Search Climate Insights Directory

A joint statement by six NGOs criticizing EU governments for attempting to weaken the Effort Sharing Regulation, arguing that their current position would result in a reduction of less than 25% of emissions by 2030, failing to meet the 30% target supported by the European Parliament.

The briefing contends that the EU ETS phase 4 (2021-2030) fails to drive sufficient decarbonisation due to low carbon prices and excessive free allowances. It recommends that Member States implement national carbon floor prices, unilaterally cancel allowances following coal plant closures to avoid the 'waterbed effect', and redirect auctioning revenues toward a just transition. For the industrial sector, it advocates replacing free allocations with a carbon border tax and increasing the Linear Reduction Factor (LRF) to align with a 2040 or 2050 decarbonisation timeline.

A coalition of NGOs calls for the EU to ensure the post-2020 EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) does not subsidize coal plants and implements a tightening emissions cap to drive decarbonization in line with Paris Agreement goals.

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.

Carbon Market Watch urges COP23 negotiators to phase out the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to prevent the use of credits that lack environmental integrity and could increase overall emissions. The organization advocates for strong rules for Article 6 to ensure net mitigation and protect human rights, and calls for the integration of aviation and shipping sectors into the Paris Agreement's transparency and accounting frameworks to avoid double counting and emissions increases from schemes like CORSIA.

Carbon Market Watch argues that international aviation and shipping emissions (bunkers emissions) must be accurately tracked within the Paris Agreement framework to prevent double counting of emission reductions. The organization recommends that Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) include a specific section for contributions outside their scope and that the UNFCCC formally cooperate with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) regarding the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA). Furthermore, it proposes that the global stocktake incorporate data from ICAO and International Maritime Organization (IMO) reports to assess collective progress toward long-term temperature goals.

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.

Carbon Market Watch advocates for an orderly phase-out of the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and suggests using a placeholder for market provisions in the Paris Agreement rulebook until robust rules are established to ensure emissions reductions are additional and do not undermine climate ambition.

The author criticizes the ICAO for developing the CORSIA offsetting scheme behind closed doors, warning that a lack of coordination with the UNFCCC could lead to double-counting of emission reductions and undermine the Paris Agreement. The text calls for the European Union to advocate for public participation and transparency in the aviation body's decision-making process.

The authors contend that proposed loopholes in the EU's Effort Sharing Regulation—which covers over 60% of EU greenhouse gas emissions—could allow member states to avoid real climate action between 2021 and 2030. They highlight a disconnect between national governments, such as those of Spain and Italy, and ambitious local authorities in cities like Gijón and Salerno, arguing that the EU must support urban-led mitigation efforts to achieve its climate commitments.

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 document assesses the current state of global carbon pricing, noting that most prices are below USD 10, far below the USD 40-100/tCO2 levels recommended by the High-Level Commission on Carbon Prices to meet Paris Agreement goals. It advocates for a 'climate policy portfolio' that combines carbon taxes or cap-and-trade systems with complementary measures to address non-price barriers and avoid 'waterbed effects' through price floors. The brief also calls for the abolition of counterproductive policies like fossil fuel subsidies and the use of carbon revenues to fund a just transition and fight energy poverty.

The European Parliament voted on the Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR), which covers approximately 60% of the EU's total greenhouse gas emissions across transport, buildings, agriculture, and waste sectors. While the Parliament's position improves the emission baseline to better reflect actual levels—potentially leading to 280 million tonnes of additional emission cuts compared to the Commission's proposal—it maintains a 280Mt limit on land use and forestry offsets for agriculture. Additionally, the document notes the introduction of an 'early action reserve' of up to 90 Mt CO2e in carbon permits, which the author suggests may reward past emission savings and risk widening per capita emission divergences in Europe.

A coalition of environmental organizations calls on Finland to advocate for stricter EU climate targets, specifically requesting a 95% emission reduction by 2050 and a 47% reduction in the effort-sharing sector by 2030. The letter argues against 'loopholes' in forestry and emissions trading and demands a LULUCF regulation that uses historical baselines for forest carbon accounting and includes mandatory wetland protections.

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 Environmental Advisory Council calls for Latvia to advocate for higher 2030 EU emission reduction targets, a more accurate baseline for non-ETS sectors starting in 2017, and the reduction of compensation mechanisms to ensure the effectiveness of the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD).