Published

2 years ago

June 25, 2024

Alice Rush

French citizens will go to the polls for two rounds of voting on 30 June and 7 July to elect deputies to the national assembly.

Following the results of the European parliamentary elections earlier in June, French president Emmanuel Macron called a snap election. (He himself is not up for reelection until 2027.)

Macron’s centrists had suffered a “crushing defeat”, securing just 15% of the vote, less than half the tally for Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally (Rassemblement National or RN).

Subsequently, the president took what he described as the “serious” and “heavy” decision to dissolve the country’s national assembly as an “act of confidence” in the French people.

Candidates had until 16 June to register for the 577 seats in the lower house of the national assembly, with campaigning then officially starting on Monday 17 June – just 13 days before the first round of voting is set to take place.

Under France’s electoral system, candidates who obtain at least 12.5% of total registered votes during the first round will advance to the second round of voting. Candidates who then get the most votes during the second round will be elected as deputies (members of parliament).

Macron will then have to appoint a prime minister, taking into account the results of the elections.

In the interactive grid below, Carbon Brief tracks the commitments made by each of the main party alliances in their election manifestos, across a range of issues related to climate and energy. The parties covered are:

The New Popular Front (Le Nouveau Front Populaire or NFP): a coalition of four of France’s leftwing parties, the Socialist party (PS), Greens, Communists and France Unbowed (LFI).
Together (Ensemble): a coalition of France’s ruling Renaissance party and other centrist parties, led by current French prime minister, Gabriel Attal.
National Rally (Rassemblement National or RN): Marine Le Pen’s far-right party. Leading the campaign is Jordan Bardella, who is likely to take the job of PM if the RN win.

Each entry in the grid represents a direct quote from one of these documents.

<br />

Approach to net-zero

Climate change and net-zero are not expected to be a key focus in the French election, as perceived opposition to green policies has grown over the past year in Europe.

The election follows significant losses for the French Green party in the European Parliament elections, which contributed to fears that the swing towards rightwing parties could lead to a weakening of climate ambition in the country.

France’s main Green party, EELV, saw its share of votes fall from 13% to 5% in the European parliamentary elections, while RN increased its share of votes from 23.34% to 31.4%.

RN has previously called the EU Green Deal a tool of “punitive ecology” and has pledged to dismantle it, Clean Energy Wire notes. If it gains a majority in the upcoming election, it could “unravel progress in the energy and climate policies of the EU’s second largest economy and weaken ambitions at a critical point in time”, the outlet adds.

The party uses similar language in its election manifesto, which does not mention climate or net-zero directly. It argues that environmental standards penalise economic growth.

The RN manifesto pledges to “develop a common-sense ecology, based on scientific realities, that protects the standard of living of French people and guarantees our national independence”.

The NFP pledges to “implement a climate plan aiming for carbon neutrality by 2050”. Ensemble targets reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 55% compared to 1990 levels by 2030 – in line with the EU target set out in the Green New Deal.

France – the second most populous country in the EU, with around 67 million inhabitants – was the world’s 25th largest greenhouse gas emitter in 2018. (See Carbon Brief’s France profile for more.)

Both NFP and Ensemble recognise the threat of climate change in their manifestos, with the latter citing ecology as one of the “challenges of a generation” facing the country.

The main issues in the French election are expected to be retirement, energy bills and immigration.

(NFP’s manifesto does note that migration has a climate angle and includes an aim to “create a status for climate displaced people”. For more on migration and climate change, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth Q&A.)

Energy bills and security

The energy crisis in recent years, driven by surges in gas prices following the Russian invasion of Ukraine – but amplified in France by significant nuclear outages – has made energy security a key election concern.

Until recently, the French government had owned a 84% stake in national electricity firm and nuclear plant operator EDF. However, in July the country’s then-prime minister, Élisabeth Borne, announced plans to renationalise EDF within her first state-of-the-nation speech as concern about energy prices and security soared.

