A via crucis awaits the European Climate Law

The European Commission on Wednesday presented its ambitious climate protection plan: 13 legislative initiatives to reduce gas emissions by 55% by 2030 compared to 1990. It is his new commitment, already ratified, within the Paris agreement against climate change. The plan includes banning the sale of cars with internal combustion engines by 2035 and expanding carbon markets to put a price on emissions in transport and building. A tax on aviation fuel will also be introduced. But here are some steps of what can be a long way of the cross.

Waiting for China’s voice

1) Carbon border adjustment mechanism

The carbon border adjustment mechanism is the new instrument with which the EU seeks to tax the import of products whose manufacture generates more _CO2 than desirable. The intention is to ensure that imported items bear the cost of climate impact (as the EU seeks to do) and to prevent carbon leakage; that is, to prevent European factories from relocating to less stringent third-country rules.

However, China has been very critical for months of this idea, and its reactions are not expected to be favorable. There could even be litigation in the World Trade Organization (WTO), in which environmental law and free trade would come into play.

The political danger lies in the fact that it can be misinterpreted internationally and considered a protectionist tool of a “rich people’s club” and penalize developing countries.

“The Commission says it has very well studied this proposal and, according to its legal advisers, there should be no problems with the WTO. But legal interpretation is one thing and politics is another; above all, geopolitics; we’ll see…,” said David Howell, a climate policy expert at SEO/BirdLife and the Climate Action Network.

The EU takes a solo lead with this border tax; but the measure takes the US on the back foot, just as Biden is immersed in the process to overcome Trump’s legacy and tries to eliminate the barriers to trade that he imposed.

The Special Envoy for Climate Affairs, John Kerry, has called on the EU to make the mechanism a last resort.

“This legislative package may cause friction between these two powers, but American products are usually much less carbon-intensive than those of other major powers such as India or China, so, for this country, the tax would not have such a negative impact,” says Carlos Rico, an expert at Transport and Environment (T&E).

More expensive fuels

2) Overcoming the ‘yellow vest’ syndrome

The inclusion of road transport and buildings in emissions trading is a controversial idea. It would lead to an increase in the price of fuel. This is something that has not had the unanimous support of the Commissioners, although it is strongly supported by Angela Merkel and Ursula von der Leyen. Reluctant Commissioners fear the social repercussions of rising energy prices on vulnerable social groups, such as families and businesses heavily dependent on fossil fuels.

In Brussels, the yellow vest syndrome is rife: the fear of a protest movement like the one registered in France as a result of the increase in the price of diesel. Germany and Denmark are the only ones who support it if you doubt it.

To compensate for the increase in fuel prices, a Social Climate Fund will be created (which mobilizes 72,200 million euros for the period 2025-2032).

“This fund shows Europe’s political desire for social justice. But citizens should be treated like adults. This is a shared responsibility between the EU and national governments, which requires policymakers to take responsibility rather than blame Brussels,” Laurence Tubiana, the architect of the Paris agreement, told this newspaper.

Transition to electrical

3) Vehicle manufacturers give the alert

Restrictions on new internal combustion vehicles clash with manufacturers lagging behind in electrification processes.

“In the worst case, some 150,000 jobs are at risk in France, 100,000 in the industrial sector and about 50,000 in the auxiliary services, which would disappear completely,” says François Roudier, spokesman for the Plataforme Automobile, which groups 4,000 companies.

Still, the EU plan will place European manufacturers as world leaders in the electric car market, ahead of Chinese companies.

Volkswagen, Audi and Volvo have announced plans to be 100% electric by the target date.
“We need stricter _CO2 limits to push Europe to remain a leader,” says Rico. It is significant that 2020, the year in which the new EU rules on _CO2 emissions from cars came into force, was the first year in which Europe surpassed China in sales of electric vehicles (it sold more than China did in its territory).

Electrical and leadership

Europe has its own plans to generate its own batteries and not have to rely on other powers like China. Therefore, technological leadership in the field of electric vehicles will be absolute, should the ambition proposed in the package presented by the European Commission be maintained. “But maintaining that leadership is going to require continuing to accelerate and, as we have seen, that is only achieved by raising the ambition of _CO2 standards,” adds Carlos Rico, an expert at Transport and Environment.

