This week’s European parliamentary election results saw parties on the populist right making big gains in France and Germany, while the historic “green wave” of 2019 receded.
Despite polling showing a large majority of EU voters are in favour of continued or strengthened climate action, the results have “raised concerns” over the future of the bloc’s climate ambition.
The Green Deal package of EU laws passed during the past five years are expected to be “hard to undo”. However, these laws will need to be fully implemented in order to meet EU climate targets.
Moreover, while centrist parties continue to hold a majority in the new European parliament, the stronger presence of right-wing parties could make ambitious new laws harder to pass.
Carbon Brief has asked a range of policy experts what they think the European election results will mean for EU climate action over the next five years.
These are their responses, first as sample quotes, then, below, in full:
- Prof Federica Genovese: “[W]e should expect a rhetorical downscaling of the relevance of climate action. Whether this also means a substantive downscaling of the Green Deal depends on whether the EU will be looking at climate as a social redistributive agenda or a geopolitical security one.”
- Simone Tagliapietra: “[T]he pro-European centre has retained its majority of seats in the European Parliament, [sd] Europe is not going to reverse course on the green transition.”
- Luca Bergamaschi: “The results are a strong wake up call for climate action compared to the euphoria of 2019…The politics of climate action needs to be reengineered and reconnected with the needs of society.”
- Linda Kalcher: “While the threat from Moscow lingers we can expect Brussels to back its Green Deal – even if it’s sold as a weapon against Putin.”
- Vincent Hurkens: “The upcoming negotiations on the next European Commission president and her/his policy agenda will be decisive for Europe’s capacity to address the severe impacts and risks of climate change for Europe and EU’s global climate leadership.”
- Nils Redeker: “The results will complicate EU climate politics…the overall shift is likely to dampen enthusiasm for ambitious climate policies in [the European] parliament and could deter member states in the European Council from adopting new measures.”
Prof Federica Genovese
Professor of political science and international relations
University of Oxford
At least two results of the European Parliament (EP) elections will have important implications for Europe’s climate policy.
The first one is the self-evident main election outcome at the aggregate level. The right and far-right European party families – the governing European People’s Party and the European Conservatives and Reformists, plus the NI group – visibly increased their vote share, while the more progressive Renew Europe liberal party and, in particular, the Greens lost significantly.
[See Carbon Brief’s EU elections manifesto tracker for more on the party groupings.]
Whereas this is less of a gain of extreme-right populism as some had predicted, it is still a clear ideological shift from left to right. This is climate news because more progressive left-leaning parties have so far championed the urgency of climate change mitigation and adaptation, so the composition of the new EP will threaten the political momentum of the EU climate policy agenda.
Some expression of continuity with past policies will remain, both because the historical EPP-S&D balance remains relatively strong, and also because [current European Commission president Ursula] Von Der Leyen will probably continue heading the commission.
However, we should expect a rhetorical downscaling of the relevance of climate action. Whether this also means a substantive downscaling of the Green Deal depends on whether the EU will be looking at climate as a social redistributive agenda or a geopolitical security one.
There is also another electoral result that deeply affects the future of Europe’s climate policy, namely that this shift is particularly determined by the French and German EP elections. This is important as it is not a result observed in other comparably large countries.
In the short term, this result could have some negative impacts. France and Germany are the largest European economies, where much of decarbonisation should take place. Despite their controversial policies, political leaders from both countries – Emmanuel Macron in France and Robert Habeck in Germany – have championed climate action in the past, and these voices are being traded with more ambiguous – if not openly sceptical – views.
At the same time, this could be the opportunity to rethink how climate issues can enter the heart of mainstream parties – in France and Germany, but also across Europe – that want to distinguish themselves and credibly compete with the far right. The Socialists and Democrats (S&D) from across the board now have a big chance to appropriate the climate issue and push the EP towards more progressive climate action.
Simone Tagliapietra
Senior fellow
Bruegel
In the run up to the European elections there has been substantial speculation about the future of the Green Deal, with some pointing at its potential being dismantled following an eventual dramatic surge in far-right parties.
The good news for Europe, and for the world, is that this scenario has been avoided: as the pro-European centre has retained its majority of seats in the European Parliament, Europe is not going to reverse course on the green transition.
However, business-as-usual is not an option, either. The elections have unveiled an important sense of unease in our societies – and in the case of Germany and France, even more than largely anticipated – that must be taken seriously and duly addressed, also when it comes to climate policy.
