The European Commission has launched a strategy to protect people in the EU from “fossil-fuel price shocks” and accelerate the expansion of “homegrown clean energy”.
The strategy notes that the latest fossil-fuel crisis, triggered by the Iran war, has already cost the EU an additional €24bn for imports of oil and gas.
Carbon Brief has identified 44 specific actions in the AccelerateEU package, ranging from an “ambitious” new electrification target through to filling up the bloc’s depleted gas storage. (See the internative table below.)
The proposals are meant to ensure the EU has enough fuel in the short term, to protect consumers from price rises and – in the longer term – to curb reliance on oil and gas.
Many EU nations are already spending billions to provide immediate relief to their citizens amid the energy crisis, which was sparked by the US-Israeli attack on Iran in February.
With its new 16-page plan, the commission has set out an initial blueprint to shift the bloc towards a more resilient future, including a proposal for tax changes that favour electricity over gas as part of a drive to incentivise clean technologies.
However, much of the plan relies on European governments taking up the proposals and changes to EU-wide taxation will depend on the full support of all member states.
Why has the commission launched AccelerateEU?
On 28 February, the US and Israel launched an attack on Iran, triggering a war and sparking an energy crisis.
Iran is a major oil producer and much of the world’s liquid natural gas (LNG) exports transit through the region.
Shipping through the critical strait of Hormuz has been paralysed and direct attacks by both sides on fossil-fuel infrastructure, including some of the world’s biggest oil and gas facilities, have paused production.
This pushed oil prices over $100 a barrel for much of March. Whilst they have now dipped below that benchmark following a ceasefire agreement, they remain elevated and uncertain – for example, a report of an attack on a ship in the strait earlier this week led them to briefly spike over $100 again.
Moreover, there is a widespread fear that markets are not accurately pricing the level of risk posed by an extended conflict. A 21 April article in the Economist was titled: “Global energy markets are on the verge of a disaster.”
To manage the impact of the surge in prices seen so far, countries around the world have announced a range of measures to protect consumers.
Carbon Brief tracked more than 200 policies from 60 nations over the first month of the war, including cutting fuel taxes, implementing driving bans and fuel rationing, and boosting domestic renewable-energy construction.
Earlier this week, the UK government announced a series of measures to “double down on clean power” in response to the unfolding energy crisis.
AccelerateEU is the European Commission’s proposal to provide “immediate relief to European households and industries, especially the most vulnerable ones, while putting Europe on a steady pathway to energy independence”.
It is a response to a request by EU heads of government at the 19 March European Council meeting to present “targeted temporary measures to address the recent spikes in the prices of imported fossil fuels arising from the crisis in the Middle East”.
The proposal includes both short-term and structural measures with longer-term effects to “further reduce dependency on volatile fossil-fuel markets”.
It highlights that “coordination is key” and proposes a range of “timely, targeted and temporary measures”. AccelerateEU prioritises the shift to homegrown clean energy, “stepping up” the electricity grid and boosting investment.
The strategy stresses that this is the second time in less than five years that such a crisis has hit Europe, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the subsequent ongoing war.
While Europe is less directly exposed to the conflict in Iran than the Ukraine war, its heavy reliance on oil and gas imports still leaves it vulnerable to surging prices.
For example, the commission notes that since the escalation of the conflict in February, the EU has spent an additional €24bn on energy imports due to higher prices.
The European Commission states that this is “a strong reminder of the need to accelerate electrification” as “the current crisis is also a call… to end exposure to fossil-fuel price shocks and import dependencies”.
In a statement, Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, said:
“The choices we make today will shape our ability to face the challenges of today and the crises of tomorrow. Our AccelerateEU strategy will bring both immediate and more structural relief measures to European citizens and businesses.
“We must accelerate the shift to homegrown, clean energies. This will give us energy independence and security, and mean we are better able to weather geopolitical storms.”
What actions have been proposed?
