Elections for the European Parliament are taking place between 6-9 June, kicking off a process that will establish a new EU leadership.
Around 360 million EU citizens are eligible to vote. They will choose between representatives of national parties, each of which is affiliated with a broader political grouping at EU level, ranging from communists to the far-right.
The grouping or coalition with the most parliamentary seats will shape the leadership of the next European Commission – the EU’s executive branch – and help to determine the bloc’s overall direction of travel for the 2024-2029 term.
The balance of power in parliament, which is one of the EU’s legislative bodies, will also play a key role in determining whether or not ambitious new climate policies are voted through.
The elections come at a critical time for climate and energy policy across Europe. Amid geopolitical turmoil, EU member states face mounting pressure to provide secure energy supplies and compete with other major powers such as China and the US.
Meanwhile, there has been widespread reporting of a “green backlash” in many EU countries, exemplified by farmers protesting against perceived injustices that include environmental policies. (Based on recent EU-wide polling, the so-called backlash has been dismissed as “largely overblown”.)
The new European Parliament, the new Commission and member states must also agree in the coming months on an emissions target for 2040, a stepping stone on the bloc’s wider path to “climate neutrality” by 2050.
These decisions will be influenced by which parties triumph in the parliamentary elections.
In the interactive grid below, Carbon Brief tracks the commitments made by each of the main European Parliament groupings in their election manifestos, across a range of issues related to climate and energy. The parties covered are:
- European People’s Party (EPP): A centre-right group that currently holds the most seats in parliament, and to which current European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen belongs.
- Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D): A centre-left group that currently holds the second highest number of seats in parliament.
- Renew Europe Now: The liberal and centrist campaign platform for the European Democratic Party (EDP), the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) – both of which also have their own manifestos – and France’s ruling Renaissance party.
- European Green Party: Representing green parties from across Europe, the Green Party is part of a parliamentary grouping with the European Free Alliance (EFA), which represents regionalist or separatist European groups. Volt Europa, a pro-European, federalist party, is also affiliated with the group.
- European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR): A parliamentary grouping of right-wing Eurosceptics. The far-right Identity and Democracy coalition, which split off from the ECR in 2019, has not released a manifesto.
- Party of the European Left (PEL): An association of democratic socialist and communist parties that sits in a parliament grouping known as The Left in the European Parliament.
Each entry in the grid represents a direct quote from a manifesto document.
Climate targets
When the last European Parliament elections were held in 2019, a “green wave” saw climate-focused politicians winning seats across the continent. This was interpreted as a clear mandate to set ambitious, EU-wide climate targets and policies.
In the years that followed, the EU approved a European Green Deal, with goals to cut emissions by 55% from 1990 levels by 2030, and reach net-zero by 2050. It also passed a package of policies to help member states achieve these goals.
These measures have “significantly improved” the EU’s performance on tackling climate change, according to independent analysis by Climate Action Tracker. However, the group says that the bloc would need to implement further policies to align itself with the goals of the Paris Agreement.

With the 2024 election looming, forecasters predict a swing to the right in EU politics. A surge in far-right MEPs could result in a right-wing majority coalition within parliament.
This, in turn, could jeopardise the next phase of the EU’s climate ambitions, including negotiations over a European Commission proposal to reduce emissions by 90% by 2040.
For example, the right-wing ECR’s manifesto says that it will “prioritise the implementation of existing legislative requirements…before considering any new regulations”.
It also refers to “review[ing] the more problematic objectives” and “negative impacts” of “green” policies, implying it might support weakening existing climate goals.
The centre-right EPP says it is “clearly committed” to existing targets – which include the 2030 and 2050 goals – but it does not mention the mooted 2040 ambition.
There have been reports of internal disputes within the EPP over the 2040 target and broader environmental policies. An earlier draft of its manifesto illustrated these disputes, with a commitment to “rejecting” bans on any technologies and “revising” the 2035 ban on petrol and diesel cars. This language is missing from the final manifesto.
