Can Europe's energy grid survive war, weather and cyber attacks?
He argues that the war in Ukraine has changed the mindset around energy security and that policymakers must not replace fossil fuel dependence with reliance on rare earth imports.
As global energy systems shift, Ruby calls for faster planning, smarter regulation, and deeper cooperation—especially ahead of COP30 in Brazil.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
2 days ago
- Euronews
Can Europe's energy grid survive war, weather and cyber attacks?
From weather extremes to sabotage and cyber warfare, Europe's energy grid faces rising threats. Kristian Ruby, Secretary General of Eurelectric, joins Energy Frontiers to explain why more decentralised, interconnected infrastructure is key to future resilience. He argues that the war in Ukraine has changed the mindset around energy security and that policymakers must not replace fossil fuel dependence with reliance on rare earth imports. As global energy systems shift, Ruby calls for faster planning, smarter regulation, and deeper cooperation—especially ahead of COP30 in Brazil.
Euronews
3 days ago
- Euronews
Brazil brings COP30 to Belem to highlight poverty and climate risks
When world leaders, diplomats, business leaders, scientists and activists go to Brazil in November for the annual United Nations' climate negotiations, poverty, deforestation and much of the world's troubles will be right in their faces — by design. In past conference cities, including resort areas and playgrounds for the rich such as Bali, Cancun, Paris, Sharm El-Sheikh and Dubai, host nations show off both their amenities and what their communities have done about climate change. But this year's conference is in a high-poverty city on the edge of the Amazon to demonstrate what needs to be done, said the diplomat who will run the mega-negotiations in Belem known as COP30, or Conference of the Parties. What better way to tackle a problem than facing it head-on, however uncomfortable, COP30 President-designate André Corrêa do Lago, a veteran Brazilian diplomat, said in an interview with The Associated Press at United Nations headquarters. "We cannot hide the fact that we are in the world with lots of inequalities and where sustainability and fighting climate change is something that has to get closer to people,' do Lago said. That's what Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has in mind, he said. 'When people will go to Belem, you are going to see a developing country and city with considerable infrastructure issues still with, in relative terms, a high percentage of poverty and President Lula thinks it's very important that we talk about climate thinking of all the forests, thinking of poverty and thinking of progress,' do Lago said. 'He wants everybody to see a city that can improve thanks to the results of these debates.' Activists and the media are already feeling discomfort The rich and powerful, as well as poorer nations, activists and media, are already feeling a bit of that discomfort before getting to Belem. Even with two years of notice, Brazil is way behind in having enough hotel rooms and other accommodations for a global conference that has had 90,000 attendees. The official United Nations COP30 website says Brazil would have an official booking portal by the end of April. But specific plans weren't announced till last week when Brazil said it arranged for two cruise ships with 6,000 beds to help with lodging, saying the country is ensuring 'accommodation for all countries' and starting a system where 98 poorer nations have the option to reserve first. Skyrocketing lodging costs are a problem, do Lago conceded. Some places have been charging $15,000 (€12,888) a night for one person, and activists and others have talked of cutting back. But he said prices 'are already going down,' even as local media report otherwise. Do Lago said it will be a local holiday so residents can rent out their homes, adding "a significant supply of apartments.' A big year for climate negotiations This is a significant year for climate negotiations. The 2015 Paris climate agreement required countries to come up with their own plans to reduce the emissions of heat-trapping gases from the burning of coal, oil and natural gas and then to update those plans every five years. This year, nearly every nation — the United States, the number two carbon dioxide emitter and historically biggest polluter, withdrew from the accord earlier this year — has to submit their first plan update. Most of those updates are already late, but the United Nations wants countries to complete them by September, when world leaders gather in New York. That would give the United Nations time to calculate how much they would curb future climate change if implemented, before COP30 six weeks later. UN Secretary-General Antonio-Guterres, in an interview with AP, reiterated what officials want in those plans: that they cover each nation's entire economy, that they include all greenhouse gases and that they are in line with efforts to limit long-term human-caused warming to 1.5°C since pre-industrial times. That target is the Paris Agreement goal. And it's tough since the world is only a couple of tenths of a degree away and last year even temporarily shot past the 1.5°C mark. Do Lago said he expects the countries' plans will fall short of keeping warming below this threshold, so tackling that gap will be a crucial element of negotiations. Some big things aren't on the agenda Some of the negotiations' most important work won't be on the formal agenda, including these plans, do Lago said. Another is a road map to provide $1.3 trillion (€1.12 trillion) in financial help to poorer nations to deal with climate change. And finally, he said, Brazil 'wants very much to talk about nature, about forests.' The nearby Amazon has been an important part of Earth's natural system to suck large amounts of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, but deforestation is a major threat to that. At times, parts of the Amazon have gone from reducing carbon dioxide in the air to increasing it, a 2021 study found. On Wednesday, the United Nations' top court ruled that a clean and healthy environment is a basic human right, a decision that may bolster efforts to come up with stronger action at the November climate conference, some activists said. 'Failure of a state to take appropriate action to protect the climate system ... may constitute an internationally wrongful act,' court President Yuji Iwasawa said during the hearing. Do Lago said the challenge for countries is to think of these emission-reduction plans not as a sacrifice but as a moment to change and grow. 'One of the objectives of this COP is that we hope we will be remembered as a COP of solutions, a COP in which people realised that this agenda is creating more opportunities and challenges,' do Lago said.