Carbon Brief has identified 44 distinct actions in the commission’s plan, ranging from affirmations of existing policies to entirely new initiatives. The commission has divided its proposed measures into five key “areas of action”, which are:
- Improving EU-wide coordination;
- Protecting consumers and industry;
- Accelerating the shift to homegrown clean energy and electrification;
- “Stepping up our energy system” through measures such as grid improvements;
- Boosting investment for the energy transition.
Some of the measures, particularly those involving coordination between member states, focus on fossil fuels. Examples include working together to fill gas storage facilities and ensuring the full use of domestic oil refineries.
However, roughly half of the actions set out by the commission focus specifically on scaling up clean energy or boosting electrification across the EU.
The table below includes all of the actions laid out in the AccelerateEU plan, including target dates and descriptions by the commission of what each one would entail.
By summer, the commission says it will set out an electrification action plan, including an “ambitious” electrification target and various measures to “remove barriers to the electrification of the industrial, transport and building sectors”.
Central to the commission’s strategy is a proposal to overhaul the EU’s taxation system so that it favours electricity over gas. It plans to introduce a legal proposal for this change in May, but passing this would require unanimous approval from all member states.
Media coverage of the commission’s proposals noted that it has “stopped short” of introducing a windfall tax on oil and gas company profits, of the kind used during the 2022 energy crisis. However, the commission says it will “assist and provide best practices” for any member states that choose to implement such taxes domestically.
Some of the AccelerateEU measures – such as updating the EU emissions trading system (EUETS) – were already underway prior to the energy crisis, but could contribute to its goal of curbing reliance on fossil fuels.
Some proposals focus on securing aviation fuel, amid warnings that Europe will soon be running low. The commission will map out existing fuel supplies and provide guidance to the aviation industry on how to deal with shortages.
Many of the proposals set out in AccelerateEU involve the commission playing a supportive role, but leaving decisions up to member states.
The commission says it will relax state-aid rules to allow member states to “implement targeted, temporary emergency measures” for sectors that are hit hardest by the energy crisis.
Countries across Europe have already taken domestic actions to protect consumers and industry from energy price rises and an annex document contains various proposals for ideas to provide “immediate relief”.
This includes targeted relief on energy bills for vulnerable households, reducing the costs of public transport and delaying the retirement of nuclear power plants. It will be up to member states which of these policy options they choose to implement.
What happens next?
The majority of the measures outlined by the European Commission are set to come into force in April or May 2026. (See the table above for dates).
On 23-24 April, the measures will be discussed by EU leaders at the informal European Council meeting in Cyprus.
Subsequently, EU energy ministers will receive a catalogue of energy-saving and efficiency measures at a meeting on 13 May. This will be based on an assessment of the most efficient measures taken since the 2022 energy crisis triggered by the Ukraine war. It will set out ways nations can rapidly reduce oil and gas consumption in the short term.
AccelerateEU also includes reference to various pieces of work already being undertaken by the commission to support decarbonisation, for example, updates to the EUETS.
The commission will consult with member states on this update “soon”, before adopting a legislative proposal by 31 July. This will build on changes that have already been proposed to the market stability reserve.
The commission notes that AccelerateEU “is one part of the commission’s dynamic response” and “will evolve as the situation develops”.
Beyond what is already outlined in the proposals, the EU is looking at ways to mitigate the impact of the Iran war on agriculture, aviation and other sectors.
The European Commission will present a fertiliser action plan on 19 May, according to Reuters, to “accelerate decarbonisation and address affordability issues made more urgent by the knock-on effects of the Iran war on an already tight market”.
It is reportedly “mulling jet fuel imports from the US and new minimum reserve quotas as it eyes options amid a supply crunch due to the Iran conflict”, according to Al Jazeera.
Euractiv says the European Commission “is rejecting demands to clamp down on air travel” in response to the crisis.
