ECOS | Environmental Coalition on Standards

14 June 2022

No green label for gas and nuclear investments – MEPs back veto and ‘stay true to science’

Members of the European Parliament's Environment and Economic Affairs committees have voted against including gas and nuclear energy in the EU Taxonomy. The vote is an encouraging step in the right direction to save the credibility of the EU Taxonomy Regulation.

Members of the European Parliament at the committees on the Environment (ENVI) and Economic Affairs (ECON) have approved today a resolution asking to veto the Commission’s decision allowing investments in projects related to nuclear and natural gas to be considered green [1].

Two months ago, the European Commission adopted a Complementary Delegated Act (CDA) that labels specific gas and nuclear activities as environmentally sustainable by listing them as transitional activities under the Taxonomy Regulation as of January 2023.

Today, MEPs at ECON and ENVI had the power to recommend the Parliament’s plenary to veto this decision [2]. The majority have voted in favour of stopping that process.

The vote from the joint committee is perceived as a likely indication of the plenary vote next month.

This means there is a high chance the Parliament votes against labelling gas and nuclear as green investments by officially objecting to the Commission’s CDA.
 
Standing up for a science-based Taxonomy  
Ensuring the CDA is not adopted is absolutely key to proving that the European Union values scientific evidence and is ready to lead the world in transforming financial systems to solve the global environmental crisis.

In contrast, adopting the CDA would be disastrous for the credibility of the Taxonomy Regulation and for the role of the EU as a world leader in sustainable finance.

The IPCCIEA, and the Platform on Sustainable Finance have proven that there is no room for investment in new fossil fuel and nuclear power if we want to meet the Paris Agreement goals of keeping global warming below 1.5°C. The science is clear. 

The investor and financial sectors have voiced concerns that going against science adversely impacts both the credibility and usability of the Taxonomy. [3]

The CDA would also deepen Europe’s dependence on gas and uranium imports, which will inevitably fuel energy insecurity and threaten geopolitical mayhem.

Mariana López Dávila, Programme Manager on Sustainable Finance, Environmental Coalition on Standards (ECOS):
The vote of the joint committee shows the Parliament’s willingness to stay true to science, and gives us hope that the EU can still lead the world into a truly sustainable future. However, the veto is not yet a done deal. Members of the European Parliament stand a unique chance to walk the talk, and avoid greenwashing well-meaning investments into environmentally-harming projects.
 
Background:
ECOS is one of the 50 members of a Platform on Sustainable Finance created by the European Commission in October 2020 to inform the development of the EU Taxonomy.

The EU Taxonomy is a science-based classification system established to clarify which investments are sustainable. The aim is to prevent greenwashing and help investors assess whether investments are consistent with policy commitments like the EU Green Deal.

 

Notes to editors: 

[1] https://multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/en/webstreaming/envi-econ-committee-meeting_20220614-1200-COMMITTEE-ENVI-ECON

[2] The Parliament and the Council have the power to reject the CDA during a six-month scrutiny period. The CDA can be rejected but not modified. With no objections, the Commission’s decision will be automatically in force as of 1 January 2023.

[3] Principles for Responsible Investment – Implementing The EU Taxonomy An Update To The PRI’s ‘Testing The Taxonomy’ Report – https://www.unpri.org/download?ac=16143

 
If you have any further questions or requests for further comments, please do not hesitate to contact: 

Ivo Cabral, press & communications manager at ECOS – ivo.cabral@ecostandard.org 

ECOS is co-funded by the European Commission and EFTA Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or EISMEA. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.

Website by