BRUSSELS — The European Union is “well on track” to reach its 2030 goal to cut 55 percent of planet-warming emissions, according to new findings released Wednesday.  The European Commission, the EU’s executive, based the conclusions on countries’ updated climate plans, which governments have been filing in recent months. The assessment — which shows the EU on track to cut 54 percent of emissions by 2030 — reflects progress for the bloc, which previously said it was at risk of falling short of its 2030 goal based on prior climate plans.  “When we play our cards and instruments in a smart manner, we deliver as a continent,” EU competition and climate chief Teresa Ribera told POLITICO ahead of the presentation. But the updated figure — which is measured against 1990 emission levels — also relies on countries delivering on fresh promises despite a green backlash and surging focus on defense spending. The Commission warned the EU not to rest on its laurels, noting in its analysis that the bloc isn’t doing enough to address energy poverty and support left behind in the green transition.  Governments are also falling short on a few targets, including a drive to create enough “carbon sinks” via healthy forest and land area to absorb the equivalent of 310 million tons of CO2 annually by the end of the decade. EU members are also behind on energy efficiency goals. The bloc is projected to reduce energy consumption by only 8.1 percent — short of an 11.7 percent target for 2030. Meanwhile, Belgium, Estonia and Poland have not submitted updated climate plans.  “This is the first time that the aggregated result is align[ed] with the Paris Agreement: That is good news,” said French centrist MEP Pascal Canfin, who was involved in negotiating the European Green Deal, referencing the landmark 2016 global climate accord.  Yet he cautioned that the findings also reveal “the weakness of our carbon sink as a consequence of the deteriorating state of our forest,” which “is worrying and needs to be addressed.” On its renewable power goals — which require installing energy sources like wind and solar — the EU is on pace to generate 41 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2030, just shy of the 42.5 percent goal.  The assessment also calls on countries to better prepare and adapt society for climate change’s inevitable ramifications. Only a handful of countries are addressing increasing water scarcity, for instance. And it bemoaned the work being done to end fossil fuel subsidies, saying “a list of existing fossil fuel subsidies, concrete timelines, and measures to phase them out are largely missing.” Reaching all of these goals will be expensive, the report conceded. The EU will need roughly €570 billion annually until 2030 to get there, the Commission said. But it noted that the bloc spent €430 billion on fossil fuel imports in 2023.  That cash “could be redirected to invest in the clean transition toward a more autonomous and secure EU,” it said. The EU will soon unveil a proposal to cut 90 percent of emissions by 2040 — although with some new “flexibilities” on how countries can get there. 

This article is part of the Europe’s looming water crisis special report. Aragon in northeastern Spain is a land of cornfields, peach farms and cherry orchards, where water was a precious commodity even before the advent of climate change. Now, as the threat of drought increases, the farmers of Aragon could find themselves competing with a powerful and extremely thirsty new neighbor: Big Tech. U.S. giants Microsoft and Amazon are investing billions to snatch up land in the increasingly water-stressed territory with the aim of building data centers, which typically use many millions of liters of water a year. The Spanish and regional governments are ecstatic. The country’s former digital minister celebrated Amazon’s decision to move in last year, boasting that Spain is “at the forefront of technology innovation and Artificial Intelligence in Europe.” It goes hand-in-hand with the European Union’s push to build more data centers on home soil: The European Commission wants to triple the EU’s data center capacity over the next five to seven years. But the locals aren’t buying what Big Tech is peddling. While the likes of Amazon promise more than €15 billion of investment, jobs, partnerships with local schools, community education programs, water infrastructure updates and “sustainability initiatives,” grassroots groups are springing up, wary of tech giants muscling in on their water resources. “In the end the farmer never wins,” said ‍Chechu Sánchez, an Aragonese farmer speaking at an event on data centers in Zaragoza, Aragon’s capital. “Whenever there is plunder by foreign capital, the farmer, the people of the municipalities — we never win, we don’t benefit at all.” Activist Aurora Gómez and her collective Tu Nube Seca Mi Río (which translates as “your cloud is drying up my river”) is heading up a campaign for a moratorium on all new data centers in Spain. Farmers, Europe’s most prolific water users, are among the most vulnerable, said Gómez, and — when they find out about the data centers’ water usage — the most incensed. “People from agriculture are really, really angry because they realize that it is so difficult for them, fighting in this context of the climate emergency,” she told POLITICO. Local mayors and councilors, too, are joining the resistance. This battle for water is playing out across Europe, from Ireland to France, complicating the bloc’s A.I. ambitions and posing a dilemma for EU policymakers. A THIRSTY BUSINESS Much has been written about A.I.’s energy demand and carbon footprint. But running a data center is also extremely thirsty work. In 2024, Europe’s data center industry consumed about 62 million cubic meters of water, which is equivalent to about 24,000 Olympic swimming pools.  As the sector grows, consumption is expected to reach 90 million cubic meters by 2030, according to the water sector lobby Water Europe.  