BRUSSELS — The European Commission has unveiled a new plan to end the dominance of planet-heating fossil fuels in Europe’s economy — and replace them with trees. The so-called Bioeconomy Strategy, released Thursday, aims to replace fossil fuels in products like plastics, building materials, chemicals and fibers with organic materials that regrow, such as trees and crops. “The bioeconomy holds enormous opportunities for our society, economy and industry, for our farmers and foresters and small businesses and for our ecosystem,” EU environment chief Jessika Roswall said on Thursday, in front of a staged backdrop of bio-based products, including a bathtub made of wood composite and clothing from the H&M “Conscious” range. At the center of the strategy is carbon, the fundamental building block of a wide range of manufactured products, not just energy. Almost all plastic, for example, is made from carbon, and currently most of that carbon comes from oil and natural gas. But fossil fuels have two major drawbacks: they pollute the atmosphere with planet-warming CO2, and they are mostly imported from outside the EU, compromising the bloc’s strategic autonomy. The bioeconomy strategy aims to address both drawbacks by using locally produced or recycled carbon-rich biomass rather than imported fossil fuels. It proposes doing this by setting targets in relevant legislation, such as the EU’s packaging waste laws, helping bioeconomy startups access finance, harmonizing the regulatory regime and encouraging new biomass supply. The 23-page strategy is light on legislative or funding promises, mostly piggybacking on existing laws and funds. Still, it was hailed by industries that stand to gain from a bigger market for biological materials. “The forest industry welcomes the Commission’s growth-oriented approach for bioeconomy,” said Viveka Beckeman, director general of the Swedish Forest Industries Federation, stressing the need to “boost the use of biomass as a strategic resource that benefits not only green transition and our joint climate goals but the overall economic security.” HOW RENEWABLE IS IT? But environmentalists worry Brussels may be getting too chainsaw-happy. Trees don’t grow back at the drop of a hat and pressure on natural ecosystems is already unsustainably high. Scientific reports show that the amount of carbon stored in the EU’s forests and soils is decreasing, the bloc’s natural habitats are in poor condition and biodiversity is being lost at unprecedented rates. Protecting the bloc’s forests has also fallen out of fashion among EU lawmakers. The EU’s landmark anti-deforestation law is currently facing a second, year-long delay after a vote in the European Parliament this week. In October, the Parliament also voted to scrap a law to monitor the health of Europe’s forests to reduce paperwork. Environmentalists warn the bloc may simply not have enough biomass to meet the increasing demand. “Instead of setting a strategy that confronts Europe’s excessive demand for resources, the Commission clings to the illusion that we can simply replace our current consumption with bio-based inputs, overlooking the serious and immediate harm this will inflict on people and nature,” said Eva Bille, the European Environmental Bureau’s (EEB) circular economy head, in a statement. TOO WOOD TO BE TRUE Environmental groups want the Commission to prioritize the use of its biological resources in long-lasting products — like construction — rather than lower-value or short-lived uses, like single-use packaging or fuel. A first leak of the proposal, obtained by POLITICO, gave environmental groups hope. It celebrated new opportunities for sustainable bio-based materials while also warning that the “sources of primary biomass must be sustainable and the pressure on ecosystems must be considerably reduced” — to ensure those opportunities are taken up in the longer term. It also said the Commission would work on “disincentivising inefficient biomass combustion” and substituting it with other types of renewable energy. That rankled industry lobbies. Craig Winneker, communications director of ethanol lobby ePURE, complained that the document’s language “continues an unfortunate tradition in some quarters of the Commission of completely ignoring how sustainable biofuels are produced in Europe,” arguing that the energy is “actually a co-product along with food, feed, and biogenic CO2.” Now, those lines pledging to reduce environmental pressures and to disincentivize inefficient biomass combustion are gone. “Bioenergy continues to play a role in energy security, particularly where it uses residues, does not increase water and air pollution, and complements other renewables,” the final text reads. “This is a crucial omission, given that the EU’s unsustainable production and consumption are already massively overshooting ecological boundaries and putting people, nature and businesses at risk,” said the EEB. Delara Burkhardt, a member of the European Parliament with the center-left Socialists and Democrats, said it was “good that the strategy recognizes the need to source biomass sustainably,” but added the proposal did not address sufficiency. “Simply replacing fossil materials with bio-based ones at today’s levels of consumption risks increasing pressure on ecosystems. That shifts problems rather than solving them. We need to reduce overall resource use, not just switch inputs,” she said. Roswall declined to comment on the previous draft at Thursday’s press conference. “I think that we need to increase the resources that we have, and that is what this strategy is trying to do,” she said.

The European Commission will present a new plan to break the EU’s dependencies on China for critical raw materials, President Ursula von der Leyen announced on Saturday. The EU executive chief warned of “clear acceleration and escalation in the way interdependencies are leveraged and weaponized,” in a speech Saturday at the Berlin Global Dialogue. In recent months, China has tightened export controls over rare earths and other critical materials. The Asian powerhouse controls close to 70 percent of the world’s rare earths production and almost all of the refining. The EU’s response “must match the scale of the risks we face in this area,” von der Leyen said, adding that “we are focusing on finding solutions with our Chinese counterparts.” Brussels and Beijing are set to discuss the export controls issue during meetings next week. “But we are ready to use all of the instruments in our toolbox to respond if needed,” the head of the EU executive warned. This suggests that the Commission could make use of the EU’s most powerful trade weapon — the Anti-Coercion Instrument. This comes after French President Emmanuel Macron called on the EU executive to trigger the trade bazooka at a meeting of EU leaders on Thursday. His push has not met with much support from the other leaders around the table. NEW BREAKAWAY PLAN To break the EU’s over-reliance on China for critical materials imports and refining, the Commission will put forward a “RESourceEU plan,” von der Leyen said. She did not provide much detail about the plan, nor when it would be presented. But she said it would follow a similar model as the REPowerEU plan that the Commission introduced in 2022 to phase out Russian fossil fuels after Moscow’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. Under REPowerEU, the Commission proposed investing €225 billion to diversify energy supply routes, accelerate the deployment of renewables, improve grids interconnections across the bloc and boost the EU hydrogen market, among other measures. The EU executive also put forward a legislative proposal, which is currently under negotiations with the European Parliament and the Council, to ban Russian gas imports by the end of 2027. The aim of RESourceEU “is to secure access to alternative sources of critical raw materials in the short, medium and long term for our European industry,” von der Leyen explained. “It starts with the circular economy. Not for environmental reasons. But to exploit the critical raw materials already contained in products sold in Europe,” she said. She added that the EU “will speed up work on critical raw materials partnerships with countries like Ukraine and Australia, Canada, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Chile and Greenland.” “Europe cannot do things the same way anymore. We learned this lesson painfully with energy; we will not repeat it with critical materials,” von der Leyen said.

The leaders of France and Germany issued a joint call Friday for cuts to EU water pollution and chemical safety rules, in a bid to help European industry.   In a joint statement adopted at the 25th Franco-German Council of Ministers in Toulon, France, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz backed calls for a revision of REACH — the EU’s chemical legal framework — that’s focused on “reducing burdens” by “streamlining procedures.”  It comes months before the European Commission is due to present its long-delayed revision of REACH. The EU executive has signaled that the revision’s primary aim would be to simplify rules and speed up procedures for industry — to the dismay of civil society groups.  The two governments also pushed for an easing of financial constraints for Europe’s struggling chemicals industry. Merz and Macron pushed for an easing of recently-revised urban wastewater rules, which require cosmetics and pharmaceuticals companies to bear the bulk of the costs of cleaning up micropollutants in urban wastewater from the end of 2028. The Commission has already committed to producing an updated study on impacts of the extended producer responsibility scheme, following strong industry pushback.   The statement from the EU’s two biggest economies sends a strong message to Brussels to push ahead with its drive to cut red tape. “To unleash our companies’ full potential of growth and productivity it is … urgent to substantially ease the complexity and simplify the European Union’s regulatory environment,” the document states.  MATERIALS RECYCLING FOCUS  The two leaders repeated calls for better rules to facilitate the recycling and reuse of critical raw materials (CRM), as EU countries scramble to reduce dependency on Chinese minerals essential in defense and the energy transition.   Paris and Berlin committed to “work together on the design of the CRM aspects of the Circular Economy Act and coordinate their efforts” in the hope of “reaping the benefits” of the policy proposal, the draft reads.   The Circular Economy Act is expected in 2026 and aims to facilitate the transfer of materials waste between EU countries to boost recycling and reuse across European industries.   Back in 2023, the two EU countries had already pledged further cooperation on critical raw materials alongside Italy, including by setting up working groups for new extraction, processing and recycling projects.   Giorgio Leali contributed reporting.

