Connect with us

Published

on

The EU should cut its emissions to 90% below 1990 levels by 2040, according to a new roadmap released by the European Commission.

This will require an expanded and emissions-free power system within 16 years and an 80% reduction in the use of fossil fuels for energy, the new guidance states.

The goal is designed to bridge the gap between bloc’s existing short- and long-term emissions reduction targets.

It kicks off a lengthy process in which EU politicians and institutions will grapple over the details of the proposal before it is cemented into law.

The bloc is about to enter a major period of transition as a new European Parliament is due to be elected in June, followed by a new commission, the EU’s executive arm. The result of this could be a surge in opposition towards climate policy as EU politics swings to the right.

The recommendations come as farmers have been taking to the streets across Europe to voice their anger about environmental policies and other matters.

Meanwhile, business leaders are worried about EU industries maintaining their competitiveness against the likes of China and the US as they decarbonise.

In this Q&A, Carbon Brief outlines how the commission has tried to deal with these concerns, while also setting out an ambitious strategy that aligns with the EU’s domestic and international climate obligations.

What has the commission proposed?

The European Commission recommends that the EU should cut its “net” emissions to 90% below 1990 levels by 2040.

To meet the goal, emissions would need to fall to “less than” 850m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), while “up to” 400MtCO2e would be removed from the atmosphere using both carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies and “land-based” solutions such as tree planting.

Taken together, this would reduce net emissions to 450MtCO2e in 2040, which would be 90% below 1990 levels and 86% below the figure seen in 2022.

The proposal is required under the European climate law. It is an interim target on the way to the EU’s wider goal of achieving a net-zero emissions economy by 2050. 

It follows the EU’s existing target of cutting emissions by “at least 55%” by 2030. As it stands, the EU is not on track to achieve this target.

Current projections suggest that, even if all planned climate policies are implemented, the bloc’s emissions are set to fall 48% by 2030, rather than 55%. Member states are due to submit updated plans in June that could close this shortfall.

As the chart below shows, adding a new 90% reduction target for 2040 would require even more stringent climate policies, to drive a steeper decline in emissions. Emissions are currently projected to fall 60% by 2040 and 64% by 2050. 

Proposed EU 2040 climate goal would need much stronger policy
EU emissions, including historical emissions (1990-2022) and projected emissions (2023-2050) according to member states’ emissions projections submitted in March 2023 under the EU’s governance regulation, based on both existing and “additional” climate policies. The red dots show the targets and proposed targets for emissions cuts under the European climate law. The 2035 nationally determined contribution (NDC) “target” has not been officially proposed, but is inferred from the European Commission’s recommendation for a 2040 target. Emissions include shares of international aviation, as well as land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF). Source: Eurostat, Carbon Brief analysis.

In its assessment, the commission details what kind of “enabling policy conditions” would be “necessary” to close the gap to the 90% goal, if it gets formally adopted.

The power sector should approach “full decarbonisation in the second half of the 2030s”, and reach it by 2040, according to the commission. Renewables “complemented by nuclear energy” should generate over 90% of the EU’s electricity by this date, it adds.

With low-carbon electrification driving economy-wide decarbonisation, the share of electricity in the EU’s final energy consumption would double from 25% to 50%, it continues.

The commission says “all zero and low-carbon energy solutions” will be required – including CCS and nuclear – while “solar and wind will make up the vast majority of renewable energy solutions”.

(An earlier leaked draft placed even more emphasis on renewables, stating that “renewables such as solar and wind will make up the vast majority of solutions”.)

The commission impact assessment suggests a very small amount of abated fossil fuels would continue to be used in the power sector in 2040, with gas-fired CCS plants making up 3% of electricity generation – down from the 36% share of fossil-fueled power in 2021.

This inclusion of CCS in the power sector has drawn criticism from some groups. In its assessment of the proposal, Climate Action Tracker stated it was “absolutely not needed in the power sector”.

According to the commission, the rollout of low-carbon electricity would be accompanied by an 80% reduction in the consumption of fossil fuels for energy, including a phase-out of coal and an effective phase-out of unabated gas power, by 2040.

Meanwhile, the use of gas and oil for heat, transport and industry use “should decrease over time in a way that guarantees the EU’s security of supply”.

The commission says that implementing existing measures “will allow emissions to decrease by close to 80% in 2040 relative to 2015” in the transport sector.

A key focus of the recommendations is an “industry decarbonisation deal”. The commission calls for a “firmer and renewed European agenda for sustainable industry and competitiveness” that builds on the Green Deal industrial plan, released last year.

Prominent references to cutting emissions from agriculture – included in leaked draft proposals – have been removed from the commission’s final recommendations.

An earlier draft stated that livestock and fertiliser use would be “core areas” for emissions cuts by 2040, adding that “it should be possible” to reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions by “at least” 30% by 2040. The final version includes a vaguer reference to “agricultural activities play[ing] an important role” in achieving the 2040 target.

This change was reportedly a response to recent protests from European farmers that have targeted EU environmental policies, among a long list of concerns.

The decision came under fire from NGOs, with the European Environmental Bureau referring to it as “shortsighted” in light of the sector’s slow progress in cutting emissions.

Other recommendations included an extra 1.5% of GDP being invested annually in the low-carbon transition, compared to 2011-2020. The commission emphasises the need to move subsidies away from fossil fuels and lean on the private sector to “mobilise” funding.

The overarching recommendation from the commission is based on an assessment of three options for the 2040 target – an “up to” 80% emissions reduction, an 85-90% reduction and a 90-95% reduction.

The commission says only aiming for the 90-95% goal would align with official scientific advice, signal a “clear transition path away from fossil fuels as called for by COP28” and avoid “put[ting] at risk the EU’s commitments under the Paris Agreement”. (See: Where did the target come from?)

