European Parliament backs Zero Carbon Emissions by 2050

By Frédéric Simon | ( | – –

Green lawmakers have hailed a “great victory for the climate” as a proposal to bring down to zero the amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted in the atmosphere by 2050 received unexpected backing from the European Parliament last Wednesday (17 January).

Plenary session week 3 2018 in Strasbourg – Debate on energy efficiency, renewables and the governance of the Energy Union. [European Parliament]

“For the first time, we are proposing a ‘carbon budget’,” said Claude Turmes, a Green lawmaker who introduced the proposal as part of the Parliament’s report on the governance of the Energy Union, which was voted on in plenary yesterday.

The carbon budget proposal “will set out exactly what can still be emitted into our atmosphere if we are to comply with the 1.5 and 2 degrees limits set out in Paris and achieve a net-zero carbon economy by 2050,” Turmes said in a statement after the vote, hailing “a great victory for the climate and citizens”.

The Energy Union governance regulation is the cornerstone of a broader ‘clean energy’ package of laws that was tabled by the European Commission in December 2016. It sets an overarching framework for achieving the EU’s energy and climate policy goals until 2030, including a strict timeline and a review mechanism to ensure the bloc meets objectives on renewable energy and greenhouse gas emissions.

But support for Turmes’s carbon budget idea was far from a foregone conclusion as the largest political group in Parliament, the centre-right European People’s Party (EPP), appeared divided on the issue ahead of the vote.
EU lawmakers agree ‘flexible’ renewable energy targets for 2030

Political groups in the European Parliament have sealed an agreement Tuesday evening (16 January) on a proposed Energy Union governance bill, assigning a strict yet flexible timeline for EU countries to meet the bloc’s 2030 objectives on renewable energy, EURACTIV has learnt.


Quentin Genard from the energy and climate think tank E3G, called the Parliament vote on carbon budget “a game-changer”.

“We could not have expected a better outcome. If the carbon budget went through in Parliament, it means the proposal probably got backing even by some EPP members,” Genard told EURACTIV. “It was quite a comfortable majority in the end, which means there is probably a shift within the EPP group in support of that,” he said.

Getting backing from EU member states on the proposal won’t be easy, however, as there is no common position on this in the Council of Ministers, which held tense discussions on the clean energy package in December.
EU ministers stumble towards joint position on future energy laws

Energy ministers on Monday (18 December) took well over 15 hours to agree common positions on four clean energy draft pieces of EU legislation ahead of a final round of talks in 2018 with the European Parliament and Commission.

However, Genard believes there were also some “encouraging signs” from individual EU countries. The UK already has a rolling five-year carbon budget and is therefore likely to back the idea at EU level. During the first round of governance talks in December, France put its foot down, saying Europe should adopt a net-zero emissions target, an idea that was supported by Sweden and Luxembourg.

More broadly, EU member states backed long-term climate and energy strategies at the December meeting. These were “one of the few elements where the Council strengthened the Commission’s initial proposal,” Genard remarked.

But timing already looks tight. EU member states are required to submit their draft Integrated National Energy and Climate Plans by the end of the year, which means the Commission has to make a move beforehand to introduce a carbon budget.

“EU member states are currently working on their 2030 and 2050 energy and climate plans. They need clarity about what the Commission expects from them as soon as possible to ensure a smooth preparation by the national administrations,” Genard said.

The text approved by the Parliament actually requires the Commission to calculate the EU’s remaining Carbon budget by 1 July this year. If the Council ends up backing the idea, this will be no small feat and time is already scarce to collect and analyse the necessary data.

“As soon as you introduce a carbon budget, you need evidence, so the Commission needs to do some number-crunching,” Genard said.

“It means the Commission needs to start working on it now to be able to deliver on time”.


Related video added by Informed Comment:

Wochit News: “Investment In Renewable Energy Pays Off As Germany Enjoys Power Excess”

2 Responses

  1. 2050 is too late, but it’s still progress because they’re breaking the mental barricade that says that government, and in this case the EU parallel government, must not take a position on such things, and we now have the means to bring it about a lot faster. If the decree is made, then it’s not hard to do the math and realize how much money they save, and how much their balance of payments might be improved, by cutting out fossil fuel energy imports from outside the EU right away instead of 2050.

    There was an enormous drop in the price of offshore wind in the last couple of years in Europe as competitive suppliers matured – which hasn’t happened in the US yet. This drop means that you can now run wind power from the North and ever-cheaper solar power from the South into one European grid. So the next step is making a commitment to energy storage to balance those off. There is a proposal out there to create a huge artificial loch in Scotland that could hold enough pumped storage to perform that function all by itself for all the EU, but I figure the environmental destruction that it would cause is prohibitive. Instead, many lakes in Scotland, Norway, Switzerland, etc. will be considered, pretty much any existing dam. Europe is lucky to have mountain ranges all over it from the wind power zone to the solar power zone. Batteries only need to enter into it on the level of local solar mini-grids.

    The next step after that is for the EU to commit to decarbonization of transport, which means accepting that diesel was a mistake and working to rapidly eliminate the urban health hazards it has exacerbated. Germany is the problem here. Its car companies have been shown in an expose by Der Spiegel to have formed a technological cartel, coordinating a slower pace for technological improvements to save money while presenting a joint face to the world that their technology is the best. Thus it’s not surprising that their hybrid cars are kind of a joke, with electric-only range so short that they really only function as substitutes for diesel cars that they know will be banned soon. The diesel scandal has now embarrassed them into taking all-battery cars more seriously, but not in the lower price categories where a breakthrough is badly needed to wipe out diesel in the cities. A big EU push for shared self-driving car services might change everything.

Comments are closed.