The EU Emissions Trading System Directive 2003/87/EC (EU ETS) governs the world’s largest carbon market: a cap-and-trade system covering key energy intensive sectors, accountable for 41% of EU emissions. In light of the European Green Deal and the EU’s new 2030 GHG target, the EU Commission proposed increasing the ambition of the EU ETS in September 2020. The EU ETS update will review the 2030 targets for ETS sectors (currently 43%) to ensure the responsibility for reaching the EU's overall emission reductions is balanced with sectors not covered by the scheme. It will also update rules governing the free allocation of emissions allowances, including the Linear Reduction Factor (LRF) (the annual decrease of allowances provided to the market) and the Market Stability Reserve (MSR) rules (the mechanism for dealing with surplus/unallocated emission allowances in the market). Another key concern is the need for a mandate for auction revenues to ensure they are spent on climate action.
After intense negative policy engagement from industry, efforts to reform the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) in line with Europe's 2030 climate targets were partly watered down. The adopted policy maintained a higher rate of free emissions allowance allocation to heavy industry sectors than proposed by the EU Commission.
Emissions Trading
Inactive: completed. The file was approved in April 2023 and will apply from 1 January 2024.
Emissions Trading
Inactive: completed. The file was approved in April 2023 and will apply from 1 January 2024.
In a 10 July joint declaration, the French cross-sector association MEDEF and the Italian cross-sector association Confindustria advocated for a weakening of both the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). Despite supporting some measures to increase the effectiveness of the CBAM, the associations advocated for including unspecified "export adjustments" and promoted a continuation of existing carbon leakage protection measures under the ETS until at least 2030, in misalignment with the EU Commission's adopted phaseout starting in 2026. In addition, MEDEF and Confindustria called for a "structural review" of the EU ETS due to its potential impacts on European international competitiveness, and called for the extension of the scope of indirect cost compensation through the scheme.
On 9 December, an industry coalition representing the European chemicals, aluminium, and electricity sectors published a series of policy recommendations to EU policymakers, as an outcome of the Antwerp Dialogue on Industrial Electrification & Competitiveness. The signatories of the joint recommendations, which included the European Cement Association (CEMBUREAU), the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) and Eurelectric, expressed broad support for a Clean Industrial Deal to enable the decarbonization of the energy sector. However, several policy recommendations did not appear to be aligned with the EU Commission's original policy ambition. For example, entities advocated against reducing indirect cost compensation as part of reforms to the EU Emissions Trading System, and did not seem to support prioritizing non-fossil flexibility support schemes in the EU Electricity Market Design reform.
In a 22 November joint statement, the Mouvement des Entreprises de France (Medef), the Federation of German Industries (BDI) and the Confederation of Italian Industry (Confindustria) did not appear to fully support previously adopted reforms and regulations under the European Green Deal. The joint statement advocated for reforms to the EU ETS, including delays of implementation until the introduction of the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism proves "effective," and called for an earlier revision of the EU CO2 emission standards for cars and vans. The industry associations also called for a technology-neutral approach to the deployment of low-carbon energy, which does not clearly align with scientific recommended pathways to achieve net zero by 2050. The joint statement seemed to support additional investments for the green transition in Europe, however without stating a position on the need for stringent regulations and advocating for the review of existing legislation and increased focus of future legislation to better protect industry competitiveness.
In a 4 October Euractiv article, the president of the Confederation of the Italian Industry (Confindustria), Emmanuel Orsini, voiced concerns about the upcoming phase out of free allowances in the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), stating “we cannot afford to lose pivotal supply chains due to key policy choices that we now know were wrong”. In the same article, Euractiv also reported that Confindustria will push for scrapping the new ETS for buildings and road transport, which is due to come in force in 2027.
In a joint position paper from 4 June, MEDEF and Confindustria called for a revision of the rules of the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, including a simplification of requirements and a softening of measures on exports. In the joint statement, both industry associations also supported a simplification of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) implementation and additional support for industry.
The news outlet Carbon Pulse reported on March 19th that the European Steel Association (Eurofer) did not seem to support reforms to the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) benchmarks and advocated to weaken measures which would consequently lead to increased free allocation of emissions allowances for steelmakers.
