- Backdrop
- Main Takeaways
- The problems with gas
- Comments and reflections
- 22/11/2019: Update on different emission standards (EIB, Sust. Finance Taxonomy, NGOs)
- 17/12/2019: Update on EIB argumentation emission standard
Thanks @SamJamesMorgan for an update on the ongoing @EIB and @EU_Commission climate debate
A summary thread, comments and questions 👇 https://t.co/At3IdgAZYM
Backdrop
-
@EIB energy policy review [v. 26/9 : https://t.co/QRqarUPIjh], to be decided by the board on the 15th.
-
@EUCouncilPress ENVironment committee debate of 4 october on climate action, circular economy https://t.co/6CRQQUmXop [minutes: https://t.co/GFaRzK1DzD]
Main Takeaways
It’s all about the money –> (a) ambition discussion + (b) link with @EIB : gas gets more attention
Discussion on ambition : it’s all about the money
(a) ambitious NDC draft revised to “in 2020, the EU will update its NDC”
& BG, CZ, HR, EE, GR, HU, LT, MT, PL and RO blocked efforts for more explicit language https://t.co/tvLox0q9kE
But: @vonderleyen pledged to increase NDCs to 50% and to bump it up to 55% when appropriate, @MAC_europa reiterated EU is de facto on course to 45 % reduction
PL/CZ argue for more money. @EIB will finance up to 75% of projects by poorer member states rather than the usual 50%
Revised EIB Energy Lending Policy : introduction of emission standard and gas projects
(b) Debate revised @EIB energy lending policy
First draft thread : https://t.co/AetzwcPHSO + blogpost https://t.co/VxWHOrHk4l
Notable changes now [ https://t.co/59kgYbtEnC
- Introduction emission standard < 250 gCO2/kWhe
- Inclusion of gas projects, despite large criticism https://t.co/7yE3P0n2P2
(b*) Reaction of 60 NGOs (https://t.co/HKc6H99tO0) :
- Disappointment on loopholes, no specifics on ‘low carbon gases’
- 250 gCO2/kWh threshold ‘over lifetime of project, as long there is a credible plan’ -> uncertain @nworbmot
- Support gas boilers -> uncertainty future gas
The problems with gas
(a) Mentioned by NGOs : 4th list of projects of PCIs “will be financed irrespective of new lending policy criteria” -> loophole
(b) Cost benefit assessment of @ENTSOG can be used, instead of @EIB 🤔🧐 [https://t.co/ifN7GTdFoW]
Despite reservations on @EIB CBA [see https://t.co/VxWHOrHk4l for full argumentation], @ENTSOG CBA [https://t.co/JXj3EqRk0X] has an even more fundamental problem [https://t.co/ZkyTulbKmt]:
“CO2 benefits” only compared to gas, no renewables!
Cancels out any reasonably comparison https://t.co/ziB7scsaRS
Comments and reflections
250 CO2/kWh reasonable?
(a) Although also political (and dependent on calculation, future weather,…), how “wrong” (or right) is a ‘250 CO2eq/kWh over project lifetime’ financing threshold, according to recent cost/technical estimates?
@AukeHoekstra @nworbmot @mzjacobson
Importance of carbon costing narrative in policy
(b) To the collective IAM/”carbon costing” community - despite fundamental flaws (ex. @ENTSOG CBA☝️), please watch out together on how these costs are used
ex. @EIB : https://t.co/VxWHOrHk4l
@KevinClimate @NB_pik @jessicadjewell @ChristianOnRE @BjarneSteffen @MaxJerneck
22/11/2019: Update on different emission standards (EIB, Sust. Finance Taxonomy, NGOs)
NGOs call power sector emission standard in the EU Sustainable Finance taxonomy of 50gCO2/kWh instead of 100gCO2/kWh [https://t.co/Px46lFc69j]. Statement 9/2019: https://t.co/fGFvCU51Dg
Why is @EIB proposing 250gCO2/kWh? https://t.co/eglGd2jSIa
17/12/2019: Update on EIB argumentation emission standard
Argumentation @EIB on emission standard of 250 gCO2/kWh in final energy lending policy 15/11/19 [https://t.co/mcvbOTxsSL, p27]:
“level is above proposed #SustainableFinance #Taxonomy benchmark but enables the bank to focus on projects needed over the long term […]” https://t.co/n7tTF06CbA
