EU climate plan gets cool reception from business and green groups
LEIGH PHILLIPS
24.01.2008 @ 09:22 CET
The European Commission on Wednesday (23 January) unveiled wide-ranging proposals on how the EU is to tackle climate change.
The package has had a mixed reception, with green organisations generally saying it does not go far enough while the business lobby fears industry's competitiveness could be harmed.
(Photo: European Community, 2008 )
The renewable energy producers was decidedly content with the support they are now receiving from the commission.
"The solar thermal sector welcomes the renewables directive proposal. For the first time, renewable heating and cooling will be fully integrated into EU legislation," said a spokesperson for the European Solar Thermal Industry Federation.
The European Photovoltaic Industry Association, representing solar power firms, was also largely pleased: "The proposal is welcomed by the photovoltaic sector, as it should foster a strong uptake of solar photovoltaic electricity. However, a number of clarifications and improvements are necessary to ensure its concrete implementation."
Nonetheless the wider business community while welcoming parts of the package, is afraid of the cost.
The Confederation of European Businesses, or BusinessEurope – the European employers' organisation – said that the significant electricity price increases the will result from the package are "not satisfactory".
BusinessEurope president Ernest-Antoine Seillière said: "The new proposal will have a huge impact on the European economy. It will now be crucial that the competitiveness of European industry is maintained and not affected by unduly large direct and indirect cost increases."
The business group is also unhappy with the threshold for opting out of the EU Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) for small installations. They want this threshold raised to 25,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per year, with the ETS system putting a price on each tonne emitted by a company.
They would like to see the "severe restrictions" on the use of credits generated by the clean development mechanism lifted as well.
Industry upset
The steel industry is upset that its reduction effort up to now has gone unnoticed.
"The commission has decided that we must achieve a 21% reduction in emissions on 2005 levels by 2020, but the commission is not acknowledging the reductions in the steel industry made between 1990 and 2005, where we already achieved precisely a 21% reduction," said Axel Eggert, the spokesperson for Eurofer – the European Confederation of Iron and Steel Industries.
"If this means we have to reduce emissions by some 40% all together, this is unacceptable, and from a technical viewpoint unachievable," he warned.
Environmental groups meanwhile are frustrated at what they believe is a lack of ambition in the emissions targets. Plans to cut the EU's greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent will not be sufficient to avert dangerous climate change, says Friends of the Earth Europe. The environment group accuses the commission of backtracking from the position it took at international climate negotiations in Bali a few weeks ago.
"The promising parts of this energy package are overshadowed by a greenhouse gas target that falls well short of what is needed," said the group's climate campaigner, Sonja Meister. "Reducing greenhouse gases by only 20 per cent is simply not enough."
"The EU must live up to the agreements made in Bali and commit to at least 30 per cent emission cuts at home," she said.
'Permits to pollute'
Other groups are critical of the continued free allocation of emissions permits under the ETS. "The EU has compromised to corporate lobbyists again" said Tamra Gilbertson of Carbon Trade Watch. "Instead of imposing strict regulations on emissions, it is offering them a lifeline and continuing to offer free pollution permits for at least the next decade."
Carbon Trade Watch is sceptical about the entire emissions trading scheme: "Haggling over whether EU emissions trading permits are auctioned or handed out misses the point. These are still 'permits to pollute' that companies can use to buy their way out of their responsibility to reduce emissions" said Kevin Smith, a researcher at Carbon Trade Watch.
The ten percent target for biofuels in transport has come under heavy criticism from many groups.
Corporate Europe Observatory, (CEO) a lobby watchdog group based in the Netherlands, is worried that the commission is taking into account the interests of the biofuel industry and ignoring the warnings of scientists, noting that the EU Joint Research Centre and the UK Parliament Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) have expressed strong doubts about biofuel sustainability, with the EAC calling for a moratorium on biofuel targets.
"The European Commission's failure to act on the many warnings is shockingly irresponsible," said CEO spokesperson Nina Holland.
Although some developing world leaders such as Brazilian President Lula da Silva are great champions of biofuels, many grassroots peasant organisations are steadfastly opposed. "The sustainability criteria proposed by the European Commission exclude vital factors such as large scale water extraction, soil erosion, land conflicts, human rights and labour conditions of workers. Moreover, they can't deal with macro-level impacts such as displacement and increased food prices," said Stella Semino of Argentina's Grupo de Reflexión Rural.
Biofuels worries
Greenpeace welcomed the implementation of the 20% renewables target into legislation, and calls the climate package "a good start", but wonders if there can be such a thing as sustainable biofuels.
"The 10%-target for biofuels in transport could have severe environmental and social impacts," said Mahi Sideridou, Greenpeace's EU climate and energy policy director.
"The amount of available biomass that is sustainable is limited and, in order to contribute towards the 20% renewable energy target, it is currently more efficiently used in electricity and heating sectors," he said.
"Most biofuels now appear to be worse for the climate than oil," said Friends of the Earth Europe's Sonja Meister.
"There is not enough good agriculture land to grow food, feed and biofuels. The JRC report said any expansion in Europe would mean ploughing grasslands, which will result in huge greenhouse gas emissions," she added.
But it is not just environmental groups that are worried about biofuels. Food security concerns mean that development NGOs are opposed to the biofuels target as well. "Biofuels can make a positive contribution," said Oxfam spokesperson Alexander Woollcombe, "but only so long as they are done in the right way. Until clear sustainability and social criteria are developed, the biofuel targets should be dropped."
"Oxfam is already seriously concerned that the EU's biofuels strategy fails to protect the land, livelihoods and human rights of vulnerable people, creating a huge threat to sustainable development where there should have been an opportunity."
Given the significant effect the climate and energy proposals will have on the whole of European society and beyond, further reactions from different sectors is expected in the coming days and weeks as the full ramifications of the package sink in.