In a December 11th meeting with the EU Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič on the clean industry transition, ArcelorMittal did not support EU state aid conditions for the steel industry to use green hydrogen to decarbonize, advocating that the industry should be able to use carbon capture and storage (CCS) or fossil gas in the short-term. The company also advocated to weaken the EU Emissions Trading System and EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, whilst supporting the Electricity Market Design reform on renewables and a range of policy to scale up demand for low-carbon steel.
Sourced from a Freedom of Information (FOI) Request, in October 2022, ArcelorMittal sent a letter to the EU Commission opposing the reform of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), as it suggested that price signals are sent by high energy prices, and emphasized the costs of the revision of the steel benchmark.
On the 27th May, Eurofer’s Director General Axel Eggert was interviewed by Italian news outlet Mosaico Europa, taking supportive positions on the scaling up of green hydrogen in the EU Hydrogen and Gas Decarbonisation Package. However, he advocated against the need for additionality in the Renewable Energy Directive reform and took unsupportive positions on the EU Emissions Trading System and the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.
In a social media post on 19 December 2022, the German chemical industry association Verband der Chemischen Industrie (VCI) did not support the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) reform and Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), criticizing it as a burden for the chemical industry and citing price increases as endangering the industry.
In a press release on the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) Reform trilogue agreement on 20 December, Eurometaux Director General Guy Thiran and President Evangelos Mytilineos emphasized the need to avoid deindustralization in response to the proposed CBAM and EU ETS reform.
In several press releases in December surrounding the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism and EU Emissions Trading System Reform trilogues, Eurofer Director General Axel Eggert supported weakening the EU ETS reform and CBAM, advocating for export rebates to be included in the CBAM. He also was unsupportive of proposed measures in delegated acts in the Renewable Energy Directive Reform on carbon capture use and storage and renewable hydrogen.
In a press release on the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) Reform trilogue agreement on 16 December, CEMBUREAU broadly supported the proposed EU ETS reform, but advocated that export rebates should be included in the CBAM.
In a press release on 15 December, BusinessEurope Director General Markus J. Beyrer stressed the impacts of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism and EU Emissions Trading System Reform on the competitiveness of EU industry before the policy trilogues. He also supported export rebates in the CBAM and a gradual application until the mid-2030s, and supported a slower rebasing of the EU ETS emissions cap, and advocated for the EU ETS for road transport and buildings to include private households.
On 2nd November, the German chemicals association Verband der Chemischen Industrie (VCI) published an evaluation of the EU Green Deal. In the text the association generally supported the EU’s 2050 target, but expressed major concerns about different elements of the EU ETS reform, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, Energy Efficiency Directive and Renewable Energy Directive.
In a position paper published on 5th December, CEMBUREAU supported a weaker Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) with a slower phase out of the free allocation of emissions allowances in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) reform and the inclusion of export rebates, although it did support including indirect emissions. It also was in favor of a large Innovation Fund in the EU ETS.
In comments to Euractiv on 30th November in response to a study which found that industry has received almost 100 billion euros in free CO2 credits since 2013, Eurofer Director General Axel Eggert supported the maintenance of current levels of free allowances in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), a position which is misaligned from the EU Commission’s proposal for a reform of the policy. Mr Eggert stated that the steel industry needs free allocation to remain alongside the proposed Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) until it is fully in place to finance new green steel projects, whilst also consistently advocating for increased government financing, for example, in May 2022.
On 26th October, heavy industry associations Eurofer, Eurometaux and CEMBUREAU published a joint statement on the EU’s trilogues on the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) Reform and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). The associations stated opposition to an ambitious phase out of the free allocation of emissions allowances alongside a CBAM, preferring the maintenance of full benchmark-based free allocation until the CBAM is proven effective. Failing this, they supported the EU Council’s proposed slower phase out of free allowances compared to the EU Commission proposal.
Euractiv reported on 11th October that EU policymakers had made concessions to the EU steel industry in EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) trilogues, agreeing that proposed reforms to tighten the benchmark against which free allowances for the industry are measured should be scrapped. Eurofer stated support for this outcome, which it has consistently advocated for since the reform proposal in 2020. Eurofer also suggested it did not support the proposal for the phase out of the free allocation of emissions allowances alongside the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.
In a joint statement with IndustriAll on the 17th October, Eurofer advocated for public funding for industrial decarbonization projects and energy infrastructure, as well as EU regulation to support green steel markets. However, it also stated support for carbon leakage protection measures, referencing a previous statement in 2021 where the association was unsupportive of the EU Commission’s proposed Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism and reforms to the EU Emissions Trading System.
