A group of Renew Europe MEPs led by Anna Stürgkh has demanded that the European Commission set a clear timeline for proposing ecodesign requirements for high-voltage switchgear, warning that regulatory uncertainty is delaying grid expansion and undermining EU climate goals. The written parliamentary question, submitted on 9 April 2026, targets a loophole in the F-Gas Regulation that allows continued use of sulfur hexafluoride (SF₆), a potent greenhouse gas, in the absence of life-cycle criteria for alternatives.
The question highlights that Article 13(13) of the F-Gas Regulation permits fluorinated gases with a global warming potential above 1 if ecodesign rules show lower life-cycle CO₂ emissions than alternatives. However, the Commission has stated it will 'monitor developments without a specific end date' before proposing such requirements. This, the MEPs argue, creates a regulatory vacuum: European manufacturers have developed SF₆-free switchgear with 99% lower GWP using EU LIFE funds, but cannot compete because no life-cycle assessment framework exists. Utilities, facing 26-month procurement lead times, are reverting to SF₆ technology or delaying investments.
The question notes that in June 2025, 14 Member States formally requested ecodesign requirements, citing new International Electrotechnical Commission guidelines. The MEPs ask three specific questions: (1) by when the Commission will propose ecodesign requirements under Article 13(13); (2) how indefinite delay reconciles with urgent grid expansion needs and the Commission's commitment to life-cycle assessment; and (3) what measures will prevent grid operators from procuring higher-emission equipment amid uncertainty.
Policy orientation and ambition
The question pushes for accelerated regulatory action to phase out SF₆ in high-voltage switchgear, a sector where Europe is a global leader. It seeks concrete deadlines and a shift from monitoring to rulemaking, aligning with the EU's climate neutrality goal and the REPowerEU grid buildout objectives. The MEPs frame the delay as a barrier to both environmental and industrial competitiveness.
Expected follow-up
The Commission must respond within approximately six weeks. Its answer will signal whether it intends to fast-track ecodesign rules or maintain a wait-and-see approach, with direct implications for grid operators, equipment manufacturers, and climate targets.