Policymakers are overlooking a $370 billion market that will determine whether climate goals succeed or fail.  In the grand narrative of the clean energy transition, materials like lithium, rare earths and silicon dominate headlines. Yet the most strategically important materials for this transition may be hiding in plain sight, dismissed by policymakers as environmental villains rather than recognized as the enablers of human progress they truly are. The $370 billion blind spot Polyolefins — the family of materials that includes polyethylene and polypropylene — represent perhaps the greatest strategic oversight in contemporary clean industry policy Here is a reality check. Polyolefins represent a global market approaching $370 billion, growing at over 5 percent annually.1,2 They make up nearly half of all plastics consumed in Europe.3 By 2034, global production is expected to hit 371 million tons.4  Yet in the European Union’s Clean Industrial Deal — a €100 billion strategy for industrial competitiveness — polyolefins receive barely a mention.4 This represents a profound strategic miscalculation. While policymakers focus on securing access to exotic critical materials like lithium and cobalt, they overlook the fact that polyolefins are already critical materials— they simply happen to be abundant rather than scarce. In the infrastructure-intensive clean energy transition ahead, abundance is not a weakness; it is the ultimate strategic advantage. > While policymakers focus on securing access to exotic critical materials like > lithium and cobalt, they overlook the fact that polyolefins are already > critical materials. The EU’s REPowerEU plan calls for 1,236 GW of renewable capacity by 2030 — more than double today’s levels.4 Every offshore wind farm, solar array and electric grid connection depends on polyolefins. They insulate cables, protect components and form structural parts of turbines and solar panels. Every solar panel relies on polyolefin elastomers to protect its inner workings for up to 30 years, even in harsh weather.8 And every grid connection depends on polyethylene-insulated cables to carry electricity efficiently across long distances. 7 Multiply these requirements across thousands of installations, and the strategic importance of polyolefins becomes undeniable. Yet, currently, the policy framework treats these materials as afterthoughts, focusing instead on the relatively small quantities of rare elements in generators and inverters while ignoring the massive volumes of polyolefins that make the entire system possible. Beyond energy: the hidden dependencies The strategic importance of polyolefins extends far beyond energy infrastructure. As one example, modern medical systems depend fundamentally on polyolefin materials for syringes, IV bags, tubing and protective equipment. Global food security increasingly depends on polyolefin-based packaging systems that extend shelf life, reduce waste and enable distribution networks — feeding billions of people. Meanwhile, water infrastructure relies on polyethylene pipes engineered for 100-year lifespans. These applications are rarely considered alongside energy priorities — a dangerous fragmentation of strategic thinking. The waste challenge and a circular solution Let’s be clear, plastic waste is a real environmental challenge demanding urgent action. However, the solution is not abandoning these essential materials, it is building the infrastructure to capture their full value in circular systems. The fundamental error in current approaches is treating waste as a material problem rather than a systems problem. Europe currently captures only 23 percent of polyolefin waste for recycling, despite these materials representing nearly two-thirds of all post-consumer plastic waste.3 That’s not because the material can’t be recycled. The infrastructure to do so isn’t at the scale needed to collect, sort and recycle waste to meet future circular feedstock needs. Polyolefins are among the most recyclable materials we have. They can be mechanically recycled multiple times. And with chemical recycling, they can even be broken down to their molecular building blocks and rebuilt into virgin-quality material. That’s not just circularity, it’s circularity at scale. This matters because the EU’s target of 24 percent material circularity by 20305 is unlikely to be met without polyolefins. However, current frameworks treat them as obstacles rather than enablers of circularity. The economic transformation The transition represents an economic transformation, creating competitive advantages for regions implementing it effectively. A region processing 100,000 tons of polyolefin waste annually could capture €100-130 million in additional economic value while creating up to 1,000 jobs.6 > A region processing 100,000 tons of polyolefin waste annually could capture > €100-130 million in additional economic value while creating up to 1,000 jobs. At the end of the day, the clean energy transition must be affordable. Polyolefins help make that possible. They’re cheaper, lighter and longer lasting than many alternatives. Manufacturers with access to cost-effective recycled feedstocks can reduce input costs by 20-40 percent compared with virgin materials. Polyethylene pipes cost 60-70 percent less than steel alternatives while lasting twice as long.9 These aren’t marginal gains. They’re system-level efficiencies that make the difference between success and failure at scale. The strategic choice The real challenge isn’t technical, it’s institutional. Polyolefins sit at the crossroads of materials, environmental and industrial policy, yet these areas are treated as separate domains. There’s also a geopolitical angle. Unlike lithium or rare earths, polyolefins can be produced from diverse feedstocks — natural gas, biomass and even captured CO2 — enabling domestic production and supply chain resilience. This flexibility is a major asset, but current policies largely overlook it. > The path forward requires recognizing polyolefins as strategic assets rather > than environmental problems. The path forward requires recognizing polyolefins as strategic assets rather than environmental problems. This means including them in critical materials assessments — not because they are scarce, but because they are essential. It means coordinating research and development efforts rather than leaving them to fragmented market forces. Most importantly, it means recognizing that the clean energy transition will succeed or fail based on our ability to build infrastructure at unprecedented scale and speed. And that infrastructure will be built primarily from materials that combine performance, abundance, sustainability and cost-effectiveness in ways only polyolefins can provide. The choice facing policymakers is clear: continue treating polyolefins as problems to be managed or recognize them as strategic assets enabling the clean energy future. The regions that understand this integration first will shape the global economy for decades to come. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Grand View Research. (2024). Polyolefin Market Size, Share, Growth | Industry Report, 2030. Retrieved from https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/polyolefin-market 2. Fortune Business Insights. (2024). Polyolefin Market Size, Share & Growth | Global Report [2032]. Retrieved from https://www.fortunebusinessinsights.com/polyolefin-market-102373 3. Plastics Europe. (2025). Polyolefins. Retrieved from https://plasticseurope.org/plastics-explained/a-large-family/polyolefins-2/ 4. European Commission. (2025). Clean Industrial Deal. Retrieved from https://commission.europa.eu/topics/eu-competitiveness/clean-industrial-deal_en 5. European Commission. (2022). Circular economy action plan. Retrieved from https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/circular-economy-action-plan_en 6. Watkins, E., & Schweitzer, J.P. (2018). Moving towards a circular economy for plastics in the EU by 2030. Institute for European Environmental Policy. Retrieved from https://ieep.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Think-2030-A-circular-economy-for-plastics-by-2030-1. 7. Institute of Sustainable Studies (2025). EU Circular Economy Act aims to double circularity rate by 2030 EU Circular Economy Act – Institute of Sustainability Studies 8. López-Escalante, M.C., et al. (2016). Polyolefin as PID-resistant encapsulant material in PV modules. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells, 144, 691-699. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927024815005206 9. PE100+ Association. (2014). Polyolefin Sewer Pipes – 100 Year Lifetime Expectancy. Retrieved from https://www.pe100plus.com/PPCA/Polyolefin-Sewer-Pipes-100-Year-Lifetime-Expectancy-p1430.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Arms aloft, the president of the United Nations Environment Assembly triumphantly told delegates in Kenya: “Plastic pollution has grown into an epidemic. With today’s resolution, we are officially on track for a cure” in November 2023. Three years on, governments have not yet agreed on a global instrument to combat plastic waste, but the ambition and willingness remain. Success, however, is closely linked to systems change, which is urgently needed if we are to change the current trajectory.  Plastic remains closely intertwined with modern life. It keeps medicines and food safe and affordable, and it makes a vital contribution to the way we live, consume, work and travel. With it comes the issue of plastic waste. Yet, plastic waste is a solvable problem despite the scale and diversity of the challenge.   A future international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution could provide a coherent policy framework for industry, governments, civil society and financial institutions to carry out coordinated action. But that’s just the start. The key to success will be implementation of the instrument — deploying the solutions and funding the systems change needed to vastly improve waste management and increase recycling rates to drive a circular economy for plastics.  Prioritizing collaboration over compulsion  To achieve lasting change, the instrument must provide mechanisms to unlock financial support for waste management infrastructure and innovation. With an estimated $2.1 trillion needed by 2040 to eliminate plastic leakage into the environment, it is imperative that we look for innovative ways to mobilize capital from a diverse range of sources. Every dollar of capital committed to the right project can potentially catalyze ten times that amount from larger institutions.   > Every dollar of capital committed to the right project can potentially > catalyze ten times that amount from larger institutions. The Alliance to End Plastic Waste has direct experience of this. To provide just one example, we made a critical loan to a women-led social enterprise in Indonesia that allowed it to navigate equity requirements and to secure a $44.9 million Asian Development Bank loan to develop a bottle-to-bottle recycling plant in Java.  Our work on the ground has demonstrated the significant potential of coordinated action and a systems-based approach. For example, by providing our technical expertise and financial support to the ASASE Foundation — a Ghana-based social enterprise that supports women entrepreneurs in managing plastic waste collection and recycling businesses — the foundation successfully developed a functional system and became a recipient of the World Bank’s Plastic Waste Reduction-Linked Bond. The bond provides investors with a financial return linked to plastic and carbon credits expected to be generated, allowing the ASASE Foundation to benefit from financing that significantly exceeds our initial investment.  In developed countries, where we are more focused on addressing plastic waste through technology, a coordinated approach has also been pivotal to progress. HolyGrail 2.0, a digital watermarking technology that we support, is a good example of this. The imperceptible codes contained in the watermarks and printed on plastic packaging carry information about the material and can be detected by high resolution cameras in sorting facilities to increase sorting accuracy and improve the quality of material bound for recycling. The project has involved significant collaboration across the plastics value chain, involving technology providers, sorting facilities, brands and governments, enabling the technology to be successfully proven in a series of industrial trials in Europe.    