That’s because data centers generate a lot of heat and need to be cooled down constantly. Water is “key basically to these data centers, whether it’s for AI or whether it is for every time we send an email message or WhatsApp message, or every time we do a search on the Internet,” said Kevin Grecksch, a lecturer in water science at the University of Oxford.  Europe is facing increasingly frequent droughts, which are destroying soil health, threatening crop yields, and complicating the transport of goods by river. Big Tech, meanwhile, has seen its water use soar. Microsoft’s water consumption nearly doubled in the three years from 2020 to 2023, nearing 8 million cubic meters, most of that going to cooling data centers. Amazon does not disclose its total water footprint. For companies, it makes sense to build data centers in water-stressed areas, as in other respects dry regions often provide optimal conditions to run a data centers, which need lots of land and low humidity levels, said Grecksch. Aragon “is an area where I travel with my students every year. We look at water issues and it’s a massive problem,” added Grecksch.  MORE DATA CENTERS But such environmental concerns aren’t slowing the global AI arms race. EU governments are determined to roll out more data centers across the continent as they attempt to catch up with AI leaders the U.S. and China. One internal document obtained by POLITICO summarizes countries’ proposed strategies to promote the development of “sustainable, geographically balanced infrastructure optimized for AI and data processing within the EU.” A draft of the European Commission’s upcoming Water Resilience Strategy, also obtained by POLITICO, notes that strategic sectors for the clean and digital transitions, including data centers, are consuming large amounts of water, and should be pressed to achieve maximum water savings in the future. The Commission “will rate their overall sustainability and propose minimum performance standards, including water consumption.” On the ground, residents remain skeptical. The local mayor for the Villamayor de Gállego municipality near Zaragoza, Aragon is trying to push back on the plans of fund manager Azora to build a data center in his town. “We believe this location should be reconsidered,” José Luis Montero told local media, adding that he hoped to met with the regional government to “clarify” the plans. “This is not democracy,” said Gómez, “when you realize that the data center has more power than the local mayor.” Grecksch, the Oxford University lecturer, said: “I would wish there would be a little bit more foresight and more integrative thinking around these things.” INNOVATING THE WATER STRESS AWAY When asked by POLITICO to explain what kind of measures the Spanish government has in place to protect local water resources as data centers continue to descend on the country, a spokesperson pointed to its Artificial Intelligence Strategy. It “contemplates the sustainable deployment of data centers” and pitches a “seal” to denote sustainable data centers that are “energy efficient, use renewable energies, minimize their impact on water consumption.” The regional Aragon government, too, denied that there will be any problems with water stress, arguing water consumption is “tightly controlled by the companies,” while the government “ensures that they are more efficient in terms of water and energy consumption.” “This is made possible by the increasingly advanced technology that is being implemented, often for the first time in the world, in Aragon.” Some also argue that prioritizing resource allocation to tech innovations like AI is essential because these technologies will help European companies be less resource intensive in the future. Microsoft believes AI will help manage water and energy efficiency, providing net improvements to both, the company’s global sustainability policy lead Michelle Patron told POLITICO. In Spain, where Microsoft has four data centers, the company is also using AI. “to look at the local utilities, the pipe [infrastructure] to identify where there are leaks, to be able to enable less water loss,” she said. Others point to the breakthroughs in making data centers more water efficient. “I see technology improvements moving from in the data center [industry], moving from air cooling of the GPUs to liquid cooling, which will further improve by 30 to 40 percent the usage of cooling and the usage of water,” said Georgios Stassis, chairman and chief executive officer of PPC, a major utilities company operating in South East Europe.  Microsoft has also flaunted a new data center design that would recycle water through a “closed loop.” GREENWASHING RISKS Amid rising concerns over water stress, tech companies are eager to promote their efforts in innovating cooling systems to use less water, but also boast about compensating for that consumption in other ways.  “The majority of our water usage comes from our data centers,” Microsoft’s Patron told POLITICO, adding that the company plans to be water positive by 2030  which means that they “put more water into the local basins where we operate than we withdraw,” she added. Amazon’s cloud provider service, Amazon Web Services (AWS) has the same target, while Google has pledged to “replenish 120 percent of the freshwater volume we consume, on average, across our offices and data centers by 2030.” Activist Gómez claims that’s all greenwashing. “Amazon, they made a huge campaign [saying] we are going to be water positive, we are going to be so efficient and so on,” she said. “But at the same time, they are asking for 48 percent more water in Spain to expand their data centers.” Oxford University’s Grecksch says it’s “completely wrong” and “a misunderstanding of the basic science [to say] that you can replenish more water that you took out, that’s just physically impossible.”  Water moves on a continuous and natural cycle known as the hydrologic cycle, transitioning between physical stages: solid, liquid and gas.  “There is a limited amount of water available,” says Grecksch. “This is like saying we created gold.”

