Latest news with #ClimateLaw
Euronews
02-07-2025
- Business
- Euronews
EU open to carbon offsets on path to 2040 emissions target
The European Commission formally proposed a 90% carbon emissions reduction target by 2040 in an amendment to its Climate Law on Wednesday, as a pathway to achieving zero emissions by 2050. The 90% emissions reduction target allowed for the controversial use of international carbon credits to account towards the goal, a mechanism that allows countries or companies to buy emission reduction credits from projects outside the EU. While these credits can theoretically represent genuine climate action, critics argue they often act as a license to pollute, letting wealthier nations avoid making domestic changes. The Commission opened the door to outsourcing a portion of Europe's climate effort by effectively allowing the capture or removal of carbon to happen beyond EU borders. "We're broadening the solution space," said Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra. 'Part of the work, part of the emission reductions, can be done outside the European Union.' The Dutch Commissioner pointed out that the vast majority of reductions, including carbon capture, will still take place within Europe. Concerns and limits While the original climate law stipulated that both 2030 and 2050 targets must be met through domestic efforts, the Commission now suggests that a limited share of international credits could count toward the 2040 goal. The Commission's own Scientific Advisory Board has previously expressed scepticism about the use of international offsets—not opposing them entirely, but warning they should supplement, not replace, domestic action. To address these concerns, the Commission proposes capping international credits at 3% of the 2040 target. This figure is rooted in Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, a clause largely shaped by the EU, and aligns with Germany's stance on the issue. A senior Commission official described the cap as a way to balance European investment priorities with global climate cooperation. 'We believe it's important not to go for a very high proportion of these credits,' the official said. 'This sends the right signal to both European actors and international partners: we're open to using such credits, but only if they are well-executed and uphold high integrity.' Additionally, these credits will only be permitted during the second half of the next decade (2036–2040), giving time to build more robust partnerships and ensure the availability of high-quality credits. The Commission official also specified that any international credits must align with the Paris Agreement, demonstrate environmental effectiveness, and be supported by rigorous monitoring, reporting, and verification systems, similar to the EU's own emissions trading scheme. Domestic flexibilities expanded Beyond offsets, the amendment introduces more sectoral and domestic flexibilities to help achieve the 2040 target in a cost-effective and socially just way. This includes incorporating permanent carbon removals into the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and allowing cross-sectoral compensation. For example, if a country exceeds emissions reductions in the transport or waste sectors, it could use that overperformance to compensate for underperformance in the land use sector. While such flexibilities already exist under the current Fit for 55 framework, the new approach seeks to expand them. Executive Vice-President Teresa Ribera explained she often hears from member states performing strongly overall, especially in sectors like housing or transports, but struggling in others like aviation. 'Shouldn't we, without lowering the bar, allow them to overachieve in some areas while being more flexible in others?' According to Ribera, these changes reflect a pragmatic evolution of the EU's climate strategy, aiming to preserve ambition while accounting for diverse national circumstances.
E&E News
20-05-2025
- Politics
- E&E News
House approves bill to increase scrutiny of DOE program
The House approved legislation Monday that would require more regular reporting from a Department of Energy office critical to deploying emerging, clean energy technologies. H.R. 1453, the 'Clean Energy Demonstration Transparency Act,' would require the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations to submit semiannual reports to Congress on the status of projects and grants. It passed by voice vote. Republicans pitched the bill — sponsored by Reps. Mike Carey (R-Ohio) and Josh Riley (D-N.Y.) — as a way to further scrutinize climate law funding passed under the Biden administration. Advertisement 'Requiring DOE to submit semi annual reports will provide Congress with crucial tools to protect taxpayer dollars, hold DOE accountable and ensure that projects are based on merit rather than crony favoritism,' said Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas), chair of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee.