However, the commission only recommends the lower bound of this 90-95% target. Unlike the 2030 goal, it does not say the EU should be aiming for “at least” a 90% emissions cut.

While all three targets require “similar levels of investment”, the commission says the 90-95% option relies more on “novel low-carbon technologies”, such as CCS. It also requires more raw materials and brings more investment forward to the 2030s, the document notes.

The commission proposals will be subject to approval and negotiation with EU member states and the European Parliament. (See: What comes next?)

Back to top

What does it mean for the EU’s next Paris pledge?

The 2040 target will also guide the EU’s next international climate pledge under the Paris Agreement, known as a nationally determined contribution (NDC).

Parties to the international climate regime are obliged to come forward with more ambitious targets every five years. The deadline for the next round of NDCs is ahead of the COP30 summit at the end of 2025.

This process is supposed to close the gap between existing pledges to cut emissions and the ambition required to achieve the Paris Agreement’s temperature goal.

The EU’s current NDC pledges to cut net emissions to “at least” 55% below 1990 levels by 2030. This aligns with the at least 55% emissions reduction target of the European climate law.

In their next round of NDCs, parties are expected to submit emissions-cutting goals for 2035.

However, the European Commission proposals do not recommend a specific 2035 target. According to the impact statement, only Denmark advocated for an “additional interim target for 2035”.

Instead, the commission says that a new “greenhouse gas figure for the EU in 2035” will be “derived once the 2040 target is agreed”.

In practice, experts tell Carbon Brief, this means drawing a straight line from the 2030 target to the 2040 target and using the middle value as the NDC goal for 2035. (This would amount to roughly a 73% emissions cut by 2035, compared with 1990 levels.)

Ignacio Arróniz Velasco, a senior policy adviser with the thinktank E3G, tells Carbon Brief that the commission sees this as preferable to opening up extra negotiations around an additional climate target for 2035:

“The commission is being careful of this because if they recognise it as an additional target then you can actually have a political conversation about where you put it…It risks becoming the classic thing in which European leaders would probably go head to head and we may lose a lot of political capital discussing that.”

Rather than following a linear emissions path from 2030 to 2040, EU scientific advisers suggested the bloc could front-load its climate ambitions. This would mean faster emissions cuts in the short term, in order to achieve a fairer international transition. (See: Where did the target come from?)

In a press briefing ahead of the target’s launch, Linda Kalcher from thinktank Strategic Perspectives said the EU should be setting an ambitious 2035 target as early as possible, in order to show leadership and encourage other countries to do the same. She stated:

“While the politics of that might be difficult…It’s really important that the Europeans are advancing on it. It might be that we have [US president Donald] Trump again so it would be an even stronger approach by the Europeans to respond to that.”

Another issue is the timeline for the EU’s new climate targets.

The global stocktake text agreed at COP28 calls on all parties to submit their new NDCs “at least nine to 12 months in advance” of COP30. This would mean around the first quarter of 2025, months before the new 2040 target is likely to be legislated (see: What comes next?)

However, according to Kalcher, if EU member state leaders agree on a new target at the European Council meeting in June, then the new NDC could be submitted on that basis. (The last NDC was submitted in a similar way, when the European Council approved the at least 55% target following a European Commission proposal.)

“The EU can move very fast, if it needs to, on issues that seem to inevitably take a long time. If it’s necessary, those processes can be accelerated,” Kaveh Guilanpour, vice president for international strategies at the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES), tells Carbon Brief.

Back to top

What does it mean for energy, the economy and industry?

Reducing emissions in line with the proposed 2040 target would entail investments of €1.5tn a year in the energy and transport sectors, according to the commission.

Overall, it says this would have a minimal impact on EU GDP by mid-century, despite implying “transformations in production and consumption patterns” across the economy. The recommendations notes:

“Growing the economy on the basis of fossil fuels and resource wastage is not sustainable. The EU has shown that climate action and sustaining economic growth go hand in hand by decoupling growth from greenhouse gas emissions.”

In addition, it says investment to meet the 2040 target would avoid €2.4tn in climate-related economic losses during 2031-2050 and cut net costs for fossil fuel imports by €2.8tn over the same period.

Investment in the energy system would need to be close to €660bn (or 3.2% of GDP) per year over the period 2031-2050, while yearly spending on transport would need to be about €870 (or 4.3% of GDP), it states.

This investment would allow energy emissions to reach near-zero by 2040 and transport emissions to drop by 69-78% compared to 2015, shown by the orange and dark grey wedges in the chart below, respectively.

Meanwhile the proposals would see agricultural emissions fall by 30% (yellow), residential and service emissions by 77-85% (light grey) and emissions from industry by 56-84% (blue).

Increasing carbon removals from land-based (green) and industrial sources (red) would bring net emissions down further (dashed black line) and enable net-zero emissions to be reached in 2050, despite ongoing residual emissions in some sectors – notably agriculture.

Historical and projected sectoral greenhouse gas emissions in the period 2015-2050
Caption: Greenhouse gas emissions in tons of CO2 equivalent, per sector including industrial removals, land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF), waste, agriculture, buildings, transport, industry, energy supply, and net greenhouse gas emissions. Credit: European Commission.

For the energy sector, the European Commission has called on member states to increase the level of ambition in their national energy and climate plan updates, which are due in June 2024. 

For its own part, the commission says it will pursue policies to ensure a fast deployment of renewable energy, as well as zero and low-carbon solutions, and to further development of energy efficiency. It points to initiatives such as the EU Solar PV Alliance and Wind Charter as existing examples of this. 

Higher renewable shares will require “substantial” investments in the expansion of the EU’s electricity networks, as well as in upgrading to smarter and more flexible grids, the commission notes.

The recent EU grid action plan is a “first step” in this direction, it continues, the experience from which will allow a “comprehensive masterplan for accelerating the development of the European integrated energy infrastructure”. 