Reliable and consistent definitions and reporting metrics, both heavily discussed at the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee sessions, are fundamental to the future instrument’s long-term and lasting impact. These will not only establish how much plastic is used, its purpose, the levels of waste and where it ends up, but also allow businesses and governments to develop the most impactful responses and introduce accountability.    > Reliable and consistent definitions and reporting metrics […] are fundamental > to the future instrument’s long-term and lasting impact. They will also guard against a cumbersome ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach that underestimates the complexity of the plastic waste challenge and puts progress at risk. Indeed, the flexibility of countries to design action plans that acknowledge and address specific national circumstances is vital, as is the need for the treaty to encourage greater collaboration between nations and actors across the entire plastics ecosystem.  Resetting the dial  As an organization that is focused on developing and implementing solutions, we have learnt a lot over the past five years. As the world looks for how to scale practical solutions to the challenges of plastic waste, the alliance is concentrating on larger-scale efforts in the Global South where underdeveloped waste management infrastructure represents an outsized opportunity for plastic waste reduction. These programs, aligned with countries’ national priorities, will begin in India, Indonesia and South Africa — each receiving at least $100 million in collective financing. The scale of these efforts and their ability to provide a practical model that other nations can replicate will help to move countries up the recycling maturity curve.  In parallel, we will be carrying out significant efforts to tackle systemic plastic waste issues in the Global North with a focus on film and flexible plastics. Commonly used in packaging and consumer goods, flexible packaging is notoriously difficult to recycle. This is a problem for every consumer packaging goods company, retailer and municipality. The key to success will be bringing together all the different stakeholders of this complex ecosystem around a cohesive strategy.  A time for action  A fully circular economy for plastics can only be achieved through systems change. We are optimistic that the delegates at the upcoming negotiations in Geneva will create a framework to catalyze collaborative progress, but this is just one piece of the puzzle. What countries really need is the ability to implement the right solutions and infrastructure, which is only possible with cooperation across the entire plastics ecosystem.   > What countries really need is the ability to implement the right solutions and > infrastructure, which is only possible with cooperation across the entire > plastics ecosystem. More details of the Alliance’s work can be found on our website. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

President Donald Trump released a second wave of letters sent to U.S. trading partners in Asia, Africa and Europe on Wednesday, continuing the administration’s roll-out of new tariff rates on imports from nearly every country in the world that are due to go into force Aug. 1. The Philippines is the largest, economically, of the six countries that received a letter Wednesday, sending $14.1 billion in goods to the U.S. last year. But that still pales in comparison to top U.S. trading partners like the European Union and China. The new tariff rates threatened in the letters Trump shared Wednesday are similar to those he announced on what the White House dubbed “Liberation Day” in early April, with small adjustments. The Philippines’ tariff rate, for instance, increased from 17 percent to 20 percent, while Moldova’s decreased from 31 percent to 25 percent and Iraq’s from 39 percent to 30 percent. The other recipients of the letters Trump shared Wednesday include Brunei, Algeria and Libya. In a Cabinet meeting Tuesday, Trump told the reporters his tariff-setting letters were in lieu of negotiating deals with many countries. “I just want you to know a letter means a deal. We can’t meet with 200 countries. … You have to do it in a more general way. “ The release of the latest batch of letters came after Trump signed an executive order Monday officially extending the deadline — again — for his “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly 60 trading partners, with rates ranging between 10 and 50 percent. Those duties briefly went into effect April 9 before the president suspended them until July 9. Monday’s order pushed that date to Aug. 1. Trump said Monday that the new deadline is “firm, but not 100 percent firm.” But the following day he vowed in a post on Truth Social that the Aug. 1 deadline is final. “TARIFFS WILL START BEING PAID ON AUGUST 1, 2025. There has been no change to this date, and there will be no change,” Trump wrote. “No extensions will be granted.” The latest update comes after Trump unveiled letters to 14 foreign governments Monday — 10 of them from Asia, triggering frustration and disbelief among recipients in the region. The Philippines, which received a letter on Wednesday, is another Southeast Asian country that is central to U.S. efforts to expand its economic influence and counter China. The 20 percent rate Trump is threatening to impose on exports from the Philippines is the same level Vietnam received as the result of a framework deal it struck with the Trump administration. Hanoi, which exported $136 billion worth of goods to the United States last year, initially faced a potential tariff of 46 percent, per Trump’s April announcement. The United States imported $7.5 billion worth of goods from Iraq last year; $2.4 billion from Algeria; $1.5 billion from Libya; $238 million from Brunei; and $136 million from Moldova.