WASHINGTON — Donald Trump wants to beat China in just about every market — but he’d rather take the loss on clean energy. In his second term, the U.S. president has returned more committed than ever to promoting fossil fuels and crushing clean, renewable power sources that don’t burn the planet. Trump’s view is that China has already won the clean energy race, due in part to practices such as forced labor, massive subsidies and intellectual property theft. Trying to compete with Beijing would just make the United States the loser. The president wants the U.S. to focus on energy sources it already dominates, including oil, natural gas and coal. That represents a complete break from Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, who sought to go toe-to-toe with China in a race for clean energy dominance. Not only that, it contrasts with Trump’s first term, when the White House took an all-you-can-eat-buffet approach to energy and clean power.  The new stance could present America’s competitors with a multibillion-dollar opportunity. And in Washington, it’s opening up a fundamental divide within Trump’s Republican Party as it works through spending talks. “The second administration is really not about taking half-measures,” said Daniel Simmons, who ran the Energy Department’s energy efficiency and renewable energy office in Trump’s first term. “To all appearances, it is not a battlefield that they care about.” GOP FISSURES Not all Republicans are ready to let China, Europe and other nations win the clean energy race by default.  That intra-GOP division is boiling underneath one of the biggest political controversies in Washington right now: the complicated passage of Trump’s “big, beautiful” tax and spending megabill. Hard-line conservatives are demanding that the bill include a wholesale gutting of hundreds of billions of dollars in Biden-era clean energy tax incentives, which were aimed at juicing U.S. competitors to Chinese and European manufacturers.  That push threatens to alienate moderate Republicans whose communities stand to gain from factories and other projects enabled by the tax breaks — and who had hoped they could win Trump to their side by framing the incentives as the key to edging out China. The message they’ve gotten instead: When it comes to winning on clean energy, Trump just isn’t interested. Trump’s Energy Department confirmed as much in a statement to POLITICO that focused largely on oil — an energy source that the U.S. produces more of than any other country. Trump officials have argued that putting any money into green technology boosts China, which dominates major slices of the global battery, electric vehicle, solar and wind energy supply chains. | Olivier Matthys/EFE via EPA “Thanks to President Trump, America is leading the way in lowering costs by removing red tape and unleashing affordable, abundant, and reliable American energy,” the department said Friday. “As the world’s largest oil producer, the United States welcomes a secure and stable global supply of oil that promotes economic prosperity at home and promotes peace and stability around the world.” The White House referred questions about its clean energy worldview to the Energy Department. DRILLING TO BEAT CHINA? Trump officials have argued that putting any money into green technology boosts China, which dominates major slices of the global battery, electric vehicle, solar and wind energy supply chains.  Trump’s zero-sum assessment of the clean energy market has forged an energy strategy even more reliant on fossil fuels than he pursued in his first term. Following this approach would jeopardize a U.S. clean energy manufacturing industry that is just beginning to sprout — and, green tech advocates say, all but ensure that China will command the global sector. That vision is coming to a head in Congress, where Republicans are working to slash the clean energy incentives created by Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act. While not proposing to erase the tax breaks altogether, GOP lawmakers in the House have floated tight restrictions outlawing Chinese sourcing in the supply chains of energy projects. Those limits would render most of the tax credits unusable for projects that have not yet been built, effectively squelching the nascent U.S. clean manufacturing sector. The changes remain in limbo as part of the broader budget reconciliation bill, the legislative vehicle for green-lighting Republicans’ and Trump’s policy agenda that can pass with a simple majority vote in Congress. House Republicans are trying to forge a compromise among fiscal conservatives and blocs of GOP lawmakers that want to preserve clean energy credits and raise tax deduction caps for state and local taxes.    Trump’s presence looms over the negotiations. He has repeatedly vowed to end Biden’s programs — the nation’s largest-ever investment in clean energy and fighting climate change — while labeling them the “green new scam.” Cutting many of those policies, such as consumer credits to purchase electric vehicles, would fund a small portion of his administration’s other priorities, including trillions of dollars in tax breaks. “They don’t see climate change as a problem,” George David Banks, who ran Trump’s first-term climate portfolio, said of the current team’s outlook. He added: “They don’t want to essentially create a jobs program for China.” Defenders of the IRA tax credits say wiping them out would wipe out an American jobs program, one whose benefits would flow to heavily Republican communities as well as Democratic strongholds. Private sector manufacturing projects seizing on Biden’s incentives had been projected to create roughly 160,000 jobs, according to analyses published late last year. Overturning the subsidies would eliminate a potential U.S. export market for solar modules and batteries that could be worth as much as $50 billion by 2030, according to another analysis by researchers at Johns Hopkins University. Other countries would fill an $80 billion investment gap left by shuttered U.S. solar facilities, electric vehicle shops and battery gigafactories.  Many countries stand to benefit from the U.S. vacating the space, the Johns Hopkins researchers wrote. But governments outside the U.S. would face risks as well: Those that fail to encourage cleantech investments at home may fall even further behind China, which would likely benefit in every industrial category.  