By 2040, coal should have been phased out in the energy sector and oil in transport is expected to represent about 60% of the remaining energy uses of fossil fuels. The rest would be gas, used in industry, buildings and the power sector.

As seen in the chart below, final energy consumption from coal (brown) drops to virtually nothing across all three of the scenarios outlined by the European Commission, as well as its LIFE scenario which looks at societal changes to a more sustainable lifestyle.

(The “S1”, “S2” and “S3” scenarios refer to the three different 2040 target ranges considered by the commission. The recommended 90% goal corresponds to S3.)

Overall, fossil fuel consumption falls by 80% in 2040 under the S3 scenario, with oil (red) and gas (yellow) continuing to play a minor role in the energy mix. By 2050, this declines further, with just oil forming part of the mix.

Electricity (blue) grows to dominate the energy mix, with direct use of energy from renewables (green), district heating (orange), hydrogen (pale blue) and “synthetic fuels” (grey), making up the rest of the total.

Energy consumption by energy source, 2015-2050
Caption: Changes in final energy consumption from 2015-2050 across the European Commission’s S1, S2 and S3 scenarios, as well as its LIFE scenario. Energy mix consists of synthetic fuels (grey), coal (brown), hydrogen (pale blue), district heating (orange), renewables (green), electricity (blue), gas (yellow) and oil (red). Credit: European Commission.

The gas market structure would have to change significantly, according to the commission, to reflect the increasing role for low-carbon and renewable liquid fuels and gases.

Additionally, gas infrastructure would need to adapt to decentralised production, as some of it is repurposed for “e-fuels”, advanced biofuels and hydrogen

Ultimately, the transition away from fossil fuels will see power prices fall, but investments will be needed to avoid obstacles in some areas having knock-on effects on wider decarbonisation as the economy is electrified, the report continues. It is critical to ensure financing tools are available to support these investments, the commission notes.

The commission emphasises the need for a “just transition that leaves no one behind”. It references the need for measures to support those who are “dependent on carbon-intensive activities”, and says policies could be used to ensure lower-income and middle-income households are protected from steep increases in energy prices in the interim.

In order to ensure the Green Deal “delivers for people”, the commission’s recommendations include investing in reskilling and upskilling of the workforce, support for labour market transitions and targeted income support measures. 

The impact of the net-zero transition on employment will vary by sector and region, it says, with those that depend on fossil fuels undergoing a “fundamental transformation”.

EU cohesion policy – an instrument designed to support the “economic diversification and reconversion of impacted territories and communities – will play an essential role in supporting regions most affected by the transition, it notes. 

Energy-intensive industry should also be supported, the commission says, allowing it to bridge the transition period when it faces the “dual challenge of investing in clean production methods when available, and coping with high energy prices”.

Concern over the “deindustrialisation” of Europe was raised in the run up to the proposed 2040 climate target. 

In January, Euractiv quoted European steel association Eurofer, which stated the 90% target is “possible only if there is the certainty of having access to competitive clean energy in unprecedented quantities, while levelling the playing field with other regions of the world that do not share the same climate ambition”.

At the time, EU climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra told the Financial Times that the bloc must not be “lured” into a “false narrative” that climate action would undermine the competitiveness of business.

He added that despite “significant worries” from industry, he was “absolutely convinced” the EU could continue to have a “world class, second to none, business environment”.

The commission’s recommendations emphasise that a “firmer and renewed European agenda for sustainability industry and competitiveness” would enable a successful transition over the next decade.

It says it will target a conducive regulatory and financing environment to attract investment and production to Europe. The Critical Raw Materials Act, and the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation will be key instruments to deliver an “open strategic autonomy”, it adds. 

Additionally, the commission says the Net Zero Industry Act – a provision deal on which was also agreed by Council and the European Parliament on 6 February – is a “concrete step”, which covers faster permitting, focused R&D investments and changes to public procurement. 

Public investment through both the Recovery and Resilience Facility and InvestEU is expected to mobilise “well-targeted” support for industry, it continues. 

The recommendations recognise the global competition that the EU faces, highlighting China’s supply-chain dominance and the impact of the Inflation Reduction Act in the US. Europe must remain a “sovereign and resilient economy” throughout the net-zero transition, it notes.  

In a statement, Marco Mensink, director general of the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) says industry investments will need to be a factor of six higher than today: 

“This enormous challenge comes just as industry faces the most severe economic downturn in a decade, demand is falling, and investments move to other regions. With [the] US economy closing its borders, Chinese overcapacity and exports will target Europe even more. Our companies fight against this challenge every day. Sites are being closed, production halted, people let go. Europe needs a business case, urgently”.

One key sector is agriculture. The commission highlights its decision to set up a strategic dialogue on the future of the agriculture sector in order to “jointly shape the transition”.

It is designed to address issues such as viable livelihoods, reducing burdens and ensuring competitive and sustainable food production.

Back to top

Who is supporting or opposing the target?

Ahead of the European Commission’s new emissions target, numerous countries expressed their support for “ambitious global climate action” in a joint letter from a coalition of countries.

Although it does not specify a percentage reduction, the letter can be interpreted as support for the 90% target, according to Politico

The letter expresses support for the conclusions of the global stocktake at COP28, stating that it is “crucial” that the EU translates this into “concrete ambitious action to send a strong political signal that the EU will lead by example”. 

However, the letter recognises that setting an ambitious target will be a “considerable task” and that there is a need to ensure climate action is an “opportunity for all”.

The letter was signed by Austria, Bulgaria, Germany, Denmark, Spain, Finland, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Portugal.

The recently-elected Polish government has also hinted at support for a 90% goal. In January, Poland’s deputy climate minister Urszula Zielińska, announced that the country would be stepping up its efforts to fight climate change. 