The Federation of German Industries (BDI) published a position paper on the EU’s Fit for 55 package on 20th September, in which the association laid out its opposition to the 2035 zero emissions vehicle standard proposed by the EU Commission. In addition, the association supported quotas for low-CO2 and climate neutral aviation fuels as part of ReFuelEU Aviation, while emphasizing the risk of carbon leakage and the need for flexibility to compensate for additional costs, and called for "ambitious but realistic" quotas for biofuels in the Renewable Energy Directive (RED).
In the same position paper, BDI advocated for a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) test phase which only includes industries that support it, and the maintenance of free emissions allowances in the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). Furthermore, the entity supported the extension of the EU ETS for road transport and buildings, but not for aviation, and it did not support “inappropriate” Minimum-Energy-Performance-Standards (MEPS) in the Energy Performance Buildings Directive (EPBD), as well as not supporting an energy consumption cap in the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED).
In a joint letter to EU policymakers on 6th September, coordinated by the industry association Eurometaux, European companies including Boliden, Glencore and Norsk Hydro appeared to oppose new and ongoing climate and energy policy in the EU, stressing costs for industry. The letter also advocated to diversify gas imports, and did not appear to support national coal phase outs or an ambitious EU Emissions Trading System. However, the letter advocated for more ambitious market-based renewable energy policy.
In a 13th September tweet, CEMBUREAU advocated for a “gradual phase out of free allocation” of emissions allowances in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) only once the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is proven to be “watertight”, in contradiction to the EU Commission’s proposal for the files. However, the tweet stated support for the inclusion of waste incineration in the EU ETS.
In a statement on Energy Prices published on 9th September 2022, CEMBUREAU advocated to speed up renewable energy project permitting and infrastructure deployment, and was in favor of including indirect emissions in the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) to respond to high energy prices. However, it also supported extending indirect cost compensation in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) to the cement industry.
In a 1st September press release, the President of Confindustria strongly opposed the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), calling for the EU’s flagship emissions trading system to be suspended given the height of energy prices. The association has repeatedly made this call since it was first detected by InfluenceMap in March 2022.
The German chemical association VCI published a new position paper on EU climate laws on 12th July, criticizing the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) reforms and the planned phase out of free allocation of certificates, as well as not supporting absolute energy savings targets as part of the EU Energy Efficiency Directive. Meanwhile, on 25th July, VCI emphasized in a tweet the importance of Germany becoming independent of Russian gas, supporting the role of LNG terminals and coal as means to do so.
In its weekly newsletter, published on 14th July, BusinessEurope stated positions on several of the EU’s Fit for 55 package policies, which have had positions agreed by all EU institutions. It supported increasing the ambition of the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation and was in favor of speeding up the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) for road transport and buildings. However, it supported the EU Parliament’s proposal to stagger the rebasing of the EU ETS emissions cap. It also did not support proposals for an EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), advocating for export rebates.
In a press release, published on 1st July 2022, Eurofer’s Director General Axel Eggert supported the EU Council’s proposal for the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism and the reform of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), but suggested that the proposal needed strengthened carbon leakage protection measures and export rebates. He also stated that reforms such as rebasing the emissions cap and strengthening the Market Stability Cap should be avoided.
In a press release published on 8th June, the Corporate Leaders Group (CLG) supported an ambitious agreement on the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) in the EU Parliament plenary. It stated that the free allocation of emissions allowances cannot continue in its current form, but suggested that they should only be phased out as fast as possible for sectors which do not face low-carbon competition from overseas on a large scale.
An op-ed written by the President of the EU Parliament Environment Committee, Pascal Canfin, published in Le Monde on the 2nd June reported that in a “tsunami of lobbying” Eurofer had advocated to EU parliamentarians to not support the EU Commission’s proposal to reform the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) by eliminating a certain amount of carbon credits from the market, called ‘rebasing’. Canfin stated that the EU Commission had shown that without this measure, there is no chance of achieving the necessary emissions reductions in European industry to align with the UN Paris Agreement. Eurofer also appeared to advocate for the EU Parliament to support the weaker draft of the EU ETS and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).
