{"id":2634,"date":"2020-03-02T15:57:57","date_gmt":"2020-03-02T14:57:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/?p=2634"},"modified":"2020-03-02T15:57:58","modified_gmt":"2020-03-02T14:57:58","slug":"media-briefing-hollow-eu-climate-law-would-delay-action","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/issues\/climate-energy\/2634\/media-briefing-hollow-eu-climate-law-would-delay-action\/","title":{"rendered":"Media briefing: Hollow EU climate law would delay action"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The political\nresponse to the climate emergency is the defining issue of our time. But\nprogress has been painfully slow. The European Union has staked its credibility\non showing the world that it can decarbonise as extensively as science demands,\nwhile ensuring no-one is left behind. The European Commission claims its new\nclimate law – the centrepiece of the European Green Deal – will be at the heart\nof this effort. But questions remain about the law\u2019s ability to commit\ngovernments to urgent action.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Greenpeace EU\nclimate policy adviser Sebastian Mang<\/strong>: \u201cThe problem\nwith the EU\u2019s response to the climate emergency is that what it calls\npolitically unprecedented is in fact woefully insufficient when you look at the\nscience and the scale of the challenge. Decades of dithering, delays and\nhalf-baked measures have led us to a point where the very survival of life on\nEarth is at risk. But instead of taking responsibility, governments and\ncorporations are deflecting urgent action by latching on to distant targets\nthat primarily commit future generations.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n

\"\"
“Green New Deal” sign among demonstrators. \nThousands of people march in Madrid to demand politicians take ambitious action to save the climate. Several collectives, including Greenpeace, and Fridays for Future march along the Paseo del Prado street in the capital city of Spain and end at Nuevos Ministerios where a music concert takes place.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n

Since her appointment, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has been adamant that responding to the climate and ecological emergency is the most pressing issue facing the EU. She promised a European Green Deal in the Commission\u2019s first 100 days, with a new EU climate law at the heart of it.<\/p>\n\n

When\nit was released in December 2019, the European Green Deal promised much<\/a>, but left the\nCommission with a lot to prove. On 4 March, von der Leyen and Commission vice\npresident Frans Timmermans will unveil the draft EU climate law amid much\nfanfare.<\/p>\n\n

This\nbriefing outlines expectations for the new law, within the context of the green\ndeal\u2019s ambition to respond to the escalating climate emergency. <\/p>\n\n

The European Parliament and national governments are expected to battle it out this year to amend the Commission\u2019s draft. The chair of the European Parliament\u2019s environment committee, Pascal Canfin<\/a>, is keen to rush through the final climate law before a UN climate conference in November. But central and eastern European governments, led by Poland, could try to drag out the process and are expected to resist binding short-term measures.<\/p>\n\n

FLIMSY\nCLIMATE LAW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

The Commission\u2019s draft is likely to largely focus\non a target to reduce EU greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero by 2050. The\nCommission is also expected to suggest giving itself the power to raise\nemission targets, leaving governments and the European Parliament with limited\npower to object. These reviews would take place every five years – but only\nafter 2030 – and be guided by the best available UN climate science.<\/p>\n\n

The Commission<\/a> has said that it\nwould not table an upgraded 2030 climate target until September, after it has\ncarried out an impact assessment.<\/p>\n\n

The draft law is also expected to set out\nprinciples or guidelines to encourage the alignment of other EU policies with\nits climate targets. The scope of these guidelines and whether any of them will\nbe binding is as yet unknown. Timmermans has said that ensuring \u201cjoined-up\nthinking […] and consistency\u201d <\/em>is likely to be an essential but \u201ccomplicated\ntask.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n

In addition, the Commission is expected to require governments to develop and implement plans to adapt to climate impacts.<\/p>\n\n

In practice, the expectation in Brussels is that\nthe draft EU climate law will be thin on substance, compared to most equivalent laws at\nthe national level<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n