She said the EU “absolutely needs to embrace ambitious targets, and we need to embrace the 90% emission reduction target”, Politico reported. She later clarified that this was not Poland’s official position.

Nonetheless, Zielińska’s statement illustrates a major shift for Poland, which has traditionally pushed back against EU climate action. It comes as the country looks to drop lawsuits brought by Poland’s previous governments against EU climate policies, according to Reuters.

Few countries have publicly opposed the 90% proposal. At a meeting of the EU commissioner’s chiefs of staff on 5 February, only the cabinet of Hungarian commissioner Olivér Várhelyi opposed the target, according to Politico.

Strategic Perspectives’ Kalcher tells Carbon Brief that discussions on the matter had been “much more constructive than usual”. While countries did have concerns, “nobody was outright dismissive”. She adds:

“Even the fact that they considered [the 90% target] means that now it’s on the table domestically, and it can’t be dismissed. If you would have asked me two years ago, if people would consider a 90% target, I would have said no.”

In the impact assessment, published alongside the release of the proposed 90% target, the commission notes that most public authorities welcomed the process behind the proposals.

The Danish ministry of climate, energy and utilities firms, the Bavarian state parliament and the UN, among others, all called for an acceleration of the transition.

However, the Polish ministry of climate and environment and the government of Flanders both expressed the view that setting the 2040 target should be postponed, the document notes. (Consultation on the 2040 goal was held last year, before the Polish elections.)

They stated that it was still too uncertain to predict the impact of an EU-wide climate target for 2040, and that the implementation of measures to reach the 2030 target should remain the priority.

While there has been limited pushback from EU member state governments, some political groups within the bloc have taken a more cautious approach to the 90% proposal.

Peter Liese, the chief environmental spokesperson for the centre-right European People’s Party – the largest grouping in the European Parliament – said on 5 February that the group will “consider” the 90% reduction in exchange for other concessions, including dropping a ban on “PFAS forever chemicals”. 

Tweet by Chloé Mikolajczak regarding the 2040 EU targets

In the run up to the release of the commission’s target, there has also been opposition to climate action by far-right and nationalist parties, Irish website the Journal reported. (See: What comes next?). 

In addition, farmers have been protesting across Europe about competition from cheaper imports, rising energy costs and environmental rules. (See Carbon Brief’s recent analysis on how these protests relate to climate change.) 

A reference to the agricultural sector cutting its emissions by 30% between 2015 and 2040, as part of the 90% goal, was dropped from an earlier draft of the commission’s proposal, according to Politico– reportedly in response to farmers’ protests. (See: What does it mean for energy, the economy and industry?)

Back to top

Where did the target come from?

The proposed new 2040 climate target is informed by advice from the commission’s official scientific advisers.

Under the 2021 European climate law, a group of scientific advisers known as the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change (ESABCC) was established to bring independent research-based analysis to EU policymakers.

In June 2023, the ESABCC released its scientific advice for setting a 2040 climate target, along with a greenhouse gas “budget” for 2030-2050. (The budget is an estimate of how much the bloc can emit over the 20-year period while still being in line with the global ambition to keep warming to 1.5C).

It said that the EU should aim to cut its emissions by a net 90-95% by 2040, compared to 1990 levels. This level of emissions reductions would keep the bloc within a proposed budget of 11-14bn tonnes of CO2e from 2030-2050, as set out in the scientific advice.

To come up with this figure, the ESABCC considered more than 1,000 different pathways for how the EU can reach its longer-term goal of net-zero emissions by 2050 and keep in line with the 1.5C temperature aspiration.

The ESABCC noted there are different pathways that the EU can take to reach its emissions targets. However, these pathways have “common features”, including:

  • A phase-out of coal power by 2030.
  • A phase-out of “unabated” gas power by 2040.
  • A “large-scale deployment” of wind, solar and hydro energy.
  • A “substantial decrease” in fossil fuel imports.
  • A “considerable decrease” in final energy consumption by 2040, particularly driven by a switch to electric vehicles.
  • A “rapid scale-up” of carbon removal techniques.

In addition to assessing how the EU can get to net-zero, the ESABCC also examined how the EU can make a fair contribution to global efforts to reduce emissions, by considering various “equity principles“. Its advice says:

“Under some of these principles, the EU has already exhausted its fair share of the global emissions budget.”

Because “none of the assessed pathways towards climate neutrality fully align with the fair share estimates”, the ESABCC recommended taking “additional measures to account for this shortfall”.

These measures include pursuing the upper range of the 90-95% emissions reduction target for 2040, as well as helping non-EU countries reduce their emissions.

The ESABCC added that the EU could “increase fairness” further by increasing the ambition of its “fit for 55%” pledge, a target to reduce emissions by at least 55% by 2030. The ESABCC said the EU could aim to cut emissions “up to 70% or more by 2030”.

In its analysis of the ESABCC’s advice, the climate thinktank E3G said it represented the “first stress test” for whether the European Commission would fully integrate scientific advice into its policymaking.

In its coverage of the 2040 proposals, Ireland’s the Journal noted that the commission opted for the “lower end of the recommended range” from the ESABCC, by choosing the 90% emissions reduction target.

In a statement, the independent scientific research group Climate Action Tracker said it was “disappointing” that the commission opted for the lower end of what was recommended by its advisers. Mia Moisio, who leads Climate Action Tracker, said:

“[The commission] should increase its 2040 target to at least the recommended 95% reduction.”

Back to top

What does the industrial carbon management strategy say?

As well as setting out plans for reducing emissions by 90% on 1990 levels by 2040, the European Commission has also released a first-of-its-kind blueprint for how removing CO2 from the atmosphere can help the bloc reach its climate targets.

The commission’s 27-page industrial carbon management communication describes techniques to remove CO2 from the atmosphere as an “an essential complement” to efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in coming decades.