The post Iran war: EU strategy sets out 44 actions to limit ‘fossil-fuel price shocks’ appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Iran war: EU strategy sets out 44 actions to limit ‘fossil-fuel price shocks’
Climate Change
Live from LCAW – Raw diplomacy: Can new mineral alliances deliver a just energy transition?
Join us for an afternoon of high-level discussions at London Climate Action Week on what resource-rich developing countries need to make new critical mineral partnerships genuinely beneficial.
We are bringing together high-level speakers from mineral producing countries, the finance sector, the UN and civil society to reflect on the latest developments in resource diplomacy and ask what’s next for mineral governance.
Agenda
02:00 PM
Welcome
MC, Gabriela Flores, NRGI
02:00 PM – 02:30 PM
In conversation: Minerals governance – what’s next?
Celine Kauffman, IDDRI, Patrick Schröder, Chatham House, Sascha Raabe, UNIDO (online), Moderated by Chloé Farand, Climate Home News
We will explore G7 outcomes and the practical steps the G7 and G20 can take to advance mineral governance and responsible mining, with a spotlight on how the UK can seize its 2027 G20 presidency to drive this critical agenda forward.
02:30 PM – 03:00 PM
Tracking allegations of abuse in mining for transition minerals
Phil Bloomer, BHRC, Ketakandriana Rafitoson, Resource Justice Network
The Business and Human Rights Centre presents its 2026 Transition Minerals Tracker update and unveils new data on allegations of human rights abuse linked to the extraction of bauxite, cobalt, copper, iron ore, lithium, manganese, nickel, rare earth elements and zinc – and the companies behind them.
03:00 PM – 03:30 PM
Break
03:30 PM – 04:30 PM
Can finance clean up mining? The role of investors and lenders
Stephen Barrie, Church of England Pensions Board/ Global, Pavel Laberko, Emerging Markets Investors Alliance, Margaux Day, Accountability Counsel
Finance can be a powerful force for raising environmental and social standards in mining — but only if financial actors remain in the sector rather than walking away. This session examines how investors and lenders can drive accountability and responsible practices in transition minerals, and whether the answer lies in divestment, engagement, or stronger oversight from civil society. Moderated by Caroline Avan, BHRC.
04:30 PM – 05:50 PM
What should equitable mineral partnerships look like?
Eric Ngang, African Resources Watch (Afrewatch), Thomas Scurfield, NRGI , Tobias Musonda, Director of Policy and Planning, Zambia , Wen-Yu Weng, Ellen MacArthur Foundation.
As demand for critical minerals surges, the race to secure supply chains risks repeating the extractive models of the past. This session cuts to the heart of what truly equitable mineral partnerships look like — and what it will take to to move from principle to practice. Moderated by Chloé Farand, Climate Home News
06:00 PM
Closing
Amir Shafaie, NRGI
The post <span style="color: #F39200;">Live from LCAW</span> – Raw diplomacy: Can new mineral alliances deliver a just energy transition? appeared first on Climate Home News.
Live from LCAW – Raw diplomacy: Can new mineral alliances deliver a just energy transition?
Climate Change
COP31 presidency ‘open’ to reflecting Santa Marta in UN climate process, ministers say
Colombia and the Netherlands, which co-hosted the first conference the first conference on transitioning away from fossil fuels earlier this year, say they have held “constructive” discussions on bringing the meeting’s outcomes to the COP31 climate summit.
Speaking on the sidelines of London Climate Action Week, the outgoing Colombian environment minister and Dutch climate policy minister, said COP31 presidencies Australia and Türkiye were “open” to suggestions on how to reflect the discussions in Santa Marta on transitioning away from coal, oil and gas at the end-of-year summit.
What format this might take, “we don’t know yet,” said Colombian minister Irene Vélez Torres.
“We had this very interesting conversation with COP31 and they were clearly open for suggestions about what is needed in the discussion in Türkiye, and we were explicit about the need to engage with the phasing out of fossil fuels,” she said.
