech business plan

Documents