Such techniques will be needed to account for sectors where “emissions are particularly difficult or costly to reduce”, the commission says. This includes certain industrial processes that play a large role in the EU’s economy, such as cement production.

The world’s authority in climate change, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said in its most recent assessment of solutions that using CO2 removal in difficult-to-abate sectors is now “unavoidable”, if the world is to meet its climate goals.

However, the failure of CO2 removal technologies to contribute meaningfully to climate action to date and the widespread touting of such techniques by fossil-fuel companies leaves many NGOs wary.

In a statement issued before the industrial carbon management communication was released, 140 NGOs described it as a “smokescreen for continued use of fossil fuels”.

In the Net-zero Industry Act released in 2023, the commission proposed that the EU develop means to remove at least 50MtCO2 per year by 2030.

In the new communication, it says that the EU should capture 280MtCO2 per year by 2040 and 450MtCO2 by 2050. (These figures come from modelling for the impact assessment report for the EU’s 2040 climate target. They represent an average of the “S2” and “S3” scenarios included in this report, representing 2040 targets of 85-90% and 90-95%, respectively.)

The communication notes that “the scale of this endeavour is large”. The target for 2030 would involve removing around the same as the annual emissions of Sweden, it says. The target for 2050 involves removing the equivalent of Italy or France’s annual emissions.

The top chart below, taken from the new communication, shows how the scale of carbon capture should increase from 2030 to 2050, according to the projections.

Dark blue indicates projected CO2 removal from “carbon capture and storage”, a technology where CO2 is removed from the atmosphere and stored underground or in the sea. Light blue, meanwhile, indicates projected CO2 removal from “carbon capture and utilisation”, where captured CO2 is used to produce synthetic products, such as fuels and chemicals.

Projected removals from carbon capture and storage in the EU
Top: Projected removals from carbon capture and storage (dark blue) and carbon capture and utilisation (light blue) in the EU from 2030-2050. Bottom: Projections of where CO2 will be captured from, including process emissions (orange), fossil fuel emissions (grey), biogenic emissions (green) and direct air capture (blue). Credit: EU commission (2024)

The bottom chart shows projections of where CO2 will be captured from, including industrial process emissions (orange), fossil fuel emissions (grey), biogenic emissions (green) and direct air capture (blue).

The communication says that, until 2030, “the main focus will be on capturing CO2 from process emissions as well as some emissions from fossil and biogenic CO2 sources”.

Process emissions originate from industrial processes involving raw materials, while biogenic emissions result from changes to the natural carbon cycle or from burning biomass.

In a still-emergent technique called “bioenergy with carbon capture and storage” (BECCS), biomass is burned with the resultant emissions captured, in theory leading to the net removal of CO2.

Most scenarios for how developed nations can reach their climate goals use large amounts of BECCS. However there are concerns that growing the biomass required would take up large amounts of land that might be needed for nature restoration or food production. 

The communication adds that, by 2040, “close to half of the CO2 that is captured annually would have to come from biogenic sources or directly from the atmosphere [through direct air capture]”.

Direct air capture” is a technology that uses chemical reactions to remove CO2 from the air, as opposed to at the point of emissions. The technology is still in its infancy. Globally, direct air capture currently captures just 0.01MtCO2 per year, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

A major barrier to its development is that the technology currently requires very large amounts of energy to run.

The communication notes that rolling out direct air capture will “require significant additional energy to power this energy-intensive process”. It also notes that removing CO2 from biogenic sources (mostly BECCS) will require “the sustainable sourcing of biomass”.

In its reaction to the communication, the climate NGO Carbon Gap “welcomes” the new projections and says they provide “much-needed visibility and predictability on the role of CO2 removal in achieving the EU’s climate goals”.

However, by focusing only on emissions from industrial and biogenic sources or direct air capture, the projections are “missing a whole suite of promising high-durability CO2 removal methods”, it adds. This includes enhanced rock weathering, a technique involving sprinkling rock dust on crop fields in a bid to speed up the natural weathering process, which captures CO2.

From 2030 to 2050, some carbon capture will be used for fossil-fuel emissions, according to the communication’s projections.

The communication says that, despite fossil fuels being rapidly phased out in the EU under the proposals, there will still be some use in the “form of oil in the transport sector and some gas for heating and industrial purposes”.

The wording on fossil fuels differs from an earlier leaked draft of the communication, which said that the power sector is projected to capture 100MtCO2 from fossil fuels and biogenic sources by 2050. 

The 100MtCO2 figure was criticised by various groups. This includes the climate and energy NGO Bellona, which said using carbon capture for fossil-fuelled power generation “is both expensive and inefficient, given the breadth of alternative sources of clean electricity”. 

Kalcher, from the thinktank Strategic Perspective, also told Carbon Brief she found the 100MtCO2 figure “very worrying”.

To achieve the transformation set out in its projections, the communication says that a “common approach and vision are needed to establish a single market for industrial carbon management solutions”.

It notes there are already policies in place to support development of carbon capture.

This includes the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), the bloc’s “cap and trade” scheme for putting a price on CO2 emissions. The communication says the ETS has “incentivised the capture of CO2 for permanent storage in the EU and the European Economic Area”.

It also includes the Net-zero Industry Act, which “recognises carbon capture and

storage as strategic net-zero technologies and supports project deployment with regulatory

measures, including accelerated permitting procedures”, according to the communication.

But, achieving the EU’s carbon capture goals will require “more ambitious and well-coordinated policies at national level, as well as strategic infrastructure planning at EU level”, the communication says. It adds:

“Achieving this vision of a well-functioning and competitive market for captured CO2 requires partnership with industry and member states, and resources to develop a coherent policy framework that provides regulatory certainty and incentives for investments in carbon capture, storage, use and carbon removals.”

