Friday

23rd Jun 2017

Opinion

EU’s 2030 climate plans based on flawed analysis

  • The European Commission unveiled its greenhouse gas reduction targets for 2030 in January (Photo: Marina and Enrique)

Ban Ki-Moon, the United Nation's Secretary General, was in Brussels last week to champion the urgency of action on climate change.

I enjoyed his stories about dealing with frostbite on a trip to the Greenland icecap, and discovering that lifejackets are standard issue in the Kiribati islands (where the maximum altitude is 3 metres).

Dear EUobserver reader

Subscribe now for unrestricted access to EUobserver.

Sign up for 30 days' free trial, no obligation. Full subscription only 15 € / month or 150 € / year.

  1. Unlimited access on desktop and mobile
  2. All premium articles, analysis, commentary and investigations
  3. EUobserver archives

EUobserver is the only independent news media covering EU affairs in Brussels and all 28 member states.

♡ We value your support.

If you already have an account click here to login.

But I didn't think much of his enthusiasm for the EU's climate and energy plans for 2030.

“President Barroso proposed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent [by 2030]", Ban Ki-Moon said, referring to the head of the European Commission. "I strongly support this".

He went on to urge EU member states to officially adopt the European Commission’s proposal as soon as possible. But would Ban Ki-Moon – or anyone – support 40 percent with full understanding of what it means?

The commission calls 40 percent by 2030 “ambitious” and “in line with climate science”. It is not.

Seven years ago, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recommended that developed countries cut their emissions by 25-40% by 2020, increasing to 80-95% by 2050.

The commission has taken the low end of that outdated trajectory and adjusted it for 2030. The truth is that 40 percent cuts equal a fifty-fifty chance or worse of exceeding the critical threshold of 2°C of global warming. And that’s without taking into account the latest IPCC analysis, which urges even tougher action on climate change.

So much for the commission’s regard for climate science. But if you challenge commission officials on the inadequate level of action, they say we must be realistic and think about the economic impacts. “Forty percent is the most cost-efficient scenario,” they claim. This too is nonsense.

It turns out the commission assumed artificially high risks and costs for energy efficiency in its modelling of options for 2030. This made the 40 percent scenario (which has relatively little energy efficiency) look cheaper than other more ambitious scenarios.

Officials working on the dossier have also indicated that the commission only looked at the costs, not the balance of the costs and benefits, of each scenario.

For example, health benefits due to reduced air pollution were not taken into account. The economic impacts of climate change – such as flooding and loss of food production – were not even modelled. This also helped make 40 percent look like the cheapest option.

Most damning of all, the commission’s background analysis cites research from Cambridge Econometrics (a consultancy), which estimates that the 40 percent scenario would result in negative GDP impacts.

By contrast, the research shows that more ambitious emissions cuts and binding targets for renewables and energy efficiency would increase the EU’s GDP (see p81-82 of the 2030 impact assessment). These findings were ignored.

Why would the commission do this?

Senior officials lecture me that 40 percent is the best the EU can do in today's political climate. “You need to get real”, said one. President Barroso – and many commission people working on the dossier – are disgracefully defeatist.

They would rather propose a weak 40 percent target, which they think member states are more likely to support, than fight for action on the scale genuinely needed.

And they’re quite plainly prepared to be selective with the truth to justify 40 percent.

Ban Ki-Moon would hopefully re-think his strategy if he knew all this. The problem is that, for now, he wants the EU to adopt an official position on 2030 as soon as possible.

He hopes this will inspire other big emitters – China, the US – to come up with targets of their own, in time to broker an international deal at the Paris climate summit next year.

This approach only makes sense if the EU's position is up to the task. Whatever the EU does on climate change is seen as the gold standard – other big emitters will almost certainly aim lower.

So unless the EU adopts a much higher target than the commission's pitifully weak 40 percent, the result will be a chain reaction of even weaker commitments from other countries.

This could cost us the fight on climate change.