It is unlikely, for example, that it will include\nplans to phase out subsidies for fossil fuels and other climate-damaging\nsectors, such as airlines and industrial agriculture. The EU and several\nEuropean governments committed ten years ago at the G20 to eliminate fossil\nfuel subsidies by 2025. Despite this, no EU government<\/a> has a plan to phase\nout fossil fuel subsidies, and the lion\u2019s share of the EU\u2019s budget, including\nthe recently tabled Sustainable\nInvestment Plan<\/a>, continues to allow investments into gas, nuclear\nenergy and industrial agriculture. EU governments provided on average \u20ac55 billion per year<\/a> in fossil fuel\nsubsidies between 2014 and 2016, according to research for the Commission.<\/p>\n\n

The new draft climate law will also fail to address\nthe political influence\nand greenwashing<\/a> of the fossil fuel industry.<\/p>\n\n

To stimulate more immediate government action,\nenvironmental organisationshave called for a much broader set of\nmeasures<\/a>, including intermediate climate targets, in\nparticular an upgraded EU 2030 target, the end of fossil fuel subsidies, and regular\nchecks to assess progress against the latest climate science. In line with\nexisting national climate\nlaws<\/a>, NGOs also say the EU\u2019s targets and policies\nshould be regularly reviewed by a new independent body of climate scientists\nand other experts.<\/p>\n\n

Another missing element will be a recognition of\nthe growing impact of animal farming on the EU\u2019s greenhouse gases, now\naccounting for a share of 12-17%<\/a>. Greenpeace has\ncalled for measures and a target to reduce the EU\u2019s overconsumption of\nmeat and dairy products<\/a>, which are major contributors to climate breakdown<\/a>, as well as\ndeforestation and ecosystem destruction.<\/p>\n\n

Finally, in order to achieve full transport decarbonisation by 2040, Greenpeace has called for the phase out of new petrol and diesel cars by 2028, This target should be included in the law and combined with measures to accelerate the modal shift from cars and planes to alternatives like walking, cycling, train travel and public transport.<\/p>\n\n

POLITICAL BATTLE LINES<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

The European Parliament also has its doubts about\nan EU climate law primarily built around the net-zero target. In a resolution<\/a> on the European\nGreen Deal in January 2020, the Parliament said the EU should cut emissions by\n55% by 2030 (compared to 1990 levels) and set an \u201cintermediate\u201d<\/em> target\nfor 2040, with the aim of achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.<\/p>\n\n

The European United Left and European Greens\nsupport targets of 70% and 65% respectively. These targets are in line with\nlimiting global heating to 1.5\u00b0C, which scientists say would rein in the worst\neffects of climate breakdown. Although a majority of MEPs from the Socialists\nand Democrats group abstained on votes on the higher targets, the group as a\nwhole supports a target of 55%, which would result in over 2\u00b0C of heating and\nwidespread climate breakdown. The majority of the Renew group also favours the\n55% target.<\/p>\n\n

The majority of the European People\u2019s Party\nsupports a target of 50% by 2030. Most of the European Conservatives and\nReformists group and most of the far right Identity and Democracy group voted\nagainst a 2030 target increase.<\/p>\n\n

The EU\u2019s current target for 2030 is to cut\ngreenhouse gas emissions by 40%, which is incompatible with commitments made\nunder the Paris climate agreement and would result in around 3\u00b0C of global\nheating.<\/p>\n\n

The Socialists and Democrats<\/a> group and the European Greens<\/a> have also called for the climate law to offer more than just climate targets. For example, they call for a scientific advisory body to make sure EU policy is in line with climate goals, and are keen that the most disadvantaged people in society do not shoulder the burden of a \u2018green\u2019 transition. The European Greens also call for an end to all fossil fuel subsidies by 2021.<\/p>\n\n