The researchers also raised the prospect of a transition of intellectual property to China. As U.S. businesses shuttered, they said, foreign companies could purchase their technical knowledge at fire-sale prices. Donald Trump’s barrage of tariffs against nations worldwide would limit some of the advantage countries could gain by selling clean technology to the U.S., said Tim Sahay, one of the authors of the study. | Jim Lo Scalzo/EFE via EPA Trump’s barrage of tariffs against nations worldwide would limit some of the advantage countries could gain by selling clean technology to the U.S., said Tim Sahay, one of the authors of the study. Still, he said, the upshot from Trump’s policies was clear — including for European allies that had erupted in fury over Biden’s use of protectionist tax breaks to move clean energy manufacturing to the United States.  “China would be the biggest winner, but not the only winner … The rest of the world wins,” Sahay said. It’s “basically the IRA in reverse. When the IRA passed, foreigners were like, ‘Oh my God, Americans are stealing our jobs and investments because of their superior fiscal space.’ Well, now the IRA is gone, then foreigners are like, ‘Well, more for us.’” Some conservative clean energy supporters still hope they can persuade Trump to back tax credits that have yielded solar manufacturing and battery-making plants across Republican strongholds in the Sun Belt and Rust Belt.  Those advocates criticized the IRA for being too lenient in allowing Chinese content into the supply chains of products receiving the tax incentives. But they believe Trump would bless tweaks that tighten foreign content requirements to retain incentives that support blue-collar jobs in the U.S. “There’s an enormous and rapidly growing market for low-carbon technologies around the world, and right now the U.S. is a secondary player,” said Greg Bertelsen, CEO of the Cleaner Economy Coalition, a business advocacy organization that promotes low-carbon manufacturing at the state and federal level. “There’s a recognition within the Trump administration that we need to be competing in these markets for these technologies.” TRUMPISM ON THE ROAD Trump officials have been making a very different case. Last month, Energy Secretary Chris Wright flew to Eastern Europe to propose that ministers from Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary and other regional governments join “Team Energy Freedom,” urging them to embrace oil, gas and nuclear energy and reject what he framed as climate dogma.  “Climate alarmism has reduced freedom, prosperity and national security,” he said, adding — in language that carried a particular charge addressed to former communist bloc countries — that it may be a Trojan horse to “grow centralization and re-establish top-down control.” Wright’s subordinate, Tommy Joyce, was even more blunt in telling a gathering of 60 governments in London last month that the pursuit of climate policy was a gift to Beijing. “There are no wind turbines without concessions to or coercion from China,” he said. People outside the MAGA world also acknowledge the dominance China has built over decades of developing its clean energy supply chains.  In solar, batteries, electric vehicles and to some extent wind power, “China started early. China is the biggest,” said Li Shuo, director of the China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute. In solar, batteries, electric vehicles and to some extent wind power, “China started early. China is the biggest,” said Li Shuo, director of the China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute. | Wu Hao/EFE via EPA These are the core clean technologies the world is going to need en masse in the coming decades as it shifts toward a cleaner energy system. And in all of these fields, Li said, “the Chinese lead is significant and irreversible.”  In the past months, for example, two rival Chinese companies — BYD and CATL — made potentially game-changing claims in announcing they had developed electric vehicle batteries that could get 400 or even 500 kilometers (roughly 250 to 310 miles) from just a five-minute charge. By contrast, Tesla boasts that its “superchargers” can give drivers around 320 kilometers in about 15 minutes.  Republican proposals would also hamstring some clean energy technologies that the Trump administration has touted, such as next-generation nuclear, fusion and geothermal power, according to an analysis by the research firm Rhodium Group. The proposed tweaks to subsidies would essentially eliminate the long-term price signals that early-stage technologies covet, eroding their business case. Beyond that, the administration’s massive spending and job cuts across federal agencies and science research threaten to constrain U.S. innovation.  Rather than focusing on clean energy technologies such as batteries and EVs, the Trump administration has so far made critical minerals the forefront of its strategy to combat China, said a State Department official who was granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak with the media. Those efforts focus on extracting and processing raw materials rather than supporting value-added industries like battery-making or electric vehicles.  The official said the administration’s opposition to subsidies for green technology doesn’t mean it opposes the technologies writ large — apart from wind energy, which Trump has made clear for years that he despises. AMERICA ALONE Apart from the current U.S. government, no other major power has determined that China’s dominance means that action to fight climate change needs to take a back seat. The Biden administration’s argument, one still being pursued in Europe, was that a targeted industrial strategy could claw back some share of those industries. Those strategies have often come cloaked in pledges to make this country or that country a “clean energy superpower.” But Li said there was a danger of “making too big of a promise. A promise that cannot be entirely fulfilled.”  Li said he had long feared that a U.S. president would someday ask: If China’s lead is so big, “then why do we play the game?” That is the conclusion being drawn in the White House during Trump’s second term. And it helps explain why the administration has broken so radically with past U.S. policy, shut down government funding for future projects, kneecapped agencies that deal with clean energy, and reversed regulations. “What has surprised me is the extent to which the administration hasn’t just pursued an agenda but has thrown sand in the gears of the parts of the agenda that they don’t agree with,” said Thom Woodroofe, a former Australian diplomat in Washington who now works at the Smart Energy Council. “Even when it costs American jobs.” Zack Colman reported from Washington and Karl Mathiesen reported from London.

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.”

