Thursday

22nd Feb 2018

Opinion

Commission in do-nothing mode on climate change policy

  • Rather than issuing a 'what-do-you-think' document the commission ought to be saying what it thinks (Photo: europarl.europa.eu)

“Commission moves forward on climate and energy towards 2030” reads the headline of the press release accompanying a recent ‘green paper’ on the same issue.

Regrettably, the headline is more ambitious than the text of the paper.

Thank you for reading EUobserver!

Subscribe now for a 30 day free trial.

  1. €150 per year
  2. or €15 per month
  3. Cancel anytime

EUobserver is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that publishes daily news reports, analysis, and investigations from Brussels and the EU member states. We are an indispensable news source for anyone who wants to know what is going on in the EU.

We are mainly funded by advertising and subscription revenues. As advertising revenues are falling fast, we depend on subscription revenues to support our journalism.

For group, corporate or student subscriptions, please contact us. See also our full Terms of Use.

If you already have an account click here to login.

The Commission is right in stating that “early agreement on the 2030 framework is important” in order to ensure the right infrastructure investment in the near future, to provide an incentive for innovation, and to decide the EU ambition level in the international climate negotiation of a post 2020 regime, to be finalized in 2015.

Unfortunately, rather than providing a stance on this, the document offers a number of general reflections and reports on the outcome of the different, already much debated, “roadmaps” on climate and energy policy.

There is no mentioning of the fact that any cost-effective trajectory from where we are today towards 2030 would imply more effort now than currently agreed in the 2020 policy.

The document reports, correctly, that emissions in 2011 were 16 percent below 1990 levels. But it fails to mention that this - taking Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) credits into account - is already an over-fulfillment of the 2020 target (this has been the case since 2009!).

The best way to get to a +/- 40% reduction in 2030 as suggested in the climate roadmap cannot be to do “nothing” (except keep present emission levels constant) over the next seven years and then aim for a 25 percent reduction in the subsequent 10 years.

In fact the situation is even worse. The Emissions Trading System (ETS) – allowing companies to trade pollution credits – has been capsized.

The unused emission allowances from the 2008-12 period, carried over into the 2013-20 trading period, plus the allowances to be auctioned in the coming years means that 2020 emissions from ETS-covered installations can easily exceed what would be consistent with the overall 20 percent reduction target by 2020.

The commission’s persistent hesitation in taking proper corrective action on the ETS is a major climate policy - and credibility - problem.

The document is also disappointingly silent on the more recent debate on the role of biomass in climate mitigation.

The scientific committee of the European Environment Agency in 2011 pointed out that the automatic consideration of biomass as carbon neutral is unjustified and may lead to major climate-unfriendly policy developments, particularly the substitution of natural gas with wood pellets.

Recent past history shows the commission is slow to act on new evidence - almost five years in the case of liquid biofuels.

There is no need to wait another three or four years before agreeing a more correct CO2 assessment of different types of solid biomass.

Less questioning and more action

But the most serious objection to the green paper is not on substance but on format.

A ‘green paper’ is appropriate when opening a new policy area or extending an existing one into uncharted waters. This is not the case for climate or energy policy.

Rather than issuing a what-do-you-think document, the commission ought to be telling us what the commission thinks.

There is no shortage of material on which a commission opinion, or even proposal, could have been based.

Moreover, it is not as if the answers of the important stakeholders are not already clear. I am far from being the only one able to anticipate the opinions of the electricity sector, the chemical industry, the renewable energy sector and the oil industry.

The commission’s reluctance to make policy proposals has serious implications. It paralyses the EU decision-making process. The elimination of SO2 from power plants, urban waste water treatment, or catalytic converters on cars would never have happened if the commission’s approach at the time had been: “What do you think?".

It appears obvious that the Commission is unable to agree on an ambitious climate policy. But even an unambitious policy proposal is better than a questionnaire.

The defensive commission position is particularly unfortunate given the current institutional timetable. Following the responses to the questions in the green paper, the commission is expected to table “proposals” by the end of the year.

But to what avail?

The European Parliament will go into election mode next year long before any legislative proposal could be dealt with. And the next parliament can, at best, only be expected to pronounce itself in the second half of 2015.

Can we afford to energy and climate policy remaining in limbo for the next three years?

