Members of the European Parliament’s environment (ENVI) and economic and monetary affairs (ECON) committees expressed their differences over the potential future inclusion of gas and nuclear in the EU’s taxonomy, while criticising the planned criteria for bioenergy and forestry on Monday 17 May, during a discussion with EU Financial Services Commissioner Mairead McGuinness.
Thus, while ECR MEPs Alexandr Vondra (Czechia) and Bodgan Rzońca (Poland) argued for such an inclusion on the grounds that some Central and Eastern European Member States need these energy sources to move away from coal, Paul Tang (S&D, Netherlands) voiced his concerns. This, he said, could “undermine the credibility of the entire (taxonomy) framework”.
“How are you going to make sure that the credibility of the taxonomy on gas and nuclear is not going to be undermined?” asked Bas Eickhout (Greens/EFA, Netherlands).
In the same vein, Martin Hojsík (Renew Europe, Slovakia) asked how the Commission intended to impose the conditions set out in the taxonomy regulation on transitional activities (the category into which gas would fall), in particular that these should not lead to a ‘lock-in’ effect and should not hinder the development and deployment of low-carbon alternatives.
Recalling that the Commission is awaiting the results of two assessments of a report by its Joint Research Centre (JRC) on nuclear power before deciding on the inclusion of this energy source in the taxonomy (see EUROPE 12688/5), Ms McGuinness assured that she would continue to press for the results to be provided before the end of the summer.
She also recalled that the institution will consider including some gas-related activities via a subsequent delegated act (also covering nuclear depending on the outcome of the evaluations - see EUROPE 12703/2). This will be done “within the legal limits set by the taxonomy regulation and based on scientific expertise”, she went on to say, in the hope of reassuring MEPs.
The regulators also added that: “We may also need to consider legislation to recognise the role of gas in facilitating the switch from coal and oil”.
The Commissioner also stressed that not being on the list of economic activities covered by the EU taxonomy “does not mean that an economic activity is unsustainable”. The group also emphasised: “It is not a mandatory list for investors to invest in, but it is a powerful tool that provides a guide to the activities that will help us reach our climate and environmental goals”.
Forestry and bioenergy
Like Mr Eickhout, Silvia Modig (The Left, Finland) criticised the criteria for forestry and bioenergy in the first delegated act on taxonomy, presented on 21 April (see EUROPE 12703/2, 12701/16), as being inconsistent with the EU’s climate ambitions (see EUROPE 12704/15).
Ms McGuinness said that “a lot of the work we have done within the taxonomy is entirely fit for purpose”, while assuring that the taxonomy’s criteria will be reviewed in due course. “The ‘Fit for 55’ package (due on 14 July) will probably ask us to go further”, she said.
The Commissioner repeatedly stressed that the taxonomy is “a living document”, which “will be developed gradually over time as science, technology and our understanding of sustainability evolve”.
Finally, Ms McGuinness stressed that, while science must underpin the Commission’s work to develop the taxonomy, it is also necessary to take into account “the political support for what we are doing”. (Original version in French by Damien Genicot)