An open letter on the European Battery Regulation

Europe is well on its way to building a domestic battery industry. Despite the challenges of the task which was once dismissed by many as a pipedream, Europe will soon be a fixture on the global battery map – accounting for one fifth of global cell production by the mid-2020s, second only to China.

This new European battery value chain will be worth over €250 billion by 2025, according to the European Commission.

In December 2020 the European Commission proposed a new landmark sustainable battery law aimed at embedding resilience, sustainability, and competitiveness into the European battery industry. The proposal includes mandatory carbon footprint declarations, mandated recycling and due diligence policies and more – all of which would position the industry to set a new standard for sustainability and ethics within the global battery industry.

Northvolt welcomed the proposal.

However, with the proposed regulation now under discussions and legislative procedure, several EU Member States are suggesting delays of up to four years to the timelines for the carbon footprint requirements.

This would be a mistake. In a recent public letter, eight businesses engaged in developing the new European battery supply chain, including Northvolt, are calling on all stakeholders involved in the implementation of the battery regulation to commit to at least the originally proposed level of ambition for carbon footprint transparency and due diligence proposed by the European Commission.

We want to speed up rules that will regulate the industry, and at minimum we’re calling for

• carbon footprint declaration requirements from 1 July 2024
• supply chain due diligence obligations in place one year after the regulation enters into force (and for that to be as soon as possible)

We hold the firm belief that swift adoption and implementation of meaningful EU battery regulations is key to the battery industry establishing itself with sustainability at its core from day one.

Delays in implementing the key parts of the regulation are unnecessary, counterproductive and, ultimately, would be a clear mistake.