In a controversial move last year, the European Commission gave gas power plants a ‘sustainable’ label under the EU’s green finance taxonomy, provided they meet a strict CO2 emissions threshold.

Gas power plants will be considered as a “transitional” technology under the EU taxonomy provided they replace existing coal-fired power stations, and “subject to clear limits and phase-out periods”, the EU executive said.

That decision was challenged by four environmental groups – ClientEarth, WWF’s European Policy Office, Transport & Environment (T&E), and BUND (Friends of the Earth Germany).

Japan, US and EU block G7 from setting coal phase out date

The four started legal action in September to stop the inclusion of fossil gas in the bloc’s sustainable finance rulebook, arguing that the legislation clashes with the European Climate Law and does not respect the EU’s obligations under the Paris Agreement.

However, in February the Commission rejected their request, and the NGOs are now challenging this decision by filing a case with the Court of Justice of the European Union. 

Absurd and unlawful?

“Labelling fossil gas as ‘sustainable’ is as absurd as it is unlawful. It goes against the EU’s own scientific advice and fundamentally undermines the credibility of the EU’s climate action. Fossil gas is not clean, not cheap and not a secure source of energy,” said a spokesperson for the four green organisations. 

Saudi Arabia, Russia push for more World Bank money into carbon capture

The NGOs argue that gas cannot be considered a sustainable source of energy and has a huge impact on climate change as it is a high-carbon source when burnt, while its extraction and transport also lead to the release of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. 

Including fossil gas in the ‘green’ taxonomy would also worsen the EU’s dependency on imported fossil fuels, exposing EU member states to more price volatility, dependence on producing countries, and supply crises in the future, they add. 

“We’re taking the Commission to court in the hope of restoring some credibility to the Taxonomy and avoiding this huge risk to the climate and people’s energy security,” the spokesperson said. 

“Life or death”: Weather-watchers warn against Elon Musk’s Twitter changes

Contacted by Euractiv, a Commission spokesperson said the EU executive “takes note of the legal action undertaken by several NGOs” but prefers not to comment on the substance of the case “before EU Court judgments are delivered”.

A hearing at the General Court is being scheduled for the second half of 2024, with a judgement expected to be released in 2025.

Nuclear challenged too

A separate lawsuit at the Luxembourg-based European Court of Justice against the inclusion of gas and nuclear in the taxonomy regulation will also be filed by Greenpeace on Tuesday.

In September, Greenpeace organisations from eight countries asked the EU to review its decision, but their request was rejected. 

As the lawsuit is being filed on Tuesday, activists from Greenpeace Luxembourg are planning to gather in front of the Court to protest the “green” label for gas and nuclear. 

Unlike gas, nuclear is a zero-carbon technology. But Greenpeace opposes it due to concerns over the disposal of nuclear waste and about safety and cost.

The post Campaigners sue EU for labelling gas sustainable appeared first on Climate Home News.

A motion to veto the European Commission’s proposal to include nuclear and gas in the EU’s sustainable finance taxonomy was defeated by 328 votes to 278.

A minimum of 353 votes was needed to reject the plan, which means it is now officially approved by the European Parliament.

Objection to the inclusion of nuclear and gas in EU green finance taxonomy is rejected: 278 votes in favour, 328 votes against.

This means the proposal goes through: nuclear and gas are now officially recognised as “transitional” activities under the taxonomy. pic.twitter.com/G6se90ZUoi

— Frédéric Simon (@FredSimonEU) July 6, 2022

Before it becomes law, the proposal to include nuclear and gas in the EU’s green finance taxonomy must also face a vote in the EU Council of Ministers representing the EU’s 27 member states.

However, a majority of 20 countries is needed to veto the proposal in the Council, which makes a rejection highly unlikely.

Reacting on Twitter, the energy minister of Luxembourg said he would challenge the decision before the EU Court of Justice.

“Luxembourg and Denmark will press legal charges and the Court will rule about its legality,” wrote Claude Turmes, saying he deeply regrets the Parliament’s decision.

Protestors in the hemicycle reacted immediately after the vote, wearing T-shirts reading “betrayal” and calling MEPs “traitors”.

Want climate news in your inbox? Sign up for free to get our weekly newsletter and occasional extra bulletins

Michael Bloss, a German Green MEP, denounced the “madness” of labelling nuclear and gas as sustainable investments, saying it will keep Europe addicted to Russian fossil fuels for many more years.

“France’s nuclear reactors and waste dumps will be renovated and new fossil gas infrastructures created,” Bloss said in a statement. “No serious bank will trust this taxonomy,” he added, saying the Greens were now preparing to take legal action against the decision.

Greta Thunberg, the teenage activist who started the Fridays for Future movement, reacted coldly on Twitter, saying the vote will delay the green transition and “deepen our dependency on Russian fuels”.

“The hypocrisy is striking, but unfortunately not surprising,” she wrote.

The European Parliament just voted to label fossil gas as “green” energy. This will delay a desperately needed real sustainable transition and deepen our dependency on Russian fuels. The hypocrisy is striking, but unfortunately not surprising.
This is still #NotMyTaxonomy

— Greta Thunberg (@GretaThunberg) July 6, 2022

Pascal Canfin, a French MEP who chairs the Parliament’s environment committee, sought to assuage the concerns of green activists, reminding them that the taxonomy does not give a blank cheque to all gas investments.

“The conditions set by the taxonomy for gas are precise: gas is only possible to replace coal, until 2030, under emission thresholds that are not considered dangerous and with reinforced transparency obligations,” he wrote on Twitter.

Nuclear Europe, an industry association, congratulated MEPs after the vote, saying Parliament had taken a “science-based decision” to include nuclear in the taxonomy.

“It is fantastic to see that a majority in the European Parliament has decided to listen to the experts and take the right decision,” said Yves Desbazeille, director-general of Nuclear Europe.

“We have less than 30 years left to decarbonise our economy in a sustainable way. By listening to the science, these MEPs have strengthened the EU’s chances of achieving this ambitious goal.”

Eurogas, an industry lobby group, was also cheerful, saying the Parliament’s decision “provides a decent framework” for future investments.

However, it said the European Commission’s taxonomy proposal “could have done more to promote coal phase-out and the adoption of best-in-class technologies” such as hydrogen and renewable gases.

“It is also crucial that we overcome bottlenecks for imports of diversified natural gas and LNG [liquified natural gas], and renewable hydrogen,” said James Watson, secretary-general of Eurogas.

This article was produced by Euractiv and republished under a content sharing agreement.

The post EU set to use ‘green’ label for gas, nuclear investments after parliamentary vote appeared first on Climate Home News.