Peter Liese: Priority for 2035 target because of international process / China and India are waiting for Europe / Climate is still a very important issue

“The 90% greenhouse gas reduction target that the European Commission intends to propose for 2040 is extremely ambitious and I don’t think we can support it if not major flexibilities are included,” said Peter Liese, spokesperson for climate in the biggest group in the European Parliament (EPP, Christian Democrats). Liese criticised that the impact assessment of the Commission is not really serious when it talks about 88% with existing legislation.

Source: Impact Assessment European Commission on 2040 target (06.02.2024): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:6c154426-c5a6-11ee-95d9-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&format=PDF (pp. 23/24).

“The impact assessment assumes that there will be no more emissions from ETS1 sectors as of 2039. This is already challenging for electricity and almost impossible for industry but clearly impossible for aviation, which is also part of ETS1. That’s why we need to either go for lower targets or include major flexibilities,” said Liese.

On the other hand, Liese emphasised that climate change is still a very important issue, in Europe and beyond: “We have just experienced the warmest March in European history and already now in Central Europe drought is coming back. We are already late to present our 2035 target in the international process of UNFCCC. Many countries like Canada, Brazil, Japan and the UK have already pledged. Others like China and India are desperately waiting for the European Union. That’s why it is important to present an EU target for 2035 well before the COP30 in Belem in December this year.”

Many experts now talk about including international credits in the EU climate policy according to Liese: “This includes challenges because in the past, those international credits were rather a money-making-machine for China than actually helpful for the climate. They can only be a temporary solution because in the end, all countries in the world need to be climate-neutral.”

Liese stressed the challenges for companies in Europe and how flexibilities would be beneficial to face decarbonisation struggles: “Sometimes in life minus and minus equal plus. For example, the biggest chemical company in Europe, BASF in Ludwigshafen, was considering to decarbonise their plant but they had no answer for the remaining 3-4% residual emissions which is why their plan has not been implemented yet. Cement plants in areas far away from any CCS possibility also have their challenges to decarbonise until 2039. Limited inclusion of high quality third country certificates can be a solution for industry and it can also be the solution to get a compromise at EU level.”

Liese insisted: “If ever a 90% target for 2040 is considered, it needs to include the above mentioned flexibilities. On top of that, we need to include negative emissions in the EU ETS as soon as possible, fully implement the Clean Industrial Deal and many more enabling conditions. Very important is also much stronger and targeted support for citizens and for farmers for carbon removals and reduction measures.”