-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is BMW Group * The advertisement is linked to policy advocacy around the Draghi report, the Union of Skills, the EU Green Deal, the Life Cycle Assessment, the Critical Raw Materials Act, the Net-Zero Industry Act and the CBAM. More information here

Lime e-scooters have returned to Brussels — thanks to an anonymous company that offered to transfer its license to Lime. Approximately 6,000 scooters owned by American company Lime were booted off the streets last week when its license expired. The move followed a Belgian Council of State ruling that upheld the region’s previous decision to only allow Bolt, Dott and Voi to operate in Brussels. But another rental company offered to transfer its license to Lime in “a remarkable show of industry solidarity,” Lime, which has a partnership with Uber, announced in a statement on Tuesday. Brussels Mobility Minister Elke Van den Brandt said rental scooter numbers were limited for the safety and comfort of all road users. “It is ironic that Uber/Lime is using its army of lawyers to challenge a regulation expressly requested by the sector. Uber/Lime is now using all legal means, but the system can only work if everyone plays by the rules,” she told POLITICO. The gesture from the unnamed competitor allows Lime, one of the largest e-mobility operators in the world, to function in Brussels until December 5, when that license expires. “This allows us to secure the jobs of more than 100 people in Brussels for the next five months, offering stability to them and their families during a period of legal uncertainty,” said Lime’s regional director in Belgium and Northern Europe. The e-scooter saga dates back to 2023, when Brussels announced it would downsize the total number of vehicles in the city from 20,000 to 8,000, citing a lack of regulations and safety problems. It followed a complete ban on e-scooters in Paris and restrictions in other European cities including Vienna and Barcelona. After a tender process, Brussels chose Bolt, Dott and Voi in 2023 as the only permitted operators in the city. However, Lime contested the decision, citing a lack of transparency. The company is still awaiting a final verdict on its challenge. In February 2025, the Brussels authorities restricted the permitted operators to Bolt and Dott. Lime and Voi were allowed to operate until their license expired — July 3 for Lime, Aug. 23 for Voi. Lime is now also suing Brussels for not providing an interim solution, and claims the city could be liable for million of euros in compensation.

A German regional court on Monday convicted four former Volkswagen executives of fraud in connection with the long-running Dieselgate emissions scandal. The court sentenced two of the former executives to prison for several years, while the remaining two received suspended sentences. The ruling concludes a major trial that spanned nearly four years. The scandal known as Dieselgate first came to light in September 2015, when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency discovered that many diesel vehicles produced by German carmaker Volkswagen were equipped with illegal so-called defeat devices. These devices detected when a car was undergoing emissions testing and altered performance to meet environmental standards — while in real-world driving conditions, the cars emitted pollutants far above legal limits. In 2017, Volkswagen admitted to manipulating emissions data in the United States, sparking global backlash and triggering one of the biggest corporate scandals in automotive history. The fallout plunged the Wolfsburg-based carmaker into a deep crisis. In 2019, German prosecutors charged then-CEO Herbert Diess, Chair Hans Dieter Pötsch and former CEO Martin Winterkorn — who resigned shortly after the scandal broke in 2015 — with market manipulation related to the emissions deception. In 2020, a German court ended legal proceedings against Deiss and Pötsch as VW coughed up a €9 million fine over the scandal. Winterkorn was originally set to be part of this trial, but was removed for health reasons before it kicked off in September 2021. In his capacity as a witness and defendant, Winterkorn has continued to deny responsibility for the scandal. Since the scandal erupted, Volkswagen has faced a barrage of lawsuits and legal proceedings. In 2020, the company said that the crisis had cost it more than €30 billion in fines and settlements.

