Ivan Scrase, Senior Climate Change Policy Officer - Renewable Energy
On Wednesday the European Commission released its proposals for a European policy framework for climate and energy in the period from 2020 to 2030. At first glance the proposals look quite ambitious. However NGOs have been unanimous in their alarm at what it will mean for people, the environment and nature - see these press releases from the RSPB, BirdLife, WWF, Greenpeace, and Climate Action Network.
According to Ariel Brunner, Head of EU Policy at BirdLife Europe, “The Commission is setting its ambition at a level that cannot safeguard us from damaging climate change and it even proposes to open Europe’s doors to the worst types of dirty fuels.” So, what was announced, and what are the implications?
ClimateEurope will cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. This may sound like a substantial cut. However the 2020 goal (for a 20% cut) was achieved in 2012: 40% is in fact not ambitious at all. More importantly it is right at the bottom of the range of cuts that scientists say would be sufficient to stand a reasonable chance of avoiding dangerous climate change. It puts us on course for a roughly 50:50 chance of experiencing less than two degrees of warming – the level scientists consider the upper limit of ‘safe’ warming. Hence the title of this blog article.The RSPB and other NGOs have argued that for cut of at least 55%. According to Dr Kevin Anderson at the UK Energy research Centre, a cut of 80% by 2030 is needed to stand a good chance of avoiding dangerous warming.
Renewable energy
Europe will aim to produce 27% of its energy from renewable sources by 2030, up only 7% on the 2020 target. The RSPB and other NGOs wanted to see 45% of Europe’s energy coming from renewable sources by 2030. Moreover the commitment to 2030 is not binding on national governments, unlike the 2020 target. This sends a much less assuring message to investors and hamper innovation and growth in this vital sector for the fight to combat climate change.
Other energy disappointments and dangers
Plans to make the emissions trading scheme effective by raising the price of carbon were announced, but with a delay that means it will not be fixed before 2020 if at all.
No new target or delivery mechanisms were set for energy saving in the announcement. The Commission missed an opportunity to introduce new regulations on shale gas drilling, and instead issued some non-binding recommendations. Alarmingly, the paper says no standards should be set for the carbon intensity of imported transport fuels, which would open the doors to dirty fuels, such as oil produced from Canadian tar sands.
Any silver linings?
There are a few sensible proposals in the white paper that could benefit birds and wildlife. The paper does not set a target for renewable transport fuels after 2020, which is good news as it means less pressure to convert land to intensive cropping for biofuel production. It also proposes measures that would make sure biomass used in power stations is sustainably produced and contributes to cutting carbon emissions. And there is a proposal to account for carbon emissions from land use changes, which could create a useful incentive to restore degraded peatlands.
All is not lost. The European Parliament (made up of MEPs) has taken a more positive and ambitious line on clean energy. And the Council (made up of national governments) could still improve the commitments when they meet in late March this year. We’ll be working hard in the UK and Brussels to ensure Europe regains its ambition and leadership position on clean energy.