Streamline your sales flow in European Union with airSlate SignNow

How to create outlook signature

Climate neutrality is European destiny. The EU means business when we pledged to make Europe climate usual by 2050 the European The European Commission tabled its much awaited climate law in a bid to carve into stone Europe's objective of becoming the first climate neutral continent in the world by 2050. But what is the EU's new climate law all about? Well, the Commission calls the climate law the heart of the European Green Deal. Its main objective is to make the the EU's climate neutrality objective a legally binding obligation on the Member States. That means that EU countries will now be legally obliged to aim for net zero emissions by 2050. This is hugely significant, it means that investors and businesses will now have the legal certainty that the climate neutrality objective is irreversible. If new climate skeptic governments are elected somewhere in Europe say in Denmark Poland or Germany well, they won't be able to come back on that commitment and amend their climate objectives in a retroactive manner So what does the climate law actually do? Well, the climate law is all about process not about substance. There is nothing in there for example about renewable energies or CO2 emissions from cars. These are important of course but they will be dealt with elsewhere in other pieces of legislation. What the climate law does do in detail though is to set out a process to make sure Europe stayed on track and eventually reaches the 2050 objective. Importantly, decisions on climate policy, including targets, will no longer be decided by unanimity among the Member States but by qualified majority voting. This means you countries will no longer have a veto over things climate related Moreover, the European Parliament will from now on be fully involved as a co-legislator, meaning decisions will be more democratic. How will the climate law work in practice? Well, the EU member states will be asked to report on a yearly basis about progress made and if they deviate from the objective the Commission will be allowed to take some corrective measures, in the way of new legislation or by making some detailed recommendations for the member states. And in due time, some intermediary targets will be added on the way to reaching the 2050 objective, for example in 2030 and 2040 and revised on a regular basis every five years, in line with the latest available science. What are the criticisms all about? Most of the criticism concerns the climate targets. Under the Paris Agreement, the EU - like all other signatories - has committed to submit an upgraded climate target for 2030 with new stricter objective to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. These national contributions are supposed to be submitted in time for the COP 26 UN Summit in Glasgow which is taking place in November. However, under the climate law the EU has only committed to submit a detailed cost-benefit analysis of moving its emission target from the current 40% up to 50 or 55%. ing to critics, this won't leave enough time to get Europe's updated UN contribution in time for Glasgow. Officially, the Commission says it needs until September to complete its cost-benefit analysis but many among the critics believe this is only a tactical move, aimed at making sure Europe doesn't come to Glasgow as the only major trading bloc with an updated UN target. A strategy, that hasn't really paid off in the past if you look at the results of the Copenhagen conference in 2009. Among those pushing for an earlier timeline are 12 EU countries, including Denmark, France, Spain and the Netherlands which have sent a letter to the Commission earlier this month calling for the cost-benefit analysis to be completed in June not in September. But the criticism doesn't stop there. Some like Poland and other Eastern EU countries say the proposal doesn't focus enough on social equity aspects and doesn't contain of guarantees on funding for the energy transition. And others like teen activist Greta Thunberg have condemned the proposal because it doesn't contain a carbon budget that would limit the amount of CO2 that European countries are allowed to spew into the atmosphere. No policy plan or deal will be nearly enough as long as you just continue to ignore the CO2 budget which applies for today. We don't just need goals for 2030 or 2050, we above all need them for 2020 and for every following year to come. We need to start cutting our emissions drastically at the source, now. All these criticisms are founded of course Negotiations on the climate law will show whether some of these issues can be addressed or not when it reaches the European Parliament and the member states. But they also fail to do justice to the climate law. Despite all the criticism, the bottom line is that the European Union, if it adopts its climate law in time for Glasgow, will have the most far-reaching climate legislation in the world. And that in itself is hugely significant.