What a 90% emissions cut could mean for EU citizens
Whether a 90% reduction in Europe's greenhouse gas emissions compared to 1990 levels will bring net costs or benefits for workers, households, and industry depends on how EU leaders choose to implement the target – if they agree to it at all.
That decision comes as the European Commission shifts its focus increasingly toward competitiveness and lowering energy prices.
In recent months, calls have mounted to roll back landmark policies like the 2035 phase-out of petrol and diesel cars, or to weaken key measures by outsourcing climate action through international carbon credits, or by capping the price polluters must pay for emitting CO2.
This is despite mounting evidence that failing to act on climate could ultimately cost more – and undermine crucial price signals meant to steer companies toward cleaner technologies like electrification, sustainable fuels, and carbon capture and storage. Rising costs Transport remains the only EU sector where emissions have increased since the 1990s. It is also where the public is most likely to feel the cost of the green transition first-hand – even as more affordable electric cars enter the market.
Business travellers and tourists, for instance, could see airfares rise as airlines begin passing on the cost of sustainable jet fuel mandates to consumers. Fully decarbonising European aviation by 2050 is expected to cost €2.4 trillion in investment, according to the lobby group Airlines for Europe.
The NGO umbrella group Transport and Environment (T&E) warns that by 2030, the transport sector could account for up to 45% of the EU's total emissions – making its transformation critical to meeting climate targets.
Likewise, renovating Europe's poorly insulated homes and replacing gas boilers with efficient heat pumps will bring significant upfront costs for many households, even as these measures aim to reduce emissions and long-term energy bills. The other side of the balance sheet Still, the EU's push to decarbonise energy through renewables is expected to lower energy bills over time and reduce the bloc's reliance on imported fossil fuels – potentially freeing up billions for strategic investments.
According to T&E, the European Commission's own modelling suggests a 90% reduction pathway would cut the EU's oil bill by $75-100 billion a year.
Failing to act, on the other hand, carries indirect but massive economic risks amid rising global temperatures.
'Over the period 2031-2050, the cumulative additional GDP cost of a pathway leading to worse global warming could amount to €2.4 trillion in the EU, compared to the costs under a pathway compatible with the 1.5°C objective of the Paris Agreement,' the European Commission said last year.
And EU citizens are already paying the price for 'extreme weather events that are accelerated by climate change', consumer organisation BEUC told Euractiv.
Making it happen
How the costs and benefits of the 2040 target will be distributed depends largely on how Brussels acts – and how national governments respond.
Some core legislation is already in place, including a new carbon price on heating and transport fuels. To cushion the impact, especially for low-income households and small businesses, the law includes a Social Climate Fund to recycle revenues back to vulnerable groups
But this week, 26 out of 27 national governments missed the deadline to submit the national plans needed to activate the fund.
More broadly, any backtracking on climate policies could derail the price signals these mechanisms are designed to send to the private sector – frustrating many businesses that see the green transition as a strategic opportunity, not a burden.
The risk of being too flexible
The European Commission is expected to allow the use of international carbon credits to meet the yet-to-be-confirmed 90% target. This means investing in climate-friendly projects abroad – like tree planting in developing countries – and counting the resulting emissions savings toward Europe's target.
Proponents argue this could cut the costs of the green transition. Critics – including some promoters of carbon capture and storage technology as well as highly sceptical environmental campaigners – say it would undermine incentives to cut emissions in Europe and delay the development of clean technologies more generally.
'The EU's cleantech industry experiences the greatest benefits when EU climate investments are made in Europe – not abroad. Why should we outsource the benefits that the energy transition provides to countries outside of the EU,' the socialist lawmaker Mohammed Chahim asked.
Greenpeace's Thomas Gelin echoed this message: 'With an effectively lower domestic target, there will be less impetus for businesses and communities in Europe to implement the solutions we need.'