CLIMATE FINANCE<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

The Commission\u2019s \u20ac1 trillion<\/a> European Green Deal\nInvestment Plan (or Sustainable Investment Plan), released in January, was the\nfirst initiative under the European Green Deal. The\nInvestment plan will cover a ten-year period between 2021 and 2030 with\ninvestments of \u20ac100 billion a year.<\/p>\n\n

According to the Bruegel think tank, the European\nGreen Deal would in fact require three times more\ninvestments<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n

The investment plan is intended to help the EU achieve\nthe 2050 net-zero target and is made up of \u20ac503 billion from the EU budget, which the Commission says will trigger \u20ac114\nbillion in national co-financing and leverage around \u20ac279 billion of private\nand public investments.<\/p>\n\n

As part of the Sustainable Investment Plan, the\nJust Transition Mechanism, worth another \u20ac100 billion between 2021 and 2027, is\nmeant to support the EU regions currently most reliant on fossil fuels. Only a\nsmall part of the Just Transition Mechanism, known as the Just Transition Fund,\nworth \u20ac7.5 billion in public EU money for seven years, has entirely excluded\nfunding for fossil fuels, like gas, and for nuclear energy.<\/p>\n\n

Environmental groups argue that the Sustainable\nInvestment Plan and the entire EU budget should exclude fossil fuel and nuclear\nsubsidies. Greenpeace has also called for the EU to limit access to the\nSustainable Investment Plan<\/a> to countries committed to a coal\nphase out by 2030 and a fossil fuel phase out by 2040.<\/p>\n\n

The Commission has labelled 40% of all payments<\/a> under the Common Agricultural Policy as green. This represents roughly \u20ac130 billion under the next EU budget (according to the latest plans). With a poor track record for \u2018greening\u2019 measures and governments largely in charge of how to spend the money, the European Court of Auditors has slammed the claim that these funds will be used to fight climate change as \u201c<\/em>unrealistic<\/em><\/a>.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n

CLIMATE POLITICS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Under the Paris climate agreement, governments must\nsubmit new or updated 2030 climate plans <\/a>before the UN conference, in line with the\nobjective to limit global heating to as close as possible to 1.5\u00b0C.<\/p>\n\n

By failing to include a 2030 emission reduction\ntarget in the EU climate law and by delaying a plan to raise this target until\nafter the summer, the European Commission could derail the prospects of a\nglobal climate deal at the end of the year. There is a very real risk that the\nEU could go empty handed to the UN climate conference in Glasgow this November.<\/p>\n\n

So far, only three governments<\/a>, Norway, Suriname\nand the Marshall Islands, have submitted new or updated plans, while 134 countries,\nincluding the EU, have stated their intention to do so in 2020. The likes of\nChina and India, who have not formally committed to increase their targets, are\nunlikely to pledge to step up climate action without major developed blocs like\nthe EU taking the lead by agreeing to higher targets first.<\/p>\n\n

In September, Chinese President Xi Jinping will\nmeet EU and national leaders in Leipzig, Germany, for an EU-China summit. The\nclimate crisis is already on the agenda. This would be the ideal moment for a joint\nannouncement on climate commitments ahead of the UN conference. The EU and\nChina are responsible for close to 40% of all global emissions. <\/p>\n\n

In a recent resolution<\/a>, the European\nParliament also underlined the need for a speedy agreement to raise the current\n2030 target in line with climate science and the Paris climate agreement \u201cwell\nahead\u201d<\/em> of the EU-China summit.<\/p>\n\n

The European Parliament<\/a>, Commission president\nvon der Leyen <\/a>and several EU governments<\/a> \u2013 France, Spain,\nthe Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Luxembourg and Latvia \u2013\nhave said the EU should increase its 2030 climate target to 55%. German\nchancellor Angela Merkel<\/a> has indicated that\nshe could support this, but her government has not yet adopted a formal\nposition.<\/p>\n\n