Epoch Times
06-05-2025
- Business
- Epoch Times
Democrat-Led States Sue Trump Admin Over Wind Energy Project Freeze
A coalition of 18 Democratic-led states filed suit on Monday challenging President Donald Trump's nationwide suspension of wind energy project approvals, calling it an unlawful and politically motivated blockade that threatens job growth, energy security, and 'climate progress.' The lawsuit, Trump's directive cites a range of concerns, including potential impacts on marine ecosystems, navigational safety, national defense operations, and what it suggested were destabilizing effects of intermittent wind generation on grid reliability and energy prices. 'We're not going to do the wind thing,' Trump said on Jan. 20 after returning to the Oval Office for a second term. 'So if you're into whales, you don't want windmills either, and they're the most expensive form of energy that you can have by far. They're all made in China, by the way, practically all of them. They kill your birds and they ruin your beautiful landscapes.' According to the complaint, the move has stalled dozens of wind energy projects and forced at least one federally approved offshore development near New York to halt construction. Related Stories 5/2/2025 5/1/2025 James and her co-plaintiffs argued in the lawsuit and a 'This administration is devastating one of our nation's fastest-growing sources of clean, reliable, and affordable energy,' James said in a statement. 'This arbitrary and unnecessary directive threatens the loss of thousands of good-paying jobs and billions in investments, and it is delaying our transition away from the fossil fuels that harm our health and our planet.' The lawsuit contends that Trump's directive violates the Administrative Procedure Act and exceeds presidential authority by imposing a blanket freeze without statutory justification or due process. The plaintiffs are seeking a preliminary injunction to immediately restart the permitting process while litigation proceeds. The coalition said in a press release that the halt undermines states' ability to meet clean energy mandates and rising electricity demands. New York, for instance, is legally required to generate 70 percent of its electricity from renewables by 2030 and 100 percent by 2040 under its Climate Law, they noted, adding that the state's wind sector currently supports over 4,400 jobs and is projected to create 18,000 more in the next decade. 'Those jobs will not materialize if these projects are halted,' James and the co-plaintiffs stated in the press release. 'The administration's indefinite blockade could leave billions of dollars in states' clean energy investments stranded or underutilized and significantly harm their economic development.' Besides New York, the other plaintiffs in the case are attorneys general from Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and the District of Columbia. The White House dismissed the lawsuit as a politically motivated effort to block the president's agenda to reassert 'America's energy dominance.' 'Instead of working with President Trump to unleash American energy and lower prices for American families, Democrat Attorneys General are using lawfare to stop the President's popular energy agenda,' Taylor Rogers, White House assistant press secretary, told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement. 'The American people voted for the President to restore America's energy dominance, and Americans in blue states should not have to pay the price of the Democrats' radical climate agenda.' Trump's Jan. 20 directive also ordered a government-wide review of all existing wind leases, including the condition and safety of idle turbines, and instructed federal agencies to evaluate whether defunct projects should be dismantled. It was issued alongside a series of executive actions aimed at fast-tracking domestic oil, gas, and mineral extraction and repealing Biden-era climate regulations.
