Although not on the agenda, the delicate issue of including fossil gas and nuclear energy in the European Union’s taxonomy crept into the discussions of the EU Member States’ ministers on Friday 21 January in Amiens, during a joint informal ‘Environment/Energy’ meeting organised by the French Presidency of the EU Council.
Austria, Luxembourg, Spain, and Denmark had set the tone by publishing a letter the day before, expressing their intention to “defend a common position” at the meeting.
These four countries are strongly opposed to the European Commission’s draft complementary delegated act to classify fossil gas and nuclear as “transitional” activities in the taxonomy, a classification system aimed at defining sustainable activities and thus guiding private investors (see EUROPE 12860/1).
Asked about this by journalists upon his arrival in Amiens, Luxembourg’s Energy Minister Claude Turmes dodged the question by replying that the taxonomy will be discussed “behind the scenes”.
His Austrian counterpart, Leonore Gewessler, reiterated Vienna’s determination to refer the matter to the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) if the draft delegated act was not amended (see EUROPE 12835/4). The possibility is also being examined by Luxembourg.
According to the French Minister on Environmental Transition, Barbara Pompili, the subject of taxonomy did not monopolise the discussions. “The vast majority of countries”, including Germany, did not want disagreements on taxonomy to overshadow the other “very important issues” of the ‘European Green Deal’, she said at a press conference.
Unsuitable criteria?
In their letter to the European Commission, Austria, Luxembourg, Spain, and Denmark describe the draft delegated act as a “step backwards”.
They believe that it is “problematic from both a political and a technical point of view”, that it “goes beyond the principles of the Taxonomy Regulation”, and that it “endangers the Taxonomy Regulation (...) and the energy transition in the EU and globally”.
In their view, including gas and nuclear in the taxonomy risks diverting investment from renewables and leading to technology lock-in for several decades, given the long life of gas and nuclear facilities.
In particular, they criticise the conditions that gas and nuclear activities would have to meet in order to be included in the taxonomy.
“Two of the criteria are based on future promises, e.g. the condition of a gradual switch to renewable energy or low-carbon gases by 2035”, the letter says.
On the nuclear side, they point to the criterion of establishing a plan for the commissioning of a final disposal facility for high-level radioactive waste by 2050, when “we have no operational experience with deep geological repositories for highly active waste”.
They added: “For decades to come, there will be no effective waste disposal solution for the large amounts of hazardous waste generated”.
They also criticise the lack of provision for clear action in the event of non-compliance.
European Commission under pressure
These countries could be joined by others.
Although it did not sign the joint letter due to timing (legislative elections are approaching in the country), Portugal had also expressed its opposition to the inclusion of fossil gas and nuclear energy in the taxonomy (see EUROPE 12831/9).
On his arrival in Amiens, the Dutch minister, Rob Jetten, expressed the Netherlands’ wish to classify gas in a specific category, outside the EU taxonomy.
In addition, a section of the European Parliament is also determined to put pressure on the European Commission.
“We do not see how the S&D Group can support the proposed delegated act with its current content”, says a letter sent to the European Commission by MEPs Simona Bonafè (Italy) and Paul Tang (Netherlands) on 21 January.
While recognising a role for fossil gas in the transition to climate neutrality in 2050, the letter deplores “a definition of the conditions for its inclusion in transitional activities that is too broad”.
Like the four Member States mentioned above, the S&D Group is particularly critical of the European Commission’s proposed threshold of 270g CO2e/kWh for gas, compared to 100g CO2e/kWh for other forms of electricity generation.
According to the draft delegated act, gas installations for which planning permission is granted before 31 December 2030 will have to show direct greenhouse gas emissions below this 270g threshold to be compatible with the taxonomy.
Joining the Dutch Energy Minister, the S&D therefore proposes to create a separate category for gas and nuclear energy, outside the taxonomy.
In a separate letter to the European Commission, Sirpa Pietikäinen MEP (EPP, Finland) and Bas Eickhout MEP (Greens/EFA, Netherlands), the European Parliament’s co-rapporteurs on the regulation establishing the taxonomy, expressed “serious doubts” about the legality of the proposed technical selection criteria.
The chair of the Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON), Irene Tinagli (S&D, Italy), and the chair of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI), Pascal Canfin (Renew Europe, France), had called for a public consultation on the issue (see EUROPE 12872/5).
Towards a rejection of the delegated act?
As the consultation period with Member States and stakeholders of the ‘Platform on Sustainable Finance’ closes tonight at midnight (see EUROPE 12866/14), a rejection of the delegated act in the EU Council seems unlikely, given the majority required (at least 20 Member States representing at least 65% of the EU population).
The European Parliament, which has not been consulted on the draft delegated act, may on the other hand oppose it, provided it receives the vote of at least 353 MEPs in plenary.
Asked by EUROPE, a parliamentary source said it was still too early to make predictions, as the draft delegated act could still be amended following input from Member States and the ‘Platform on Sustainable Finance’.
See the letter from the four Member States: https://bit.ly/3Akn0Aq
See the S&D’s letter: https://bit.ly/3FQ0HE7
See the letter from Sirpa Pietikäinen and Bas Eickhout: https://bit.ly/3FJ0mD6 (Original version in French by Damien Genicot)