In press releases published on the 8-9th June, CEMBUREAU expressed disappointment at the failure of the EU Parliament Plenary to agree on proposals for the reform of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). CEMBUREAU stated support for "some key issues" within both the ambitious Environment Committee draft and the weaker EU Parliament draft, but did not specify its position on the phase-out timeline for free allowances.
Ahead of the plenary votes in the EU Parliament on the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) reform and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) on 8th June, the Verband der Chemischen Industrie (VCI) published a press release in which director general Große-Entrup stated the association's opposition to the proposed ETS reforms and emphasized the potential negative impacts of CBAM on the chemical sector.
In a position paper published on 19th May, Eurofer advocated for the continuation of current carbon leakage protection measures under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) until at least 2030, alongside the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). The association also did not support proposed reforms to the EU ETS, such as strengthening the Market Stability Reserve and rebasing the emissions cap. The Director General Axel Eggert came out against the EU Parliament Environment Committee’s vote to increase the ambition of the EU ETS and the CBAM, opposing the new phaseout date of 2030.
In a press release on 18th May, BusinessEurope Director, General Markus J. Beyrer, stated opposition to the EU Parliament Environment Committee’s vote to increase the ambition of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism by speeding up the phase out of the free allocation of emissions allowances in the EU ETS. He also did not support the proposal to make free allowances conditional on decarbonization efforts.
In a press release on 23rd May, thyssenkrupp stressed that the reform of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) must not be too ambitious, in response to the EU Parliament Environment Committee’s vote to increase the ambition of the policy reform. The company was also unsupportive of the decision to speed up the phase out of the free allocation of emissions allowances alongside a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), and suggested that companies investing in decarbonization should be exempt from this phase out.
On 11th May, ahead of the REPowerEU plan, Corporate Leaders Group (CLG) Europe published a joint letter that highlighted a strengthened EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is needed to deliver on the EU’s targets.
In a joint statement published on 11th May, energy-intensive industry associations including Eurofer, CEMBUREAU, FuelsEurope and International Federation of Industrial Energy Consumers did not support reforms to the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), including the proposal to strengthen the Market Stability Reserve and rebase the emissions cap. The associations also did not support the EU Commission’s proposed Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), suggesting that the free allocation of emissions allowances in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) should be maintained until 2030.
Speaking at a conference on 12th May, ArcelorMittal Europe’s CEO and President of Eurofer, Geet Van Poelvoorde, did not support proposed reforms to the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), stressing high costs and advocating for a transition phase. Van Poelvoorde also did not support the EU Commission’s proposed Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), advocating to maintain the free allocation of emissions allowances until 2030. However, he supported a regulatory framework for green hydrogen.
In a 6th May 2022 press release, the President of Confindustria strongly opposed the EU ETS, calling for the EU’s flagship emissions trading system to be suspended and suggesting that it over-penalizes Italian companies. The association has repeatedly made this call since it was first detected by InfluenceMap in March 2022.
In an opinion piece for Euractiv, published on the 29th April, Eurofer Director General Axel Eggert cited the war as justification for slowing down the EU Commission’s proposed phase out of free allowances in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) alongside the implementation of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. Axel Eggert also did not support proposed reforms to the EU ETS to rebase the emissions cap and strengthen the Market Stability Reserve, stressing the impacts of a unilateral and high carbon price and international competitiveness. However, Eggert also advocated for the RePowerEU and Gas and Hydrogen Decarbonisation package to increase renewable electricity and green hydrogen since the war in Ukraine “undermined the possible role of gas as a transition fuel.”
In a letter to the Chair of the EU Environment Council on 16th March, BusinessEurope advocated for more flexibility in the EU Emissions Trading System Reform to allow additional allowances to flow from the Market Stability Reserve and to increase the buffer for free allocation to cope with “current crises", weakening the ambition of the scheme. It also did not support the EU Commission’s proposal for a carbon border adjustment mechanism, as it proposed maintaining current free allocation of emissions allowances until at least 2030 and advocated for export rebates to be included.
According to an article on 1st March by Carbon Pulse, Confindustria reportedly called for a temporary suspension of the EU carbon market to ease pressure on industry due to high gas prices and the risk of a gas supply cut by Russia.
On 24th February 2022, a range of cross-sector EU industry associations, including the European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA), the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) and WindEurope, published a joint statement asking the EU Commission to assess the impact of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) on downstream industries. The associations appeared not to fully support the CBAM, suggesting that it may cause carbon leakage if unspecified “necessary steps” are not taken, and appeared to support the Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) but stressed that unilateral action may also cause carbon leakage.
