Expert dispute over adaptation of battery law

02.09.2025

Source: E & M powernews

In the Bundestag's Environment Committee, experts discussed the draft bill to amend battery legislation. Opinions differed widely.

On September 1, the Bundestag's Environment Committee held a public hearing to discuss the German government's draft bill to adapt battery legislation to the EU regulation. The draft, entitled the "Battery Law EU Adaptation Act", is intended to replace the existing Battery Act (BattG) and bundle it into a new Battery Law Implementation Act (BattDG). While some experts welcomed the plan, others expressed considerable reservations.

The draft provides for European regulations on the manufacture, labeling, disposal and recycling of batteries to be transposed into German law. These include restrictions on hazardous substances, regulations on conformity, obligations in the supply chain and higher collection targets. The aim is to collect 63% of all portable batteries by 2027 and 73% by 2030. In Germany, the collection rate is currently 50 percent.

Do not introduce any additional burdens

The question of whether the draft goes beyond the EU requirements was particularly controversial. Experts appointed by the CDU/CSU parliamentary group criticized the German government for creating additional burdens without any discernible added value. Georgios Chryssos from the Stiftung Gemeinsames Rücknahmesystem Batterien (GRS) also warned against a "hasty adoption". In his opinion, the EU regulations are already directly enforceable and national implementation is therefore not absolutely necessary. He also feared new bureaucratic hurdles.

The German Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers' Association (ZVEI) also spoke of "gold plating". Gunther Kellermann from the ZVEI criticized the fact that the German government wanted to stipulate eight criteria for measuring contributions, whereas the EU only provides for two. This would make the system more complicated and non-transparent.

Deposit system and fire protection required

In contrast, the experts named by the SPD, the Greens and the Left supported the plans in principle. However, they called for additional regulations, for example in dealing with fires caused by lithium-ion batteries. Anja Siegesmund from the Federal Association of the German Waste, Water and Recycling Industry (BDE) described the issue as a "blind spot" in the law. According to the BDE, lithium batteries cause around 30 fires every day, causing damage in the hundreds of millions of euros per year. Siegesmund called for a deposit system to better protect against risks.

Individual aspects were also highlighted from a municipal perspective. Tim Bagner from the German Association of Cities welcomed the obligation for manufacturers of industrial and vehicle batteries to participate in a producer responsibility organization. However, he was critical of the planned commitment period of twelve months for municipal waste management companies. They should be able to change providers at short notice if necessary in order to avoid problems with interim storage.

Disputed take-back routes

Holger Thärichen from the Association of Municipal Companies (VKU) spoke out in favor of accepting more battery types at municipal collection points. At the same time, he recommended that the take-back obligation for certain batteries, such as e-bike batteries, should not be introduced until 2026 so that sufficient special containers can be provided.

The retail sector also expressed concerns. Antje Gerstein from the German Retail Association (HDE) pointed out that although the take-back of batteries in retail has been established for years, the proper storage of damaged lithium batteries is overburdening companies. Recycling centers with trained personnel are better suited for this.

Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) criticized weaknesses in the implementation of so-called ecomodulation. Marieke Hoffmann from DUH warned that manufacturers with particularly environmentally harmful batteries could evade their responsibilities. She called for mandatory system participation, binding interim targets and stronger incentives for collection. The opposition voiced fundamental criticism. Reinhard Müller-Syhre, an expert appointed by the AfD, spoke of a "gigantic juggernaut" of bureaucracy that would hinder innovation.

Although the hearing revealed many weaknesses, the German government's goal remains to transpose the EU requirements into national law. The main point of contention is how far German legislators are allowed to go beyond the European minimum standards - and how practical the requirements are.

Author: Susanne Harmsen