This blog was first published by EurActiv
By Jori Sihvonen and Andrew Murphy
The ink is barely dry on the EU’s revised renewable energy policy and already it is under threat from the aviation sector. That sector’s UN aviation agency, ICAO, known for its “spectacular lack of transparency”, is once more having a closed door meeting which risks clearing the way for the type of bad biofuels the EU has spent a decade trying to get rid of. And, on top of that, they are seeking to add “lower carbon” aviation fossil fuels as an option to cut aviation emissions.
Should Europeans be forced to burn palm and soy in their cars in the name of EU climate policy? This is the simple question the European Commission needs to answer today.
After five rounds and 27 long hours of negotiations, the EU agreed a new car CO2 deal that will cut new car emissions by 15% in 2025 and 37.5% in 2030. This is good news, especially considering where we started.
“What a day! More tomorrow. Goodnight and goodbye #EU2050”. EU climate commissioner Miguel Arias Cañete was obviously very pleased about the announcement he made last Wednesday. Under his stewardship the Commission proposed a plan that would see the EU almost entirely cut its carbon emissions in the next 30 years. It is a bold plan which broadly sets the right direction for the EU economy and its climate, energy and transport policy for decades to come (although the plan is way too optimistic about bioenergy).
This opinion article was first published by EurActiv
Put yourself in the place of a truck driver in a busy city centre. Would you rather (a) see cyclists and pedestrians directly through the windows of your vehicle or (b) have a sensor that lights up on the dashboard when there’s a cyclist or pedestrian very near you – but is invisible due to poor truck cab design?
Decarbonising the global economy requires all the world’s major economies to join forces and move in the same direction. That makes fighting climate change the largest cooperative effort humankind has ever embarked on and also explains why the Paris agreement was such an important achievement. But at the same time it is clear international agreements are only one part of the climate puzzle. And that’s actually a good thing.
This blog was originally published as an opinion article by EurActiv
The European Commission made its proposal in to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from heavy duty vehicles (HDVs) such as trucks and buses in mid-May. The file is currently being debated by the European Parliament and Council, and MEPs are set to vote on it next week. It’s an important piece of legislation: HDVs account for 26% of road transport emissions in the EU and, as leading companies point out, these emissions can cost-effectively be reduced by at least 20% with technologies that are available today or will soon be.
It is nearly 200 years (1824) since French physicist Joseph Fourier first describes the Earth's natural 'greenhouse effect'.
The battle over the type of cars we will drive in 2030 is heating up and so are the claims and counterclaims about the impact on jobs. This week the European Parliament voted for a 40% reduction in new car CO2 emissions between 2020/1 and 2030 much more than the 30% proposed by the European Commission. Parliament also introduced real world checks to stop the industry gaming laboratory tests.
Most regulatory fights on vehicle emission regulations ultimately boil down to one iconic number battle. A few technical disputes get less attention but have a much bigger impact on the stringency of the new rules than a few percent up or down on the headline target. The ongoing discussions over car and van CO2 regulations for 2030 follow this pattern.
If you want to stay up to date, subscribe to the T&E Bulletin.