BRUSSELS — As Beijing asserts itself amid global trade tensions, it is playing an ace it has kept up its sleeve for decades: control over the flow of minerals Western countries desperately need to fuel their green, digital and defense ambitions.  When U.S. President Donald Trump last week hailed a draft “framework” with Beijing to end their trade dispute, he singled out China’s export controls on seven rare earth elements — minerals deemed “critical” because they are used in the production of high-tech products such as magnets used in cars. “Our deal with China is done, subject to final approval with [Chinese] President Xi and me,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social. “Full magnets, and any necessary rare earths, will be supplied, up front, by China.” In return, the U.S. agreed to drop plans to revoke Chinese student visas. But the situation remains tense — at the G7 summit in Canada, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen accused China of “weaponizing” its leading position in producing and refining critical raw materials. At the summit, Western leaders were expected to pledge to implement a “G7 critical minerals action plan.” But their draft statement didn’t name-check China, instead obliquely mentioning “non-market policies and practices in the critical minerals sector.” “China has the upper hand in the short term,” said Philip Andrews-Speed, senior research fellow at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. Beijing’s export controls are “much more powerful than a tariff that Trump is putting on,” he added.  Those controls — initially imposed in April and framed as a response to Trump’s tariffs — sparked outrage and alarm among industry bosses and officials in the U.S. and across the EU. They apply to all countries, requiring companies to be granted a license for each shipment.  Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič earlier this month called the situation “alarming” for the European car industry as well as for industry more broadly. “Rare earths and permanent magnets are absolutely essential for industrial production,” he argued, with the magnets an essential component in everything from smartphones, TVs and computers to car and wind turbine engines and defense applications.  DECADES IN THE MAKING It’s a gambit Beijing has skillfully crafted for decades — and one that projected market developments are only set to buttress. China has a virtual monopoly in the sector, dominating the entire supply chain from the extraction of rare earths to their processing and the manufacture of permanent magnets.  According to the International Energy Agency, the country accounts for some 61 percent of rare earths extraction and 92 percent of refining. Moreover, it provides nearly 99 percent of the EU’s supply of the 17 rare earths, as well as about 98 percent of its rare earth permanent magnets. Global demand for these minerals is expected to increase by 50 to 60 percent by 2040. “Over the last few years, China has managed to build up this kind of defence system,” said a person from the Chinese business sector, granted anonymity to speak candidly. That gives Beijing “confidence” on the international stage, they added. Back in 1987, when the U.S. still dominated mining and the metals and minerals were of far less — and certainly not “critical” — importance, then-ruler Deng Xiaoping said: “The Middle East has oil, China has rare earths.” Deng, China’s most important figure from the late 1970s until his death, was at the time touring Baotou in the interior of Mongolia, China’s rare earth center.  Since then, Beijing has heavily invested in growing its monopoly and capitalizing on it.  In 2020 it overhauled its export control regime, passing an Export Control Law that largely emulates U.S. legislation. Four years later it took another step in building a domestic legal foundation by introducing export control regulations for so-called dual-use items that can be used for military and civilian purposes. It has also shown it doesn’t shy away from using these tools. In 2010 China briefly restricted rare earth exports to Japan; more recently it has imposed export restrictions on gallium, germanium and antimony (which are also deemed critical minerals) and banned the export of rare earth processing equipment.  While the person from the Chinese business sector quoted above argued that the export control system is a “tit-for-tat measure for the U.S.,” Beijing decided — in its latest move — to target all countries rather than just the U.S. That’s also leaving a mark on European industry. “All export licenses now have to be re-approved and there has been a temporary de facto export ban, meaning we are experiencing a backlog in the approval of new export licenses, which is still affecting supply chains today,” said Stefan Steinicke, a raw materials expert at the Federation of German Industries, a business lobby group. The controls not only give the Middle Kingdom more leverage in trade talks with the EU by sending a warning to Brussels not to team up with Washington — they also afford it valuable insight into rare earth supply chains. Earlier this month Beijing agreed to set up a “green channel” for European companies to speed up the approval of licenses. CATCH ME IF YOU CAN In response, industry bodies are pushing for the EU to accelerate its own efforts to diversify supply away from China, alongside pursuing diplomatic efforts. James Watson, director general at metals lobby Eurometaux, called on Brussels to “continue to invest in international cooperation,” to “support recycling efforts and the circular economy in the EU,” and to push “domestic production of certain metals in the EU.” But as keen as the EU is to play catch-up and slash its dependence on China for the minerals — as recently exemplified by its designation of several rare earth extraction and processing projects within and outside the bloc as “strategic” — it faces a mammoth task.  Rare earths aren’t as rare to find as their name suggests — they are, however, difficult to extract and refine in economically viable quantities, with all of the biggest reserves found outside the bloc’s borders.  “The outlook for substantially denting China’s dominance in the next years is pretty grim,” said Andrews-Speed, the Oxford researcher. “Twenty, 30 years ahead, anything can happen with technology and trade.”  With more minerals set to be used as levers in the future, China’s chokehold on rare earth minerals is only the beginning.  Its sway over rare earths is an “extreme case,” but China also dominates a vast array of other minerals such as lithium and cobalt and is “increasingly moving … downstream in the value chain,” said Edoardo Righetti, a researcher in the energy, resources and climate change unit at the Centre for European Policy Studies think tank.  Giorgio Leali and Koen Verhelst contributed to this report from Kananaskis, Canada. This story has been updated.