The Green Deal has come a long way since it was conceived five years ago, and these elections mark a new beginning for this agenda rather than its dismissal. It must now restart with a new agenda focused on green investments, green social support and green industrial policy. Decarbonisation is the only route for Europe to get to resilience and competitiveness. The new majority in the European Parliament has the responsibility to drive it, by avoiding futile shortcuts.
Linda Kalcher
Executive director
Strategic Perspectives
While it’s correct that the European Parliament elections hit Green parties hard, it’s simply not the case that this means EU climate legislation and plans will be undone. We’ve seen a lot of – quite frankly – lazy analysis to this effect, but what matters here are the numbers across parliament and capitals in the European Council.
One: the European Green Deal still has a majority in the house. The appetite for any roll-backs of laws is really low, especially given the uncertainty of how the French parliamentary elections will affect majorities in Council. European industry knows it risks losing ground to China and the US in the clean energy transition and investors crave policy certainty.
Two: while climate may be less explicitly referenced by the Commission it will still be central. We can expect that many new initiatives under the next Commission will be about strengthening industrial competitiveness and energy security. The high geopolitical and economic cost of being dependent on gas, oil and coal imports remains a major challenge for the competitiveness of the economy and energy bills.
Three: energy prices are still two times higher in the EU than in the US. The answer to this is to invest in resilient and secure clean energy and storage systems that can offer the continent long term security and lower risks of Russia exerting leverage over gas-dependent members. While the threat from Moscow lingers we can expect Brussels to back its Green Deal – even if it’s sold as a weapon against Putin.
Luca Bergamaschi
Co-founding director
ECCO
The results are a strong wake up call for climate action compared to the euphoria of 2019. The low turnout and the increasing dissatisfaction with established parties in many countries are yet a further symptom of the distrust of many towards the current political offer – both in terms of representatives and policy.
The politics of climate action needs to be reengineered and reconnected with the needs of society. While the desirability of the transition remains high, politics is failing to make it more accessible and tangible for the most.
At citizens’ level, one of the main tasks should be to design and offer concrete solutions for different social classes. At the economic level, we need to see bolder plans for mobilising the capital needed and directing it to the industrial players that want to invest in innovation.
European leaders and ministers now need to work together to build an agenda and design policy that can bridge the gap between long-term targets and everyday needs and desires.
Vincent Hurkens
Programme lead
EU politics and climate governance at E3G
Although far-right gains have garnered significant attention, a large majority of Europeans supported centrist parties that have committed to continuing the green transition.
It depends on the largest pro-democracy political forces of social democrats, liberals – and particularly the centre-right – how much influence they allow the far right to have on the EU’s climate agenda for the next five years.
Sustained climate action and a predictable regulatory framework towards climate neutrality are crucial to deliver on electoral promises made by pro-European political families for more security, competitiveness and strategic autonomy.
The upcoming negotiations on the next European Commission president and her/his policy agenda will be decisive for Europe’s capacity to address the severe impacts and risks of climate change for Europe and EU’s global climate leadership.
The European Council and political groups in the European Parliament should prioritise a science-based green transition, integrating a strong and global dimension to ensure Europeans feel the benefits of it domestically and to increase the EU’s trust and credibility internationally.
Nils Redeker
Deputy director
Jacques Delors Centre thinktank
The results will complicate EU climate politics, primarily due to developments in a few major countries. In France and Germany, Green parties suffered losses, which will substantially reduce the number of Green lawmakers in the European Parliament. Additionally, these countries, along with Italy, contributed to a strengthening of far-right groups.
Although left-wing and green parties did unexpectedly well in Denmark and Sweden, the overall shift is likely to dampen enthusiasm for ambitious climate policies in parliament and could deter member states in the European Council from adopting new measures.
However, the next phase of the Green Deal will focus on implementation. The key question is, therefore, whether the EU will stick to its existing policies or unravel its landmark green legislation. The latter option seems unlikely. To secure a second term, Ursula von der Leyen will need the support of the Social Democrats. To avoid risks in her confirmation vote, she may also seek backing from the remaining Green forces. This will limit the scope for a big and official role-back.
But still, there is plenty of room to throw sand in the wheels of execution. Two key aspects are therefore crucial to watch. First, how the European People’s Party (EPP) will interpret its mandate on climate. The party may seek to dilute implementation by forming issue-specific alliances with the far-right. Our research suggests that this would be at odds with its electorate’s preferences, but recent months have already shown a willingness to pursue this approach. Second, it will be crucial to see how the next Commission integrates climate goals into less controversial areas where progress is still possible such as industrial policy, competitiveness and economic resilience.