-
Bonn climate talks end in “gridlock” on adaptation and emissions-cutting
Splits between developed and developing countries over finance and science held back progress on key areas of climate action, leaving disappointment and much work for COP31 -
The UN climate process was built for negotiation – now it must support implementation
Consultations are underway on reforms to streamline the talks, which take too long to produce outcomes that are often not adequate to tackle the scale of the climate crisis
Australia and Türkiye will jointly preside over the COP31 climate conference, which is taking place in the Turkish resort city of Antalya in November. Türkiye will lead on the action agenda, referring to initiatives that lie outside of the formal negotiations, while Australia will chair the negotiations.
Dutch minister Stientje van Veldhoven said the outcomes of the Santa Marta conference could be part of COP31’s action agenda,
“We are here to facilitate action on one particular part of what COP has agreed to do, namely transitioning away fossil fuels so there is a very logical connection to the COP process, and we will make sure that we continue to bring this coalition of the willing, this coalition of the doers back into the COP process,” she said.
At the event in London, UN secretary-general António Guterres urged countries to reduce their fossil fuel dependencies, arguing that “economies based on renewables are much more secure than economies based on the imports of fossil fuels”. He added that the transition to renewables is “unstoppable”.
European, island states seek clear future for global roadmap to cut fossil fuels
Including the fossil fuel transition in UN climate negotiations, rather than the action agenda, is likely to be controversial among governments. While nations agreed to transition away from fossil fuels at COP28, at COP30 last year Saudi Arabia, Russia and others successfully opposed a push to agree for a roadmap to be drawn up on how to meet this goal.
Despite the lack of agreement, the Brazilian government which presided over COP30, is drawing up a global roadmap. But the Russian government has said it opposes this roadmap being referenced in UN climate talks.
Finding agreement on referencing the Santa Marta process in UN climate talks is also likely to be difficult. Last week in Bonn, the chair of the African Group of Negotiators, Antwi-Boasiako Amoah from Ghana, criticised “minilateral initiatives and coalitions of the willing” as distracting political attention and lacking the legitimacy that comes from multilateral climate negotiations, where any country can veto anything.
Strengthening the COP process
The Santa Marta conference kick-started a diplomatic process outside of the formal UN climate negotiations to offer a space for governments to make progress and find solutions to wean their economies away from fossil fuels.
Around 60 countries, including many large fossil-fuel producers attended the meeting after being frustrated by failed attempts to get UN climate talks to sign off on the global roadmap away from fossil fuels. They agreed to work towards voluntary national roadmaps away from fossil fuels.
A 170-page report summarising the outcome of the conference published on Tuesday says that the Santa Marta coalition of countries will seek to influence the formal UN negotiations.
The report says Colombia proposed to build “a strong coalition to bring these discussions to the second Global Stocktake”, a process in which countries will review climate progress and agree on measures forward at COP33 in 2028.
Colombia also suggested organizing “a high-level event during the next COP presidency” to discuss Santa Marta outcomes, while Italy proposed an event during the UN General Assembly.
“We will make sure that Santa Marta conference is not a separate, parallel process to the COP” but “strengthens” the negotiations without becoming a formal part of them, said van Veldhoven, adding that the process will remain “a conversation” to demonstrate that transforming economies away from fossil fuels is possible.
COP30 CEO Ana Toni from Brazil told a separate event in London that the response to the second Global Stocktake “will probably need several pages” to deliver an agreed commitment to transition away from fossil fuels. The Santa Marta report says that Brazil’s global roadmap should also be included in the response.
Colombian election signals u-turn
Colombia, which has been one of the most proactive countries promoting a global transition away from fossil fuels, is likely to reverse course after the election of right-wing candidate Abelardo de la Espriella as the country’s new president at a general election on Sunday.
The newly elected president has branded himself as an ally of US president Donald Trump, and has promised to reverse a current halt on new coal, oil and gas licenses, as well as venture into “responsible fracking” without overlapping with protected areas or high-mountain páramo ecosystems.