(de)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euractiv
an hour ago
- Euractiv
Europe's struggle to lead in nuclear fusion energy race
Despite its early involvement in nuclear fusion research, the European Union is facing growing concerns about its ability to lead in this potentially transformative energy technology. While fusion promises a cleaner, safer, and virtually limitless source of power, the EU's fragmented approach and lack of high-level political leadership are raising alarms among experts and policymakers. At a recent conference in Barcelona, several speakers highlighted the mismatch between Europe's scientific capabilities and its strategic direction, pointing to the fact that only a small fraction of global private investment in fusion is currently flowing to Europe. Although major projects like ITER in France demonstrate Europe's technical ambition, critics argue that progress remains slow due to bureaucratic inertia and the absence of a unified vision. Calls are growing for a clear, EU-wide fusion strategy that includes strong political backing, public-private partnerships, and a regulatory framework distinct from nuclear fission. Without a coordinated roadmap from research to commercialisation, many warn that Europe could miss its opportunity to shape the future of global energy and fall behind more agile competitors like the United States. Read this Event Report to find out more about the EU's Nuclear Fusion ambitions.
Euractiv
an hour ago
- Euractiv
EU lacks bold political leadership on nuclear fusion
An influential member of the European Parliament's industry committee has warned a gathering of politicians and stakeholders at a nuclear fusion event that a lack of political leadership at the European Commission is causing the EU to fall behind in a potentially game-changing energy technology. 'There is a lack of political leadership when it comes to nuclear energy in Europe - fission is not exempt from this,' said Christophe Grudler, a French MEP from the Renew Europe group, which also counts French President Emmanuel Macron as a member. Only 2% of the global amount of fusion investment is currently going to Europe, while 75% is going to the US, he said at the event. Grudler welcomed the Commission's intent to develop a European fusion strategy but said he still sees resistance and foot-dragging. 'We lack leadership today. In the current Commission, the responsibility for fusion lies somewhere between Euratom, the Commission's [research department] and its [energy department] - between one DG dealing with many files and another whose commissioner is not the most enthusiastic supporter of nuclear energy. This is why we need strong political ownership. That should be led from the very top by the president of the Commission herself, or an executive vice president.' Capital investment Stéphane Séjourné, the Commission's executive vice president who is also from Emmanuel Macron's French political group, has complained that seven times more private capital is available for fusion in the US than in the EU and has been pushing for a dedicated fusion strategy. France has been one of the countries pushing for more of an EU focus on nuclear energy but has faced resistance from other countries, including Germany and Austria. 'The strategy should promote public-private partnerships, provide a clear and stable regulatory framework distinct from nuclear fission and at the end create a European-level legal architecture rather than 27 fragmented ones,' said Grudler. No 'eureka' moment Grudler was speaking at a conference last month in Barcelona organised by Fusion for Energy, an organisation of the EU managing Europe's contribution to the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project in Southern France, the largest fission demonstration in the world. Though research into nuclear fusion's potential has been going on for decades, it has yet to reach the 'eureka' moment which would make it viable like nuclear fission. Fusion is the same process that powers the sun, and the most common way to make it happen is by combining deuterium and tritium, two isotopes of hydrogen, to form helium and release energy according to Einstein's mass-energy equivalence principle (E=mc²). If it can work, it would be a much more efficient and clean way to produce energy than nuclear fission, which produces long-lived radioactive waste and relies on hard-to-source uranium. Fusion promises a cleaner and virtually limitless source of energy if it can be successfully harnessed on Earth. But reproducing what the sun does is very complex. The promise is immense, but so is the challenge. Speaking at the conference, Massimo Garribba, the deputy chief of the Commission's energy department, said the intent is there for fusion, but there are obstacles, and that's why there needs to be a larger strategic focus that goes beyond just financing. '[Energy] Commissioner Jorgensen and [Research] Commissioner Zaharieva work together, and they are fully in favour of delivering this strategy,' he said. 'We have to see, there are another 23 commissioners and a president that will have to agree to this. But those two I can tell you, are quite committed to arriving at this point.' More money? 'Don't believe that if you just throw money at a problem, it will solve itself,' he added, noting that the Commission has spent €10.7 billion on ITER since 2007. 