Even at the stage of preparing the standards, manufacturers of equipment and product components (parts, subsystems, software, etc.) were already investing more in Europe than in China.

Kerosene tax

4) Airlines get their nails

The International Air Transport Association (IATA) opposes the announced program and assures that the planned measures (such as the kerosene tax and the end of free duties in European trade) are counterproductive. “Aviation is committed to decarbonisation, and we don’t need persuasive or punitive measures like taxes to drive this change,” said Willie Walsh, IATA Director General Willie Walsh.

“The taxes will divert money from the airline sector that could alternatively be used to reduce emissions if it were used in fleet renewal and adoption of clean technologies,” added the head of the association, whose airlines concentrate 80% of global traffic.

Walsh said that for the sector to reduce its emissions “it is necessary for governments to adopt a constructive policy that focuses on incentives for sustainable fuels and for the creation of a single European airspace.” Many sectors are calling for a greater contribution from the aviation sector in the fight against warming.

In addition, ships, as was the case with intra-European flights until now, will be able to be integrated into emissions trading. “Shipping companies, which until now barely had to contribute to climate issues thanks to the practical inaction of the World Maritime Organization (IMO), are not happy with this changing,” says the experts of Transport and Environment.

The Shadow of Denialism

5) The debate in the states and the European Parliament

The Commission’s proposal now begins a legislative process to be debated in the European Parliament and the states. Juantxo López de Uralde (president of the Commission for the Ecological Transition of the Congress, of UP) warned on Thursday – in a debate organized by Ecodes – that denialism has taken root in Vox and sectors of the PP, which may lead to obstacles to the European plan.

“Don’t get confused. Pedro Sánchez said the steak thing,” replied Deputy Diego Gago (PP). “Spain’s opinion will be key,” says Florent Marcellesi, spokesman for Más País Verdes- Equo.

“The Spanish climate change law puts an expiration date on the conventional car in 2040. It was approved only two months ago, and it was born obsolete,” says this former MEP, convinced that this is an example of how a Way of the Cross can sometimes be transformed into a fast pace.

Opinions

The impact of the European proposal

What impact can the Commission’s proposal have on the future global fight against climate change?

“With this package of legal measures, the EU shows that it is very serious about decarbonising its economy and meeting its targets set out in its climate action plan (NDC) for 2030,” says Laurence Tubiana, diplomat, president of the European Climate Foundation, considered one of the key people in the Paris agreement. “The Fit for 55 package (named after the group of dozen new directives) is the world’s first attempt to go beyond numbers and offer a set of precise policies, in a region with different geographies, social systems and levels of wealth, asking policymakers to find compromises that are fair and ambitious.” adds Laurence Tubiana.

“The policy package is impressive and it will take time to digest it at the national level to understand the implications it will have on employment, industries and national policy options to meet the goals,” she says.

Only a few countries have set targets more ambitious than those required by the EU’s 55% target: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Austria and Germany. “But the fact that 27 European countries are uniting around a common emissions reduction target and taking their share of the effort is something to be celebrated. It is a tribute to multilateralism at a time when the world is trying to comply with the 2015 Paris Agreement,” adds the president of the European Climate Foundation.

David Howell, an expert on climate policy at SEO/BirdLife and the European coordinator CAN, believes instead that the cut in “net emissions” of 55% is “insufficient” and proposes, like the other environmental groups, that it be raised to 65%, so that it is a decrease. Howell considers the EU proposal positive because it puts it in a position of credibility before the next climate summit in Glasgow (in November) although he does not believe that it will change the positions of China or the United States, which have already announced their new national contributions within the framework of the Paris agreement.

The third vice president and minister for the Ecological Transition, Teresa Ribera, indicated that the ‘Fit for 55’ package, to reduce Europe’s carbon footprint, “is a significant and complex step that requires maximum social commitment.”

“As far as we know, we believe that it is a package that is not only compatible, but that it is congruent, that it promotes renewable energies, that the objectives are aligned with our own Law and our own plans and that, in general, it facilitates a transversal action in all fields of emission reduction, but also thinking about that necessary adaptation to the effects of climate change.”

Source: The Vanguard