BRUSSELS — The European Commission is considering revising landmark energy legislation as part of its drive to ease requirements on the EU’s struggling businesses, according to several people familiar with the plans. The EU executive has vowed to slash red tape for its ailing firms, which are facing stiff competition from global rivals along with a flagging economic outlook and a looming threat of tariffs from the U.S. Last month Brussels proposed cuts to green reporting rules and exemptions for most firms from an upcoming carbon border levy. Now the Commission is also considering targeting green energy policies. In particular, the EU executive has set its sights on rules meant to slash energy consumption, two of the people said. It is also exploring whether to reopen laws on renewable energy and green renovations.  The new push comes amid growing criticism of Brussels’ European Green Deal, which aims to make the bloc climate-neutral by 2050. Businesses and right-leaning politicians argue the package is too burdensome, given other pressing economic concerns. Under fire in particular is the EU’s revamped Energy Efficiency Directive, which requires that the bloc slash 11.7 percent of its energy consumption by 2030 (compared to 2020). BusinessEurope, the bloc’s biggest industry association, has argued that requirements under the law to conduct energy efficiency “audits” resemble existing obligations for companies that must pay for carbon emissions, increasing unnecessary administrative work for businesses. The double reporting is “stupid,” said Isabelle Chaput, secretary general at IFIEC, a lobbying group representing energy-intensive industries. The energy efficiency target should simply be made voluntary, she added. The law needs a “reality check,” Chaput said.  EFFICIENCY OVERDRIVE The private sector complaints aren’t universally shared. Lawmakers who helped forge the fiercely fought-over legislation are warning against reopening it. They’re concerned not just about the energy efficiency law but also about a potential revamp of the EU’s Renewable Energy Directive, which requires that 42.5 percent of energy consumed in the bloc come from renewable sources by 2030. Additionally, they’re wary that the Commission is scrutinizing the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, which requires countries to make homes 16 percent more energy efficient by 2030. Reopening the buildings directive would be “a clear win for [Russian President Vladimir] Putin,” said Ciarán Cuffe, a former Green MEP who helmed the file through the European Parliament. The law “will improve the EU’s energy security and is a hugely important part of our climate ambition,” he added. Nicolás González Casares said he worries revising the rules will imperil “the deployment of renewables” across the EU. | Martin Bertrand and Hans Lucas/Getty Images Nicolás González Casares, a center-left MEP who led work on the renewables law for the Socialists and Democrats group, said he worries revising the rules will imperil “the deployment of renewables” across the EU.  EU countries, too, have mixed views on reviving the sensitive discussions. “Scrapping some reporting and administrative burden would be good,” said one EU diplomat, who was granted anonymity to speak freely. “The level of detail that needs to be reported is sometimes insane.” But others disagree. “I would be very concerned,” about efforts to reopen the texts, said a second EU diplomat. Since capitals are “in the middle” of transposing them into national law, doing so “would be extremely counterproductive,” the person added, slowing their enforcement. Beyond logistical difficulties, overhauling the laws could make it “more difficult” to reach the EU’s target of slashing emissions by 55 percent this decade, said Mats Engström, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations.  Given the larger number of right-leaning MEPs in the Parliament who oppose stringent climate legislation, he added, “there are big political risks” involved, including ultimately “a significant weakening that goes further than what the Commission proposes” once it reaches lawmakers. That also extends to EU country negotiators. “Let’s address this wisely,” warned a third EU diplomat. “I’m just afraid we’ll get this shoved down our throats,” the diplomat argued, creating “an impossible discussion” among capitals. Brussels has set a provisional date of May 21 to present its proposed revisions, one of the people familiar with the matter said. The Commission declined to comment on its plans.

At a time when the European Union is striving to increase its competitiveness through its Competitiveness Compass, the new ecodesign rules for solid fuel local space heaters (i.e. your wood stove) may do the opposite. The European Commission is rolling out its ecodesign requirements with the aim of achieving resource and energy efficiency while boosting the circular use of materials that help decarbonization, competitiveness and economic security. Manufacturers underline that they are keen to help achieve that objective, but what’s currently on the table is not fit for purpose.   European manufacturers warn that the draft proposal published on Jan. 24, 2025 will not only undermine European competitiveness, but also destroy a European industry that accounts for 11,000 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and around 200,000 jobs. Raymond Zantinge, president of the European Committee of Manufacturers of Domestic Heating and Cooking Appliances (CEFACD), said: “We are deeply committed and engaged in producing cleaner and greener ways to heat homes. However, innovation takes time. Setting unachievable standards to be met in unrealistic timelines derails our innovation journey. The draft text creates more uncertainty rather than achieving better outcomes. This is especially the case when new testing standards for products being rolled out are not scientifically backed. In fact, we can end up with products that are worse. Also, having these new standards come into force on Jul. 1, 2027 places an unreasonable burden on manufacturers, especially SMEs, with insufficient time for retesting, recertification and necessary product re-design. It feels very much like ideology getting in the way of science and, frankly, it risks jobs, growth and worse environmental outcomes.” The proposed