Reacting to the communication, Julia Michalak, EU policy director at the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), said she “welcomes the acknowledgement of carbon trading as a major instrument to deliver net-zero cost-efficiently”, but added:

“However, carbon markets must change to deliver net-zero as the mechanism as we know it will not take us there. It is crucial that the right policy incentives are introduced with greater urgency for removals technologies to develop at scale. This includes the recognition of industrial carbon removals that can be measured with a high level of accuracy under the EU ETS.”

Back to top

What comes next?

The EU has a complex political timetable this year, which will likely have a significant impact on how smoothly the 2040 target can be adopted.

The European Commission has now issued its initial “communication” with recommendations for the new goal. This launches a process of high-level negotiations among European leaders to reach a final decision on what form the 2040 goal will take.

This will be followed by a period of debate between member states and the European Parliament, which could result in the target being adopted into law towards the end of 2025.

Climate ministers from EU member states will initially be tasked with considering the target and the wider package of climate measures, starting at the next Council of the EU environment meeting on 25 March and followed by another on 17 June.  

These discussions will cover not only the headline 2040 target, but also highly political details such as sectoral targets and how to finance the transition.

The council, which represents member state governments, must endorse the new target for it to proceed. The council’s rotating presidency is currently held by Belgium, but Hungary – a nation that has pushed against climate action – is set to take over at the start of July.

Following these ministerial discussions, there is an expectation that a final target will be agreed by member state heads of government – possibly when they meet at the next European Council summit on 27-28 June, observers tell Carbon Brief.

At that summit, leaders will also be discussing the most pressing issues facing the bloc as part of its five-year “strategic agenda”. This does not specifically include climate targets, but covers relevant topics, such as energy and “resilience and competitiveness”.

It would “make a lot of sense” for the European Council to wave the 2040 target through alongside the strategic agenda, Manon Dufour, executive director of E3G Brussels, tells Carbon Brief. 

Kalcher, from Strategic Perspectives, agreed, telling a press briefing that this would “inform the work of the next European Commission, and it would be a very good signal to the international level”. However, such a decision would require consensus between leaders and, as Politico noted, “Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán holds veto power”.

Meanwhile, the bloc will also be gearing up for the European Parliament elections, which will be held between 6-9 June.

This will be followed by the election of the new European Commission president and commissioners, which will depend on the make-up of the new parliament. Therefore, the commission charged with putting the proposed target into law could be very different to the one that proposed it.

Discussions around the new target will be taking place at a time of great flux. This may affect member states’ willingness to push ahead with decisions.

Ahead of the European Council summit at the end of June, questions over which coalitions hold the balance of power within the new European Parliament, who the new commission president is and who their commissioners are, will remain open.

It could be that the new commission remains roughly the same as the one that proposed the 2040 target in February, led by Von der Leyen.

However, the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) has forecast a “populist right coalition”, consisting of conservatives, Christian democrats and representatives of the “radical right” taking over from the “super grand coalition” of centrist groups that currently dominates parliament. Such a “sharp right turn” could threaten the future of climate policy and the EU “green deal” in general, the ECFR concludes

(According to Politico, even Von der Leyen and climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra, both from the centre-right European People’s Party that currently dominates EU politics, have recently faced “rebellion” from within their party over the 2040 target.)

Amid such political uncertainty, the European Council’s approval of the 2040 target could be delayed until the next summit at the end of October, or even the one after that in mid-December. If the latter, it would push the decision past the COP29 climate summit, which could affect the EU’s standing there and its ability to pressure other nations into setting stronger climate targets of their own.

Other external events, including G7 and G20 meetings, and the upcoming US presidential election, could also affect EU leaders’ momentum in setting an ambitious target.

With the approval of member states, the new commission will make an official “legislative proposal” to amend the existing climate law by adding in a 2040 target. (Under the 2021 EU climate legislation, this was meant to happen “within six months” of last year’s COP28 summit, but it is expected to be delayed due to the European Parliament elections.)

This will be followed by a “co-legislation” process where the European Parliament and Council of the EU must agree on the new legislation. This could take several months, meaning the final outcome might emerge close to COP30 at the end of 2025.

Key dates for EU climate politics in 2024 can be seen in the calendar below.

6 February European Commission releases its 2040 climate “communication”
21-22 March European Council summit
25 March Environment Council of the EU Council meeting
26 March “Climate high level” meeting between EU climate ministers
19-21 May G7 summit in Hiroshima, Japan
6-9 June European Parliament elections
17 June Environment Council of the EU Council meeting
27-28 June European Council summit
June-July European Council proposes the next European Commission president candidate
1 July Hungary takes over the EU Council presidency from Belgium
Mid-July Election of new European Commission president in the European Parliament
September Hearings of new commissioners in European Parliament committees
November New European Commission is confirmed and starts its term in office
5 November US presidential election
11-24 November COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan
18-19 November G20 summit, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Back to top

The post Q&A: European Commission calls for 90% cut in EU emissions by 2040 appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Q&A: European Commission calls for 90% cut in EU emissions by 2040

Continue Reading

Greenhouse Gases

After Congress cuts clean energy measures, climate advocates are undeterred in D.C.

Published

on

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

After Congress cuts clean energy measures, climate advocates are undeterred in D.C.

July 16, 2025 – Next week, Citizens’ Climate Lobby will hold its 16th annual Summer Conference and Lobby Day in Washington, D.C. 

CCL will welcome more than 800 registrants from around the country, who will attend conference activities beginning Sunday evening, July 20, through Monday, July 21. 

Keynote speaker Amanda Ripley — author of High Conflict and co-founder of the nonprofit Good Conflict — will offer a timely and essential message as we navigate today’s fractured political landscape. See the full conference program here.

Then on Tuesday, July 22, conference attendees will head to Capitol Hill for hundreds of climate-focused meetings with members of Congress. Every meeting will focus on asking lawmakers — Republicans and Democrats like — to support America’s clean energy transition.

