The European Commission, in its infinite wisdom, announced yet another landmark climate target for the distant utopia of 2040. Wopke Hoekstra, the self-proclaimed climate oracle, gleefully declared, as if we were all applauding, that ‘Europe will continue to lead the world on climate’.
In some way it’s already there, as more and more industrial companies opt for immigration. Some choose China and East Asia, some come to the USA. Due to the very nature of the industrial processes steel can’t be made with sun and elven dust. As well as many other important achievement of civilization it comes with a price attached. But what are the alternative? Let’s look at it.
According to this grand plan, all EU member states will achieve the miraculous feat of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2040 compared to 1990 levels. This plan, announced at a fascinating monthly conference in Strasbourg, naturally comes at a high price: billions of euros a year. Because saving the planet is not cheap.
But don’t worry, citizens. The European Commission believes that the 2040 interim target is absolutely necessary for the EU to be on a virtuous path to climate neutrality by 2050. As if the secret to solving the climate problem is to set arbitrary targets in the distant future.
And what a surprise, 2030 is the next milestone in this grand journey. This target makes the 33% reduction achieved in 2022 look like child’s play.
The European Green Deal is a magical package of spells and targets inspired by the 2015 Paris Agreement. Because nothing says commitment like an agreement with colour in its name: The 2040 plan, unlike the 2030 and 2050 plans, has as much legal standing as a recommendation to try a new flavour of ice cream.
The Commission, in its might and glory, argued that the responsibility lies with the incoming administrations, which coincides with the elections scheduled for June. Because if a recommendation can be made, there is no need for a legal obligation.
Visionary Vopke Hoekstra championed the cause in October, calling for cuts of ‘at least 90%’ and throwing consumption tax proposals like confetti; the EU Scientific Advisory Board gave its approval, recommending a slightly wider range of 90-95% to keep things interesting.
Climate change cheerleader Minister Rob Jetten applauded the commissioners for following scientific advice and insisted that the last step towards 2050 was the hardest. Because in the magic land of climate targets, it seems that the closer you get to your goal, the harder the journey.
But not all environmental groups are on the same page of Book of Wonders. The World Wildlife Fund insists that the EU must become climate neutral by 2040, demanding more than just a 90% reduction. Carbon Market Watch supports the plan but demands a legally binding instrument. Greenpeace praised the plan, but sharply pointed out that rich countries with historically high emissions need to do more. Ah, the joys of saving the world.
