Skip to main content

The European Green Deal

December 12, 2019

It's important to remember that the European Union (EU) has the world's largest economy. It ranks third, behind China and the United States, in contributions to climate change. What the EU decides to do in order to combat climate change will affect every one of us, existentially and economically. Unveiled yesterday, the EU's Green Deal proposes a target of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. Regulators will create standards for the manufacturing of goods that force recycling and the phasing out of plastic and other kinds of non-recyclable waste.

Beginning in 2021, 40 percent of the agricultural budget will, assuming adoption of the plan, be devoted to mitigating climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, 30 percent of fisheries subsidies would be used in a similar manner. Air quality standards will be more stringent, an essential element of the plan, given that 400,000 premature deaths a year can be attributed to air pollution in Europe. Higher levels of energy would come from renewable sources (up to 100 percent by 2050). Shipping would increasingly rely on rail and water, with greenhouse gas emissions as a result of air freight being reduced.

There are member states of the EU - Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary - that are very reluctant to end their dependence upon coal as an energy source. To ease their transition to carbon neutrality, the European Commission, which authored the plan, proposes to help them with a gift of 100 billion British pounds, or $111 billion. These countries do not present the only sticking point. Agriculture and fisheries both have powerful lobbies with objections of their own. Car manufacturing and chemical production companies will have plenty to say about new regulations proposed in the Green Deal plan.

The European Green Deal, like the Green New Deal proposed in the United States, places considerable emphasis on innovation and worker protections, making it a social justice document as well as an economic and environmental document. The plan enjoys an oblique endorsement by the World Wildlife Fund, whose Ester Asin says, "The proposed package is comprehensive, identifying the right areas for action, from biodiversity and nature restoration to climate change and stopping deforestation. However, by emphasizing continued economic growth as a key objective, the commission has missed an opportunity to challenge the traditional growth paradigm in favor of an approach that would respect planetary boundaries." We will no doubt be hearing much more in the coming months.



With thanks to Vox, Mother Jones, and the Guardian.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Truly, There's Nothing to be Afraid of

February 26, 2013 – The 1960s scared conservatives worse than I knew – worse than a lot of us knew, I guess.   Certainly I lived through that period.   Certainly young adults found their voices, and had the nerve to object to being put through the meat grinder called Vietnam.   Black Americans continued to seek justice and equality in their adopted homeland.   Change was inevitable.   It’s understandable that conservatives wanted a say in what those changes would be.   Their fearful reaction was – and is - badly overblown.   Others’ happiness is nothing to fear.     These longed-for changes cost conservatives nothing but their unearned, self-satisfied atrophy.   Young people went on dying, even so. It turns out all of that change scared the socks off market fundamentalists.   Determined to return the country to its previous perceived state of inertia, Lewis Powell wrote a memorandum for the US Chamber of Commerce, urging a sh...

Greenland: A State of Rapid Collapse

 September 1, 2020 The good news, such as it is, goes like this: the suspense is over. No need to guess about whether sea level rise will be life-altering by the end of this century or not. It will, at least for the 40 percent of humankind which lives on or near a coastline. That's because all the ice on Greenland is going to melt, according to researchers at Ohio State University (yes, yes, I know - it's THE Ohio State University. Get over yourselves.) Their research appeared in the journal Nature Communications Earth and Environment in August. Total meltdown will take 10,000 years, but enough will have melted by 2100 to cause sea level rise of approximately three feet. That will cover a lot of coastal property, a loss made worse by storms and hurricanes. How have researchers reached this conclusion? By studying almost 40 years of satellite data. Glaciers on Greenland have shrunk so much since the year 2000 that even if global warming came to a complete stop, they would contin...