Connect with us

Published

on

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:

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.

EU emissions, including historical emissions (1990-2022), and targets proposed by a selection of groups running in the European Parliament elections in their manifestos. EPP does not mention a 2040 target in its manifesto, so its goals are indicated with a dotted line. S&D does not mention a specific 2040 target in its manifesto but has expressed support for a 90% reduction, compared to 1990 levels. Greens have called for “beyond” a 55% cut by 2030 but not proposed a figure, so the 55% figure is shown here. Source: Eurostat, party/group manifestos, Carbon Brief analysis.
EU emissions, including historical emissions (1990-2022), and targets proposed by a selection of groups running in the European Parliament elections in their manifestos. EPP does not mention a 2040 target in its manifesto, so its goals are indicated with a dotted line. S&D does not mention a specific 2040 target in its manifesto but has expressed support for a 90% reduction, compared to 1990 levels. Greens have called for “beyond” a 55% cut by 2030 but not proposed a figure, so the 55% figure is shown here. Source: Eurostat, party/group manifestos, Carbon Brief analysis.

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

Continue Reading

Climate Change

COP Bulletin Day 8: Pope keeps faith in 1.5C

Published

on

The United Nations may have accepted that overshooting 1.5C of warming – at least temporarily – is inevitable – but God’s representative on Earth didn’t get the memo.

The new pope, Leo XIV, sent a video message to cardinals from the Global South gathered at the Amazonian Museum in Belém last night, saying “there is still time to keep the rise in global temperature below 1.5°C” although, he warned, “the window is closing.”

“As stewards of God’s creation, we are called to act swiftly, with faith and prophecy, to protect the gift he entrusted to us,” he said, reading from a sheet of paper in front of a portrait of the Vatican.

And he defended the 10-year-old Paris Agreement, saying it has ”driven real progress and remains our strongest tool for protecting people and the planet.” “It is not the Agreement that is failing – we are failing in our response,” he said In particular, the American Pope pointed to“the political will of some.”

“We walk alongside scientists, leaders and pastors of every nation and creed. We are guardians of creation, not rivals for its spoils. Let us send a clear global signal together: nations standing in unwavering solidarity behind the Paris Agreement and behind climate cooperation,” he emphasised.

UN climate chief Simon Stiell welcomed the message, adding that the Pope’s words “challenge us to keep choosing hope and action, honouring our shared humanity and standing with communities all around the world already crying out in floods, droughts, storms and relentless heat”.

Former US climate negotiators Trigg Talley and Todd Stern at COP30 on November 17

The post COP Bulletin Day 8: Pope keeps faith in 1.5C appeared first on Climate Home News.

COP Bulletin Day 8: Pope keeps faith in 1.5C

Continue Reading

Climate Change

 A fast, fair, full, and funded fossil fuel phaseout

Published

on

I pause to write this letter in the middle of week one of the 30th UNFCCC Conference of the Parties — the big international climate conference, the space for multilateral decision making to save ourselves from ourselves and rein in the climate crisis. Day two photos showed that a torrential downpour left the blue zone entrance flooded. Mother Nature is present and making her anger known.

This morning I also saw the announcement of Time Magazine’s 100 Climate leaders for 2025. At the top of the list I found the Global Head of Climate Advisory for JP Morgan Chase, Sarah Kapnick. I shook my head, thinking perhaps I was still asleep, and refocused. There it was indeed.

JPMorgan Chase is the world’s largest financier of fossil fuels, having provided over $382 billion since the Paris Agreement, with $53.5 billion in 2024 alone. The bank faces criticism from scientists and activists for its continued large-scale investments, particularly in fossil fuel expansion. How does a person who works for such an institution end up being lauded as a hero working to resolve the climate crisis?