requirements, in their current form, use widely untested and unreliable standards, that are not developed through the scientifically backed normalisation route approach through the European standardisation system (CEN). > It feels very much like ideology getting in the way of science and, frankly, > it risks jobs, growth and worse environmental outcomes.” > > Raymond Zantinge, president of CEFACD Manufacturers have underlined that a better roll-out would include reasonable testing standards as well as a more realistic period of five to seven years. This would allow for sufficient preparation and adaptation, aligning better with the industry’s capabilities and the goals of the European Competitiveness Compass. With over 41 million Europeans already struggling to keep their homes adequately warm, this roll-out plan leaves a large part of Europeans at risk of greater energy poverty. Many of us rely on local space heaters, particularly in recent months with the cold weather in Europe. This locally sourced technology is used to improve our everyday lives, providing comfort and essential heating while supporting Europe’s energy sovereignty. As we transition to renewable energy in Europe, energy prices remain high, and domestic stoves offer a stable and manageable low-carbon heat source that reduces the strain on electric grids and gas networks. These stoves are particularly vital for vulnerable rural populations, providing cost-effective means to heat homes amid the ongoing challenges of energy security and affordability. > These stoves are particularly vital for vulnerable rural populations, > providing cost-effective means to heat homes amid the ongoing challenges of > energy security and affordability. Maintaining woodland sustainably produces fuel and promotes rural economies and supports responsible woodland management. The decline of this sector would not only impact energy affordability, but also our maintenance of rural woodlands and the renewable energy mix. Biomass, including wood, is the main source of renewable energy in the EU and there are sustainabity requirements for the wood and wood pellets used for heating homes. By eradicating solid fuel local space heaters, the Commission risks undermining this portion of our renewable energy mix, which is an essential heating source for some Europeans. Manufacturers also warn against the decision-making process. CEFACD’s secretary-general, James Verlaque, said:“We are really concerned that the requirements propose elements based on an impact assessment that has not been made available to us. It is important that the Commission is transparent on the impact of its proposal as, based on our assessment, this legislation is not fit for purpose. Legislation with such a strong impact on the European economy deserves involvement from the European Council and the European Parliament. Bringing in standards that have such huge ramifications with one institution acting alone does not allow for the necessary democratic oversight that this deserves.” The industry’s ability to innovate and improve to produce ever-cleaner burning, efficient stoves has been demonstrated through significant advancements made in products since the first Ecodesign Directive came into force. This included  increases in the efficiency of products so that they require less fuel to generate heat. It has also included improvements to the combustion technology of appliances, reducing emissions. Furthermore, the industry has made progress on transitioning toward a circular economy model, with products that now mainly consist of almost completely recyclable materials and have a long life span to reduce waste. The industry is speaking up in an unprecedented fashion to ensure that this important European market is not destroyed to the competitive advantage of international players bringing  product to the EU. > The EU’s pursuit of environmental ambition must be balanced with needing to > protect jobs, support SMEs and ensure energy affordability. The EU’s pursuit of environmental ambition must be balanced with needing to protect jobs, support SMEs and ensure energy affordability. The proposed Ecodesign Regulation , in its current form, risk undermining these objectives by imposing unrealistic standards and unvalidated testing methods on the solid fuel local space heaters sector. By adopting a more balanced and scientifically grounded approach, the EU can achieve its goals of decarbonisation and competitiveness without sacrificing the economic sustainability of a vital industry. Transparent and inclusive policymaking, informed by thorough impact assessments, is essential to navigate this complex landscape and ensure a prosperous and sustainable future for all European citizens.

LONDON — It is, says one former U.K. energy minister, “the biggest problem” blocking the country’s efforts to go green. How do you kit out the U.K.’s millions of old, cold, drafty homes with better insulation and cleaner heating systems? After years in government grappling with the same issue, Britain’s Conservatives are now going on the attack — seizing on what they believe is a major political blindspot for Labour and accusing their opponents of a real lack of ambition as winter approaches. It seems like an open goal at a time when Labour already faces voter fury for cutting social security payments meant to help pensioners cope with heating costs — but the problem runs far deeper, and implicates the Tories too. One of the energy sector’s most influential figures has already fired her own warning shot at new ministers. “We are very worried, and thinking about or interested in heat — and I haven’t heard much from the new Labour government about heat at all,” Emma Pinchbeck, Energy UK boss and incoming chief executive of the Climate Change Committee, which scrutinizes government policy, said last month. “They haven’t said anything on it,” said Martin Callanan, a Conservative member of the House of Lords and, until July, an energy minister. “How you get to grips with home heating and small business heating, basically gas heating in the U.K., is the biggest problem [the government] face.” WARNING SHOTS The stakes couldn’t be higher if Britain is serious about meeting its climate targets — and weaning itself off foreign energy imports. Replacing old boilers with heat pumps, and cladding walls to stop heat escaping, are a “key component” of the U.K.’s drive to slash carbon emissions, government watchdog the National Audit Office said earlier this year.  