Dear readers,
The EU Member States and the European Parliament have until this Friday, January 21, to comment on the EU Commission's proposal for the so-called Taxonomy Regulation.
Since the beginning of the year, much has been reported about the Commission's initiative to classify investments in new nuclear power plants and natural gas plants as »green« – as sustainable investments.
The resistance is growing, but the hurdles are high that could prevent the project.
However, the taxonomy regulation is not the only step that the EU is taking to get a little closer to its climate goals – net emissions down by at least 55 percent by 2030, climate neutrality by 2050.
On Thursday, the EU Environment Council held an informal meeting in the city of Amiens in northern France.
On the agenda was, among other things, a topic that has so far been largely ignored by the media: a planned second EU emissions trading system for the building and transport sectors, the »ETS 2«.
The EU Commission presented this project in July last year as part of the "Fit for 55" package.
24 percent more emissions in the transport sector
The sectors road transport, building heating, agriculture, small industrial plants and waste management together account for around 60 percent of the EU's greenhouse gas emissions.
And the problem does not seem to resolve itself: annual CO₂ emissions in the transport sector were 24 percent higher across the EU in 2018 than in 1990.
more on the subject
Speculation with CO₂ certificates: How hedge funds fuel the coal phase-outBy Stefan Schultz
However, the EU Commission wants emissions in the building and road traffic sectors to fall by 43 percent by 2030 compared to 2005.
A separate emissions trading system is to be set up to compensate for greenhouse gas emissions from motor fuels used in road traffic and in buildings.
In a study for the organizations Climate Alliance, Germanwatch, WWF and Climate Action Network, scientists from the research center of the Evangelical Study Group and the Forum Ecological-Social Market Economy have evaluated what the plans for this system look like so far.
A few points from this:
As a
supplementary instrument
, the introduction of an emissions trading system for buildings and road traffic in the EU makes sense and is useful.
Because the general idea for a CO₂ price is that the
costs of the
damage caused
by greenhouse gas emissions must be borne by those who cause the damage.
This is no different in the two new sectors than in industry and the energy sector.
Issuing emission certificates is a way of regulating the
amount of greenhouse gases
that can be emitted.
And it is transparent and comprehensible.
Because emissions trading is to take place at European level, there is an opportunity to mitigate economic and social inequalities between countries through certain
distribution mechanisms
.
In relative terms, the financial burden of a universal and therefore equally high CO₂ price varies, depending on the wage level.
Greenhouse gas emissions vary in line with the level of pollution: Per capita emissions in Luxembourg, Ireland or Germany are many times higher than in Romania, Bulgaria or Estonia.
This mismatch
is particularly pronounced
in the transport sector.
Financial compensation would therefore be fair.
And could look something like this: 50 percent of the revenue should flow into a
social climate fund
, 47.5 percent should go to the member states to pay for climate and social policy measures.
An innovation fund is to use the rest to promote "innovative low-CO₂ technologies".
The total sum at stake is not small: the EU expects revenues of
287 billion euros
for the period between 2026 and 2032 .
It is planned that emissions trading for the transport and building sectors will start in 2026.
It is also possible that it will start as early as 2025.
How effective is the tool?
Many of these points still sound relatively vague.
The climate and environmental protection organizations that commissioned the study took this as an opportunity for criticism.
It is unclear how great the climate protection effect will actually be, said Malte Hentschke-Kemper, Deputy Managing Director of Climate Alliance Germany: "Emissions trading without sufficient climate protection effect, which also hits the poor more, would be absurd and would reduce the acceptance of climate protection measures endanger.« The regulations on social balance should be formulated more clearly.
more on the subject
Nuclear physicists on the French nuclear renaissance: »It's about nationalism, not about climate protection« An interview by Susanne Götze
And in general one can ask oneself: How effective is the instrument of CO₂ certificate trading in the EU?
In the beginning, the parameters were set incorrectly, that's clear today: in 2005, for example, so many certificates were issued that the price for the "pollution rights" that can be freely traded fell to zero - because of an oversupply.
But because the number of certificates and thus the CO₂ upper limit is constantly falling, and the EU has also tightened its climate targets for 2020, it now costs more than 80 euros to blow a ton of CO₂ into the air.
And since the introduction of emissions trading in 2005, emissions have fallen by almost 43 percent in the most important sectors covered, according to the EU.
more on the subject
The »opening balance« of the Ministry of Climate: »We wasted an incredible amount of time« An interview by Viola Kiel
So it seems sensible to expand the pool of companies that have to pay for emissions.
Around 11,000 companies that earn money by generating electricity and heat or are active in energy-intensive industry currently have to offset their carbon dioxide emissions via EU emissions trading.
And the EU is also confident: The second emissions trading system should now be based on the “positive results”, according to the Commission.
One point mentioned in the study is particularly important: The »ETS 2« must not remain the only instrument.
If you like, we will inform you once a week about the most important things about the climate crisis - stories, research results and the latest developments on the biggest issue of our time. You can subscribe to the newsletter here.
The topics of the week
Resistance in the EU Parliament to the green classification of nuclear power is growing Nuclear
and gas power plants are to be considered sustainable in Europe in the future.
Members of the EU Parliament are now criticizing the plans in an open letter to the EU Commission.
But the hurdles for a stop are high.
Dispute over lignite mining: EU Commission will stop payments to Poland
Because Poland is resisting an EU order on lignite mining, the European Court of Justice imposed a fine of 500,000 euros a day.
Warsaw hasn't paid yet, now Brussels will withhold EU funds.
Solar geoengineering: Scientists warn against dimming the sun
Last hope in the climate crisis – or dangerous experiment?
The idea of sending the sun's rays back into space is as daring as it is controversial.
Critical scientists and environmentalists are calling for a global moratorium.
Federal Minister of Transport: Volker Wissing calls speed limit "very small issue"
Tempo 130 on motorways just an emotional issue?
FDP Transport Minister Volker Wissing is a tip against the coalition partners.
When it comes to the agreed target for electric cars, an important definition is apparently unclear.
Findings of global studies: How dangerous is climate change for unborn babies and small children
More premature births and a higher risk of becoming obese: Global warming harms even the youngest – and has lifelong consequences.
This is shown by studies from very different countries.
stay confident
Your viola keel