Search Climate Insights Directory

A coalition of NGOs calls on the European Parliament, Council, and European Commission to ensure the post-2020 EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) supports the Paris Agreement. The statement argues that the ETS must stop subsidizing coal plants and instead tighten the carbon cap to drive decarbonization and a socially just transition, noting that unabated coal in Europe must reach zero by 2030 to meet climate targets.

The author warns that the EU ETS reform for 2021-2030 could inadvertently subsidize coal and other fossil fuels, potentially channeling 160 billion euros to polluters. While the European Parliament and several member states advocate for emissions performance standards to exclude coal from the Modernisation Fund and Article 10c provisions, the document highlights that 90% of previous investments under these rules have supported existing fossil fuel infrastructure.

The document examines the lack of transparency in the ICAO's creation of the CORSIA offsetting scheme, highlighting risks to the Paris Agreement and the EU ETS. It argues that ICAO's current practice of closed meetings and non-disclosure agreements contradicts its own rules of procedure and the obligations of 13 member states under the Aarhus Convention. The brief recommends broadening observer diversity, opening meetings to the public, and providing access to key regulatory documents to ensure the environmental integrity of aviation carbon offsets.

The document highlights the critical role of cities in meeting the EU's 2020 and 2030 climate targets, noting that urban areas deliver over a third of the 2020 target. It warns that national governments—specifically Poland, Italy, and Spain—are pushing for regulatory loopholes in the Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR) that could stifle local climate actions. The briefing provides case studies from Barcelona, Gijón, Niepolomice, Gdynia, Salerno, and Parma to demonstrate the effectiveness of local initiatives in transport, energy efficiency, and waste management, and recommends closing ESR loopholes to unlock these co-benefits.

The text examines how regional governments and cities can maintain climate ambitions despite national withdrawals from international agreements, such as the US's proposed exit from the Paris Agreement. It highlights the Under2MoU as a global sub-national alliance and details Baden-Württemberg's legal and strategic approach to climate neutrality, while noting that regional success remains dependent on supportive national and EU frameworks.

The text emphasizes that while climate change is a global challenge requiring national commitments like the Paris Agreement, effective action is often anchored at the subnational level. It highlights the Under2MoU alliance, co-founded by Baden-Württemberg and California, as a model for regional leadership. The author, Franz Untersteller, details Baden-Württemberg's specific goals—including a 90% emission reduction by 2050—while noting that regional success is limited by the need for stronger regulatory frameworks from the German federal government and the European Union.

A coalition of environmental organizations calls on the Italian government to strengthen the EU's Effort Sharing Regulation by lowering the emission starting point, limiting the use of LULUCF and ETS credits, capping accumulated surpluses, and introducing periodic upward revisions of 2030 targets to align with the Paris Agreement.

A coalition of Romanian NGOs urges the Minister of Environment to advocate for a strengthened Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR) during the Environment Council. The authors argue that the current ESR is insufficient to meet Paris Agreement goals and propose specific improvements, including higher emission reduction targets for 2030 and 2050, more accurate emission baselines, the removal of forestry and ETS loopholes, and stricter governance with financial sanctions.

A coalition of environmental organizations calls on the Spanish government to strengthen the EU's Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR) to align with the Paris Agreement, specifically requesting a 95% emissions reduction by 2050, the removal of the 'ESR safety reserve', and stricter governance to ensure climate targets are met.

The policy brief asserts that while the EU ETS is necessary, it is insufficient on its own to achieve a net-zero economy due to market barriers, low carbon prices, and a lack of focus on energy security and air quality. It advocates for a complementary policy package including energy efficiency measures, renewable policies, and direct regulation to avoid high-carbon infrastructure lock-in and ensure synergy between the EU ETS and the Clean Energy Package.

The policy brief critiques the proposed EU ETS revision, arguing that over-generous free allowances to industrial sectors—particularly the steel industry—create windfall profits and deprive the public of potential auctioning revenues. It recommends increasing the Linear Reduction Factor to 4.2% to align with Paris Agreement goals, establishing a Just Transition Fund for workers, and shifting toward full auctioning to fund low-carbon innovation and support citizens.

