{"id":14114,"date":"2021-07-22T09:04:12","date_gmt":"2021-07-22T07:04:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reclaimfinance.org\/site\/?p=14114"},"modified":"2023-02-08T16:16:03","modified_gmt":"2023-02-08T15:16:03","slug":"abandoning-science-how-the-gas-and-nuclear-lobbies-are-winning-the-eu-taxonomy-fight","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reclaimfinance.org\/site\/en\/2021\/07\/22\/abandoning-science-how-the-gas-and-nuclear-lobbies-are-winning-the-eu-taxonomy-fight\/","title":{"rendered":"Abandoning Science? How the Gas and Nuclear Lobbies are Winning the EU Taxonomy Fight"},"content":{"rendered":"

When is a sustainable <\/span>taxonomy<\/span>\u00a0not sustainable? When it becomes captured by lobbyists\u00a0<\/span>from<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>environmentally damaging<\/span>\u00a0industries<\/span>, of course<\/span>.\u00a0<\/span>That is<\/span>\u00a0the key\u00a0<\/span>–\u00a0<\/span>unsurprising<\/span>\u00a0but\u00a0<\/span>unfortunate<\/span>\u00a0– takeaway<\/span>\u00a0of our new report<\/a><\/span> on the gas and nuclear industries\u2019\u00a0<\/span>\u20ac85m lobbying offensive aimed at overturning their\u00a0<\/span>initial<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>effective\u00a0<\/span>exclusion<\/span>\u00a0from the European\u00a0<\/span>Union<\/span>\u2019s flagship \u2018sustainable\u00a0<\/span>taxonomy<\/span>\u2019<\/span>, with\u00a0<\/span>support from state backers<\/span>.<\/span>\u00a0Unfortunately, it appears their efforts are paying\u00a0<\/span>off, with the door\u00a0<\/span>now<\/span>\u00a0open to th<\/span>e inclusion of these\u00a0<\/span>energy sources\u00a0<\/span>confirmed\u00a0<\/span>in the\u00a0<\/span>European Commission<\/span>\u2019s\u00a0<\/span>\u201csustainable finance strategy\u201d\u00a0<\/span>announcement\u00a0<\/span>two weeks ago<\/span>. But\u00a0<\/span>it\u2019s<\/span>\u00a0not too late to save the\u00a0<\/span>ta<\/span>xonomy<\/span>.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>

<\/div><\/div><\/span>

A battle with consequences<\/b><\/h1><\/span>
<\/div><\/div><\/div>

The outcome of this fight matters. <\/span>The <\/span>taxonomy<\/span> will set the pace for \u201csustainable\u201d investment in the EU, <\/span>and will be studied worldwide, <\/span>and <\/span>as such <\/span>has been hotly <\/span><\/span>contested<\/a><\/u><\/span><\/span>. <\/span>An initial<\/span> recommendation in March 2020 from the Commission\u2019s Technical Expert group (TEG) <\/span>entailed the <\/span>effective <\/span>exclusion of gas and nuclear from the EU <\/span>taxonomy<\/span>, <\/span>leading to both lobbies scaling up their efforts to force their way back in. But the truth is that fossil fuels <\/span><\/span>can<\/span> never<\/span> <\/span>be sustainable, and <\/span>that<\/span> \u2013 <\/span>though<\/span> not as harmful to the climate – <\/span>nuclear <\/span>raises major sustainability concerns<\/span>.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>

<\/div><\/div><\/span>

Hitting the Gas
\n<\/b><\/p><\/h2><\/span>

<\/div><\/div><\/div>

The gas industry has moved heaven and earth to achieve its goals. 776 staff have been employed in 182 gas-related companies and industry groups to lobby the EU. Together they spent <\/span>between \u20ac64.9 and \u20ac78.4 million<\/span> each year, with prominent <\/span>contributions from oil majors such as Shell, BP Exxon and TotalEnergies<\/span><\/b> (1). Money gets results: namely, <\/span>an extraordinary 323 meetings with EU officials \u2014 more than one meeting every two days<\/span><\/b> (2). This has been buttressed by support from cental and eastern European states<\/span>,<\/span> such as Czechia, Hungary and Poland, which are betting on gas to replace their coal fleets.<\/span><\/p>\n

To persuade their targets, gas lobbyists emphasize its supposed \u2018transition\u2019 fuel status (3). But in truth, <\/span>gas can emit <\/span><\/b>as much greenhouse gas (GHG) as coal<\/a><\/u><\/span><\/b> and recently became the <\/span>biggest GHG emitter<\/a><\/u><\/span> in the EU power sector. Moreover, <\/span>global <\/span>gas production must be drastically reduced to limit global warming to 1.5\u00b0C<\/span><\/b> and European infrastructures and plants are already overbuilt to respect this objective.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>

