Members of the European Parliament’s Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) stressed in particular the need to ensure the alignment of the Effort Sharing Regulation (2018/842) with the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) on Monday 27 September, during initial discussions with the European Commission on some of its ‘Fit for 55’ climate legislation.
“It will be important to work together with everybody so that we have a coherent position”, insisted Peter Liese (EPP, Germany), Parliament’s rapporteur for the proposed revision of the ETS, while mentioning the ESR, the ETS and the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).
The same was true of his colleague Jessica Polfjärd (EPP, Sweden), who was appointed rapporteur for the ESR review, who wondered how the Commission intended to ensure “alignment” of the ESR with other proposals in the ‘Fit for 55’ package, notably the revision of the ETS.
“How does the commission intend to ensure that both legislations lead to a sufficiently predictable environment?” asked Alexandr Vondra (ECR, Czech Republic), expressing surprise at the Commission’s decision to keep road transport and heating of buildings within the scope of the ESR while proposing to include them in a new ETS.
Ensuring compliance with national targets
Presented on 14 July (see EUROPE 12762/1, 12762/2), the proposed revision of the EU effort-sharing regulation aims to strengthen national targets for reducing emissions from sectors outside the ETS that currently generate around 60% of the EU’s greenhouse gas emissions: road transport, heating of buildings, agriculture, small industrial installations and waste management.
Each EU Member State will thus have to make greater efforts to meet the 2030 target assigned to it in the regulation on the basis of two main criteria: the country’s GDP per capita and cost-effectiveness. The overall objective: to achieve a reduction in emissions under the ESR of at least 40% compared to 2005 levels, i.e. an increase of 11% compared to the current target of the Regulation.
For Margrete Auken (Greens/EFA, Denmark) and Mick Wallace (The Left, Ireland), it is therefore essential to strengthen the Commission’s proposal on accountability to ensure that each Member State meets its national target. Ms Auken criticised the fact that the proposed revision does not provide for a sanction in the event that this does not happen.
The two MEPs also felt that the overall target is still too low, as it is based on a reduction in total EU net emissions (all sectors) of at least 55% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. The Greens/EFA and The Left consider this objective of the ‘Climate Law’ to be inconsistent with the Paris Agreement.
“My main priority will be to ensure that every Member State takes ambitious actions to lower emissions until 2030 and will do it in a cost-effective approach”, warned Parliament’s rapporteur Jessica Polfjärd.
Javi López (S&D, Spain) expressed concern about some of the proposed national targets. He called for “realistic and proportionate” targets, without punishing Member States that have already made early efforts. (Original version in French by Damien Genicot)