On the 23rd February, heavy industry associations CEMBUREAU, Eurofer and Eurometaux published a joint statement in opposition to the EU Parliament's International Trade Committee’s (INTA) proposed amendments to the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.
The associations were unsupportive of the proposal to phase out the free allocation of emissions allowances in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and advocated for the inclusion of export rebates. They also supported the continuation of indirect cost compensation in the EU ETS as a form of carbon leakage protection. Following this, on 1st March, the INTA Committee voted down an opinion on the CBAM after MEPs from the European People’s Party voted against compromise amendments they had previously supported, according to Politico.
A joint statement energy intensive industry, including the International Federation of Industrial Energy Consumers (IFIEC), CEMBUREAU, Eurofer, Eurometaux and FuelsEurope, advocated against proposed reforms to the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) including the revision of the benchmarks, rebasing and the tightening of the Market Stability Reserve. The groups supported the free allocation of emissions allowances and measures to avoid the application of the cross-sectoral correction factor.
In a webinar with the rapporteur for the reform of the EU Emissions Trading System in the EU Parliament, Peter Liese, the Director General of BusinessEurope Markus J. Beyrer stated that the organization did not support the EU Commission’s proposed reforms to the EU ETS. In particular, he advocated against the reduction in free allocation of emissions allowances, and suggested that the proposal needs significant changes.
In its February Newsletter, BusinessEurope’s Director General Markus J. Beyrer advocated for changes to the Fit for 55 package, seeming to suggest it should balance ambition with competitiveness. A senior executive also was unsupportive of the EU Commission’s proposed reforms to the EU Emissions Trading System, supporting the continuation of carbon leakage protection measures such as free allocation until 2030 and beyond.
In a joint statement in January 2022, energy intensive industries including CEMBUREAU, Eurofer and Eurometaux did not support the proposed phase out of free allocation of emissions allowances in the EU Emission Trading System alongside a carbon border adjustment mechanism, advocating for maintenance of both measures til at least 2030, and supported the inclusion of an export rebate. They also did not support proposed EU ETS reforms to reduce the free allocation of emissions allowances before 2030.
In feedback to the EU Commission in November 2021, Confindustria did not appear to support EU ETS reform, not supporting rebasing and increase in MSR intake, reduction of free allowances before 2030, or conditionality of free allocation. Also advocating against possibility for Member States to withdraw indirect cost compensation.
In feedback to the EU Commission in November 2021, the Federation of German Industry appeared to not support numerous EU ETS reforms including advocating for sustained free allowances, advocating for free allocation for feeder flights, appearing not to support inclusion of maritime emissions in the ETS, and not supporting the use of the MSR to remove surplus allowances.
In a December 2021 report, the European Round Table for Industry appeared not to support reform of the EU ETS, not supporting reducing indirect cost compensation, and advocating for carbon leakage protection.
Speaking to the Financial Times, the Director General of Eurofer Axel Eggert did not support the EU Commission’s proposal for a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, and opposed the phase out of the free allocation of emissions allowances in the EU Emissions Trading System. He stated that “rather than CBAM greening the EU industry, it would shrink it.”
A position paper, coordinated by Verband der Chemischen Industrie’s platform Chemistry4Climate, which includes over 70 stakeholders in the chemical industry, supported coordinating energy and climate policy in Germany to achieve the 2045 climate neutrality target. However, the paper advocated for carbon leakage protection measures in the EU Emissions Trading System and Germany’s emissions trading scheme. It also supported exemptions and caps on renewable energy levies for the chemical industry, but was in favor of increasing the 2030 Renewable Energy Target in Germany.
CEMBUREAU published a joint position paper advocating against the removal of Mineralogical processes from the sectors exempted from the Energy Taxation Directive (ETD), and stressed the cost burden from aligning the ETD with the EU's climate goals. The position paper emphasized the costs for industry from the EU ETS increased carbon prices and the increasing of the level of GHG reductions mandated by 2030 to 61%.
Eurelectric, a European power sector trade group, stated support for reforms made to the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme within the EU’s Fit for 55 climate package, including higher ambition and an increase in the linear reduction factor (LRF), in a reaction paper on the policy. However, the association appeared to have a mixed position on the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism in its reaction paper on the policy. Despite, advocating for the removal of free allocations and the inclusion of the hydrogen sector's emissions in the scope of the policy, the groups appeared to state support for exceptions for exporters.
