Evaluation of the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive
37 submissions from 37 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 373 submissions on this file. Shown here: the 37 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
23 submissions from industry — companies and their trade associations — against 10 from civil society: NGOs, consumer organizations, environmental groups and trade unions. That is 2.3 industry submissions for every one from civil society.
Industry 23Civil society 10Public authorities, academia, other 4
Groupings use the respondent type each organization selected when filing. Counting submissions, not organizations — a body that filed twice is counted twice.
What the room declares
26 of 37
in the EU Register
199
full-time lobbying staff
€17.8M+
declared costs a year
161
EP accreditations declared
Self-declared to the EU Transparency Register (snapshot 2 Sept 2026). The cost figure sums band floors, so the true total is higher.
The file, right now
The consultation closed on 29 Jun 2020 — it ran from 6 Apr 2020.
Policy area
Transport (DG MOVE)
Where it stands
Awaiting adoption
Adoption expected
31 Mar 2021
How it got here
Roadmap efc20 Mar 2019
Public consultation29 Jun 2020
Also on the Commission’s pipeline for this file, with no date recorded: Initiative planned, Swd.
Clear priorities for the public consultation should be to include support for decarbonisation of the shipping sector, should take into account the considerable investments done by the cruise industry already, costs associated with supplying alternative fuels and should support the overall reduction of air emissions and the relevant EU Directives and Regulations for the shipping sector.
DAFI FEEDBACK FROM NORWEGIAN HYDROGEN ASSOCIATION About the Norwegian Hydrogen Association (Norsk Hydrogenforum - NHF) NHF has since 1996 been a non-profit members’ national association for conveying and promoting the advantages of hydrogen as an energy carrier in Norway.
Enagás welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback on the evaluation roadmap of the 2014 Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive. Natural gas will have an important role in the future to contribute to the decarbonisation of the transport sector. CNG/LNG in the transport sector is already a reality as well as its high availability, flexibility and scalability.
Emobility is at the core of decarbonising Europe’s transport, since all new cars and vans and most new trucks sold in early-2030s will have to be zero emission if Europe is to comply with the Paris Agreement. This requires a speedy and comprehensive roll-out of charging infrastructure across Europe, but the current Directive 2014/94/EU is not aligned with EU’s climate goals or in line with the expected roll-out of…
The Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive was a welcome first step from EU oil dependency. However, there are significant structural issues that should be addressed; not least within the context of recent EU policy developments on the Mobility Packages and the 2050 Long-Term Climate Strategy.
The Directive on the deployment of Alternative Fuels Infrastructure (DAFI) went into effect when electro-mobility was still at its nascent stage in Europe. With the expected acceleration of the market, it is indeed important to revise its content to keep it aligned with the dynamic changes that are taking place in and around electro-mobility today and to help decarbonise the European Economy in a longer term.
In showing the EU the way to a climate-neutral economy by 2050, the Long-Term Climate Strategy of the Commission overlooks a key player in the decarbonisation of mobility, i.e. light, electric vehicles (LEVs) such as electric bicycles, scooters, motorcycles, light 3 and 4-wheeled vehicles, … E-bikes constitute the single biggest EV success in Europe.
Electromobility is increasingly becoming part of the sustainable urban mobility system. Polis cities have a clear vision when it comes to reducing the adverse impacts of transport, with ambitious goals to improve air quality, make the urban environment less congested, bring about modal shift in favour of public transport and active travel, and improve the overall quality of life.
FEPORT welcomes the opportunity to provide input into the evaluation roadmap of the 2014 Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive. With regards to the legislation relevant to the port industry (shore-side power supply and LNG infrastructure), it is important that the Directive is market driven and pragmatic whilst also adaptable to future technological developments.
Bellona welcomes a review of the directive on the deployment of alternative fuel infrastructure. The directive, while well-intentioned, currently risks promoting the deployment of fuel infrastructure which is not compatible with the long-term goal of a net-zero transport sector and wider economy.
The DAFI helped growing the market for alternative fuels that had already reached a certain degree of maturity, such as LPG, and to jump start a market for newcomers (e.g. electricity). EAFO figures show that the number of alternative-fueled cars increased by 75% from 2008 to 2016, from 5,4 mil to 9,4 mil, improving the environmental performance of the car fleet.
Zukunft ERDGAS sees the objectives of the AFI directive as utterly important to build up a CNG station infrastructure in Germany. However, the current implementation in Germany is not supporting a sufficient development of CNG infrastructure. Generally, Germany does not meet the recommended infrastructure targets of the AFI directive.
IGNES together with GIMELEC take note of the evaluation roadmap presented by the European Commission in order to evaluate the Directive 2014/94/UE on the deployment of Alternative Fuels Infrastructure five years after its adoption. Ex-post evaluation represents an important tool of “Better Regulation” that is fully supported.
BEUC welcomes the initiative of the EC to evaluate the 2014 directive on the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure, as the well-functioning of this directive is essential to make e-mobility convenient for consumers. BEUC therefore intends to actively contribute to the discussions regarding the upcoming revision of this text.
The AFID was meant to foster the deployment of alternative fuels and reduce the European fossil fuels dependency. Unfortunately, the role of biofuels is overlooked in the Directive, although they represent the vast majority of the renewable and alternative fuels in the European transport. In 2014, at the time of the AFID adoption, biofuels represented 89% of the renewables in the European transport energy mix.
The Directive 2014/94/EU was adopted at a time when the market of alternative fuel vehicles was still an emerging market. In 2018, a major milestone was reached as Europe accounted for its first million electric vehicles on the road and the future market outlook is promising.
