The battle has begun to reach Europe’s 2040 climate targets. On July 2, the European Commission will present a proposal to reduce CO2 emissions.
It is expected to announce a 90% reduction by 2050 to make the EU carbon neutral.
The proposal comes when European green trading is being raised in question and the EU’s competitiveness is being strengthened in the face of international competition.
Member States prepare political debates for debate. France already had its first attack at last week’s European Summit, setting the framework for it.
“I’m in favor of having these targets in 2040, but basically I’ve said some very simple things. First of all, these targets need to give themselves the means to do it by 2040, making them competitive and compatible.
Flexibility: The term is being turned and is used repeatedly in European power corridors. The committee also holds the same term of office. The vice-chairman of the institution responsible for a clean, fair and competitive transition appears to be ready to grant the capital the flexibility to persuade.
“It’s a clear objective to reduce emissions by 90% by 2040. We need to discuss the various factors and how possible flexibility can be combined,” Teresa Ribera told Euronows.
Flexible grey area
For environmental NGOs, the 90% reduction in emissions is an important marker, but we do not want to limit the discussion about this numerical evaluation. Several organizations have warned of the flexibility and possible flaws in the committee’s proposal.
Flexibility can take the form of international credit.
“Essentially, the EU and its member states were able to pay other countries outside the EU to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. This amount is included in 90% of the greenhouse gas emissions within the EU border.”
For him, this political move is “a major problem as it diverts investment in industries and non-EU people and local governments, and it will have less positive impact on EU people and industries.”
Other forms of flexibility include absorbing carbon through carbon sinks, a natural carbon absorber, and permanent absorbers, a technology that has not yet been proven to be developed at scale,” warns Michael Sico Kreis.
Negotiation time
France says they don’t want to hurry up negotiations. The 2040 target “can’t be a technical discussion that will take place in a few weeks. It must be a democratic discussion,” warned Macron.
“It’s not a target for Belem (the city of Brazil will be holding the UN climate conference this year, COP30). If you have it for Belem, it’s great. If it takes more time, it takes time to get it right.”
The president said, “We’ve repeated flexibility, investment, technology neutrality and consistency in trade consistency. That means that when we set goals in 2040, we need a trade policy that protects us.”
In this discussion, Paris should be able to rely on the support of Budapest and Warsaw. However, other member states such as Germany, Spain, Finland and Denmark (which holds six months of EU presidency since July 1) are fully supporting the 90% emission reduction target.
The WWF EU also mentions many “swing states” that obscure their ultimate position.
It is important for the European Commission to not overlook the turning point represented by its 2040 goal.
“I think this is a mistake. I think this year (2025) will mark the 10th anniversary of the Paris Agreement (climate). I want to decide how to continue progress in areas that we consider to be essential to the economic and social well-being of Europeans,” says Teresa Rivera.
Spanish officials have also opened the door to debate. “While we are about to reach an agreement between all European countries, we need to identify the challenges ahead.”
