On 22 January the European Commission published a major package of white papers on climate and energy, including proposals on 2030 climate targets and policies and on ETS reform. EU Heads of Government will meet in European Council to discuss the proposals on 20-21 March. It is expected that a second (decisive) European Council will be held in June. So far, responses to the Commission and advice to the Heads of Governments have been on the whole favourable, with some notable exceptions.
The Commission’s key proposals for a binding 40% greenhouse gas domestic emissions reductions target, for an EU ETS market stability reserve, for a binding EU-level RES target of 27% based on the emissions target, and to postpone decisions on energy efficiency, transport and CCS to later in 2014/15, did not come as a surprise. In early January, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain and the UK wrote jointly to the Commission calling for 40% greenhouse gas domestic emissions reductions (the UK further advocated for 50%). Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy and Portugal also wrote in support of a binding RES target and “a robust, long-term framework supporting renewable energy sources, regardless of various views on the operational modalities”. Meanwhile, the ETS market reserve proposal reflects more than two years of debate amongst the Commission, Member States, the power sector, energy intensive industry sectors, investors, and environmental NGOs.
On 5 February the European Parliament voted for 40% emissions reductions together with a binding target of 40% energy efficiency and 30% RES, calling the Commission’s proposals “unambitious”.
Most Member States have not yet taken formal positions on the Commission package. However, Poland has said that it disagrees with 40%, and Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia also are all said to be unhappy. The UK has said that it will support the Commission proposals. Regarding RES, Denmark has said it wants to ensure that the target will actually be binding and that it would like more ambition. A bilateral Franco-German summit tomorrow is expected – among other matters – to clarify both countries’ positions towards the Commission package.
It now looks like there will be three key issues discussed in March: Is 40% the right number on greenhouse gases? Should the RES target be EU-level only or include national targets? And – much less discussed by stakeholders, but of crucial interest to Member States – what might the Commission’s rather vague proposals on “a new European governance” and “simplified and streamlined” National Energy Plans mean in practice? These initial discussions are unlikely to be conclusive, and anyhow will not resolve the question of what policy instruments to use to deliver RES (just the ETS and innovation support, or also subsidy schemes), whether to have a binding energy efficiency target, or what additional action on emissions the EU might commit to in light of an international climate agreement. Answers to these questions will have to wait until June.