The post Experts: What do the European elections mean for EU climate action? appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Experts: What do the European elections mean for EU climate action?
Countries are still debating whether to mine the seafloor for minerals, but exploratory efforts have already begun.
As demand for critical minerals surges around the world, countries are debating whether to mine the untapped deep-sea reserves of cobalt, copper and manganese, miles below the surface. But a growing body of research shows that these activities could have profound consequences for ocean ecosystems, and the industries and communities that rely on them.
Climate Change
IEA: Slow transition away from fossil fuels would cost over a million energy sector jobs
A slower shift to clean energy could leave the world with 1.3 million fewer energy sector jobs by 2035 compared with a scenario in which governments fully implement their green policies, the International Energy Agency (IEA) has found.
In its annual World Energy Employment report, the Paris-based watchdog said on Friday that the Current Policies Scenario (CPS), which it reintroduced under pressure from the Trump administration, has “more muted” employment growth than the Stated Policies Scenario.
The CPS sees oil and gas demand continuing to rise until at least 2050 – a scenario that the IEA described as “cautious” and “anchored in enacted laws and measures” and was widely criticised by clean energy experts.
A fast energy transition would spur investment in construction, creating more jobs across the sector. New roles for electricians, building insulators, solar panel and energy-efficient lightbulb installers, and transition mineral miners would more than offset job losses in coal mines, power plants and oil and gas fields, the report found.
-
Plans to turn Europe’s biggest coal mine into a leisure lake prove divisive
Transition experts say repurposing Poland’s Bełchatów mine and power plant for renewables not recreation could bring more jobs, revenue and electricity -
Scottish oil-town plan for green jobs sparks climate campers’ anger over local park
The oil and gas industry aims to bring clean jobs to Aberdeen, but it involves paving over part of a much-loved park, igniting a debate on just transition
Anabella Rosemberg, Just Transition lead at Climate Action Network International, lamented that the clean energy sector is “being undermined at a time when employment creation is of utmost priority”.
“Climate ambition and decent job creation must go hand in hand – but as the recent conversations at COP30 showed, there is a need for both the right targets and just transition strategies to make it happen,” she added.
A more ambitious Net Zero Emissions scenario, aligned with the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to 1.5C, would see roughly ten million more energy jobs created than under the CPS, report author Daniel Wetzel told Climate Home News at a press conference.
Bottleneck warnings
The IEA warned that governments must act to train workers for these roles or risk facing shortages of electricians, welders, and grid specialists – a gap that could slow the energy transition and drive up wages and energy costs.
IEA head Fatih Birol highlighted a particular shortage of qualified workers in the nuclear industry, warning that the problem could worsen as the sector’s workforce continues to age. “I hear nuclear is making a comeback, but the interest in the nuclear sector for the jobs is rather weak,” he said.
Laura Cozzi, IEA’s Director of Sustainability, Technology and Outlooks, warned of a shortage of skilled workers in electricity grids. “That is one of the key ingredients why we are not seeing grids ramp up as [they] should,” she said. Over 60 governments pledged at COP29 to improve and expand their grids to enable clean electricity to flow to where it is needed.
-
Migrant workers building Saudi Arabia’s green future face exploitation, report finds
Heat stroke, long hours and punishment for taking breaks – low-paid foreign workers compare jobs on Saudi renewable energy projects to a prison sentence -
Self-taught mechanics give second life to Jordan’s glut of spent EV batteries
As EV sales boom in Jordan, a lack of formal infrastructure for dealing with end-of-life batteries is leading to some innovative solutions
Bert De Wel, Global Coordinator for Climate Policy at the International Trade Union Confederation, celebrated that the energy transition is creating jobs but added that they should be good jobs with decent pay, conditions and union rights. Decent work would attract skilled workers, he added.
The report found that wages in the oil and gas industry have generally risen faster over the past year than in the solar – and especially the wind – sectors. It noted that the oil and gas industry has a “historical tendency to offer highly competitive wages to attract and retain top talent”.
At the COP30 climate summit, governments agreed to set up the Belém Action Mechanism to try and make the energy transition fairer to groups such as workers in the energy industry. It will give trade unions a formal role in shaping just transition policies, for what the ITUC says is the first time.
ITUC General Secretary Luc Triangle called it a “decisive win for the union movement and working people across the world, in all sectors but especially those in transition industries.”
The post IEA: Slow transition away from fossil fuels would cost over a million energy sector jobs appeared first on Climate Home News.
IEA: Slow transition away from fossil fuels would cost over a million energy sector jobs
Climate Change
DeBriefed 5 December: Deadly Asia floods; Adaptation finance target examined; Global south IPCC scientists speak out
Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed.
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.
This week
Deadly floods in Asia
MOUNTING DEVASTATION: The Associated Press reported that the death toll from catastrophic floods in south-east Asia had reached 1,500, with Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Thailand most affected and hundreds still missing. The newswire said “thousands” more face “severe” food and clean-water shortages. Heavy rains and thunderstorms are expected this weekend, it added, with “saturated soil and swollen rivers leaving communities on edge”. Earlier in the week, Bloomberg said the floods had caused “at least $20bn in losses”.
CLIMATE CHANGE LINKS: A number of outlets have investigated the links between the floods and human-caused climate change. Agence France-Presse explained that climate change was “producing more intense rain events because a warmer atmosphere holds more moisture and warmer oceans can turbocharge storms”. Meanwhile, environmental groups told the Associated Press the situation had been exacerbated by “decades of deforestation”, which had “stripped away natural defenses that once absorbed rainfall and stabilised soil”.
‘NEW NORMAL’: The Associated Press quoted Malaysian researcher Dr Jemilah Mahmood saying: “South-east Asia should brace for a likely continuation and potential worsening of extreme weather in 2026 and for many years.” Al Jazeera reported that the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies had called for “stronger legal and policy frameworks to protect people in disasters”. The organisation’s Asia-Pacific director said the floods were a “stark reminder that climate-driven disasters are becoming the new normal”, the outlet said.
Around the world
- REVOKED: The UK and Netherlands withdrew $2.2bn of financial backing from a controversial liquified natural gas (LNG) project in Mozambique, Reuters reported. The Guardian noted that TotalEnergies’ “giant” project stood accused of “fuelling the climate crisis and deadly terror attacks”.
- REVERSED: US president Donald Trump announced plans to “significantly weaken” Biden-era fuel efficiency requirements for cars, the New York Times said.
- RESTRICTED: EU leaders agreed to ban the import of Russian gas from autumn 2027, the Financial Times reported. Meanwhile, Reuters said it is “likely” the European Commission will delay announcing a plan on auto sector climate targets next week, following pressure to “weaken” a 2035 cut-off for combustion engines.
- RETRACTED: An influential Nature study that looked at the economic consequences of climate change has been withdrawn after “criticism from peers”, according to Bloomberg. [The research came second in Carbon Brief’s ranking of the climate papers most covered by the media in 2024.]
- REBUKED: The federal government of Canada faced a backlash over an oil pipeline deal struck last week with the province of Alberta. CBC News noted that First Nations chiefs voted “unanimously” to demand the withdrawal of the deal and Canada’s National Observer quoted author Naomi Klein as saying that the prime minister was “completely trashing Canada’s climate commitments”.
- RESCHEDULED: The Indonesian government has cancelled plans to close a coal plant seven years early, Bloomberg reported. Meanwhile, Bloomberg separately reported that India is mulling an “unprecedented increase” in coal-power capacity that could see plants built “until at least 2047”.
$518 billion a year
The projected coastal flood damages for the Asia-Pacific region by 2100 if current policies continue, according to a Scientific Reports study covered this week by Carbon Brief.
Latest climate research
- More than 100 “climate-sensitive rivers” worldwide are experiencing “large and severe changes in streamflow volume and timing” | Environmental Research Letters
- Africa’s forests have switched from a carbon sink into a source | Scientific Reports
- Increasing urbanisation can “substantially intensify warming”, contributing up to 0.44C of additional temperature rise per year through 2060 | Communications Earth & Environment
(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)
Captured
A new target for developed nations to triple adaptation finance by 2035, agreed at the COP30 climate summit, would not cover more than a third of developing countries’ estimated needs, Carbon Brief analysis showed. The chart above compares a straight line to meeting the adaptation finance target (blue), alongside an estimate of countries’ adaptation needs (grey), which was calculated using figures from the latest UN Environmental Programme adaptation gap report, based on countries’ UN climate plans (called “nationally determined contributions” or NDCs) and national adaptation plans (NAPs).
Spotlight
Inclusivity at the IPCC
This week, Carbon Brief speaks to an IPCC lead author researching ways to improve the experience of global south scientists taking part in producing the UN climate body’s assessments.
Hundreds of climate scientists from around the world met in Paris this week to start work on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC’s) newest set of climate reports.
The IPCC is the UN body responsible for producing the world’s most authoritative climate science reports. Hundreds of scientists from across the globe contribute to each “assessment cycle”, which sees researchers aim to condense all published climate science over several years into three “working group” reports.