Experts say Britain needs to make progress on the issue to protect U.K. energy security, too. “Insulation is now crucial to our energy independence, as we have to reduce gas demand to stop imports rising as the North Sea continues its inevitable decline,” said Jess Ralston, head of energy at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit think tank. Yet the new government has a real job on its hands — and earlier attempts to drastically improve Britain’s drafty homes hardly bode well for the future. During the Tories’ decade-and-a-half in power, they too struggled with home heating policies. They’ve been fighting about that failure in public since they left office. The last government delayed a scheme meant to encourage manufacturers to phase out dirty gas boilers — the clean homes market mechanism (CHMM) — because it was something “Claire [Coutinho, the energy secretary] and Number 10 refused to get to grips with,” Callanan claimed. (Coutinho fired back in response that colleagues in her department backing the CHMM “couldn’t make the case for their position.”) Claire Coutinho did hike grants for homes to get them to switch to heat pumps, a move Labour’s new ministers copied this month. | Christopher Furlong/Getty Images Coutinho did hike grants for homes to get them to switch to heat pumps, a move Labour’s new ministers copied this month. The number of households using the scheme has been ticking up — but installations will need to grow eleven-fold by 2028 to hit government targets, according to the 2024 National Audit Office report. Meanwhile, the Conservatives’ major cladding program, the £1 billion Great British Insulation Scheme, is so far off track that analysts reckon it would take just shy of 150 years to hit its target. “We do support moves to insulate homes better. It’s absolutely one of the easiest ways that we can actually reduce our carbon emissions, ensure that we’re not wasting heat being generated,” said Andrew Bowie, now a shadow energy minister after July’s election ousted the Tories. He insisted the previous government made “great strides” in improving home insulation — but could have gone “further and faster.” “It’s something that we struggled with throughout our time in government,” admitted Callanan. There simply weren’t enough workers trained to fit insulation, he said. Other shadow ministers identified problems communicating the schemes to the public to encourage uptake, too. “It basically came down to the fact that people didn’t really understand” the help available, said MP Mark Garnier. OVER TO LABOUR Now all of this is Labour’s problem — and experts already fear a lack of ambition. The new government has already introduced “some helpful tweaks to existing schemes” for subsidizing heat pumps and insulation, Ralston said. But she warned: “There’s some doubt that this will be enough, and there are still policy options on the table.” Labour has moved quickly on a series of headline-grabbing energy policy decisions, from green-lighting vast solar farms to setting up a state-owned clean energy firm, GB Energy. Yet Tory rivals aren’t convinced it’ll do much on the bread-and-butter problem of keeping people warm. “When you start pushing into the details of all of this stuff, actually it tends to fall a bit short,” Garnier said. Labour ditched more ambitious home-heating plans before the election campaign even began, when it slashed its totemic green spending pledge. Yet it still entered government with a big promise: to spend over £6 billion upgrading five million homes in the next five years with new heat pumps and insulation. But Chancellor Rachel Reeves — who has a government-wide budget looming later this month — has already started to row back on some financial commitments, claiming Labour has inherited a £22 billion “black hole” from the last administration. The government insists all of this will be addressed in an upcoming “Warm Homes Plan.” Chancellor Rachel Reeves — who has a government-wide budget looming later this month — has already started to row back on some financial commitments, claiming Labour has inherited a £22 billion “black hole” from the last administration. | Pool photo by Jonathan Brady via AFP/Getty Images Energy Minister Miatta Fahnbulleh told POLITICO this week: “The Warm Homes Plan, if we get it right, will be an ambitious program for how we get warmer, cleaner homes that are cheaper to run. It is a massive undertaking.” Fahnbulleh told parliament last month that details on the plan will not be unveiled until after the spending review in the spring. When DESNZ last month announced the latest round of funding to insulate social housing, it admitted — in a sentence buried deep inside the documents — that the £1.2 billion committed to that fund by the last government was no longer guaranteed. “I think they’d be mad not to continue with it,” said Callanan. “They are now in government,” said Bowie. “It’s up to them to develop the policies that are going to change the state of the situation in terms of home insulation.” ‘VERY POOREST’ While the Conservatives gloat about Labour’s woes, the government faces pressure from its left flank, too. Current home-heating policies are “lacking,” said Green MP and party co-leader Adrian Ramsay. Labour should be rolling out help which “touches every street in the country, which is what we need if everyone’s going to benefit from warmer homes and lower bills and decarbonizing heating,” he said. Backbench Labour MPs, facing constituents spooked by still-rising energy bills, have also started to notice the hole in the government’s decarbonization plans. “People across my constituency are worried about how they will afford to heat their homes this winter,” new Labour MP Laura Kyrke-Smith told parliament this week. “It is often the very poorest in our communities [who] are forced to live in those cold and drafty properties,” said another Labour backbencher elected this summer, Joe Morris. Kyrke-Smith and Morris — naturally — point the finger firmly at the previous government. But in the meantime, Brits face another winter in cold — and carbon-intensive — homes. “There are,” said Callanan, the former Tory energy minister, “no easy political answers.”