'So, what's the problem? You have all this money, all these wonderful people working on this. Well, I personally believe the problem is the approach has been a little bit haphazard. We have ITER, which is absolutely fundamental because without it you cannot do the rest, but you don't have an ecosystem of facilities which actually drives toward having a functioning system at the end of the day.' Garribba said he agreed with Grudler that the strategy has to have very specific goals to deliver financing, noting that there will be a lot of competition for funds in the new multiannual financial framework for the EU's budget over the next seven years that will be negotiated starting in mid-July. 'If we come out with a strategy that is convincing, where we explain what needs to be done and by whom in all the different areas, then we may have a discussion for the financing which would be easier than what we would otherwise have,' said Garribba. European leadership Several speakers at the conference emphasised that Europe is well-positioned to lead globally on fusion but it needs a clearer long-term strategy. 'I am optimistic, here in Europe we have unique conditions to build on the existing industrial ecosystem around ITER which is great, but we need to go beyond to address the needs of commercial fusion, so the supply chain needs to adapt to that.' 'Our leadership must prepare us for what comes after ITER, because ITER isn't an end it's a beginning,' said Grudler. 'Europe needs a roadmap from research to commercialisation, and here F4E can play a key role.' 'Fusion is long-term a high-risk endeavour,' the MEP added. 'But public-private partnerships allow us to share those risks while accelerating progress by combining public interest with private incentive in creating a predictable, stable framework for private investment. Europe already has successful models of such cooperation, such as the Hydrogen Joint Undertaking and the Battery Alliance. Fusion deserves the same level of ambition.' [Edited By Brian Maguire | Euractiv's Advocacy Lab ]
Euractiv
2 hours ago
- Euractiv
EU gives green light for Bulgaria to join euro
EU finance ministers gave the final green light on Tuesday for Bulgaria to adopt the euro on the first day of January 2026, nearly 19 years after the country joined the European Union. "We thank all institutions, partners and everyone whose efforts made this landmark moment possible. The government remains committed to a smooth and effective transition to the euro in the interest of all citizens," Bulgarian Prime minister Rossen Jeliazkov wrote on X. In adopting the legal texts necessary for the move, EU finance ministers officially set the euro at 1.95583 Bulgarian lev. "Joining the euro area is much more than just about replacing lev with euro. It is about building a brighter and more prosperous future for Bulgaria and its citizens at the heart of Europe," EU economy chief Valdis Dombrovskis said after the approval, adding that the common currency will bring new opportunities, investments, jobs and growth. The European Commission last month said the EU's poorest country had fulfilled the strict conditions to adopt the euro, while the European Central Bank (ECB) also gave a positive opinion. The rocky road to the euro Bulgaria's journey to joining the eurozone has had a stormy political backdrop with seven elections in three years - the last in October 2024. But recent polls show Bulgarian society remains divided on the euro, with experts attributing the scepticism largely to fears of rising prices and declining purchasing power. President Rumen Radev shocked many when he proposed holding a referendum on the matter but that was given short shrift by the Bulgarian parliament. Since June, protesters have gathered in Sofia to call for "keeping the Bulgarian lev". A symbolic protest camp with several tents has been set up near the presidency and the Bulgarian National Bank in the capital. Far-right opposition parties have used the issue to promote anti-EU narratives. Proponents in Bulgaria, however, insist the move will help improve the country's economy, and reinforce its ties to the West and protect against Russia's influence. "The political benefits are becoming increasingly significant, as the protests against the euro seem to bear the mark of the Kremlin," 43-year-old musician Veselin Dimitrov told AFP in Sofia. Euro club gets bigger The green light comes as the euro has been gaining in value against the US dollar as President Donald Trump's protectionist trade policies shake trust in the US currency. The euro was launched on 1 January 2002 with 12 countries, including France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Greece. Since then, it has expanded to include Slovenia (2007), Cyprus and Malta (2008), Slovakia (2009), Estonia (2011), Latvia (2014), Lithuania (2015) and Croatia (2023), bringing the total number of countries to 20. Bulgaria wanted to adopt the euro sooner but Brussels judged its inflation was too high to meet the necessary criteria. EU states that want to join the single currency must demonstrate that their economy has converged with other eurozone countries and that they have their finances under control. The conditions include holding inflation to no more than 1.5 percentage points higher than the rate of the three best-performing EU countries. When Brussels gave its backing in June, it said Bulgaria's average inflation rate during the 12 months to April 2025 was 2.7%, just below the needed level.