Euronews
6 days ago
- Euronews
Five things to know about the ICJ's historic climate change ruling
On Wednesday, the UN's highest court delivered a historic opinion on climate change, outlining states' responsibilities under international law. It was the largest case ever seen by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), with more than 150 submissions from states, international organisations, and civil society groups. Over 100 states and international organisations took part in hearings last December. The ICJ is the world's highest court, but its 133-page advisory opinion is not legally binding. Although it doesn't establish new international laws, it clarifies existing ones and is likely to be cited in future climate litigation and UN negotiations like COP30 in Brazil later this year. Experts believe it could have a plethora of consequences for global climate action. But what do the key parts of the ICJ's advisory opinion actually mean? A healthy environment is a human right The ICJ affirmed that a 'clean, healthy and sustainable environment' is a human right, just like access to water, food and housing. In 2022, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution acknowledging this right. The ICJ confirmed this again on Wednesday, saying that a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is foundational for the effective enjoyment of all human rights. It means that, as Member States are parties to numerous human rights treaties, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, they are required to guarantee the enjoyment of such rights by addressing climate change. Preventing climate harm is bigger than the Paris Agreement Big emitters were accused of trying to hide behind the Paris Agreement during the hearings for the case. In December, they argued that the international climate agreement was already a sufficient framework that outlined states' climate responsibilities. But the court confirmed that climate change threatens human rights and involves multiple branches of international law, from international human rights law to environmental law and the UN Charter, not just the Paris Agreement. This means any duty to prevent harm to the environment and protect the climate applies to all states, whether or not they are parties to specific UN climate agreements. The ICJ also emphasised the need for ambition and accountability, not merely having a plan. Nationally Determined Contributions or NDCs are national climate plans that represent each country's commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change. They are a core part of the Paris Agreement. The content of each country's NDC is as relevant to whether they are complying with their legal obligations as simply submitting one. Essentially, it means any plan must be ambitious and in line with climate science, reflecting a state's 'highest possible ambition', and must become 'more demanding over time'. States that fail to act on climate change risk are breaking the law 'Failure of the state to take appropriate action to protect the climate system from GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions … may constitute an internationally wrongful act which is attributable to that state,' Court president Iwasawa Yuji said. He specifically mentioned fossil fuel production and consumption, as well as the provision of subsidies. This means countries that fail to take measures to protect the planet from climate change could be in violation of international law. If governments and parliaments fail to curb the production and consumption of fossil fuels, approve fossil fuel projects and roll out public money for fossil fuels, they could also be in breach of international law. The court also confirmed that countries are bound by international law to regulate the climate impact of businesses and companies within their jurisdiction, including fossil fuel firms. States harmed by climate change have a right to seek reparations The court affirmed that legal consequences for climate harm include restitution, compensation and guarantees of non-repetition. That means states responsible for unlawful emissions could be required to stop harmful actions, restore damaged infrastructure or ecosystems - or provide financial compensation for the losses suffered. The ruling paves the way for vulnerable nations to seek reparations from historical emitters for the harm they have endured from climate impacts like extreme weather. In other words, they could sue high-emitting nations, including for past emissions. 'If states have legal duties to prevent climate harm, then victims of that harm have a right to redress,' explains Sebastien Duyck, senior attorney at the Centre for International Environmental Law. 'In this way, the ICJ advisory opinion not only clarifies existing rules, it creates legal momentum. It reshapes what is now considered legally possible, actionable, and ultimately enforceable.' The ICJ's opinion could affect current climate cases and future agreements The ICJ's opinion opens the door for other legal actions, from states returning to the ICJ to hold each other accountable to domestic lawsuits. 'This newfound clarity will equip judges with definitive guidance that will likely shape climate cases for decades to come,' says ClientEarth lawyer Lea Main-Klingst. 'And outside the courtroom, this result is a powerful advocacy tool. Each and every one of us can use this decision to demand our governments and parliaments take more ambitious action on climate change to comply with both the Paris Agreement and other applicable international laws.' That includes in the lead-up to and during upcoming negotiations at COP30, where the advisory opinion from the ICJ could be used as leverage.