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Yahoo
Taking the train can be almost twice as fast as flying for some journeys in France
Taking the train is faster than flying for some short journeys within France, according to a new analysis. In 2023, France introduced a ban on domestic short-haul flights where there is a rail alternative of under two and a half hours. It was brought in to curb carbon emissions, but swapping a plane for a train could also be the cheaper and, it turns out, faster option. Research from Trainline compared five national journeys for which the air option is soon expected to disappear and found that some intercity trips are made twice as fast by choosing rail transport. Taking the train instead of a plane for journeys of 2.5 hours or less in France can mean significantly reducing travel time, according to Trainline figures. The rail booking company used its own data to calculate the train journey times and cost, and data from airline booking comparison site Skyscanner for plane travel times and cost. The difference in travel times is mainly because opting for rail transport means avoiding lengthy security checks and waiting times required when taking a flight. 'While the duration of the flight often seems advantageous, it does not reflect the (actual) duration of an air journey, including travel to the airport, waiting before boarding and security checks, possible delays related to checks and check-in,' Trainline said. Some intercity journeys in France can be almost twice as fast by train as by plane, the research found. Related Eurostar rivals given 'green signal' for cross-Channel trains: What could it mean for passengers? A two-storey bar and more leg room: Inside France's new high-speed TGV trains Rennes to Paris takes 3 hours 21 minutes by plane but only 1 hour 44 minutes by train, while Paris to Lyon takes 3 hours 37 minutes when flying and 2 hours 11 minutes by train. Rail travel can also cut journey times because passengers are more likely to depart from and arrive in the city centre, whereas many airports require a transfer. 'Train stations, ideally located in city centres and well-served by public transport, enable travellers to reduce the number of additional journeys,' Trainline said. 'Even taking into account the 30-minute advance (arrival time) recommended by train operators, this remains a more efficient option than flying, where remote infrastructures increase the total journey time.' Trainline figures also showed that the cost of train journeys can be much lower than plane journeys, too. Flying is, on average, 1.8 times more expensive than the train. Travelling between Paris and Lyon by train means saving as much as €40, while Marseille to Lyon by train cuts travel costs by €41. The findings also appear to back up France's decision to ban short-haul domestic flights. The regulation, in theory, means that any journeys that are possible in less than two-and-a-half hours by train cannot be taken by plane, with the exception of connecting flights. The changes are part of France's 2021 Climate Law and were first proposed by France's Citizens' Convention on Climate - a citizens' assembly tasked with finding ways to reduce the country's carbon emissions. The Trainline study found that the carbon footprint of trains can be 124 to 151 times lower than that of planes. This data takes into account the emissions emitted by these two modes of transport, as well as those used by the traveller to continue their journey. For example, the company calculated that a Paris to Lyon flight produces more than 90kg of CO2 per person, whereas the same journey by train only emits 0.690kg. In practice, however, the flight ban isn't cutting emissions as dramatically. The French Directorate General for Civil Aviation (DGAC) estimated that the new regulation could cut up to 55,000 tonnes of emissions, just 2.6 per cent of total emissions from domestic flights in France per year.
Yahoo
28-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Sweeping proposed law on energy use draws strong opposition: 'The ... government is preparing laws not for the public good'
The Turkish government is attempting to enact a climate bill that would address net-zero goals in the country, but the proposal has drawn ire from critics. Turkey's Justice and Development Party, or AKP, originally submitted a climate change bill to the country's parliament in February. The law proposes the creation of a carbon market board and an emissions trading system, or ETS. The legislation aimed to better align Turkey with achieving net-zero emissions by 2053. However, the AKP has been criticized for its construction of the Climate Law. The Peoples' Equality and Democracy Party in Turkey offered up a pointed rejection of the bill. "The AKP government is preparing laws not for the public good, but for the sake of capital groups it considers friends," the party wrote in a statement. "This time, they are coming before us with a law they call a climate law, but which they negotiated not with those who draw attention to the inevitable consequences of the climate crisis, but with industrialists who are the perpetrators of activities that deepen the crisis. Because the aim is not to approach the climate crisis issue seriously, but to surrender the issue to market conditions." The cornerstone of the bill includes strengthening local administration roles, incorporating climate considerations into infrastructure projects, and promoting renewable energy and energy efficiency. The climate law would impose fines ranging from 500,000 to 5 million Turkish lira (roughly $13,000 to $26,000) on entities that fail to submit their verified greenhouse gas emission reports to the Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change. But the bill's opponents argue that opposition lawmakers were not included in its drafting process. Following a lengthy and heated debate, the climate legislation will once again be discussed before being reintroduced. Murat Emir, the deputy chairman of Turkey's Republican Peoples' Party — or CHP — explained the current state of the bill. "The Climate Law, which is being discussed in the TBMM General Assembly, is being referred to the commission for reconsideration as a result of the effective resistance of the opposition parties and civil society organizations," Emir said. "We hope that this time the AKP group will listen to the criticism and prioritize scientific data, and our country will have the climate law it deserves." Do you think America does a good job of protecting its natural beauty? Definitely Only in some areas No way I'm not sure Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
