Ambitious and realistic. Europe’s path to decarbonization
Linda Kalcher, Executive Director of the think tank Strategic Perspectives, outlines strengths and weaknesses of the EC recommendation of reducing 90% net EU greenhouse gas emissions by 2040 and describes opportunities and shapes of a future that is just around the corner.
The core aim of achieving climate neutrality in the European Union by 2050 lies at the center of the European Green Deal and has been established as a legally binding target with the European Climate Law.
The path to this goal is outlined by the intermediate target of reducing net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030, compared to 1990 levels. However, the Climate Law also requires the proposal of a 2040 climate target within six months of the first Global Stocktake of the Paris Agreement, which occurred in December 2023. In this context, on February 6, 2024 the European Commission, based on a detailed impact assessment, recommended a 90% net greenhouse gas emissions reduction by 2040 compared to 1990 levels, initiating a discussion with all stakeholders. A legislative proposal for the 2040 climate target will be made by the next Commission, after the European elections, and will be agreed upon with the European Parliament and Member States.
“The European Commission’s proposal is ambitious but realistic” comments on the EC recommendation Linda Kalcher, Executive Director of Strategic Perspectives, a pan-European think tank created to promote effective climate action in the EU. “It makes a strong economic case for reducing the EU’s fossil fuel dependence in the wake of COP28 in Dubai. We highly appreciate the emphasis placed on the benefits for energy security and industrial competitiveness. The Commission is right in highlighting that a proper industrial strategy and substantially higher investments are needed to keep pace with the US and China in the global competition on green technology leadership.”
Is this target feasible and sufficiently ambitious?
The 90% is certainly feasible. Nobody said it would be easy though. It requires a series of transformations across sectors but many of them have started already. Current trends on renewable energy deployment, electric vehicles and heat pump uptake are providing confidence that the pathway is achievable if green technologies become more affordable.
In other sectors, much more needs to be done — also to become more resilient to impacts related to climate change.
Let’s take agriculture for example. Farmers come under a lot of pressure to secure a good income. If you look at the drought levels in the South of Spain and Italy already in January, it becomes clear that the threat from climate impacts will be a big driver to make farming practices more resilient. Many measures can actually help reduce greenhouse gas emissions as well, so are worth supporting — especially for small farmers.
Do you think there are any weak elements in the recommendation?
We think the Commission could have been more ambitious in two areas:
First, our own analysis shows that more is possible, especially in the energy sector. Cutting fossil fuel use by 80% is an important first step to strengthen energy security: the EU can phase out coal by 2030 and gas by 2040, with the power sector being fossil-free in 2037. This is vital for energy prices, especially when one looks at the high and volatile gas prices, and energy security. Setting clear end dates for coal, oil and gas is essential for a just transition in the energy sector and can make the EU a pioneer on an orderly fossil fuel phase out and independent from global geopolitics.
Second, we are quite concerned about the high levels of abatement technologies of around 280 million tonnes as many of them are still at infancy stage. A certain amount of carbon capture and storage will be used in the hard-to-abate sectors, our own analysis put it at about 50–60 million tonnes. Carbon can also be captured and used to produce e-fuels. Our modeling assumes half of the amount in comparison to the Commission (130 million tonnes in total) and carbon capture and storage makes no economic sense in the power sector. The future mix will be largely renewable energy with a stable role for nuclear energy.
Keep reading this content on Climate Foresight!
Climate Foresight is published by the CMCC Foundation , a research center that develops models and predictions to study the interaction between changes in the climate system and social, economic and environmental changes. Climate Foresight is an observatory on tomorrow, a digital magazine that collects ideas, interviews, articles, art performances, and multimedia to tell the stories of the future.
