The European Parliament has approved a significant climate milestone for 2040, setting the stage for fraught negotiations with member states. The resolution, passed with a comfortable majority of 379 votes in favor, 248 against and 10 abstentions, establishes an ambitious, yet potentially problematic, target for emissions reduction.
The approved text mirrors the broad consensus among member states, aiming for a 90% reduction in CO2 emissions compared to 1990 levels. However, a critical divergence emerges with the proposed mechanism for achieving this goal: up to 5% of the pledged emissions reductions can now be sourced through the purchase of carbon credits from partner nations beginning in 2036. This controversial provision, championed by some as a pragmatic necessity given the challenges of decarbonizing certain sectors within the EU, raises serious questions regarding the genuine commitment to internal emission cuts and the potential for “carbon colonialism.
Critics argue the reliance on international carbon offsets risks shifting the responsibility for emissions reduction onto developing nations, potentially undermining their own climate goals and fostering dependency on EU funding. While the Parliament stipulated “robust safeguards” to ensure the integrity of these offsets, skepticism remains regarding their effectiveness in preventing environmental exploitation and ensuring equitable climate action.
Furthermore, the resolution endorses the extension of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS2), initially slated for 2027, to 2028. This delay, covering emissions from fuel combustion in buildings and transport, has been attributed to concerns regarding the preparedness of affected sectors and the potential economic impact. The postponement is viewed by some as a symptom of wider anxieties surrounding the speed and cost of the EU’s climate transition, potentially weakening the overall ambition of the policy.
The Parliament has also stipulated a bi-annual review of progress towards these interim targets by the European Commission, allowing for potential adjustments to the EU’s climate law. This mechanism, while ostensibly designed for flexibility, introduces a degree of uncertainty and could be exploited to soften targets under pressure from industry lobbyists or politically motivated delays. The upcoming negotiations with member states are expected to be intensely contested, with significant scrutiny focused on the practical implementation of these provisions and the potential for unintended consequences.