Last week the Guardian released a report from Kick Big Polluters Out showing that over the past four years fossil fuel lobbyists have gained access to negotiation spaces at COP. The roughly 5,350 lobbyists mingling with world leaders and climate negotiators in recent years worked for at least 859 fossil fuel organizations including trade groups, foundations and 180 oil, gas and coal companies involved in every part of the supply chain from exploration and production to distribution and equipment. There are more fossil fuel lobbyists and executives in negotiations than delegates representing the most climate vulnerable countries on the planet.

We’ve known since the late 1800s that greenhouse gas emissions warm the planet. In 1902 a Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius calculated that burning fossil fuels will, over time, lead to a hotter Earth. But the fossil fuel industry followed Big Tobacco’s playbook and despite knowing the truth, waged a multi-decade, multibillion dollar disinformation, propaganda and lobbying campaign to delay climate action by confusing the public and policymakers about the climate crisis and its solutions. See this report from Climate Action Against Disinformation and the Exxon funded think tanks to spread climate change denial in Latin America.

They’ve infiltrated our K-12 classrooms. The Oklahoma Energy Resources Board, a state agency funded by oil and gas producers, has spent upwards of $40m over the past two decades on providing education with a pro-industry bent, including hundreds of pages of curriculums, a speaker series and an after-school program — all at no cost to educators of children from kindergarten to high school. In Ohio students learn about the beauty of fracking. Even Scholastic, a brand trusted by parents and educators, has attached its seal of approval to pro fossil fuel materials. Discovery Education has also embedded pro oil propaganda into its science and stem free resources.

There is no just transition, no possible way to keep our global temperatures to the limit agreed to in Paris ten years ago without a fast and fair phase out of fossil fuels. We know this is possible, during the first half of 2025, renewables generated more electricity than coal. As UN General Secretary António Guterres said in his opening remarks in Belem, “We’ve never been better equipped to fight back… we just lack political courage.”

Next year, I hope that TIME’s Climate 100 is a list of indigenous climate activists from around the world, whose leadership has led us to find the political courage Guterres spoke of, the courage to do the right thing and phase out fossil fuels forever.

Susan Phillips
Executive Director

Photo by Andrea DiCenzo

The post  A fast, fair, full, and funded fossil fuel phaseout appeared first on Climate Generation.

 A fast, fair, full, and funded fossil fuel phaseout

Continue Reading

Climate Change

COP30: Carbon Brief’s second ‘ask us anything’ webinar

Published

on

As COP30 reaches its midway point in the Brazilian city of Belém, Carbon Brief has hosted its second “ask us anything” webinar to exclusively answer questions submitted by holders of the Insider Pass.

The webinar kicked off with an overview of where the negotiations are on Day 8, plus what it was like to be among the 70,000-strong “people’s march” on Saturday.

At present, there are 44 agreed texts at COP30, with many negotiating streams remaining highly contested, as shown by Carbon Brief’s live text tracker.

Topics discussed during the webinar included the potential of a “cover text” at COP30, plus updates on negotiations such as the global goal on adaptation and the just-transition work programme.

Journalists also answered questions on the potential for a “fossil-fuel phaseout roadmap”, the impact of finance – including the Baku to Belém roadmap, which was released the week before COP30 – and Article 6.

The webinar was moderated by Carbon Brief’s director and editor, Leo Hickman, and featured six of our journalists – half of them on the ground in Belém – covering all elements of the summit:

  • Dr Simon Evans – deputy editor and senior policy editor
  • Daisy Dunne – associate editor
  • Josh Gabbatiss – policy correspondent
  • Orla Dwyer – food, land and nature reporter
  • Aruna Chandrasekhar – land, food systems and nature journalist
  • Molly Lempriere – policy section editor

A recording of the webinar (below) is now available to watch on YouTube.

Watch Carbon Brief’s first COP30 “ask us anything” webinar here.

The post COP30: Carbon Brief’s second ‘ask us anything’ webinar appeared first on Carbon Brief.

COP30: Carbon Brief’s second ‘ask us anything’ webinar

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com