The European Union aims to be carbon-neutral by 2050 as part of the comprehensive Green Deal that was agreed upon four years ago. However, an analysis of the policy documents outlining the practical measures of the Green Deal shows that it will decrease carbon emissions in Europe, but also increase carbon emissions outside the EU.
This increase is more than double the amount of carbon emissions saved by the Green Deal. This analysis was published in Nature Sustainability by an international team of scientists led by Klaus Hubacek, Professor of Science, Technology and Society at the University of Groningen.
The European Green Deal is a set of policies intended to fully decarbonize Europe by 2050, but it also includes measures for clean energy production and ecological restoration. Hubacek and colleagues from the United States and China carried out full supply-chain analyses of the policy documents underlying the Green Deal.
Their conclusion is that the Green Deal in its current form will lead to an increase of 244.8% in emissions in countries outside the EU compared to the Green Deal’s carbon reduction goal in the land, land use change, and forestry sector within EU borders.
One example is the measure to increase biodiversity in Europe by planting three billion trees.
“However, trees require a lot of land that cannot be used to produce food. That means that food must be produced elsewhere, and to do this, land must be converted into cropland. This increases the carbon dioxide emission and reduces biodiversity,” says Hubacek. “In this way, the EU would reduce carbon emissions within its borders, but ‘export’ them to the countries that would produce our food, for example, Africa or South America.”
Of course, the Green Deal does contain a paragraph forbidding the import of products (such as meat or animal feed) for which woodland is converted to farmland.
On this point, Hubacek is skeptical: “Nothing stops these other countries from growing products for Europe on existing farmland and felling forests to produce for the local market. There are simply too many uncertainties in these types of regulations.” The Green Deal also calls for an increase in organic farming, but this requires more farmland in Europe.
“Again, there is very little information available on the impact on land use,” Hubacek says.
However, the scientists did not just reveal the negative impacts of the Green Deal on the rest of the world. They also looked at different scenarios to see whether overall carbon reductions could be enhanced.
“We found one very effective way to do this,” says Hubacek. “By adopting the more plant-based ‘planetary health diet,’ it is possible to save an enormous amount of carbon emissions.” Another measure is to phase out food-based biofuels within the EU, which would reduce the amount of farmland needed and thus save carbon emissions and prevent biodiversity loss. Also, the EU could assist developing regions to increase their agricultural efficiency, which would also reduce land use.
Although the Nature Sustainability article shows that the European Green Deal in its present form could result in a net loss for the global environment, the scientists conclude that it can be remedied.
“And adopting the planetary health diet is relatively simple,” says Hubacek. However, there is one more thing that needs to change, he stresses.
“The program is driven by techno-optimism, but our analysis underlines that there is no free lunch. I very much doubt that ‘Green Growth’ is possible, as everything you produce requires an input of resources. So we really need to consume less.”
There is a strong sense of urgency now that global warming seems set to surpass the 1.5 degrees from the 1995 Paris Agreement, and many other planetary boundaries are also being overstepped.
Hubacek notes, “It is time to implement measures that work.”
More information:
Global spillover effects of the European Green Deal and plausible mitigation options, Nature Sustainability (2024). DOI: 10.1038/s41893-024-01428-1
Provided by
University of Groningen
Citation:
European Green Deal is a double-edged sword for global emissions, analysis suggests (2024, September 20)