<\/div><\/div><\/span>

Going Nuclear
\n<\/b><\/p><\/h2><\/span>

<\/div><\/div><\/div>

While the gas lobby deployed a veritable armada in pursuit of its goal, the nuclear industry and its backers – weighing in smaller at \u20ac7.9m annually, with 119 staff from 27 organizations \u2013 pursued a much more surgical approach.<\/span> <\/b>For one,<\/span> the frequency of meetings between EU Commissioners and nuclear lobbyists more than doubled after its initial exclusion by the TEG<\/span><\/b> (4). The report also unveils <\/span>the role played by \u2018astroturfed\u2019 groups set up to mimic civil society groups, as well as by nuclear industry\u2019s experts, whose influence<\/span><\/b> reaches into the EU Commission\u2019s very own Joint Research Committee (JRC). <\/span><\/p>\n

Like its gas counterpart, the industry has <\/span>amply benefited from state backing<\/span><\/b>, with nuclear-dependent France leading a coalition of seven states vociferously advocating for its inclusion. It is worth noting that the French government teamed up with notorious gas advocates to protect nuclear, while simultaneously opening the door to gas inclusion in a move that looks a lot like a \u201cnuclear for gas\u201d deal. French state-owned EDF was the biggest individual nuclear lobbyist, spending over \u20ac2m per year on EU lobbying.<\/span><\/p>\n

N<\/span>uclear advocates <\/span>seek<\/span> to depict it as environmentally friendly<\/span> (<\/span>5<\/span>)<\/span>, emphasizing its role as a \u2018decarbonized\u2019 power source. Yet as the report argues<\/span>, nuclear fails the \u2018<\/span><\/span>Do No Significant Harm\u2019 (DNSH) principle<\/a><\/u><\/span><\/span> at the heart of the taxonomy, given <\/span><\/span>the <\/span>various<\/span> environmental risks it poses<\/span><\/span>, <\/span><\/span>as recognized by <\/span><\/span>various experts groups<\/a><\/u><\/span><\/span>. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>

<\/div><\/div><\/span>

Life or Death Moment for the Sustainable Taxonomy<\/span><\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/span>
\n<\/b><\/p><\/h2><\/span>

<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

While <\/span>t<\/span>he Commission has allowed the gas and nuclear industries to creep back up to the threshold of the taxonomy, they have not yet crossed it.<\/span> This is a life-or-death moment for the sustainable <\/span>taxonomy, with<\/span> potentially enormous consequences for the climate. Reclaim Finance calls on the <\/span><\/span>Commission, EU Parliament and Member states to <\/span>heed the science<\/span><\/span> and<\/span> exclude gas and nuclear power<\/span> from the taxonomy, thus <\/span><\/span>rescuing <\/span><\/span>the EU\u2019s sustainable finance flagship<\/span>.<\/span> But the<\/span> taxonomy is only one step in the journey the EU is making towards sustainability \u2013 for it to succeed,<\/span> fossil fuel lobbyists <\/span>must be<\/span> kicked out of EU institutions <\/span>once and for all.<\/span><\/span> <\/b><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Notes :
\n<\/u><\/b><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The data have been extracted from the EU transparency register. See full methodology in the report.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. Gas lobbyists had more meetings (about + 9.5%) from January 2020 to May 2021 than from January 2018 to July 2020. The previous report by Reclaim Finance showed that gas lobbyists had 295 meetings in 31 months (about 9.5 meetings a month) while new data indicates they had 323 meetings in 17 months (19 meetings a month).<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. A full discussion of the \u201csustainability\u201d of fossil gas,\u00a0is available in the report.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
  4. A previous report by Reclaim Finance (see below) showed that nuclear lobbyists had 36 meetings in 31 months while new data indicates they had 27 meetings in 17 months. Therefore, the frequency of meetings between EU Commissioners and nuclear lobbyists significantly increased, jumping from 1.2 to 2.59 meetings per month.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n
  5. A full discussion of the \u201csustainability\u201d of nuclear, using the\u00a0taxonomy\u2019s criteria, is available in the report.<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>

    Acknowledgement:<\/span><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

    Following the publication of the report, the Italian utility company Enel<\/a><\/u> provided information showing that it did not push for gas to be included in the EU Taxonomy and pushed for only renewable energy to be included in the EU Taxonomy. Similarly, the energy company advocates for green hydrogen, excluding the production of so-called blue (fossil fuel and CCS) or grey hydrogen (fossil fuel).<\/b><\/p>\n

    Reclaim Finance conducted an analysis of Enel’s current transition plan. The NGO noted the companies’ pledge to phase-out coal power generation by 2027. Enel’s team also confirmed that the company intends to phase-out gas power by 2050<\/a><\/u>, tho no official commitments have been found. Reclaim Finance will further investigate Enel’s policy and could publish a specific article soon.
    <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

    Find out more<\/span> :<\/span><\/span>
    \n<\/u><\/b><\/p>\n