The reports inform the decisions of governments – including at UN climate talks – as well as the public understanding of climate change.
The experts gathering in Paris are the most diverse group ever convened by the IPCC.
Earlier this year, Carbon Brief analysis found that – for the first time in an IPCC cycle – citizens of the global south make up 50% of authors of the three working group reports. The IPCC has celebrated this milestone, with IPCC chair Prof Jim Skea touting the seventh assessment report’s (AR7’s) “increased diversity” in August.
But some IPCC scientists have cautioned that the growing involvement of global south scientists does not translate into an inclusive process.
“What happens behind closed doors in these meeting rooms doesn’t necessarily mirror what the diversity numbers say,” Dr Shobha Maharaj, a Trinidadian climate scientist who is a coordinating lead author for working group two (WG2) of AR7, told Carbon Brief.
Global south perspective
Motivated by conversations with colleagues and her own “uncomfortable” experience working on the small-islands chapter of the sixth assessment cycle (AR6) WG2 report, Maharaj – an adjunct professor at the University of Fiji – reached out to dozens of fellow contributors to understand their experience.
The exercise, she said, revealed a “dominance of thinking and opinions from global north scientists, whereas the global south scientists – the scientists who were people of colour – were generally suppressed”.
The perspectives of scientists who took part in the survey and future recommendations for the IPCC are set out in a peer-reviewed essay – co-authored by 20 researchers – slated for publication in the journal PLOS Climate. (Maharaj also presented the findings to the IPCC in September.)
The draft version of the essay notes that global south scientists working on WG2 in AR6 said they confronted a number of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) issues, including “skewed” author selection, “unequal” power dynamics and a “lack of respect and trust”. The researchers also pointed to logistical constraints faced by global south authors, such as visa issues and limited access to journals.
The anonymous quotations from more than 30 scientists included in the essay, Maharaj said, are “clear data points” that she believes can advance a discussion about how to make academia more inclusive.
“The literature is full of the problems that people of colour or global south authors have in academia, but what you don’t find very often is quotations – especially from climate scientists,” she said. “We tend to be quite a conservative bunch.”
Road to ‘improvement’
Among the recommendations set out in the essay are for DEI training, the appointment of a “diversity and inclusion ombudsman” and for updated codes of conduct.
Marharaj said that these “tactical measures” need to occur alongside “transformative approaches” that help “address value systems, dismantle power structures [and] change the rules of participation”.
With drafting of the AR7 reports now underway, Maharaj said she is “hopeful” the new cycle can be an improvement on the last, pointing to a number of “welcome” steps from the IPCC.
This includes holding the first-ever expert meeting on DEI this autumn, new mechanisms where authors can flag concerns and the recruitment of a “science and capacity officer” to support WG2 authors.
The hope, Maharaj explained, is to enhance – not undermine – climate science.
“The idea here was to move forward and to improve the IPCC, rather than attack it,” she said. “Because we all love the science – and we really value what the IPCC brings to the world.”
Watch, read, listen
BROKEN PROMISES: Climate Home News spoke to communities in Nigeria let down by the government’s failure to clean up oil spills by foreign companies.
‘WHEN A ROAD GOES WRONG’: Inside Climate News looked at how a new road from Brazil’s western Amazon to Peru has become a “conduit for rampant deforestation and illegal gold mining”.
SHADOWY COURTS: In the Guardian, George Monbiot lamented the rise of investor-state dispute settlements, which he described as “undemocratic offshore tribunals” that are already having a “chilling effect” on countries’ climate ambitions.
Coming up
- 1-12 December: UN Environment Assembly 7, Nairobi, Kenya
- 7 December: Hong Kong legislative elections
- 11 December: Falkland Islands legislative assembly elections
Pick of the jobs
- Greenpeace International, engagement manager – climate and energy | Salary: Unknown. Location: Various
- The Energy, newsletter editor | Salary: Unknown. Location: Australia (remote)
- University of Groningen, PhD position in motivating people to contribute to societal transitions | Salary: €3,059-€3,881 per month. Location: Groningen, the Netherlands
DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.
This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.
The post DeBriefed 5 December: Deadly Asia floods; Adaptation finance target examined; Global south IPCC scientists speak out appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Revised Vaccination Regimen
A New Tool Could Help Track Deep-Sea Mining Activity
Our Fix Our Forests advocacy in 2025
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change4 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases4 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Why airlines are perfect targets for anti-greenwashing legal action