Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
The EU has presented options to member states for ways to ease its proposed 2040 climate target amid a broader effort to cut legislation and water down some of its more ambitious environmental rules, following political pushback.
The European Commission has suggested that in order to reach a proposed 90 per cent reduction in emissions against 1990 levels by 2040 countries may be allowed to count carbon credits towards the goal, include so-called negative emissions from carbon capture and storage, or soften the curve of the trajectory towards net zero by demanding deeper emissions cuts later, according to EU officials and diplomats.
The intention was to present the target in February, but it has been delayed until “before the summer”, EU climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra has said. A senior EU official has confirmed it will come before July 21.
Another idea to help countries reach the 90 per cent goal would be to let faster-moving sectors account for more emissions reductions, rather than forcing struggling industries to decarbonise faster, officials say.
The plan to loosen criteria around the target comes amid a broader simplification drive and increasing political backlash against the EU’s ambitious net zero goals. EU countries are legally committed to reach a 55 per cent reduction in emissions by 2030 and net zero by 2050 but the interim 2040 target has proved contentious.
Against the backdrop of a trade war with the US, a waning economy and a greater need to invest in defence, tackling climate change has fallen down the priority list across many of the EU’s 27 member states. The options have been circulated to allow countries to comment ahead of the 2040 proposal being announced.
At a conference of the European People’s party, Europe’s largest political group, in Valencia last month its leader Manfred Weber suggested the EU’s green ambitions had gone too far at the expense of the economy. Referring to the commission’s previous climate chief, he said: “Where would our industry and jobs be today, if we had not stopped the ideological climate policy à la Frans Timmermans?” Weber claimed the EPP were “the ones turning climate policy into a job machine”.
European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, who originally tasked Timmermans with enacting the EU’s Green Deal climate law in 2019, clapped. At the beginning of her second mandate at the head of the EU executive, she is instead pushing a “Clean Industrial Deal” and a broad package of simplification measures that will cut sustainability reporting requirements and vastly reduce the number of companies that will have to comply with the bloc’s landmark carbon border tax, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.
Under pressure from the car industry, Brussels has also delayed full compliance with emissions targets from this year until 2027 and accelerated work on a review of a 2035 ban on new combustion-engined cars.
Benjamin Krieger, secretary-general of Clepa, the automotive suppliers industry body, describes the move as a “first step” but says more needs to be done. “The EU’s green mobility ambitions are politically bold, but they must also be realistic,” he says.
More stories in this report
Other business groups have heralded the change in direction. BusinessEurope, the EU’s biggest business lobby, describes the implification effort as a “positive step”. Christel Delberghe, director-general of EuroCommerce, the retail industry group, says the changes are “essential for businesses in the sector”.
Another business lobbyist says it is “beyond the point” where companies do or do not want to decarbonise, as most are committed to the green transition, but adds that companies expect a “safety net” of support in terms of infrastructure and governance from policymakers. The commission has said it is “staying the course” on the Green Deal objectives but “sustainability and competitiveness should go hand in hand”.
Despite reassurances from Brussels, climate organisations have been horrified. Many have sent letters to the commission warning against reopening legislation that has already been agreed, and calling on the EU executive to put forward an ambitious climate target ahead of the UN’s COP30 climate conference at which countries are expected to outline how they will cut emissions by 2035.
“It is worth highlighting how risky the commission’s approach is,” says Elisa Giannelli, programme lead in EU politics and governance at think-tank E3G. The delay in proposing the 2040 target means that “now the stakes are really high to release the proposal, as the more they wait, the easier it will be to lower the ambition”, she adds.
Legal experts also fear that loosening reporting rules could increase the risk of liability for governments and companies. In a letter sent to the commission this month and seen by the Financial Times, 25 legal academics said a weakening of sustainability due diligence requirements would mean “states’ legal obligation to regulate corporate greenhouse gas emissions would not be met”.
Companies could also be at greater risk of being sued at a time when climate lawsuits are on the rise. “There is a risk of encouraging empty promises and greenwashing. Outcomes which would increase the liability exposure of companies and undermine the transformative action needed to meet the EU’s climate goals,” the academics wrote.
Given US President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw the US from the Paris climate agreement — which aimed to limit the global temperature rise to well below 2C and ideally to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels — many campaigners fear that should the EU weaken its ambition, other countries may do the same.
Linda Kalcher, executive director of Brussels-based think-tank Strategic Perspectives, says the US retreat means “all eyes are on the EU and China now. The more ambitious their climate goal for 2035, the smaller the gap to 1.5C and the bigger the incentive for other countries to follow their lead.”