UPEI calls on the EU institutions to review policies having regard to the reality of markets: while the need to transition to low-carbon fuels is fully recognised, there are “around 95% of road vehicles still conventionally fuelled, including renewable biofuels blends” .
The latest battery electric vehicle compact models (BEV) currently have a real range of around 300 km. This is more than enough for everyday use. For some models, the total cost of ownership is already equivalent to conventional models and by 2021, this will be the case for many more. What is missing?
Using biomethane for transport improves air quality and can lead to carbon neutrality (when 80% of the gas mix is renewable). Renewable methane is already produced in increasing volumes in most European countries; the technology is mature and biomethane profits also from the existing natural gas infrastructure in Europe.
Eurelectric, the Union of the European electricity industry, welcomes the ongoing review process of the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive (AFID). As presently constructed, the Directive still includes and supports pure fossil fuels which would clearly impede a path towards decarbonising the road transport sector.
The Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive should keep on recognizing the technological neutrality of the infrastructures. The inclusion of CNG and LNG in the definition of alternative fuels should be maintained as relevant part of the EU’s decarbonisation goal. The progressive incorporation of renewable gases is able to make CO2 emissions dropping significantly for both current and future fleets.
Our high level comments are as follows: Data availability Data, both public and private, on charging point location and utilisation is crucial for planning a network of alternative fuel infrastructure. Member states should maintain accurate and up to date national charging point registries of public and private alternative fuel infrastructure and make this data freely available in accessible formats.
With the expected increased deployment of alternatively powered vehicles over the coming years it is essential that the EU takes necessary steps to prepare for such change. The evaluation of Directive 2014/94 should assess the added value of the legislation and where it can be improved in order to better manage the shift towards alternatively powered vehicles.
Fitness Check on Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive: Shell supports the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive (AFID) published in 2014 as one of the key EU Directive for development of the market for alternative fuels in the transport sector and the deployment of the relevant infrastructure.
The 2014 Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive is not fit for purpose Emobility is at the core of decarbonising Europe’s transport, since all new cars and vans and most new trucks sold in early-2030s will have to be zero emission if Europe is to comply with the Paris Agreement.
The Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive should keep on recognizing the technological neutrality of the infrastructures. Abstract The inclusion of fossil fuels such as CNG and its renewable form, the bio-CNG, in the definition of alternative fuels is not in contradiction with EU’s decarbonisation goal.
About Akershus County Council (ACC) ACC is engaged in several EU-related projects aiming to foster the deployment of alternative fuels. Among them is the Interreg Baltic Sea Flagship project Scandria2Act. Here, ACC and partners have assessed the deployment of alternative fuel vehicles and infrastructure in the Northern Scandria Corridor, and studied the use of national and local instruments to foster the deployment.
Due to the rapid development of the EV market, and the necessity of a legislation that encourages further expansion, MOTUS-E considers that the current AFI Directive does no longer set the adequate framework to accompany the expected growing uptake of EV in the coming years.
PARKING ENERGY’S KEY SUGGESTIONS FOR THE PROCESS: The main point of improvement with the current Directive is writing technologies into law, which we generally view as a incorrect solution as a directive takes years to become effective; more specifically, current Directive enforces the use of Type2 connector even when it is commercially or technically unnecessary.
The current directive is a bad compromise, which set targets for fuels we don't need but in reality not for the 'fuels' we do need. Electrification of the EU transport sector is absolute key. It is a joke, that fossil fuels are part of definition of alternative fuels. Fossil gas must be removed no matter the form - CNG, LNG and LPG.
We would like to see that in the evaluation not only the TEN-T core network is evaluated but also the effect on the comprehensive network is studied. And as a follow-up that information is gathered in how the comprehensive network can be used to enable a more fine grained roll-out of infrastructure.
The Directive on the deployment of Alternative Fuels Infrastructure was adopted at a time the alternative fuels market was still emerging. However, as we have now over a million EVs in Europe it is time for it to be revised to be kept in line with the current and foreseen growth of the sector. Within this context, AVERE, believes there are many ways in which the Directive could be improved.
Emobility is at the core of decarbonising Europe’s transport, since all new cars and vans and most new trucks sold in early-2030s will have to be zero emission if Europe is to comply with the Paris Agreement. This requires a speedy and comprehensive roll-out of charging infrastructure across Europe, but the current Directive 2014/94/EU is not aligned with EU’s climate goals or in line with the expected roll-out of…
Danish Shipping welcome the opportunity to contribute to the evaluation roadmap of the 2014 Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive. In April 2018, the UN’s International Maritime Organization, IMO, adopted an Initial strategy on reduction of Green House Gas emissions from ships which establishes several very ambitious CO2 reduction targets.
IRU welcomed the current DAFI, but calls on Member States to speed up deployment. Further steps should be taken to ensure the DAFI provides adequate coverage, particularly considering legislative developments such as the proposal for HDV CO2 Standards binding target of 30% for 2030 which will reply heavily on electrification.
EU can start producing itself all the fuel it needs at low cost, to stop all the import, and to start exporting clean fuel and systems for hundreds of billion euros, at a great profit rate. Ideal fuel for that purpose is the MOH compressed (CMOH) or liquefied (LMOH) Stoichiometric Gas Fuel, produced out of WATER.
Hi, Enclosed my feedback for the AFID: 1. Several terms used are interpreted in different ways by countries. This is making it very hard or almost impossible to offer charge stations and charge services across borders. Like: - Ad Hoc payment: what is acceptable here?
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.