Across Europe, policymakers are once again debating how renewable synthetic fuels (eFuels) should be treated in road transport regulation. The latest proposals presented by the European Commission show just how complex this debate has become: detailed monitoring of individual vehicles, assumptions about user behaviour, and extensive control mechanisms are central elements of the current thinking.

Switzerland has taken a very different approach. With Article 11a of the Swiss CO2 Act, a pragmatic and technology-neutral solution is already in force. Instead of focusing on individual vehicles or drivers, the Swiss model focuses on what ultimately matters: measurable and verifiable CO2 reduction at system level.

The Core of the Swiss Model

Article 11a allows vehicle importers to reduce the average CO2 emissions of their new vehicle fleets in two equivalent ways. They can either import low-emission vehicles, such as battery electric cars, or they can import renewable synthetic fuels and feed them into the general fuel distribution network. Both pathways are treated equally, provided that the resulting CO2 reduction can be demonstrated.

The Swiss CO2 Ordinance defines a clear and transparent calculation method. The energy content of the renewable synthetic fuel credited to an importer is multiplied by the emission factor of the fossil fuel it replaces. The avoided emissions are then allocated over the average lifetime mileage of a vehicle. If sufficient synthetic fuel is credited, a corresponding number of vehicles can be counted as having 0 g CO2 per kilometre in the fleet calculation.

Crucially, the climate benefit is accounted for over the entire lifetime of the vehicle. Once the synthetic fuel / eFuel has been injected into the system, it no longer matters which fuel an individual driver actually uses later on. The climate impact has already been delivered.

Why This Is Pragmatic – and Effective

The strength of the Swiss approach lies in its simplicity. There is no need for continuous monitoring of driving behaviour, no tracking of individual refuelling events, and no complex administrative apparatus. Climate policy is implemented where it is most efficient: at the level of fuel supply, not at the level of individual consumption.

This pragmatism creates planning certainty for vehicle importers and investors alike. It also avoids the risk that well-intended regulation becomes so complex that it slows down real climate action. In contrast, the models currently discussed at EU level risk creating high administrative barriers while delivering little additional climate benefit.

A Good Model – With Remaining Details to Solve

Even a good model is not perfect. Some implementation details still require refinement. Approval periods for production facilities are currently shorter than their economic amortisation periods. Authorisations are granted only after construction, and emission factors are not yet fully based on comprehensive life-cycle assessments. SPIN is in active dialogue with the authorities to address these issues and further improve the framework.

Despite these open points, the direction is clear. Switzerland has chosen a path that enables real climate protection without technological dogma or unnecessary complexity. It shows that defossilised mobility does not require micromanagement, but clear rules, trust in markets, and a focus on actual CO2 reduction.

A Lesson for Europe

As Europe continues to search for workable solutions, the Swiss model offers a concrete example that already works in practice. It demonstrates that pragmatism is not the opposite of ambition – it is often the key to making climate policy effective.

Source:

Swiss CO2 Act, Article 11a, and CO2 Ordinance, Annex 4b (Federal Office for the Environment, Switzerland)