Brussels, 26/02/2015 (Agence Europe) - Although the “Paris roadmap” unveiled on Wednesday 25 February by the European Commission calls for a global climate agreement that is ambitious, fair, transparent and legally binding, fears about the environmental integrity of the EU draft proposal were immediately expressed by climate defence NGOs. They all call for greater clarity and ambition and warn against ineffective rules for calculating emissions from the forestry sector, which are likely to have a negative impact on the EU goal, that of reducing emissions by 40% by 2030 (compared to 1990 levels).
The text provides an insight into what the EU may include in its contribution based on exclusively national efforts or, in other words, the contribution determined at a national level that each EU member state is planning to make (Intended nationally determined contribution, INDC in UN jargon). This draft contribution will need to be approved by the Environmental Council on 6 March, before it can be formally submitted to the UN later in the month, before the 31 March deadline.
NGOs warned that if it is not framed by robust rules, the inclusion of Land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) could clearly reduce the EU climate goal by 5% in the worst scenario.
The way in which emissions linked to the use of soil in the EU Objective will be decisive because this sector certainly contributes to emissions but it also helps absorb carbons (forests used as carbon sinks). Carbon Market Watch warns that Poland and Germany should include rules on LULUCF because the objective could be reduced to 5%, which means that the real impact of EU efforts would only be 35%.
The World Resource Institute (WRI) says that it is important to guarantee the inclusion of the forestry sector so that the efforts made in other key sectors is not reduced.
CAN Europe (Climate Action Network Europe) says that the Commission proposals for the EU contribution require greater clarity and do not go far enough. Wendel Trio, the director of the organisation, argues that the quantity of greenhouse gases that the EU will be authorised to emit after 2020 is not clear. He adds that the proposal does not deal with get-out clauses that could water down the EU objective by up to 4.5%.
This is because emissions should be reduced by 25% by 2020 but if the reductions in 2021 start at -20%, member states will not have to make any other effort during the first few years. The NGO also regrets that the Commission does not specify the EU contributions for reducing the disparity between the offers on the table and the emission reductions required by 2020, as a means of making good the funding deficit from the Green Fund For Climate, to help developing countries and that it does not indicate how the EU can do better than a 40% reduction in its emissions. (Aminata Niang)