The availability of water, across households and industries, is the basis for peace, security and economic development. It is the source of all life, connects communities, transcends borders and is central to achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals from health to education and from gender equality to climate adaptation.  Since the Millennium Development Goals were introduced in 2000, millions of people have gained access to safe water. But this progress has stalled in recent years, with the climate crisis exacerbating water scarcity and extreme weather events jeopardizing water quality.  Women and girls are disproportionately affected by water scarcity. Traditional roles often assign them the tasks of water management. In rural areas across the globe, women spend an estimated 40 billion hours a year fetching water, as much as the entire working time spent in France. The lack of basic infrastructure in their households or close vicinity deprives them of educational and professional opportunities — and can expose them to violence.   > In rural areas across the globe, women spend an estimated 40 billion hours a > year fetching water, as much as the entire working time spent in France. Water is not only essential for life, but it is also a driving force for — and foundational to — economic growth. The provision of water supply, sanitation and wastewater services (WASH) generates substantial benefits for public health, the economy and the environment.  Evidence underscoring the significant economic return on investments in climate-resilient water and sanitation infrastructure is clear. According to the UN, every euro invested in water and sanitation projects generates four times the economic benefit, mainly in the form of reduced healthcare costs. OECD analysis indicates even stronger numbers, demonstrating that benefit-to-cost ratios can be as high as 7 to 1 for basic water and sanitation services in developing countries.   The majority — about three-quarters — of the total benefits are due to saved time, as people no longer need to travel long distances or wait in lines to access water. In terms of health benefits, enhancing water, sanitation and hygiene could prevent nearly one in ten cases of illness worldwide.  > enhancing water, sanitation and hygiene could prevent nearly one in ten cases > of illness worldwide. The EU’s leadership on the global water agenda has been most welcome, to support improved governance on addressing mutual water challenges.     The development of its first European Water Resilience Strategy comes at a crucial time, providing continuity between the UN Water Conferences, and when support toward SDG6 has been, in recent years, lagging.  Support and investments in WASH services should be prioritized in the international dimension of its strategy, for it to effectively address global water stress from a social and economic perspective.    To achieve this, WaterAid encourages the European Commission to:  * Align the objectives of the strategy with the EU’s 2028-2034 Multi-Annual Financial Framework, ensuring financing for the strategy’s delivery and its UN Water 2023 commitments.  * Through Team Europe Initiatives, increase cooperation among EU member states’ water resilience programs for complementarity, with a focus on climate-resilient water and sanitation services and infrastructure.  * Increase the share of the EU’s climate adaptation financing to climate-resilient water and sanitation infrastructure, in particular to the partner countries most vulnerable to fluctuating weather trends.  * Expand the Global Gateway areas of partnerships to include water resilience, by encouraging blended finance models that combine private and public funding while maintaining government leadership.  By prioritizing WASH investments in its global water resilience strategy, the EU can lead the charge in tackling water insecurity worldwide. As Jessika Roswall, Commissioner for environment, water resilience and a competitive circular economy, declared a few days ago from Poland: “Investing in water resilience is an investment in our future, and in the continued prosperity and security of Europe and beyond.” 

Europe is at a pivotal crossroads. Geopolitical instability and economic anxiety dominate the headlines and risk leading politicians into neglecting, or worse, actively dismantling, the continent’s climate leadership. This must not happen. Rather than turning their backs in a time of crisis, EU leaders should seek to accelerate climate action as a path to both security and prosperity.   In the face of rampant disinformation and constant undermining by vested interests in the fossil fuel industry, some now talk of diluting Europe’s climate goals to appease lobby groups and climate-skeptic politicians. This would be a big mistake. Climate ambition cannot be diminished or dismissed for short-term political goals or vested interests. It must be long-sighted, future-proofed and transformational. Europe must now, more than ever, double down and show that climate action delivers for people, particularly those who have lost faith that climate action can benefit their everyday lives.  A commitment to reducing net emissions by at least 90 percent by 2040, phasing out fossil fuels and a strong Clean Industrial Deal that puts cities at the center of its delivery is as important to the health and well-being of Europeans as a strong defense policy, trade relationships or social safety net. If done well, with workers and families’ needs at the center, it will be essential to building a resilient, competitive and secure Europe.   If Europe wants to win hearts, minds and markets, it must prove how the climate transition delivers not just long-term targets, but also tangible benefits — and this all begins in cities with good green jobs, security, healthier places to live, work and play and lower bills.  Europe cannot achieve industrial competitiveness without decarbonization, and it cannot meet its climate commitments without transforming industry. Cities are hubs of economic activity, innovation and workforce development that will determine whether Europe succeeds in achieving both goals.   City leaders understand how EU policies land on the ground. Empowered cities can turn high-level climate ambition into real economic transformation.  