The writer is climate and energy campaigner at Friends of the Earth Europe

Green groups unhappy with EU climate proposals

The European Commission’s latest climate proposals fall short of the mark, say pro-green groups, following a UN report, which warned of irreversible consequences of a warming planet.

EU proposes 'affordable' climate targets

The EU commission has put out new greenhouse gas targets designed not to damage its economy, while upholding its status as a world leader on climate change.

Massive EU gas investment a mistake

Europe's massive investment plan – some €200 billion – in gas-related infrastructure is a huge misstep that does not address the challenge of Europe's energy demands or climate change commitments.

A positive agreement for Greece

The outcome of the Eurogroup meeting this week leaves a positive footprint, setting the basis for the Greek economy to exit the vicious circle of austerity and debt.

Britain preparing to jump off a cliff

Following the poor performance of Theresa May's Conservatives in the recent UK general election, her prospects of negotiating a good Brexit deal have gone from bad to worse.

Are MEPs too 'free' to be accountable?

The European Parliament is currently fine-tuning its negotiating position on the Commission's proposal from September 2016 for a mandatory transparency register. Sadly, so far it seems to prefer empty statements to bold action.

News in Brief

  1. Belgian PM calls May's proposal on EU citizens 'vague'
  2. UK lacks support of EU countries in UN vote
  3. Spain to command anti-smuggler Mediterranean force
  4. Estonia confirms opposition to Nord Stream 2 pipeline
  5. Ireland and Denmark outside EU military plan
  6. EU leaders renew vows to uphold Paris climate deal
  7. US issues warrant for VW managers, German media say
  8. EU extends sanctions against Russia

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. EGBAOnline Gambling: The EU Court Rejects Closed Licensing Regimes In Member States
  2. World VisionFaces of Today, Leaders of Tomorrow: Join the Debate on Violence Against Girls - 29 June
  3. ECR GroupThe EU Must Better Protect Industry from Unfair Competition
  4. Malta EU 2017Better Protection for Workers From Cancer-Causing Substances
  5. EPSUAfter 9 Years of Austerity Europe's Public Sector Workers Deserve a Pay Rise!
  6. Dialogue PlatformGlobalised Religions and the Dialogue Imperative. Join the Debate!
  7. UNICEFEU Trust Fund Contribution to UNICEF's Syria Crisis Response Reaches Nearly €200 Million
  8. EUSEW17Bringing Buildings Into the Circular Economy. Discuss at EU Sustainable Energy Week
  9. European Healthy Lifestyle AllianceCan an Ideal Body Weight Lead to Premature Death?
  10. Malta EU 2017End of Roaming Charges: What Does It Entail?
  11. World VisionWorld Refugee Day, a Dark Reminder of the Reality of Children on the Move
  12. European Social Services ConferenceDriving innovation in the social sector – 26-28 June

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Dialogue PlatformMuslims Have Unique Responsibility to Fight Terror: Opinon From Fethullah Gülen
  2. EUSEW17Check out This Useful Infographic on How to Stay Sustainable and Energy Efficient.
  3. Counter BalanceEuropean Parliament Criticises the Juncker Plan's Implementation
  4. The Idealist QuarterlyDoes Europe Really Still Need Feminism? After-Work Chat on 22 June
  5. EUSEW17Create an Energy Day Event Before the End of June. Join the Call for Clean Energy
  6. UNICEF1 in 5 Children in Rich Countries Lives in Relative Income Poverty, 1 in 8 Faces Food Insecurity
  7. International Partnership for Human Rights26 NGOs Call on Interpol Not to Intervene Versus Azerbaijani Human Rights Defenders
  8. Malta EU 2017Significant Boost in Financing for SMEs and Entrepreneurs Under New Agreement
  9. World VisionYoung People Rise up as EU Signs Consensus for Development at EU Development Days
  10. ILGA-EuropeLGBTI Activists and Businesses Fighting Inequality Together
  11. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Prime Ministers Respond to Trump on Paris Agreement
  12. European Healthy Lifestyle AllianceNutrition and Heart Disease: Time to Raise Our Standards