“We must have full control over our electricity production and performance. We must ensure our sovereignty in the face of the consequences of the war and the colossal challenges to come…That’s why I confirm to you the state’s intention to own 100% of EDF’s capital,” said Borne, a member of Macron’s party Renaissance.

The decision was seen as an attempt to garner cross-party support, given the left had called for the nationalisation of EDF previously and Macron’s centrist Ensemble supported expanding nuclear power.

Ensemble has reiterated its support for nuclear in its manifesto, pledging to build eight new reactors “to ensure France’s energy independence and move towards a carbon-free economy”.

It notes that the construction will be accelerated due to a law passed in May 2023, which followed a similar piece of legislation aimed at speeding up the rollout of renewable energy.

NFP focuses more explicitly on renewables, with minimal mention of nuclear power in its manifesto. It pledges to make France a European leader in marine energy, in particular offshore wind and the development of tidal energy.

Beyond this, it focuses on energy bills, including pledging to scrap Macron’s 10% tax on energy bills – an increase in excise duty on electricity called Contribution to Electricity Public Services (CSPE) – and cancel the planned increase in gas prices of 11% on 1 July.

While French consumers were protected from some of the biggest price spikes between 2021 and 2023 by the government’s “energy tariff shield”, the subsequent removal of this, as well as high inflation, is pushing up energy bills.

All three party groupings include some focus on bills, with Ensemble promising a reduction in electricity bills of 15% due to reform of the European electricity market.

Meanwhile RN pledges to exit European rules that “set energy prices and weaken our competitiveness”. This echos the party’s pledge during the 2019 presidential election that it would exit the European electricity market “to restore decent prices”. It adds:

“The attractive costs and reliability offered by our electricity system are a thing of the past, and the government is making the French pay for its misguidance on nuclear issues and on the disastrous rules of the European energy market.”

RN plans to lower VAT on all energy products, again echoing a pledge from 2019 to drop VAT levels for fuel, energy, electricity, gas and heating oil, from 20% to 5.5%, labelling them as basic necessities.

Other climate policies

Beyond energy, there is limited focus on climate related issues within the manifestos.

NFP pledges to develop industry to end France and Europe’s dependence on international markets for strategic sectors such as electric cars and solar panels. Ensemble also argues it will expand industry, pledging to create 200,000 industrial jobs and 400 additional factories by 2027.

All three party groupings pledge increased support for the agricultural sector, with NFP stating it will ban imports that do not respect France’s environmental standards, Ensemble saying it will boost prices for farmers and RN promising farmers prices that “respect their work”, amongst other pledges.

This follows protests by French farmers at the beginning of the year, partly over plans to reduce agricultural fuel subsidies. Similar protests took place across Europe, which were often framed as a “net-zero revolt” in some parts of the media.

The post France election 2024: What the manifestos say on energy and climate appeared first on Carbon Brief.

France election 2024: What the manifestos say on energy and climate

Climate Change

As a Plastic Waste Plant Violates Pollution Rules, Its Owner Makes the Case for a Second Location

Published

6 hours ago

April 20, 2026

Alice Rush

Freepoint Eco-Systems seeks to become a major player in so-called “chemical recycling.” Some residents and environmental advocates are fighting back.

By James Bruggers

Belching smoke from a new plastic waste processing plant in central Ohio has stirred opposition to an even larger “chemical recycling” factory planned for Arizona by the same company.

As a Plastic Waste Plant Violates Pollution Rules, Its Owner Makes the Case for a Second Location

Climate Change

Revealed: Scientists tell Colombia fossil-fuel transition summit to ‘halt new expansion’

Published

8 hours ago

April 20, 2026

Alice Rush

Countries attending a first-of-its-kind fossil-fuel summit have been asked to consider “action recommendations” such as “halting all new fossil-fuel expansion” and “reject[ing] gas as a bridging fuel”, according to a preliminary scientific report seen by Carbon Brief.

Around 50 nations will gather in Santa Marta, Colombia from 24-29 April to debate ways to “transition away” from fossil fuels, in the face of worsening climate change and sky-high oil prices.