The EU has been seen as the major player pushing for an ambitious global agreement on climate change. If it is to maintain this image in the negotiations towards 2015, it will be in spite of, rather than because of, present commission policy.

The writer is a former director in the European Commission and head of the European Commission’s negotiations on the UN Climate Convention and the subsequent Kyoto Protocol

Greek government's steady steps to exit bailout programme

Growth predictions are positive, exports increasing, unemployment dropping and credit-ratings up, says the head of Greece's Syriza delegation to the European Parliament. Now the government in Athens is looking to design its own reform programme.

News in Brief

  1. EU migration to UK at lowest since 2012
  2. MEP Andrieu will chair parliament pesticide committee
  3. Juncker's right-hand man warns of 'institutional blockage'
  4. Greek parliament to open probe on PMs and EU commissioner
  5. May gathers Brexit ministers to hammer out UK position
  6. Tajani asks Juncker for all EMA Brexit relocation documents
  7. Hahn: EU to back entry talks with Albania and Macedonia
  8. UEFA signs deal to promote 'European values' at EURO 2020

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. EPSUMovie Premiere: 'Up to The Last Drop' - 22 February, Brussels
  2. Aid & Trade LondonJoin Thousands of Stakeholders of the Global Aid Industry at Aid & Trade London
  3. Macedonian Human Rights Movement Int.European Free Alliance Joins MHRMI to End the Anti-Macedonian Name Negotiations
  4. Mission of China to the EUChina-EU Tourism Year to Promote Business and Mutual Ties
  5. European Jewish CongressAt “An End to Antisemitism!” Conference, Dr. Kantor Calls for Ambitious Solutions
  6. UNESDAA Year Ago UNESDA Members Pledged to Reduce Added Sugars in Soft Drinks by 10%
  7. International Partnership for Human RightsUzbekistan: Investigate Torture of Journalist
  8. CESICESI@Noon on ‘Digitalisation & Future of Work: Social Protection For All?’ - March 7
  9. UNICEFExecutive Director's Committment to Tackling Sexual Exploitation and Abuse of Children
  10. Nordic Council of MinistersState of the Nordic Region 2018: Facts, Figures and Rankings of the 74 Regions
  11. Mission of China to the EUDigital Economy Shaping China's Future, Over 30% of GDP
  12. Macedonian Human Rights Movement Int.Suing the Governments of Macedonia and Greece for Changing Macedonia's Name

Latest News

  1. Greek government's steady steps to exit bailout programme
  2. Frontex: Europe's new law enforcement agency?
  3. Poland and Greece broke EU environment laws, rules court
  4. Dutch MPs vote on ending 'Ukraine-type' referendums
  5. Corruption report: Hungary gets worse, Italy makes progress
  6. UK seeks flexible transition length after Brexit
  7. Commission defence of Barroso meeting leaves 'discrepancies'
  8. MEPs bar WMD and killer robots from new EU arms fund

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Dialogue PlatformBeyond the Errors in the War on Terror: How to Fight Global Militarism - 22 February
  2. Swedish EnterprisesHarnessing Globalization- at What Cost? Keynote Speaker Commissioner Malmström
  3. European Friends of ArmeniaSave The Date 28/02: “Nagorno-Karabakh & the EU: 1988-2018”
  4. European Heart NetworkSmart CAP is Triple Win for Economy, Environment and Health
  5. European Free AlllianceEFA Joined the Protest in Aiacciu to Solicit a Dialogue After the Elections
  6. EPSUDrinking Water Directive Step Forward but Human Right to Water Not Recognized
  7. European Gaming & Betting AssociationGambling Operators File Data Protection Complaint Against Payment Block in Norway
  8. European Jewish CongressEJC Expresses Deep Concern Over Proposed Holocaust Law in Poland
  9. CECEConstruction Industry Gets Together to Discuss the Digital Revolution @ the EU Industry Days
  10. Mission of China to the EUChina-EU Relations in the New Era
  11. European Free AlllianceEnd Discrimination of European Minorities - Sign the Minority Safepack Initiative
  12. Centre Maurits Coppieters“Diversity Shouldn’t Be Only a Slogan” Lorant Vincze (Fuen) Warns European Commission