In contrast, parties that are further to the left have backed more ambitious emissions targets, as shown in the chart below.
The relatively centrist S&D and Renew Europe Now groupings support the proposed 90% goal for 2040. (While S&D only mentions achieving “strong” 2040 goals in its manifesto, elsewhere the party has voiced support for the target.)
Meanwhile, other parties have gone even further. The European Green Party has proposed a “revised EU climate law” with a 2030 target that goes “beyond” the current 55% goal and achieves net-zero by 2040. The Left specifies a 65% reduction by 2030 and net-zero by 2035.

All the major parties with manifestos broadly support the European Green Deal, with the ECR stating it backs it “in principle” while noting its concerns about a “centralised top-down approach”. (Identity and Democracy, which has not released a manifesto, broadly opposes the green deal and includes many climate sceptics in its ranks.)
Some groups appear to go further. Both S&D and the Greens mention the creation of a new “Green and Social Deal”, with a greater emphasis on affordable energy, social protections and jobs in low-carbon sectors.
In a piece reflecting on the need for a left-wing vision to combat the growing “anti-green backlash”, Politico argued that, with virtually every party emphasising the need for a “just transition”, it was “not clear” what the S&D’s new deal was “supposed to be”.
Of the major parties, only the Green party includes a target for “phasing out” fossil fuels in its manifesto. (At COP28 last year, the EU and other parties to the Paris climate regime agreed to “transition away” from fossil fuels.) The Greens target a 2030 phaseout of coal, with all fossil fuels phases out by 2040.
Farmers’ demands
From France to Romania, EU farmers have been engaging in often dramatic protests in recent months.
While their demands have been wide-ranging, many have focused on climate and environmental issues. This follows anger from farming communities about cuts to fuel subsidies and efforts to curb the use of fertilisers and pesticides.
All of the manifestos speak directly to these ongoing issues, with some calling for major reforms to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) – the EU’s flagship farming policy. Others try to strike a balance between supporting farmers and maintaining strong climate ambitions.
Agriculture is responsible for one-tenth of the EU’s greenhouse gas emissions. It is the only major sector that is expected to see almost no progress in emissions cuts in the coming decades.
The EPP says climate policies can be achieved “only with and not against farmers” and says more funding for agriculture will be vital to support their environmental efforts. Liberals in Renew Europe Now say they have proposals to “simplify farmer’s lives” because they “want to focus on farming, not filling out forms”.
The ECR, meanwhile, says it “reject[s] unfettered green ideology” in agriculture.
S&D says its members “fundamentally disagree with the conservatives’ approach that sustainability is the enemy of farmers”. Like the EPP, it emphasises the need for more financial support to help farmers transition to “environmentally friendly” practices.
Boosting clean energy industries
Many of the manifestos focus on promoting the EU’s economic success and competitiveness, particularly in relation to the US and China, as well as ensuring it is not reliant on other nations for resources.
This comes amid a period of instability, triggered partly by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which threatened the bloc’s energy security due to its reliance on Russian gas.
Often, parties explicitly make the link between these wider geopolitical struggles and the need to scale up low-carbon industries. This is exemplified by the EPP when it states:
“We are developing the home market for our clean-tech industries. We are decarbonising and revitalising our energy-intensive industries to sell clean products worldwide. Thus, we are increasing our energy independence and overall sovereignty and resilience.”
Both S&D and the Greens focus on the need for investment across industrial sectors, in order to maintain the EU’s competitive edge. ALDE, the main party in Renew Europe Now, emphasises “cross-border” public investment in order to “achieve the economies of scale that the single market offers”.
Right-wing and liberal parties stress the need for “technology neutrality” in their plans.
Greens and left-wing parties, on the other hand, either explicitly reject nuclear power or do not mention it. They also place more emphasis on developing public transport options, including improved rail networks, alongside investment in electric vehicle infrastructure.
The post EU election 2024: What the manifestos say on energy and climate change appeared first on Carbon Brief.