The EU is struggling to get Gulf countries on board with a series of pro-Ukraine commitments ahead of a leaders’ summit on Wednesday in Brussels, according to a draft statement seen by POLITICO.  The EU-Gulf summit, the first of its kind, is meant as a show of unity on everything from trade to energy and security. But a leaked joint statement that circulated on Monday instead highlighted the tense disputes between the EU and Gulf states over Russia’s war in Ukraine.  In one passage, for instance, the EU proposed language calling on all countries to end material aid for Russia and condemning Iran for giving Moscow missiles and drones to use against Ukraine. But the Gulf countries instead wanted more generic language urging all parties to stop sending weapons to the conflict. The possible solution? A joint proposal to ditch the paragraph completely. In another section, the Gulf countries suggested deleting a passage vowing to improve joint work on sanctions circumvention — a clear allusion to the war-era penalties by Western allies targeting Moscow’s finances, and to their struggles in enforcing them. The United Arab Emirates, one of the Gulf states involved in Wednesday’s summit, has reportedly been a particular irritant for Western allies on sanctions evasion. The linguistic dispute reflects the ongoing difficulties the EU and its Western allies have had in winning others over to their coalition to support Ukraine and constrain Russia. Yet while the most contentious issues are seemingly off the table for Wednesday, the two sides do appear to have found common language on several fronts.  Not mentioned was the EU’s deepening fossil-fuel relationship with Qatar. | Karim Jaafar/Getty Images According to the document, they are set to condemn the barrage of missile strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure — an acute concern as winter approaches — although Russia isn’t explicitly named in the text. The two sides are also set to reaffirm a growing partnership on energy, specifically citing renewable energy, hydrogen, the annual COP climate summits and the Paris Agreement, the 2015 pact to keep global warming well below 2 degrees Celsius. Not mentioned was the EU’s deepening fossil-fuel relationship with Qatar, a Gulf state that has sold Europe increasing amounts of liquid natural gas as it tries to ditch Russian energy. On the trade front, the EU has been seeking bilateral trade agreements with various Gulf countries after an attempt to clinch a deal with the whole Gulf region fell apart in 2008. The joint statement shows the Gulf countries pushing back on the EU’s pivot to a one-to-one approach, suggesting a return to regional talks.  Gulf countries are not necessarily unified on the matter, however: Saudi Arabia is more keen to seek a region-wide deal, while the United Arab Emirates is actively seeking a bilateral deal with the EU, hoping to launch trade talks with Brussels before the end of the year.  The two sides are expected to keep working on the statement, with the EU aiming to finalize things on Tuesday.

BRUSSELS — Reaching the landmark renewable energy targets agreed at last year’s global climate summit will remain a distant dream unless the world invests more than $30 trillion over the next six years.  That’s the stark warning the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) delivered Friday at the final ministerial meeting ahead of next month’s United Nations climate summit in Azerbaijan, known as COP29, where financing for climate action will take center stage.  At last year’s COP28 conference in Dubai, countries pledged to collectively triple the world’s renewable energy capacity and double energy-saving efforts by 2030. The commitments were hailed as key to limiting global warming in line with the Paris Agreement.   IRENA’s first progress assessment, published Friday, gives the world a failing grade across the board. For the tripling target, the agency found that countries are on track for only half the renewable power growth required to meet the goal.  Stronger policies, easier permitting and modernizing power grids are crucial to making up for the shortfall — as is a dramatic surge in investment, according to IRENA.  Investment in renewables reached a record high of $570 billion last year, but what’s needed is $1.5 trillion a year, IRENA says. And spending on energy-saving measures must increase seven-fold to reach the doubling target, from $323 million last year to $2.2 trillion annually.  In total, reaching the twin COP28 targets requires a cumulative global investment of $31.5 trillion in renewables, grids, energy efficiency and related measures by 2030, according to IRENA.  The findings are likely to bolster developing countries’ push for a massive increase in financial support. IRENA’s assessment comes just one month before the start of COP29, where countries are meant to agree on a new collective financial target to fund climate action — crucially, switching from fossil fuels to renewables — in developing countries.  Some proposals to replace the current target of $100 billion a year reach up to $1.3 trillion. But developed countries and the European Union argue that any significant increase in public finance requires emerging economies like China to start chipping in, and that the majority of investments must come from the private sector, not national budgets.  IRENA says a “major scale-up” in both public and private financing is required to increase the share of investment in developing countries.  The vast majority of investment in renewables last year — 84 percent — was channeled into the EU, China and the United States. India and Brazil accounted for around 6 percent; investments in Africa are minuscule and actually halved between 2022 and 2023.  IRENA’s progress assessment finds the world falling short on almost every measure, aside from solar power.  IRENA’s progress assessment finds the world falling short on almost every measure, aside from solar power. | Giovanni Grezzi/AFP via Getty Images To reach the COP28 tripling target, installed renewables capacity would have to increase from 3.9 terawatts (TW) today to 11.2 TW by the end of the decade, the agency says. But current national targets are projected to add only another 3.5 TW to reach 7.4 TW by 2030.  Countries’ plans submitted to the U.N. under the Paris Agreement — known as nationally determined contributions, or NDCs — suggest even weaker growth, reaching only 5.4 TW by 2030. Governments are required to submit updated NDCs next year; IRENA says that the new set of plans must “more than double” their renewables targets.  Solar is the only renewable technology growing at the required level. Onshore wind needs to triple, while offshore wind and bioenergy should increase six-fold. Geothermal capacity ought to grow 35 times faster than it did last year to meet its projected share.  On energy efficiency, “little meaningful progress has been made” over the past year, IRENA says. Some key measures to save energy include renovating old buildings and boosting electrification, as electric vehicles and heat pumps consume less energy than their fossil fuel counterparts.  Yet while EV sales reached a record 18 percent of total global car sales last year, the picture is dire for heat pumps, the agency warns: After a brief surge in 2022, their sales fell by 3 percent in 2023, with a particularly notable decline in Europe.