Vélez Torres said the current Colombian government has already “delivered to the international community and to our sub-national forces, social forces, movements, academia” a process to keep the energy transition moving forward.
She told Climate Home News she hoped the work the government had done could be picked up by social movements in Colombia to demand change from the incoming government. “What we did cannot be erased, and we have had our voices heard, and we have been as radical as any other government could have been.”
The minister said the elections have left the country facing a “dark night” that “can really shift the politics in terms of energy transition and environmental protection”, but said she is certain that their “legacy will continue being there”.
The post COP31 presidency ‘open’ to reflecting Santa Marta in UN climate process, ministers say appeared first on Climate Home News.
COP31 presidency ‘open’ to reflecting Santa Marta in UN climate process, ministers say
Climate Change
FOIs show fossil fuel “rust bucket” Northern Endeavour shipped 17,000 kms from Australia with toxic, corrosive substances
SYDNEY, WEDNESDAY 24 JUNE 2026 — Freedom of Information documents obtained by Greenpeace Nordic reveal Australian oil processing vessel Northern Endeavour was carrying toxic waste when it was shipped across the world to Denmark, and its export by the Australian Government may have breached the Basel Convention.
The Northern Endeavour, a floating production storage and offloading (FPSO) vessel, which arrived at a Danish port in March, was found through FOIs to be carrying flammable liquids, poisonous substances, corrosive substances, toxins and ecotoxins, and its documentation was not signed by Australia’s Basel Competent Authority despite the shipment originating from an Australian offshore decommissioning project.
This week, Greenpeace Nordic protested the arrival of the Northern Endeavour to Frederikshavn Harbour in Denmark, displaying a two meter-long banner reading, “Australia, deal with your own toxic waste.”
Lauren Bowey, Campaign Leader at Greenpeace Nordic, said: “This issue is urgent –- Australia has 5.7 million tonnes of offshore oil and gas infrastructure to recycle — the steel equivalent of 110 Sydney Harbour Bridges and 11 more FPSOs like the Northern Endeavour. It cannot become a precedent that Australia puts the world’s oceans at risk by towing old, toxic oil and gas industry waste halfway across the world to Denmark.
“Of course these offshore structures should be decommissioned; leaving rusting industrial equipment to rot at sea poses serious and long-lasting environmental threats. But there is a safer solution than towing a 274 metre toxic rust bucket 17,000 kilometres across vulnerable international waters to Denmark. Australia must build its own recycling centre.”
Greenpeace Australia Pacific is renewing its calls for a decommissioning hub in Western Australia.
Geoff Bice, WA Lead at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “The Northern Endeavour is a prime example of why oil and gas companies can not be trusted with our oceans, and why the Australian Government needs to establish a local decommissioning industry.
“In this case, gas corporation Woodside shirked its responsibilities and sold the Northern Endeavour to a company that could not afford to properly decommission it. The government then chose to ship the vessel, including the toxic waste onboard, halfway across the planet for decommissioning rather than deal with it at home.
“Australia must stop outsourcing the decommissioning of fossil fuel infrastructure and commit to a local industry. Maritime workers and local businesses would benefit from the sustainable jobs going their way, and Australia would seize a major untapped source of scrap steel — 5.7 million tonnes worth.
“Strong regulation and investment in local decommissioning would reduce risks to marine environments, prevent operators from delaying or avoiding the responsibility of decommissioning their infrastructure, and ensure industrial waste is not left to corrode in the ocean.”
-ENDS-
Images of Greenpeace Nordic’s protest can be found here
Media contact
Emma Sangalli on 0431 513 465 or emma.sangalli@greenpeace.org
Live from LCAW – Raw diplomacy: Can new mineral alliances deliver a just energy transition?
Guest Idea: Home Microplastics Reduction Strategies That Work
COP31 presidency ‘open’ to reflecting Santa Marta in UN climate process, ministers say
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change11 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
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 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”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy8 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测