The talks come after a large group of nations campaigned for, but ultimately failed, to get all countries to formally agree to a “roadmap” away from fossil fuels at the COP30 climate summit in Brazil in November.

The nations gathering in Santa Marta for the summit co-hosted by Colombia and the Netherlands, call themselves the “coalition of the willing”.

Ahead of country officials arriving in Santa Marta, a global group of academics will gather in the city this week to present and discuss the latest scientific evidence on fossil-fuel phaseout, which will then inform debate among policymakers.

A preliminary scientific “synthesis report” circulated to governments attending the talks and seen by Carbon Brief offers 12 “action insights” for countries to consider, along with a wide range of “action recommendations”.

These recommendations range from “phase out subsidies on fossil-fuel production and consumption” to “kick-start a forum to develop a legal framework to ban fossil-fuel advertisements”.

‘Rapid’ assessment

The preliminary scientific report seen by Carbon Brief – titled, “Action insights for the Santa Marta process” – is the result of some rapid work by an “ad-hoc” group of around 24 scientists.

It is designed to present governments attending the talks with concrete and actionable recommendations for transitioning away from fossil fuels.

The preliminary version, which includes recommendations such as “halting all new fossil fuel expansion”, has already been circulated to governments, with a view that this could help them to prepare for the talks in advance.

It will be further debated and refined by scientists attending the academic segment of the Santa Marta talks, before a final version is made public towards the end of April, Carbon Brief understands.

The process to produce the report began shortly after the conclusion of the COP30 climate summit in Brazil in November, explains its lead author, Dr Friedrich Bohn, a research scientist and co-founder of the Earth Resilience Institute in Germany. He tells Carbon Brief:

“When [Brazil] announced there would be a Santa Marta conference led by Colombia and the Netherlands, I was sitting listening with a small group of scientists. We thought: ‘This is great news, but it should be supported by scientific expertise.’”

One of the members of Bohn’s group had a pre-existing relationship with the Colombian government, allowing a dialogue to quickly be established, he continues:

“In the beginning, the idea was to just write a peer-reviewed paper. But, because of this close connection to the Colombian government and some feedback from them, the synthesis paper evolved.”

The report came out of a “very rapidly evolved process” that relied on the “goodwill” and “enthusiasm” of the academics involved, adds coordinating author Prof Frank Jotzo, a professor of climate change economics at Australian National University. (Jotzo is a former Carbon Brief contributing editor.) He tells Carbon Brief:

“It’s an attempt to get broad coverage on relevant topics from researchers with good expertise and reputation.”

The group of 24 scientists involved spent around two months compiling the “action insights” for the report, drawing on their expertise and the latest available research, says Jotzo.

Given the rapid nature of the report, it does not aim to be “completist”, has not been externally reviewed and did not follow a stringent process for author selection comparable to that used by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports, he adds.

The contributors to the report currently skew to the global north and include more men than women, adds Bohn.

‘Direct guidance’

In a departure from IPCC reports, the preliminary Santa Marta synthesis report offers “very direct guidance to action”, says Jotzo.

The report lists 12 “action insights”, each with three “action recommendations”. (The list was cut down from a shortlist of about 40-50 insights, Carbon Brief understands.)

One of the most striking in the draft is “action insight 5”, which says:

“Take immediate measures to prevent future emissions. Ban new fossil infrastructure, mandate deep methane cuts, accelerate electrification and inscribe fossil-fuel phase-down targets in NDCs [nationally determined contributions] and clean-energy pathways support to low and middle income countries (LMICs).”

The accompanying three “action recommendations” include “halting all new fossil-fuel extraction and infrastructure projects ahead of a final investment decision”, “implementing deep, legally binding methane cuts in the energy sector” and “inscrib[ing] targets for fossil-fuel phase down, electrification and green exports in NDCs”.

(The draft report includes multiple references to “phasing out” and “phasing down” fossil fuels, rather than the “transition away from fossil fuels” language that was, ultimately, agreed by countries at the COP28 UN climate talks in Dubai in 2023.)