Despite the Republicans’ budget reconciliation bill passing into law with major cuts to clean energy measures, the process did reveal growing support among Republican lawmakers for those very measures.

“We had a lot of different letters coming out from Republicans on clean energy provisions, saying how important they are to their district,” Jennifer Tyler, CCL Vice President of Government Affairs, reminded CCL volunteers during the organization’s July meeting.

“Even though their vote and the bill wasn’t what we were looking for, it’s clear that we are generating support in Congress — it’s there. They’re willing to step out publicly and make those proclamations. We’re in this for the long haul, and we’re going in the right direction.”

Our grassroots volunteers will build on this support, emphasizing to Congress that clean energy can strengthen our domestic energy independence, enhance grid reliability, and reduce emissions—all while lowering costs, creating jobs, and spurring private-sector investment.

Public opinion is on our side. Sixty-three percent of Americans polled in December 2024 by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication stated that developing clean energy sources should be a high or very high priority for the President and Congress.

In certain offices, lobby meetings will also include building support for healthy forest policy, such as the bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act, and discussing carbon border adjustment mechanism policy. 

Follow along with this year’s event on CCL’s social media profiles on Instagram, Bluesky, X, or Facebook.

CONTACT: Flannery Winchester, CCL Vice President of Communications, 615-337-3642, flannery@citizensclimate.org

###

Citizens’ Climate Lobby is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, grassroots advocacy organization focused on national policies to address climate change. Learn more at citizensclimatelobby.org.

The post After Congress cuts clean energy measures, climate advocates are undeterred in D.C. appeared first on Citizens' Climate Lobby.

After Congress cuts clean energy measures, climate advocates are undeterred in D.C.

Continue Reading

Greenhouse Gases

Ricky Bradley steps in as interim Executive Director for Citizens’ Climate

Published

on

CCLlonglogo for PRs

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Ricky Bradley steps in as interim Executive Director for Citizens’ Climate

July 16, 2025 – Today, Citizens’ Climate Vice President of Field Operations Ricky Bradley assumes the role of interim Executive Director, after several weeks of a collaborative transition period with outgoing Executive Director Rachel Kerestes and Citizens’ Climate’s governing boards.

“Rachel’s leadership helped lay a strong foundation for the future, and I’m deeply grateful for her contributions,” Bradley said. “I’m committed to building on the groundwork she’s laid and on Citizens’ Climate’s proud history of grassroots advocacy.”

Headshot of Ricky Bradley in a black coat and blue shirt with a tie.

Ricky Bradley

Bradley brings nearly a decade of experience working as part of Citizens’ Climate’s staff, most recently as Vice President of Field Operations. In addition to his staff roles, he has also served as a volunteer Group Leader and volunteer Regional Coordinator, all of which ground him in Citizens’ Climate’s grassroots model.

“I’m excited about where Ricky’s leadership can take us from here,” said Citizens’ Climate Lobby board chair Bill Blancato said in a recent meeting with volunteers. “He’s the perfect person to take over from Rachel and carry our mission forward.”

Prior to joining Citizens’ Climate, Bradley led strategic planning and implementation efforts at HSBC, helping a large team adopt new approaches and deliver on big organizational goals.

“The political landscape is shifting, and Citizens’ Climate is stepping up — not by pressing harder in the same places, but by adapting our approach, concentrating our influence where it counts, protecting the progress we’ve made, and pursuing politically viable, durable climate solutions,” Bradley said.

Bradley joins the rest of Citizens’ Climate staff and more than 800 grassroots volunteers in Washington, D.C., next week for the organization’s annual Summer Conference and Lobby Day.

CONTACT: Flannery Winchester, CCL Vice President of Communications, 615-337-3642, flannery@citizensclimate.org

###

Citizens’ Climate Lobby is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, grassroots advocacy organization focused on national policies to address climate change. Learn more at citizensclimatelobby.org.

The post Ricky Bradley steps in as interim Executive Director for Citizens’ Climate appeared first on Citizens' Climate Lobby.

Ricky Bradley steps in as interim Executive Director for Citizens’ Climate

Continue Reading

Greenhouse Gases

嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

Published

on

火山喷发对科学家及其气候模型构成了根本性挑战。

众所周知,剧烈的火山喷发会导致地表气温突然下降,多次喷发则会在几十年乃至几个世纪的时间尺度上影响气候变率。

当火山喷发将二氧化硫注入平流层时,会形成气溶胶,从而阻挡阳光到达地球表面。

与人类对气候变化的影响不同,后者发生缓慢且可以在各种社会经济情景下被纳入气候模型进行考量。火山喷发具有突发性,这给气候预测带来了挑战。

目前科学家尚无法预测火山喷发的发生时间、地点以及二氧化硫的排放量。

那么,在进行未来气候预测时,如何考虑火山喷发对气候的影响呢?

上微信关注《碳简报》

在我们最近发表于《通讯-地球与环境》(Communications Earth & Environment)的研究中,我们表明火山喷发对全球气温预测的不确定性产生了重大影响。

我们的研究结果发现,如果将偶发的火山喷发纳入气候预测,突破《巴黎协定》所设定的1.5C升温上限的时间会略有延迟,但与此同时,未来几十年也将出现更多快速升温和降温的时期。

