Members of the European Parliament’s Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) welcomed for the most part the draft report by Jessica Polfjärd (EPP, Sweden) on the revision of the EU’s Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR) on Thursday 10 February as a good basis for negotiations.
“My main priority is to make sure that every Member State takes ambitious actions to lower its emissions by 2030”, said Polfjärd when presenting her report, previously detailed in our issue (see EUROPE 12871/9).
The ESR sets national targets for 2030 for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions that are not covered by the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) or the Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) Regulation.
These emissions are mainly from road transport, heating of buildings, agriculture, small industrial installations, and waste management.
According to the European Commission’s revision proposal, presented on 14 July 2021, these targets should lead to a reduction in EU emissions by 2030 under the ESR of at least 40% compared to 2005 levels, an increase of 11 percentage points compared to the current target (see EUROPE 12762/2).
Divided on the inclusion of carbon capture technologies
However, MEPs appeared divided on some points, in particular the possibility for Member States to use carbon capture and utilisation (CCU) and carbon capture and storage (CCS) to meet part of their targets.
While Anna Zalewska (Poland), the ECR Group’s shadow rapporteur on the subject, welcomed the initiative, the shadow rapporteurs of the S&D, Greens/EFA and The Left Groups expressed serious reservations.
“Only natural [carbon] sinks can count towards the 2030 target”, said Margrete Auken (Denmark).
In their view, such an inclusion is unwise, as these technologies are not mature enough.
For its part, the Commission considered that these technologies should not be introduced into the legislation too early. The institution recalled that it is currently working on a separate legislative proposal (expected in the fourth quarter of 2022) to establish a certification system for these carbon removals (see EUROPE 12886/12).
Another divisive issue is the proposal to increase by 50% the flexibility for some Member States to meet part of their targets by cancelling emission allowances from the ETS (Annex II of the Regulation).
Linea Søgaard-Lidell (Denmark), shadow rapporteur for Renew Europe, and Auken expressed their fears that this would lead to a weakening of emission reduction efforts.
Support for the introduction of financial sanctions
However, S&D, Renew Europe and Greens/EFA MEPs welcomed the proposal to introduce a “Pressure and Pay” system to increase transparency and introduce financial penalties for Member States that fail to meet their national emission reduction targets.
They also welcomed the establishment of a clear link between the ESR and the European climate law (see EUROPE 12750/27).
In addition, Søgaard-Lidell, Auken, but also Mick Wallace (The Left, Ireland) welcomed the proposal to abolish the current ‘safety reserve’ - which can be used by Member States with a low GDP per capita that fail to meet their emission reduction targets - and to reject the Commission’s proposal to establish an additional reserve.
Javi López (S&D, Spain) said it was reasonable to reduce the flexibilities left to Member States, but did not mention the reserves.
The deadline for tabling amendments to the draft report is 16 February, with a view to a vote in the ENVI Committee in May and a vote in Parliament’s plenary session in early June.
See the draft report: https://aeur.eu/f/bc (Original version in French by Damien Genicot)