Another action insight says “public support for climate action is broadly underestimated and undermined by interest groups, but it can be strengthened by debunking greenwashing narratives”.

One recommendation for this insight is that nations “reject natural gas as a bridging technology and CCS [carbon capture and storage] techniques as scalable compensation”.

In a letter introducing the report to governments and civil society, the scientists note that making direct recommendations is a “challenge for our community”, but added:

“However, in the spirit of a constructive collaboration between science and policymaking, we allowed ourselves to identify some potential courses of action that our community would recommend for each particular issue – and we invite you to weigh these against your own circumstances and pick up whatever seems most useful for you and your colleagues.”

The prescriptiveness of the recommendations – something strictly prohibited in IPCC reports – was an explicit request from the Colombian government, Bohn says:

“The idea of actionable recommendations was introduced by the Colombian government.

“There was some discussion within the team about this. It’s a tricky area when you leave science and move to consultation. Therefore, we agreed, in the end, to call them ‘actionable recommendations’ and to make them as precise as possible, from the scientific perspective.”

Jotzo, a veteran of the IPCC process, tells Carbon Brief that it was “very liberating” to work on a report with a “free-form process”:

“The bulk of policy-related research is very readily deployed to recommendations pointing out what countries could do. The IPCC process, for example, just doesn’t allow that. As far as the summary for policymakers in the IPCC is concerned, it will usually be governments that filter out anything that could be interpreted as a specific recommendation.”

He adds that the hope is that some of the action insights might be reflected in the high-level segment of the Santa Marta conference:

“No one is under any illusions that governments will walk away from the Santa Marta conference and will have made a decision to implement recommendations one, seven and nine – or something like that. But it is a chance to insert directly applicable action points into national and plurilateral policy agendas.”

Colombia calling

The preliminary report will be further debated and refined by scientists attending the “pre-academic segment” of the Santa Marta talks.

This is taking place from 24-26 April, ahead of the “high-level segment” involving ministers and other policymakers from 28-29 April.

The pre-academic segment will also separately see the launch of a new advisory panel on fossil-fuel transition and a scientifically led roadmap for how Colombia can transition away from fossil fuels, Carbon Brief understands.

The high-level segment is expected to be attended by representatives from around 50 countries, including COP31 host Turkey and major oil-and-gas producers such as the UK, Canada, Australia, Brazil and Norway.

Countries expected to attend account for one-third of global fossil-fuel demand and one-fifth of global production, according to the Colombian government.

At the end of the conference, countries are due to release a report featuring a “menu of solutions” for transitioning away from fossil fuels, according to Colombia’s environment minister Irene Vélez Torres.

This report is in turn set to inform a global “roadmap” on transitioning away from fossil fuels being developed by the Brazilian COP30 presidency, which is due to be presented at COP31 in Turkey this November.

The Brazilian COP30 presidency offered to bring forward a “voluntary” fossil-fuel transition “roadmap” outside of the official COP process, after countries failed to formally agree to one during negotiations in Belém.

The post Revealed: Scientists tell Colombia fossil-fuel transition summit to ‘halt new expansion’ appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Revealed: Scientists tell Colombia fossil-fuel transition summit to ‘halt new expansion’

Climate Change

Technical Assessment of Woodside’s Browse Turtle Management Plan

Published

9 hours ago

April 20, 2026

Alice Rush

DOWNLOAD TURTLE REPORT HERE

Technical Assessment of Woodside’s Browse Pygmy Blue Whale Management Plan

DOWNLOAD WHALE REPORT HERE

To secure their approvals, Woodside had to develop a plan for how they would manage the significant risks to threatened green turtles if the project proceeds. We’ve had two independent scientists provide a technical assessment of Woodside’s management plan for whales and turtles and their findings are gobsmacking.

Woodside’s Browse gas project could make Scott Reef’s unique green turtles extinct.

Woodside’s Browse gas project could delay or prevent the population recovery of the endangered pygmy blue whales that rely on Scott Reef, heightening their extinction risk.