Thomas,

I've put 26 July from 14:00h in the agenda.

best regards,

Paul



Dr Paul Greening
Director Emissions & Fuels


European Automobile Manufacturers Association
Avenue des Nerviens 85, B-1040 Brussels, Belgium

[adresse e-mail]

Tel        +32 2 738 7348
Mob        +32 485 886 644
Fax        +32 2 738 7310
www.acea.be





From:        <[adresse e-mail]>
To:        <[adresse e-mail]>,
Cc:        <[adresse e-mail]>, <[adresse e-mail]>, <[adresse e-mail]>
Date:        09/07/2012 18:10
Subject:        RE: ACEA comments to the IARC conclusions





Thanks Paul. For me 26.7 looks best, say 14:00-15:30. Will confirm tomorrow.
T
 

Thomas VERHEYE
Head of Unit


European Commission

DG Environment
Unit C.3. Industrial emissions, air quality, and noise


BU-9 05/147
B-1049 Brussels/Belgium
+32 2 295 96 39

[adresse e-mail]

 


From: [adresse e-mail] [mailto:[adresse e-mail]]
Sent:
Friday, July 06, 2012 9:03 AM
To:
VERHEYE Thomas (ENV)
Cc:
BROCKETT Scott (ENV)
Subject:
ACEA comments to the IARC conclusions


Dear Thomas,

I promised to send you some views about the IARC conclusions.

Firstly dates for a meeting - 17, 18, 20, 23, 26 July. Any time OK and a colleague from VW will join me, as we intended before.

Let me know your preference(s).

IARC:


See the attached note for our immediate views on the conclusions in reaction to the IARC press notice. A week or so later the Lancet Oncology Journal published the attached slightly more expansive text.

In general we are disappointed by the IARC process. The lack of knowledge of the IARC panel to the use of advanced engine technology was  clear. This is evidenced in the paragraph in the Lancet Journal that states that non-road engines are largely unregulated. This is completely inaccurate as the Non-Road Mobile Machinery Directive imposes quite severe emission standards on non-road engines that are requiring the use of filters and SCR NOx control systems. I'm sure EUROMOT have something to say about these IARC comments.

Note that the actual IARC report will not be published for some 12 months so all we have are these headlines from press releases and the small Lancet paper.

In addition to what's in the attached note:


Diesel exhaust is certainly not unique in emitting certain compounds that the scientific community considers carcinogenic:  many emission sources such as power plants, industrial processing facilities, wood burning, use of certain household or pest control chemicals, and cooking produce similar results.
 
For IARC to uniquely classify the entire emission stream from all diesel engines - emissions that are predominantly composed of water and carbon dioxide - as Group 1 is incorrect and has no practical value.
 
Even if manufacturers were to remove all known or suspected carcinogens from the emissions stream, the remaining non-toxic emissions would still be considered a known carcinogen under the IARC conclusions.
 
There is no compelling evidence to treat diesel exhaust differently than any other sources of emissions.
 
The scientific basis for the conclusions should be sound and fair.
 
The panel developed its conclusion primarily based on a recent US National Cancer Institute (NCI) epidemiology study of underground miners. The methods used to estimate historical exposure levels in that study are seriously flawed and have been challenged in public debate (e.g. Health Effects Institute (HEI) annual conference, 15-17 April 2012 in Chicago).
 
The remaining body of scientific evidence related to animal studies does not support a relationship between diesel exhaust and increased cancer risk and evidence from older epidemiology and toxicology studies lack coherence and certainty. The full body of scientific evidence does not warrant classification of diesel exhaust as a known human carcinogen.
 
Other recent evaluations of diesel exhaust have found that neither the animal studies nor epidemiology studies are sufficient to establish a causal link between exposure to diesel exhaust and lung cancer. Even with the most recent epidemiology studies of old diesel exhaust researchers have not been able to identify a quantitative relationship between exhaust and increased lung cancer risk.

ACEA joined with other industry stakeholders to prepare for the IARC monograph and we have, if you are interested, produced a new set of papers on the advances in diesel and petrol technology and collected together a wealth of available studies. This industry stakeholder group will continue to work actively to obtain the US NCI data to have it peer reviewed an we are looking at what other studies we need to look into.

NOTE - last year when IARC announced the timing for this monograph on petrol & diesel exhaust the industry stakeholders mentioned above wrote jointly to IARC (see attached letter) to ask them to delay their review until a major US study (ACES) was completed. You'll see that the ACES study is jointly sponsored by US legislators. Unfortunately IARC refused to wait until there was a more complete body of scientific data especially for more modern technology.

Hope that helps but let me know if you need anything more. Come back to me on the meeting dates.

best regards,

Paul