Executive Summary Sheet

Impact assessment for a Regulation amending the Regulation on ecodesign requirements for household tumble dryers and a Regulation amending the Regulation on energy labelling requirements for household tumble dryers

A. Need for action

Why? What is the problem being addressed?

Tumble dryers are popular in EU households, in particular in Central and North European Member States. The market penetration of tumble dryers is increasing and expected to grow from 26% of EU households in 2020 to 35% in 2040. Despite the considerable energy savings achieved over the past years due to the development and quick market uptake of efficient tumble dryers based on heat pump technology, some consumers continue to buy models based on obsolete and less efficient technologies. This product is still a significant electricity user and there is an important potential for reducing electricity consumption and greenhouse gas emissions by phasing-out the least efficient tumble dryers through revised ecodesign requirements. In addition, the fast market uptake of heat pump tumble dryers has caused a concentration in the current top three energy labelling classes (A+ to A+++), making it more difficult for consumers to distinguish between more and less efficient models of this product type. A rescaling of energy labels for household tumble dryers will help citizens choose the most efficient products. In accordance with the framework regulation on energy labels, a delegated act to rescale the current energy label for tumble driers needs to be adopted by August 2023 in order to ensure a homogenous A to G scale.

Furthermore, there are currently no requirements in the legislation on tumble dryers that contribute to the objectives of the Circular Economy Action Plan, in particular regarding durability, reparability and recyclability. The lifetime of tumble dryers has gone down from 14 to 12 years over the last 15 years. Although it is not possible to attribute this shortening of the tumble dryer lifetime to a specific cause, there are a number of problems that, together, may have led to a situation of anticipated obsolescence. Unavailability of spare parts, lack of repair and maintenance information and deficient quality of end-of-life information are all aspects that need to be addressed. This lack of circular economy measures leads to increased energy consumption and additional emissions of greenhouse gases over the full lifecycle of the product.

What is this initiative expected to achieve?

The revision of the existing Eco-design and Energy Labelling Regulations will:

˗reduce the consumption of electricity by household tumble dryers;

˗decrease the emission of greenhouse gases due to both the reduction of the electricity consumption and the reduction of refrigerants that may be released to the air during end-of-life processing;

˗increase durability of tumble dryers;

˗minimise lifecycle costs, including production and recycling;

˗make the Regulation less complex and more consistent with other ecodesign regulations. 

What is the value added of action at the EU level? 

Without harmonised requirements across the EU, Member States would be incentivised to lay down their own product-specific energy efficiency requirements as part of their national energy and environmental policies. This would undermine the free movement of products.

B. Solutions

What legislative and non-legislative policy options have been considered? Is there a preferred choice or not? Why? 

The following three main policy options have been examined:

˗Policy option 1 - Business-as-Usual (BAU). Baseline scenario, where the current Regulations remain unchanged;

˗Policy option 2 (PO2) - lenient measures: rescaling of the energy label including an empty A class in order to foster innovation (as required by the framework regulation);

˗Policy option 3 (PO3) - ambitious measures: setting a maximum EEI limit that would phase out all tumble dryers that are not based on heat pump technology.

˗Policy option 4 (PO4) – circular economy measures: mandating availability of critical spare parts, provision or repair and maintenance information, and provision of information for improved recyclability.

Apart from the measures outlined above, the IA considers a number of requirements to reduce legal complexity and increase consistency with other eco-design and energy labelling measures, the effect of which has not been quantified. Those measures are:

- simplification of the energy label;

- the introduction of a noise emission class;

- the inclusion of low power modes in the tumble dryer legislation and the subsequent removal of tumble dryers from the scope of the horizontal Standby Regulation.

Preferred option 

The preferred policy option is PO2+PO3+PO4, applied in two transitional periods in order to allow stakeholders, notably manufacturers, to prepare for the new requirements. A first transitional period of 18 months for the application of the measures in PO2 and PO4, and a second transitional period of additional 18 months for the application of PO3. Total duration of the transitional period will thus be 3 years.

Who supports which option? 

˗PO2 is supported by industry;

˗PO3 is supported by NGOs and a majority of Member States. Industry could however agree to PO3 provided that a transitional period is enabled for the application of that policy option. This request from the industry has been accepted, as explained above.

C. Impacts of the preferred option

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)?

By 2040, PO2+PO3+PO4 is estimated to bring about the following results with respect to a BAU scenario:

˗cumulative energy savings of 15,0 TWh by 2040;

˗cumulative GHG emission savings of 1,7 Mt CO2eq. by 2040;

˗cumulative savings on annual end-user expenditure of € 2,8 billion € by 2040; 

˗Increase in manufacturers turnover (1,1 billion € by 2040)

˗Increase in net employment across society (9.303 jobs);

˗adequate update of ecodesign requirements to keep up with technological progress;

˗no significant impact on SMEs, which are mostly retailers and repairers (no SME’s among equipment manufacturers). 

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? 

Compliance costs have been estimated to be 237 M €/year in 2040. Administrative costs related to the update of the Certificate of Conformity, updaete of EPREL information and relabelling have been estimated to be approximately 1 M€.

How will SMEs and micro-enterprises be affected?

There are no SMEs among manufacturers for this product group, which are all big companies. All SMEs are therefore retailers and repairers. In 2030, the turnover for dealers will increase due to the higher prices of heat pump tumble dryers. Nevertheless, by 2040 the turnover (and the employment) will slightly decrease. This is due to lower sales consequence of the circular economy measures, which are expected to lengthen the lifetime of the tumble dryers. The reduction of the turnover on the sales side of the business will be to a certain extent compensated by a growth in after-sale repair activities.

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations? 

There are no additional estimated impacts on national budgets and administrations apart from market surveillance, but this is business as usual.

Will there be other significant impacts? 

No other significant positive or negative impacts are expected.

D. Follow up

When will the policy be reviewed?

A review clause will propose the review of the Regulations within ca. five years after its adoption.