Carbon Market Watch and 30 partner organizations call on EU Environment Ministers to prevent the use of ETS funds, specifically Article 10c and the Modernisation Fund, for coal power subsidies. They advocate for a 450gCO2/kWh investment eligibility criterion to exclude coal, strong governance for the Modernisation Fund involving the European Investment Bank and Member States, and the establishment of a Just Transition Fund to align EU policy with the Paris Agreement.

A joint letter from environmental organizations to Italian MEPs arguing that the European Commission's Effort Sharing Regulation proposal is inadequate and proposing specific amendments to reduce the carbon budget, limit the use of credits, and introduce periodic target reviews.

A coalition of NGOs argues that the expansion of Vienna airport is incompatible with Austria's climate goals and the Paris Agreement. They highlight that aviation is the most carbon-intensive transport mode, benefiting from tax exemptions and an ineffective carbon offsetting scheme (CORSIA), and call for the end of airport expansions and fuel tax exemptions to meet emission reduction targets.

Carbon Market Watch urges the end of the UN's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) following a European Commission study by the Öko-Institut. The study indicates that 85% of analyzed projects and 73% of the potential credit supply from 2013 to 2020 are unlikely to provide real, measurable, and additional emission reductions. Such credits could potentially increase global greenhouse gas emissions by over 3.5 billion tonnes of CO2. The organization specifically warns against the aviation industry using these ineffective credits through the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) to avoid greenwashing.

Carbon Market Watch calls for the curtailment of free carbon allowances in the EU ETS following a court ruling requiring ArcelorMittal to return wrongfully received permits. The organization warns that current trialogue negotiations may result in the allocation of an additional 300 to 775 million free permits for heavy industry, contradicting the 'polluter pays' principle. The text advocates for increased auctioning of permits, the inclusion of importers in emission costs, and the potential introduction of a carbon tax to drive industrial decarbonization.

Carbon Market Watch criticizes the European Commission's proposal to reduce the scope of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) for international aviation. The organization argues that replacing the EU ETS with the ICAO's Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) would reduce the coverage of global aviation emissions from 35% to 8% and significantly lower the cost per tonne of CO2 emitted from 5 EUR to 0.31 EUR. The document asserts that the EU ETS is more ambitious than CORSIA because it utilizes an absolute cap and mandatory compliance, whereas CORSIA is voluntary until 2027 and based entirely on offsetting.

The policy brief critiques the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) as an insufficient replacement for the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) regarding international aviation emissions. It argues that CORSIA's goal of "carbon neutral growth" allows for unlimited emissions growth and lacks the mandatory enforcement and transparency of the EU ETS. The author contends that exempting international flights from the EU ETS would undermine EU climate targets, potentially increasing the EU ETS surplus by 260 million tonnes and reducing emissions reductions by 710 Mt compared to a full-scope scenario. The brief recommends that the EU continue covering international flights, demand full transparency from ICAO's Committee on Aviation and Environmental Protection (CAEP), and end the free allocation of 85% of aviation allowances to fund decarbonization research and the Green Climate Fund.

The document evaluates EU countries' positions on the Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR), which covers 60% of EU greenhouse gas emissions. Using a scoring system across five categories—starting point, land use loopholes, ETS surplus loopholes, governance, and ambition levels—it ranks Sweden as the leader and Poland as the lowest performer. The brief argues that most EU countries are pushing for loopholes that undermine the Paris Agreement, with the European Commission's own proposal scoring only 20 out of 100 points.

The EU Climate Leader Board ranks EU member states on their support for the Effort Sharing Regulation across five categories: starting point, ETS surplus loophole, land use loophole, governance, and ambition level. Sweden ranks highest with a score of 67, while Malta ranks lowest with a score of 2. The analysis concludes that no EU country is currently doing enough to make the regulation compatible with the Paris Agreement.