EnBW released a COP26 page on its corporate website discussing several elements of EU climate policy. The company stated support for the reforms made to the EU ETS, in particular suggesting waiting till after 2030 to integrate emissions trading systems for the buildings and road transport sectors.
However, the company appeared to advocate against increased ambition in the EU’s Energy Efficiency Directive, highlighting issues with the inclusion of new CHP high-efficiency criteria. Similarly, it supported a weakening of the EU’s Renewable Energy Directive, by suggesting the criteria for renewable hydrogen and bioenergy were too strong.
Finally, EnBW advocated for a greater role for fossil gas in EU policy. The company called for the weakening of the EU's taxonomy, particularly by including fossil gas for heating/cooling generation as a transitional activity. EnBW also suggested that the EU's Hydrogen and Gas Decarbonization Package applies too much pressure to transition away from fossil gas.
The Federation of German Industries (BDI) appears to have used support for a global carbon price to advocate for weaker EU regulations in a new position paper, arguing against a rapid phase-out of free emissions allowances in the EU ETS due to carbon leakage concerns. The position paper described the current EU CBAM proposal as vague but advocated for export rebates. The association also advocated for an expansion of fossil gas power in Germany alongside a doubling of renewable energy, on the basis that the fossil gas power stations should be “H2-ready”.
In a joint letter in October 2021, CEMBUREAU, Eurometaux and Eurofer supported the continuation of “effective” carbon leakage protection in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) in reaction to high energy prices in Europe. The joint letter also advocated for government promotion of Power Purchase Agreements and government incentives for industrial demand-response.
In a position paper published in October 2021, CEMBUREAU did not seem to support several proposed reforms to EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) mechanisms as it stressed the risk of carbon leakage. It also advocated for the expansion of ETS credits to CCUS and waste incineration.
In another position paper also published in October 2021, CEMBUREAU advocated against the reduction or removal of existing carbon leakage protection measures in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) until a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) is “fully watertight.” It also supported export rebates in the policy, but was in favor of including indirect emissions in the CBAM.
Eurometaux wrote a letter to EU Commission policymakers last week supporting full indirect cost compensation in the EU Emission Trading System and using the Market Stability Reserve to limit carbon prices to respond to the high costs of electricity in the EU. However, the association also suggested that a solution to the increasing electricity prices would be to ensure sufficient access to carbon-free electricity.
Various EU industry associations, including BusinessEurope, CEMBUREAU, IFIEC and Eurofer published positions on the EU’s Fit for 55 package last week, taking similar stances on several key policies. The groups advocated for the package to support industrial decarbonization with state support for breakthrough technologies. However, the groups did not support reforms to the EU ETS, some advocating for increased carbon leakage protection, and were negatively positioned on the CBAM and denounced its lack of export rebates. Eurofer did not support reforms to the RED to make the legislation binding. However, Cefic’s leadership team released notably positive, yet limited, statements on the package, supporting renewable energy legislation and the reform to the ETS that mandates that all revenues should contribute to emissions reductions.
The German Chemical Industry Association (VCI) has been actively and negatively lobbying various EU and German climate policy over recent weeks, particularly focusing on the reform of the German renewable electricity levy, advocating for it to be abolished, and not supporting Germany’s 2035 renewable energy target of 100%. The VCI did not support Germany’s accelerated coal phase out in a position paper in July 2021, and its President Christian Kullmann did not support reforms to the EU ETS to reduce free allocation of allowances and opposed replacing carbon leakage measures with a CBAM in July 2021.
Several power sector trade groups welcomed the EU’s Fit for 55 climate legislative package. Eurelectric launched a new Fit for 55 webpage, in which the association stated strong support for legislative measures, including EU ETS reforms, and revisions to the Renewable Energy Directive and Energy Taxation Directive. Similar supportive views were also shared from WindEurope and SolarPower Europe.
The table below lists the entities found to be most engaged with the policy. The entities are ranked by performance band. InfluenceMap tracks over 500 companies and 250 industry associations globally. Each entity name links to its full InfluenceMap profile, where the evidence of its engagement can be found.
| Influencemap Performance Band | Organization | Policy Position | Policy Engagement Intensity |
|---|
