Money to burn?
EU leaders may flatter themselves that they’re doing something that matters, but it’s wildly optimistic to think the climate could be changed – at vast expense – by passing laws based on unproven shaky theories. What planet are they on?
– – –
European Union environment ministers meet in Luxembourg on Friday to seek a deal on a landmark climate change law, but they will leave a decision on a 2030 emissions-cutting target for leaders to discuss in December, reports Yahoo News.
The climate law will form the basis for Europe’s plan to slash greenhouse gas emissions, which will reshape all sectors, from transport to heavy industry, and require hundreds of billions of euros in annual investments.
It will fix in law the EU target to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and define the rules for how future EU climate targets are decided, if new scientific evidence requires more ambitious aims.
Ministers, who take decisions by majority, will seek a deal on these parts of the law on Friday.
A decision on the most politically sensitive part of the bill – a new 2030 emissions-cutting target for the EU – will be left for EU leaders to agree, unanimously, at a meeting in December.
The law will give Brussels “the legal possibility to act when those who make promises don’t deliver on the promises,” said EU climate policy chief Frans Timmermans at Friday’s meeting, which is taking place in person, despite much of the continent restricting gatherings as coronavirus infections surge anew.
The price of permits in the EU carbon market climbed by more than 5% on Friday in anticipation of the ministers’ deal. The EU’s climate targets are expected to tighten the supply of permits in the market.
Full report here.
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
‘The climate law will form the basis for Europe’s plan to slash greenhouse gas emissions, which will reshape all sectors, from transport to heavy industry’
‘Sectors’ won’t be ‘reshaped.’ They’ll leave or close.
‘and require hundreds of billions of euros in annual investments’
Ahhh, yes, government spending is ‘investments.’
Brussels decadence. A killed economy won’t support hundreds of billions in spending.
Will the EU still be around in 2030?
As they destroy the economy of countries in pursuit of extremist fads the local rulers will see opposition rising and loss of the top position. Spending money that doesn’t exist is only a short term “solution” as it always has to be paid back; the big money operators don’t take kindly to losing theirs (whatever happens to the peasants). There are signs that the peasants aren’t too keen on this either.
The EU bureaucrats are desperate to somehow keep the UK doing the same old directions, and they may succeed given the lack of backbone in the British Government but, as events have shown, the public is getting restive and is prepared to change old voting habits in a desire for change.
The result might well be a complete loss of influence of those who believe in rule by multi-national bureaucratic entities.
‘if new scientific evidence requires more ambitious aims’
But if existing observational data doesn’t support the IPCC backed theory, and climate models always show non-existent levels of warming…just look the other way 🙄
A law was made a distant moon ago here… (Rodgers and Hammerstein)
‘Does not compute!’
Ha ha
Good for a laugh in a sitcom.
Oops, wait, this is for real, isn’t it?
Is there any intelligent life forms in the EU?
Silly Cnuts. The tide still comes in.
It really is amazing how once you let bureaucrats legislate for something, they will not stop until they have done the maximum possible damage and put in place the maximum possible laws, rules and regulations. When all this started, it was not obvious that we needed to do anything, but st least Stern, for all its faults, was relatively sensible in terms of timings and costs. But within a few years, that gets tossed out and we everything has to happen more quickly and to a greater degree. Then those notions s get tossed out and its Net Zero by Tuesday afternoon.
All without a single change in the science.
It isn’t about fixing “climate change” or changing CO2 levels; so it doesn’t need to “work”.
All that matters is the size of the vigorish of the Subsidy Farmers and how much kickback from China for their free pass.
Once you realize that, the “makes no sense” from a technical or physics viewpont suddenly makes a lot of sense from the graft and corruption point of view…