Today, Europe’s 18 C40 cities, representing approximately 48 million residents and contributing €3.51 trillion to the global economy, already support 2.3 million green jobs — 8 percent of their total employment — including over 1.3 million in sectors like clean energy, waste and transport. That number will only grow as key sectors decarbonize. With the right support, cities can accelerate the creation of good, green jobs and better access to them: jobs that are safe, secure and future-proof.   > Europe’s 18 C40 cities, representing approximately 48 million residents and > contributing €3.51 trillion to the global economy, already support 2.3 million > good, green jobs   The examples are everywhere: London’s Green Skills Academy is reskilling thousands for low-carbon careers. Rotterdam, where construction materials and buildings account for 25 percent of the city’s €1.3 billion annual spend, is using procurement to scale the circular economy, and through the Circular Materials Purchasing Strategy, strives for a 50 percent reduction in primary resource consumption by 2030. Considering that C40’s European cities have reduced per-capita emissions by 23 percent between 2015 and 2024, these are not just local initiatives — they are scalable models of the industrial transformation Europe needs.   Cities also control powerful economic levers. Strategic procurement can shape markets, drive clean-tech adoption and support local small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). For example, Oslo mandates zero-emission construction in public projects, and five years on, 77 percent of municipal building sites are emission-free, a great example of procurement driving industry-wide changes. With direct access to funding and streamlined EU instruments, cities can go further and faster, creating demand for clean innovation and building thriving local economies from the ground up.  Yet today, only 13 percent of the global workforce is ready for these future careers, and Europe faces urgent skills shortages in high-emitting sectors. Cities are ideally placed to bridge that gap. Madrid and London, for instance, are already training workers in retrofitting, heat pumps and renewables. Paris streamlines business registration to support start-ups, while Lisbon provides free ESG training to SMEs, ensuring they meet evolving climate standards. But this needs serious investment at the EU level and real collaboration. Without structured EU-city collaboration, industrial policies risk being disconnected from economic realities and workforce needs.  A just transition also means ensuring that new green jobs are high-quality, inclusive and secure. The green economy has the potential to create 30 percent more jobs compared with a business-as-usual approach, but only if inclusion and fairness are built in from the start so these jobs will go to those who need them the most. Cities, in partnership with unions, businesses and workers, can ensure that industrial shifts translate into widespread job opportunities, particularly for marginalized communities. Projects such as ‘Boss Ladies’ in Copenhagen are championing the inclusion of women in the building sector.   A Clean Industrial Deal that excludes cities will fall short. One that recognizes them as co-creators — alongside businesses, unions and communities — can build the industrial, climate and social transition Europe urgently needs in a time of crisis. Cities must be full partners, with direct access to the tools, funding and policy frameworks needed to drive this transition.   To translate ambition into action, the Clean Industrial Deal must include clear national frameworks for sustainable investment, early business engagement and market-shaping tools like grants, innovation hubs and procurement. With strong public-private partnerships and targeted investments in cities, we can create the conditions for green jobs, resilient industries and lower energy bills.  This unpredictable decade has presented a once-in-a-generation opportunity for Europe to create a future that works for everyone. Europe’s clean industrial strategy must prioritize city-led innovation, invest in workforce transformation and deliver for those who feel most left behind. That is how Europe can regain global leadership — not by pulling back, but by proving how climate action can be the surest path to economic resilience, energy independence and shared prosperity.  > This unpredictable decade has presented a once-in-a-generation opportunity for > Europe to create a future that works for everyone.  

BRUSSELS — Textiles, furniture, tires and mattresses will be subject to much stricter design standards to ensure they last longer, as the EU aims to stamp out wasteful consumption, the European Commission confirmed on Wednesday. Steel and aluminum will also be included in the first wave of regulations under the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR), along with a range of electronic goods from mobile phones to fridges and washing machines. The ESPR is intended to embed durability, repairability and recyclability into the design of certain products, with the goal of reducing waste, improving energy efficiency, and boosting the EU’s circular economy. The framework legislation came into law last July, but requires delegated acts before it applies to specific products. The 2025-2030 working plan, adopted Wednesday, lays out a roadmap for the ESPR for the next five years, and includes a working plan for the related Energy Labelling Regulation. Chemicals, plastics and footwear had originally been included in the first wave of proposed rules, but were withdrawn earlier this year. The adoption of the working plan marks “a pivotal moment” that will “deliver significant benefits for all Europeans, create opportunities for businesses and employment, and protect the planet through proven impact on reducing emissions,” EU industry chief Stéphane Séjourné said in a statement. “These ecodesign rules apply to all products placed on our single market, regardless of their origin-country, ensuring that each of them meets the European Union’s ambitious goals,” he said. The Commission said the particular rules would now be said through delegated acts “on a product-by-product basis or for groups of similar products.”