The economic slowdown in Europe has slashed the cost of cutting greenhouse gas emissions in Europe by a third, the European Commissioner for Climate Change, Connie Hedegaard, said on Wednesday.
In an attempt to claw climate back to the forefront of the European policy agenda, which has been dominated by the sovereign debt crisis of member states in recent months, the commissioner outlined a set of proposals that lays out a cost-benefit analysis for a more ambitious 30 per cent reduction of emissions by 2020 as opposed to the 20 per cent cut that is Europe’s current stated goal.
Hedegaard said the ongoing economic crisis had reduced the cost of the 20 per cent cut from a 70 billion euros estimate made in 2008, to 48 billion euros.
The new proposals are likely to reopen what has been an acrimonious debate within Europe on the 30 per cent versus 20 per cent cuts issue. Under the Copenhagen Accord agreed in December last year, Europe has pledged to cut emissions by 20 per cent by 2020 and up this figure to 30 per cent only if other major economies agree to similar “ambitious” cuts.
While other major economies, notably the United States and China, have not done enough yet for Europe to warrant increasing its pledge, Hedegraad bemoaned the fact that the economic slowdown had led to a decrease in innovation on the climate change front in Europe.
Europe, which for long has billed itself as the front-runner on climate change issues, was no longer leading the world when it came to the installation of new renewable energy, the commissioner warned, singling out China as having the potential to overtake Europe.
“You cannot imagine how fast things are moving in China, at a surreal speed,” she said. “Beijing has realised that this (green technologies) is the business of the 21st century.”
In 2009, China topped the global league table for wind power installation and China and Taiwan now produce most of the world’s photovoltaic panels, the communication released by the commission on Wednesday stated.
Making the case for a 30 per cent cut, Hedegaard pointed out that lower economic growth resulting from the crisis had depressed greenhouse gas emissions, while high energy prices had reduced demand for energy. Verified emissions in the EU fell almost 12 per cent in 2009 to 1.87 billion metric tonnes, compared with an allocation of 1.97 billion tonnes, according to the commission data. Moreover, unused allowances to emit carbon dioxide under the European Emission Trading System (ETS) during the crisis were being carried forward into the 2013-2020 trading period, lowering the expected carbon price in 2020.
The combined result was the reduction by 22 billion euros of the estimated cost of the 20 percent cut pledge.
Lower health costs from air pollution and increased energy security were the other co-benefits Wednesday’s communication argued made the case for a 30 percent cut more compelling.
A reduction in the number of allowances under the ETS, new rules on energy efficiency, as well as fiscal incentives were some of the practical measures by which the 30 percent target could be reached according to Hedegaard.
The commissioner stressed that her proposals were meant to stir debate going forward rather than representing any concrete decisions on the matter.
A potential move to 30 percent has created sharp divisions among EU governments, with some, like the UK, favoring a unilateral EU move with others including eastern European countries like Poland, strongly opposed. European industries are on the whole against an increase to 30 percent arguing it would make them uncompetitive, while environmentalists argue it would be a way for the EU to lead by example in the fight against global warming.
Wednesday’s proposals were timed to be released just ahead of the May 31 resumption of UN climate negotiations in Bonn, Germany.