气候预测中的火山强迫

气候科学家将火山喷发对气候的影响——主要是通过释放出二氧化硫气体进入大气——称为“火山强迫”(volcanic forcing)。

当前的气候模型在进行未来预测时采用一个恒定的火山强迫值,该值是根据1850年至今的历史平均强迫值计算得出的。

国际耦合模式比较计划(CMIP)也是如此,这项全球模型工作为政府间气候变化专门委员会(IPCC)发布的重要评估报告提供基础数据。

然而,这种方法存在显著局限。

首先,历史平均强迫值无法表示火山爆发的偶发性。

大规模火山喷发呈零星分布——有时好多事件集中发生在某几个十年内,有时两个事件之间则可能相隔上百年。

此外,与数千年尺度的记录相比,从1850年至今的参考时期中,发生过的大规模喷发事件 ——指排放超过3太克(Tg)二氧化硫的喷发事件——相对较少。

最后,早期国际耦合模式比较计划气候模型中所使用的火山强迫重建数据并未包含排放量少于3太克二氧化硫的中小规模喷发。

这是因为这些喷发在1980年卫星时代开始之前大多未被探测到。然而,这些体量较小但发生频率更高的喷发事件,在长期火山强迫中贡献了30%至50%。

采取新方法

传统上,气候科学家认为气候预测中主要存在三种不确定性来源:内部变率、模型不确定性和情景不确定性。

其中,“内部”变率是指气候系统内部自然产生的波动,如厄尔尼诺现象;模型不确定性是指不同气候模型之间结果的差异;情景不确定性则涉及未来几十年全球可能的发展路径。

我们的研究结果表明,火山喷发应被明确视为气候预测中第四个重要的不确定性来源。

为了探究在考虑火山强迫不确定性的情况下,气候预测会发生怎样的变化,我们的研究采用了一种概率方法,这一方法建立在Bethke等人于2017年提出的研究基础之上。

为此,我们构建了“随机强迫情景”,其本质是1000种延续至本世纪末的火山活动可能时间线预测。

这些情景基于冰芯中记录的过去1.15万年火山活动历史,以及卫星观测和地质证据。每个情景都呈现了不同的喷发强度、地点、时间和频率的组合。

(在数学中,“随机”系统是指结果包含随机性或不确定性的系统,因此不可预测;这与“确定性”系统相对,后者的结果可以通过初始条件和一套规则或方程完全预测。)

随后,我们利用2015至2100年期间的随机火上强迫和历史平均火山强迫模拟气候预测,研究共享社会经济路径(SSPs)中三种不同排放情景下的升温变化:低排放情景(SSP1-1.9)、与现行气候政策相符的中等排放情景(SSP2-4.5)、非常高排放情景(SSP5-8.5)。

在这一步中,我们使用了一种称为FaIR的简化气候模型,也称“模拟器”。

通过模拟1000种不同的火山未来情况,我们发现在21世纪未来时期火山喷发所引起的气候不确定性,可能超过同期气候系统本身的内部变率。

我们还发现,到2030年代,火山喷发可能占全球气温预测总不确定性的三分之一以上。

下图中能看到这些结果。图中展示了不同来源对总不确定性的影响。火山为橙色、内部变率为深蓝色、气候模型响应为黄色,未来人类排放情景为绿色。

Chart: Annual mean contribution of uncertainties

对1.5C临界值的意义

我们的模拟结果表明,在气候预测中纳入可能的火山活动时间线后,短期内突破《巴黎协定》设定的1.5C升温上限的概率略有下降。

根据不同的排放情景,相较于使用恒定火山强迫的预测,模拟发现超过1.5C升温上限的概率下降了4%至10%。

尽管这一结果听起来似乎令人鼓舞,但未来的火山活动并不能在长期缓和由人类引起的全球变暖。

1815年坦博拉火山的喷发事件就是一个强有力的例证。这次喷发使全球气温平均下降了约0.8C,带来了“无夏之年”,导致欧洲、北美和中国大范围的作物歉收和饥荒。

火山喷发带来的降温效应是短暂的,通常只持续几年,其并不会改变由人类排放所导致的长期变暖趋势。

我们的研究发现,即使考虑多种可能的未来火山活动,在除了最低排放路径以外的所有情景中,全球变暖仍将在几十年内超过1.5C。

即便21世纪火山活动频繁,其对全球变暖的抵消作用也仅占很小一部分——这意味着减排对于实现长期气候目标仍然至关重要。

下方图表展示了在三种排放情景下,使用随机火山强迫(实线)与恒定火山强迫(虚线)时超过1.5C的概率(上图),以及两种强迫方式之间的概率差异(下图)。

Charts: Probability of exceeding 1.5C

十年尺度的气温变率

我们的研究提供的另一个重要发现是:一旦将火山强迫的变率纳入考虑,将更有可能出现极端温暖和寒冷的十年期。

在中等排放情景下,我们发现出现负向十年期趋势——即全球表面温度在某个十年内平均下降——的概率增加了10%到18%。

与此同时,出现极端温暖十年期的概率也随之增加,这反映出火山强迫的变率会同时提高变暖和变冷极端事件发生的可能性。

这一结果凸显了火山喷发如何在十年时间尺度上对全球气温趋势带来显著的波动。

迈向更完善的气候预测

了解火山对气候的影响,对于全面评估农业、基础设施和能源系统在未来所面临的风险至关重要。

使用全面的地球系统模型运行数千种火山情景并不切实际,因为这需要极高的计算资源。但与此同时,当前的方法也存在上文提到的显著局限。

不过,在未来的气候模型工作中,仍有折中方案可行。

即将开展的下一阶段气候建模实验——即CMIP7情景模式比较计划——可以采用更具代表性的“平均”火山强迫基线,这一基线纳入了历史记录中常被遗漏的小型喷发事件的影响。这一偏差现已在用于下一代气候模型模拟的历史火山强迫数据集中得到纠正。

此外,建模团队还应额外运行包含高频和低频未来火山活动的情景,以全面捕捉火山不确定性对气候预测的影响范围。

虽然人类导致的温室气体排放仍是气候变化的主导因素,但若能妥善考虑火山活动的不确定性,将有助于我们获得更全面的未来气候图景及其对社会的潜在影响。

The post 嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测 appeared first on Carbon Brief.

嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com