“Whether one is concerned about climate disasters, European competitiveness or strategic autonomy, in every case the answer is the same: we need more locally produced, clean and sustainable energy”, declared Wopke Hoekstra, Commissioner for Climate, Net Zero and Clean Growth, during a debate on the Emissions Trading System (ETS), held on Wednesday 20 May in the European Parliament in Strasbourg.
At the initiative of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR), which is critical of this carbon pricing instrument, the political forces were divided over this review, scheduled by the Commission for summer 2026.
Nicola Procaccini, the Italian MEP behind the debate, called for an in-depth review of the ETS benchmarks, as well as an instrument to combat the system’s distortion effects in the maritime sector (‘carbon leakage’ towards ports neighbouring the EU), and for the abandonment of the ETS 2 reform, which provides for the system to be extended to heating for buildings and road transport.
Far right calls for ETS to be scrapped. Among its detractors, the ECR Group was able to count on the support of Patriots for Europe and Europe of Sovereign Nations. Jordan Bardella, President of the Patriots group in the European Parliament, referred to “three letters that are strangling our industrial flagships and causing cascading bankruptcies every day in the steel, chemicals and construction sectors”, and advocated “taking back control of our national electricity tariffs and freeing them from tax and regulatory constraints”. Czech MEP Ivan David (ESN), for his part, said that the Emissions Trading System was “an obstacle to European competitiveness”.
From the left to the EPP, differing visions of the review. For their part, the left-wing forces (The Left, the Greens/EFA group, S&D) and the centrist bloc (Renew Europe, EPP) agree on the need for a review, but not on its content. Peter Liese, the EPP coordinator in the Environment committee, called for more free allowances for companies investing in Europe.
These CO2 emission allowances allocated free of charge to industry, intended to preserve competitiveness in the face of international competition and to avoid carbon leakage pending the introduction of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), will be gradually reduced between 2026 and 2034.
Socialist MEP Mohammed Chahim questioned why Member States had not invested ETS revenues in decarbonising industry, which is the reason for “Europe’s vulnerability to oil shocks”.
According to the European Environment Agency, Member States have devoted the bulk of their ETS revenues to national action over the last decade. Since June 2023, ETS revenues have had to be devoted to climate- and energy-related action.
Crucial instrument for several MEPs. Emma Wiesner (Renew Europe, Swedish) called for “an end to questioning the best anti-fossil-fuel tool at our disposal” and renewed her support for a phase-out of fossil fuels. Her words therefore echoed those of Michael Bloss (Greens/EFA, German), who stated: “the solution for helping to bring down energy prices is to produce it domestically through renewable sources”.
Li Andersson (The Left, Finnish), meanwhile, called for “the ETS system to be reformed so that it is strengthened rather than weakened”. (Original version in French by Nadège Delépine)