EU election 2024: What the manifestos say on energy and climate change
Climate Change
Efforts to green lithium extraction face scrutiny over water use
Mining companies are showcasing new technologies which they say could extract more lithium – a key ingredient for electric vehicle (EV) batteries – from South America’s vast, dry salt flats with lower environmental impacts.
But environmentalists question whether the expensive technology is ready to be rolled out at scale, while scientists warn it could worsen the depletion of scarce freshwater resources in the region and say more research is needed.
The “lithium triangle” – an area spanning Argentina, Bolivia and Chile – holds more than half of the world’s known lithium reserves. Here, lithium is found in salty brine beneath the region’s salt flats, which are among some of the driest places on Earth.
Lithium mining in the region has soared, driven by booming demand to manufacture batteries for EVs and large-scale energy storage.
Mining companies drill into the flats and pump the mineral-rich brine to the surface, where it is left under the sun in giant evaporation pools for 18 months until the lithium is concentrated enough to be extracted.
The technique is relatively cheap but requires vast amounts of land and water. More than 90% of the brine’s original water content is lost to evaporation and freshwater is needed at different stages of the process.
One study suggested that the Atacama Salt Flat in Chile is sinking by up to 2 centimetres a year because lithium-rich brine is being pumped at a faster rate than aquifers are being recharged.
Lithium extraction in the region has led to repeated conflicts with local communities, who fear the impact of the industry on local water supplies and the region’s fragile ecosystem.
The lithium industry’s answer is direct lithium extraction (DLE), a group of technologies that selectively extracts the silvery metal from brine without the need for vast open-air evaporation ponds. DLE, it argues, can reduce both land and water use.
Direct lithium extraction investment is growing
The technology is gaining considerable attention from mining companies, investors and governments as a way to reduce the industry’s environmental impacts while recovering more lithium from brine.
DLE investment is expected to grow at twice the pace of the lithium market at large, according to research firm IDTechX.
There are around a dozen DLE projects at different stages of development across South America. The Chilean government has made it a central pillar of its latest National Lithium Strategy, mandating its use in new mining projects.
Last year, French company Eramet opened Centenario Ratones in northern Argentina, the first plant in the world to attempt to extract lithium solely using DLE.
Eramet’s lithium extraction plant is widely seen as a major test of the technology. “Everyone is on the edge of their seats to see how this progresses,” said Federico Gay, a lithium analyst at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. “If they prove to be successful, I’m sure more capital will venture into the DLE space,” he said.
More than 70 different technologies are classified as DLE. Brine is still extracted from the salt flats but is separated from the lithium using chemical compounds or sieve-like membranes before being reinjected underground.
DLE techniques have been used commercially since 1996, but only as part of a hybrid model still involving evaporation pools. Of the four plants in production making partial use of DLE, one is in Argentina and three are in China.
Reduced environmental footprint
New-generation DLE technologies have been hailed as “potentially game-changing” for addressing some of the issues of traditional brine extraction.
“DLE could potentially have a transformative impact on lithium production,” the International Lithium Association found in a recent report on the technology.
Firstly, there is no need for evaporation pools – some of which cover an area equivalent to the size of 3,000 football pitches.
“The land impact is minimal, compared to evaporation where it’s huge,” said Gay.


The process is also significantly quicker and increases lithium recovery. Roughly half of the lithium is lost during evaporation, whereas DLE can recover more than 90% of the metal in the brine.
In addition, the brine can be reinjected into the salt flats, although this is a complicated process that needs to be carefully handled to avoid damaging their hydrological balance.
However, Gay said the commissioning of a DLE plant is currently several times more expensive than a traditional lithium brine extraction plant.
“In theory it works, but in practice we only have a few examples,” Gay said. “Most of these companies are promising to break the cost curve and ramp up indefinitely. I think in the next two years it’s time to actually fulfill some of those promises.”
Freshwater concerns
However, concerns over the use of freshwater persist.
Although DLE doesn’t require the evaporation of brine water, it often needs more freshwater to clean or cool equipment.
