Climate neutrality is European destiny.
The EU means business when we pledged to make Europe climate usual by 2050 the European
The European Commission tabled its much awaited
climate law in a bid to carve into stone Europe's objective of becoming the first
climate neutral continent in the world by 2050.
But what is the EU's new climate law all about?
Well, the Commission calls the climate law
the heart of the European Green Deal.
Its main objective is to make the the EU's climate neutrality objective
a legally binding obligation on the Member States.
That means that EU countries will now be legally obliged
to aim for net zero emissions by 2050.
This is hugely significant,
it means that investors and businesses will now have
the legal certainty that the climate neutrality objective is irreversible.
If new climate skeptic governments are elected somewhere in Europe
say in Denmark Poland or Germany
well, they won't be able to come back on that commitment
and amend their climate objectives in a retroactive manner
So what does the climate law actually do?
Well, the climate law is all about process not about substance.
There is nothing in there for example about renewable energies or CO2 emissions from cars.
These are important of course but they will be dealt with elsewhere
in other pieces of legislation.
What the climate law does do in detail
though is to set out a process to make sure Europe stayed on track
and eventually reaches the 2050 objective.
Importantly, decisions on climate policy, including targets,
will no longer be decided by unanimity among the Member States
but by qualified majority voting.
This means you countries will no longer
have a veto over things climate related
Moreover, the European Parliament will from now on be fully involved
as a co-legislator, meaning decisions will be more democratic.
How will the climate law work in practice?
Well, the EU member states will be asked to report on a yearly basis
about progress made
and if they deviate from the objective
the Commission will be allowed to take some corrective measures,
in the way of new legislation or by making
some detailed recommendations for the member states.
And in due time, some intermediary targets will be added on the way
to reaching the 2050 objective,
for example in 2030 and 2040 and revised on a regular basis every five years,
in line with the latest available science.
What are the criticisms all about?
Most of the criticism concerns the climate targets.
Under the Paris Agreement, the EU - like all other signatories -
has committed to submit an upgraded climate target for 2030
with new stricter objective to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
These national contributions are supposed to be submitted in time for the COP 26 UN Summit in Glasgow
which is taking place in November.
However, under the climate law the EU has only committed to submit
a detailed cost-benefit analysis of moving its emission target
from the current 40% up to 50 or 55%.
According to critics, this won't leave enough time to get Europe's updated UN contribution
in time for Glasgow.
Officially, the Commission says it needs until September
to complete its cost-benefit analysis
but many among the critics believe
this is only a tactical move, aimed at making sure Europe doesn't come to Glasgow
as the only major trading bloc with an updated UN target.
A strategy, that hasn't really paid off in the past
if you look at the results of the Copenhagen conference in 2009.
Among those pushing for an earlier timeline
are 12 EU countries, including Denmark, France, Spain and the Netherlands
which have sent a letter to the Commission earlier this month
calling for the cost-benefit analysis to be completed in June
not in September.
But the criticism doesn't stop there.
Some like Poland and other Eastern EU countries
say the proposal doesn't focus enough on social equity aspects
and doesn't contain of guarantees on funding for the energy transition.
And others like teen activist Greta Thunberg have condemned the proposal
because it doesn't contain a carbon budget
that would limit the amount of CO2 that European countries are allowed to spew into the atmosphere.
No policy plan or deal will be nearly enough
as long as you just continue to ignore the CO2 budget which applies for today.
We don't just need goals for 2030 or 2050,
we above all need them for 2020 and for every following year to come.
We need to start cutting our emissions drastically at the source, now.
All these criticisms are founded of course
Negotiations on the climate law will show whether some of these issues
can be addressed or not when it reaches
the European Parliament and the member states.
But they also fail to do justice to the climate law.
Despite all the criticism, the bottom line
is that the European Union, if it adopts its climate law in time for Glasgow,
will have the most far-reaching climate legislation in the world.
And that in itself is hugely significant.