Amid concerns over sustainability fraud, the European biodiesel industry is pushing for regulatory reform. As Europe accelerates efforts to decarbonize transportation, biofuels have emerged as an important solution. These CO2-neutral fuels ― derived from sustainable feedstocks including crops and waste and residues ― are the leading contributor to renewable energy in the transport sector, providing an immediate and cost-effective substitute for conventional fuels. Dickon Posnett, president, EBB  “If Europe is serious about decarbonizing transport, we should be encouraging more biofuel use, not less.” Evidence suggests some importers, particularly from China and Southeast Asia, are circumventing sustainability standards, threatening to undermine both climate progress and fair competition. The European Biodiesel Board, representing EU producers, is raising concerns over these practices. As the European Commission prepares to review rules on biofuels verification, EBB President Dickon Posnett spoke with POLITICO Studio about the critical need for stronger controls and a more level playing field. From expanded audits to harmonized reporting, targeted changes can ensure the system remains effective for legitimate businesses doing their bit to bring down Europe’s transport emissions. POLITICO Studio: Just how bad is the biofuel fraud problem and the impact on European producers? Dickon Posnett: By far, the majority of biofuels on the EU market are legitimate and contribute to emission reduction. However, any level of fraud is a very big concern for the biodiesel industry in Europe. There are two main effects. First, by bringing in fraudulent biodiesel that’s not as sustainable as claimed, they are cheating the EU’s climate ambitions and not achieving the greenhouse gas reductions we should be. That’s unacceptable. But perhaps even more damaging is the longer-term effect of eroding trust and political confidence in our industry. Once that trust is eroded, the regulatory support for decarbonization drops away. That hits everyone, including producers abiding by the rules. Without those regulations, this market wouldn’t exist. Fraud also depresses prices to an unrealistic level that has become unsustainable for some European producers. > Rules applying to domestic producers should be enforced just as strictly > outside the EU. PS: What are the most critical reforms needed to combat fraud and ensure fair competition? DP: The basic principle is that rules applying to domestic producers should be enforced just as strictly outside the EU. For example, on-site audits should be systematic in production facilities abroad, as is common in Europe. Additionally, every producer should report the quantities, capacities and feedstock use of the biofuels they make. There are a lot of rules about what biofuels can count toward EU targets based on feedstock. Biofuels that offer the highest greenhouse gas savings are therefore more susceptible to fraud. Shining a light on how much biofuel you can realistically produce from these premium feedstocks will prevent trickery. Some EU countries already require this. We suggest it should apply to all biofuels on the EU market, regardless of where they’re produced. PS: Is it feasible to require non-EU producers to face the same strict verification rules as European companies? DP: Of course it is. All biofuels imported into the EU must have a Proof of Sustainability. It’s perfectly reasonable to require all fuels used in the EU to comply with EU sustainability rules. There is a verification system in place, but we need to clarify requirements on audits and access to information. This will enable authorities to oversee economic operators, voluntary schemes and certification bodies, both inside and outside EU jurisdiction. In fact, it can be done now. As the Commission reviews verification rules, we’ve already drafted detailed amendments that can be implemented immediately. PS: What key information should be added to the EU biofuels database to enable better fraud detection? DP: The Union Database for Biofuels is a major asset in fighting fraud. EBB has been instrumental in its inception — in fact, it’s something we have been striving for since 2012. It will fundamentally improve prevention once the system is fully functional, hopefully by early 2026. Via iStock Beyond the core data, we’ve suggested including additional information such as customs documents to clarify the origin of both the product and its sustainability documentation, enabling us to match them up. We’re also proposing links to national systems that record production capacities and feedstock use. Having all this data integrated would make anomalies easier to spot and investigate. Overall, a centralized database dramatically improves traceability and transparency. But it needs to be comprehensive and easily cross-referenced to fulfill its potential as a fraud-busting tool. PS: How can the revised rules boost European competitiveness and investment in domestic biofuels? DP: Confidence is key. The fraud issue has dented trust in biofuels and the price effects have made investors wary, at a time when major investment is needed to achieve our climate goals. Stronger verification will provide the credibility and predictability needed to drive long-term growth. The EU verification system relies on voluntary third-party verification based on criteria established by the legislator, and we do not want to change this. We build up on the current system and improve it. European producers are already subject to strict standards. Biofuels produced outside the EU and their supply chain are not subject to the same level of scrutiny. With a more level playing field, the commitment of EU producers to sustainability becomes an asset. Industries thrive when the rules are clear, consistent and rigorously enforced. Having a comprehensive solution in place is critical. A hard-to-navigate patchwork of caps and bans is not a viable solution. We’ve seen some calls to cap or cut biofuel use. A few member countries are looking at restrictions. That’s the opposite of what we need. If Europe is serious about decarbonizing transport, we should be encouraging more biofuel use, not less. Tackling fraud head-on removes a major barrier to doing that. It will take the brakes off investments and innovations that can push this industry forward. > A centralized database dramatically improves traceability and transparency. PS: Beyond verification, what other policy or market measures could help build a more resilient and sustainable European biofuels sector? DP: We need a comprehensive strategy. Of course, verification is the foundation because we have to shore up confidence. But we also need a stable, ambitious policy framework to drive demand. The more certainty there is about the market trajectory, the more investments will flow into expanding domestic production, developing new feedstocks and improving technologies. On the consumer side, education is important. We need people to understand the benefits and safety of biofuels. There’s still work to do in fighting misconceptions. Policymakers also have a role in incentivizing higher blends and ensuring vehicles that are fully compatible are also labeled as such. A renewable fuels infrastructure that’s convenient and accessible will boost uptake.