A 2023 study published in the journal Nature reviewed 57 articles on DLE that analysed freshwater consumption. A quarter of the articles reported significantly higher use of freshwater than conventional lithium brine mining – more than 10 times higher in some cases.
“These volumes of freshwater are not available in the vicinity of [salt flats] and would even pose problems around less-arid geothermal resources,” the study found.
The company tracking energy transition minerals back to the mines
Dan Corkran, a hydrologist at the University of Massachusetts, recently published research showing that the pumping of freshwater from the salt flats had a much higher impact on local wetland ecosystems than the pumping of salty brine. “The two cannot be considered equivalent in a water footprint calculation,” he said, explaining that doing so would “obscure the true impact” of lithium extraction.
Newer DLE processes are “claiming to require little-to-no freshwater”, he added, but the impact of these technologies is yet to be thoroughly analysed.
Dried-up rivers
Last week, Indigenous communities from across South America held a summit to discuss their concerns over ongoing lithium extraction.
The meeting, organised by the Andean Wetlands Alliance, coincided with the 14th International Lithium Seminar, which brought together industry players and politicians from Argentina and beyond.
Indigenous representatives visited the nearby Hombre Muerto Salt Flat, which has borne the brunt of nearly three decades of lithium extraction. Today, a lithium plant there uses a hybrid approach including DLE and evaporation pools.
Local people say the river “dried up” in the years after the mine opened. Corkran’s study linked a 90% reduction in wetland vegetation to the lithium’s plant freshwater extraction.
Pia Marchegiani, of Argentine environmental NGO FARN, said that while DLE is being promoted by companies as a “better” technique for extraction, freshwater use remained unclear. “There are many open questions,” she said.
AI and satellite data help researchers map world’s transition minerals rush
Stronger regulations
Analysts speaking to Climate Home News have also questioned the commercial readiness of the technology.
Eramet was forced to downgrade its production projections at its DLE plant earlier this year, blaming the late commissioning of a crucial component.
Climate Home News asked Eramet for the water footprint of its DLE plant and whether its calculations excluded brine, but it did not respond.
For Eduardo Gigante, an Argentina-based lithium consultant, DLE is a “very promising technology”. But beyond the hype, it is not yet ready for large-scale deployment, he said.
Strong regulations are needed to ensure that the environmental impact of the lithium rush is taken seriously, Gigante added.
In Argentina alone, there are currently 38 proposals for new lithium mines. At least two-thirds are expected to use DLE. “If you extract a lot of water without control, this is a problem,” said Gigante. “You need strong regulations, a strong government in order to control this.”
The post Efforts to green lithium extraction face scrutiny over water use appeared first on Climate Home News.
Efforts to green lithium extraction face scrutiny over water use
Climate Change
Maryland’s Conowingo Dam Settlement Reasserts State’s Clean Water Act Authority but Revives Dredging Debate
The new agreement commits $340 million in environmental investments tied to the Conowingo Dam’s long-term operation, setting an example of successful citizen advocacy.
Maryland this month finalized a $340 million deal with Constellation Energy to relicense the Conowingo Dam in Cecil County, ending years of litigation and regulatory uncertainty. The agreement restores the state’s authority to enforce water quality standards under the Clean Water Act and sets a possible precedent for dozens of hydroelectric relicensing cases nationwide expected in coming years.
Climate Change
A Michigan Town Hopes to Stop a Data Center With a 2026 Ballot Initiative
Local officials see millions of dollars in tax revenue, but more than 950 residents who signed ballot petitions fear endless noise, pollution and higher electric rates.
This is the second of three articles about Michigan communities organizing to stop the construction of energy-intensive computing facilities.
A Michigan Town Hopes to Stop a Data Center With a 2026 Ballot Initiative
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change2 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year 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”
-
Greenhouse Gases2 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change1 year 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 ago
US SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Renewable Energy3 months ago
US Grid Strain, Possible Allete Sale