The Danish and Finnish government’s national\nclimate targets, if fully implemented, are already much stronger than what an\nEU 55% target would require from them, with Denmark committed to a 70% cut in\nemission by 2030 (below 1990 levels) and Finland heading for net zero emissions\nby 2035.<\/p>\n\n

Ahead of an EU environment council meeting on 5 March, a large group of countries, including France, Spain, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Latvia, are expected to call for the Commission to set out a new EU 2030 target in June, so that an agreement between EU governments can be reached in time for the EU-China Summit.<\/p>\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n

The 55% target would\nnot be sufficient<\/a> to limit global heating to 2\u00b0C, let alone to\n1.5\u00b0C. To avoid a full-blown climate crisis, environmental groups are calling\non the EU to cut greenhouse gas\nemissions by at least 65% by 2030<\/a> (compared to 1990\nlevels) and to achieve net-zero emissions by 2040.<\/p>\n\n

PAINFUL DELAY<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

The longer governments wait to reduce emissions, the steeper and tougher these cuts will need to be in future. A recent UN report<\/a> calculated that \u201chad serious climate action begun in 2010, the [global] cuts required per year to meet the projected emissions levels for 1.5\u00b0C would only have been 3.3% per year on average. However, since this did not happen the required cuts in [global] emissions are now 7.6% a year on average.\u201d <\/em>This means, at a bare minimum, that the EU must commit to yearly reductions of 7.6% a year between 2020 and 2030, reaching just over a 65% cut in emissions by 2030. Even steeper cuts will be needed if governments do not start drastically reducing emissions now.<\/p>\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n

Average world temperatures have already increased\nby over 1\u00b0C. From mega-hurricanes to monster fires, this has caused widespread\ndevastation affecting millions of people. Europe too has started to feel the\nimpact. The summer of 2019 saw major heatwaves<\/a> in western Europe,\nwith temperature records and drought in several EU countries, including\nGermany, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, and Luxembourg. In recent\nmonths, Italy, Poland, the Czech Republic and the United Kingdom have been\nstruck by unprecedented floods.<\/p>\n\n

In 2018, a landmark UN climate science report<\/a> illustrated in stark terms the major differences<\/a> in the impact of 2\u00b0C of global heating, compared to 1.5\u00b0C. The report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that global emissions must be halved by 2030 (compared to 1990 levels), before falling to net zero as quickly as possible to limit global temperature rise to 1.5\u00b0C. Developed economies like the EU have the ability and the responsibility to go further.<\/p>\n\n

View the PDF file.<\/a><\/em> <\/p>\n\n

Contacts<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n

Sebastian Mang  \u2013 Greenpeace EU climate policy\nadviser<\/strong>: +32 (0)479 601289, sebastian.mang@greenpeace.org<\/a><\/p>\n\n

Greenpeace EU press desk<\/strong>: +32 (0)2 274 1911, pressdesk.eu@greenpeace.org<\/a><\/p>\n\n

For breaking news and comment on EU affairs: www.twitter.com\/GreenpeaceEU<\/a><\/p>\n\n

Greenpeace is an independent global campaigning\norganisation that acts to change attitudes and behaviour, to protect and\nconserve the environment and to promote peace. Greenpeace does not accept\ndonations from governments, the EU, businesses or political parties.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The political response to the climate emergency is the defining issue of our time. But progress has been painfully slow. The European Union has staked its credibility on showing the…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10,"featured_media":2635,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ep_exclude_from_search":false,"p4_og_title":"","p4_og_description":"","p4_og_image":"","p4_og_image_id":"","p4_seo_canonical_url":"","p4_campaign_name":"not set","p4_local_project":"","p4_basket_name":"not set","p4_department":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[22],"p4-page-type":[18],"class_list":["post-2634","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-climate-energy","tag-climatechange","p4-page-type-briefing"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2634","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2634"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2634\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2638,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2634\/revisions\/2638"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2635"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2634"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2634"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2634"},{"taxonomy":"p4-page-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/eu-unit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/p4-page-type?post=2634"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}