Verdes Equo asks Spain to join Austria’s resource so that fossil gas and nuclear are not considered green energy

Verdes Equo has presented a Non-Legislative Proposition in Congress, in which it asks the Government that Spain joins the appeal filed by Austria before the Court of Justice of the European Union, to prevent fossil gas and nuclear energy from being included in the green taxonomy of the EU. The European Commission approved last February the green taxonomy (classification of economic activities considered environmentally sustainable) and included fossil gas and nuclear energy.

The Taxonomy is a classification of “economic activities substantially contributing” to the “environmental objectives based on scientific criteria” that the European Union has set. And the “science-based environmental targets” that the EU has self-imposed are -55% in CO₂ by 2030 (reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 55% by 2030, compared to what the EU emitted in 1990) and net zero CO2 by 2050. What the colloquially called “green” taxonomy of the European Union does is, roughly, point out which climate solutions should be benefited (regulatory, fiscally, or through investments, for example). Its great contribution is therefore that it guides investors, who come to consider that some technologies will receive better fiscal, or regulatory, treatment than others. Thus, the Taxonomy is called to attract investment in some technologies… or others. Well, the European Commission proposed a few months ago to classify gas and nuclear as green; The proposal was very harshly criticized from many quarters (environmentalism, civil society, groups of scientists); and it did not like it either in a good part of the European Parliament, which tried to deactivate it, but… This was not possible, because last July the European Parliament, which has a conservative majority, had to pronounce on that option (the deactivation of gas and nuclear as green investments), but decided to leave gas and nuclear where they were placed by the Commission chaired by the conservative Ursula von der Leyen. That is, they decided to keep gas and nuclear as “green” energies.

The European Council – they now explain from More Green Country Equo – must soon pronounce on the taxonomy and, if endorsed, both fossil gas and nuclear energy would be labeled as “green”. Well, for Verdes Equo, classifying fossil gas and nuclear energy as green energies “is something totally contrary and inconsistent with the European Green Deal and distances us from compliance with the Paris Agreement”. The Green Party claims that, according to a report by the European Union Platform on Green Finance, the expert group that advises the European Commission on energy transition, gas “is not green at any time in its life” (neither during exploration, nor during extraction, nor during transport, nor during its use -burning- to generate electricity or heating). In addition, the construction of new plants “does not ensure a substantial contribution” to achieving climate neutrality by 2050. The report to which the party appeals points out on the other hand that, due to the risks associated with nuclear, it does not guarantee the absence of risks on the “sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the transition to a circular economy or the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems”, basic requirements of climate taxonomy. For all these reasons, Verdes Equo asks Spain to support Austria’s appeal, which has already been supported by Luxembourg.

Natural gas is a fossil fuel that contributes to climate change both during its extraction and transport and during its combustion. Moreover, according to the Ministry for Ecological Transition, “methane, which is the main component of natural [más del 95%]gas, is a more potent cause of greenhouse effect than_CO2.” Specifically, methane is a gas with a global warming potential 86 times higher than_CO2 in the first 20 years of life. Emitting one kilogram of methane is equivalent to emitting 86 kilograms of _CO2. In addition, more and more scientific research shows that methane leaks have not been well accounted for and represent a larger climate problem than previously believed.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change defines fugitive emissions as “the intentional or unintentional release of greenhouse gases during the extraction, processing and delivery of fossil fuels to the point of end use”. Bankwatch Network’s Smoke and mirrors report, published in January 2020, concludes that “fugitive emissions values in more than half of the scenarios are around the 3% threshold defined by the International Energy Agency, beyond which fossil gas ceases to offer a climate benefit compared to coal.”

Source: Renewable Energies