Brussels has started a new wave of rules designed to protect public health and harmonize standards throughout the Union, and the measure has put manufacturers, regulators and consumers alike on edge… while technicians discuss lists and scientific evaluations in offices and committees, workshops and assembly lines nervously observe the implementation schedule. Therefore, what on paper seems like an unimportant technical detail can lead to something much bigger.
A bureaucratic failure. I told it this week the financial times. A cut in a technical list of authorized substances in the European Union – part of an ambitious reform to protect the quality of drinking water that comes into force in 2027 – has unleashed the real possibility that millions of Europeans will become face cold showers.
Apparently an administrative omission hafnium and zirconiumkey elements in the enamelling of hot water tanks, do not appear among the recognized substances, and without that authorization more than 90% of current accumulators (water heaters) could be excluded from the European market. What in Brussels is a technical file translates into towns and cities with failing boilers, paralyzed factories and an immediate effect on prices and domestic supply if it is not urgently corrected.
Why hafnium and zirconium matter. Hafnium and its “brother” zirconium are not accessories: they participate in the vitrification process inside the tanks and prevent the enamel from cracking. Without them, the protective cover of the tank comes off and the result is obvious and practical: water that does not heat up or premature losses of the equipment.
Furthermore, these metals are also used in heat pump varnisha critical component in the thermal electrification that accompanies gas withdrawal. The Times remembered that putting them on the positive list is not a favor to the industry but rather a technical condition for the equipment to work and last as expected.
The real economic cost. Replacing hafnium or zirconium with alternatives such as steel or copper would increase the manufacturing cost between four and five timesaccording to the manufacturers, an increase that would inevitably fall on consumers already affected by the energy crisis.
For companies the ability to compete on price and supply product in Europe would be at risk facing non-EU rivals that do not face the same regulatory labyrinth, which increases the threat of relocation or loss of industrial investment on the continent.
Complexity and absences. The episode reveals two institutional problems: on the one hand, the Commission’s regulatory roadmap did not precisely consider that hot water tanks are part of the drinking water circuit, and on the other, the mechanism to correct the oversight is slow and technocratic.
The Commission maintains that it is the Member Statesthose who must notify the need to authorize these substances, and none has done so so far. There are alternative routes (toxicological applications or temporary national authorizations), but the industry considers them too slow and expensive to avoid an interim shortage.
Solutions and limits. In practice, there are three exits: a rapid amendment at EU level to include hafnium and zirconium on the list, temporary national authorizations to sustain production while the European assessment is processed, and accelerated toxicological assessment procedures required by the Commission.
Each option has its costs and trade-offs: the amendment requires political will and speed in Brussels, the national route can fragment the market and raise costs, and rapid scientific processes must preserve security without becoming an excuse for indefinite delays. In other words, none of the three are perfect, but inaction is possibly the worst alternative.
What is at stake. If you also want, the problem is not only domestic or purely technical: it touches on the European ambition of decarbonize heating through heat pumps and electrical appliances.
If the regulations induce manufacturers to abandon investments or produce outside the EU due to lack of certainty, the European energy transition would lose momentum and industrial sovereignty. Likewise, the error regulates a greater tension: how to make legitimate health standards compatible with the need to maintain strategic industrial chains and the competitiveness of the European productive fabric.
Quick and coordinated correction. I remembered the medium in his report that the solution that best preserves public and private interests involves an expeditious correction in a community key accompanied by scientific safeguards: provisionally authorize use with technical conditions (traceability of supply, quality controls and periodic reviews), accelerate toxicological evaluations and, above all, establish a preventive mechanism for the Commission to integrate the voice of the industry in the technical lists when the standards touch critical industrial processes.
Without this coordination, the regulatory shortcut not only aims to cause a equipment cost increase and job losses, but will send the wrong signal to investors considering returning production to Europe. That’s without taking into account the topic nuclearbecause the delay is not only technical, but tangible: it is the difference between a hot shower and a useless radiator.
Image | Pixnio, PXHere
In Xataka | There are people who want to change your life thanks to a cold shower: what science says
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings