Skip to main content
PolicySpeak
← All files

EU consultation

Ecodesign requirements for vacuum cleaners (review)

5 submissions from 5 organizations told the European Commission what they think about this file. Here is what each of them said, in their own words.

The Commission lists 41 submissions on this file. Shown here: the 5 from organizations. Not shown, by design: submissions from private individuals, which we never publish, and anything filed since our last weekly refresh.

Who showed up

3 submissions from industry — companies and their trade associations — against 2 from civil society: NGOs, consumer organizations, environmental groups and trade unions. That is 1.5 industry submissions for every one from civil society.

Industry 3Civil society 2Public authorities, academia, other 0

Groupings use the respondent type each organization selected when filing. Counting submissions, not organizations — a body that filed twice is counted twice.

The file, right now

The consultation closed on 12 Jul 2022 — it ran from 7 Apr 2022.

Policy area
Energy (DG ENER)
Where it stands
Awaiting adoption
Adoption expected
30 Sept 2027 · in 393 days

How it got here

  1. Call for evidence · impact assessment5 Apr 2022
  2. Public consultation12 Jul 2022

Also on the Commission’s pipeline for this file, with no date recorded: Initiative planned, Reg draft, Reg.

Showing 5 of 5 submissions.

A

APPLiA

· · filed 5 Apr 2022 · source

PDF

APPLiA, representing the home appliance industry in Europe, welcomes the revision of the ecodesign and the possibility to provide feedback on the establishment of a new energy label for vacuum cleaners. The Association would like to provide feedback to consider in the impact assessment. Please see attached our Position Paper.

LinkedInX
E

ECOS

· · filed 5 Apr 2022 · source

ECOS (Environmental Coalition on Standards) and the EEB (European Environmental Bureau) are relieved to see the revision of these regulations moving forward again after lengthy delays, and we welcome the considered options to extend the scope, reintroduce energy labels, and introduce ambitious requirements for material efficiency and lifetime of vacuum cleaners.

LinkedInX
ZE

ZVEI e.V.

· · filed 5 Apr 2022 · source

PDF

As representative of Germany’s manufacturers of household appliances, ZVEI e.V. appreciates the possibility to comment on the European Commission’s call for evidence on the future regulation of vacuum cleaners. We sincerely thank you for considering our comments and are available for any of your questions. Please find a detailed statement attached. Thank you.

LinkedInX
AA

ANEC and BEUC

· · filed 5 Apr 2022 · source

We welcome the decision to review the Ecodesign and the Energy Labelling Regulations for Vacuum Cleaners. This is a long-due revision expected to bring many benefits in terms of energy and material savings and financial gains for consumers. We strongly agree that the scope of both Regulations should be extended to also include cordless/battery-operated and robot vacuum cleaners.

LinkedInX
EA

EUnited AISBL

· · filed 5 Apr 2022 · source

PDF

Dear Sir or Madame, The needs of the users of household and commercial vacuum cleaners are different. Therefore, we advocate taking the differences into account and developing a separate label for commercial vacuum cleaners. In this development, we should draw on the work of the international and European working groups that have dealt specifically with this issue.

LinkedInX
Take the dataCSV — all 5 submissionsJSONFull text, not the excerpt. Free to cite.Search every submission →

Follow this file

Get an email when a new organization files a position here: one email on Tuesdays, only when there is something new. Free.

We use your email for updates on this file, and PolicySpeak may contact you about the product. Unsubscribe in one click. Privacy policy.

Method. Every quote is verbatim from the organization’s own submission to the European Commission, trimmed to its opening passage and never summarized by a model. Where a submission was filed in another EU language we show the English text the European Commission publishes alongside it, labeled on the quote; the original is one click away at the source. Groupings use the respondent type the organization itself selected when filing. We deliberately do not label anyone “supportive” or “opposed” — you read what they wrote and draw your own conclusion. Organizations only, never individuals. Reused under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU; the European Commission is not liable for this reuse.