Green Groups Sue European Commission Over Insufficient Emission Reduction Targets

CAN Europe and the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN) say the bloc’s emission reduction targets for sectors including agriculture, waste, transport, and small industry are “grossly inadequate” and in breach of environmental law.

—

Two environmental groups are suing the European Commission over what they allege are “grossly inadequate” emission reduction targets.

In a statement published Tuesday, CAN Europe and the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN) announced they had submitted the final written arguments to the General Court of the European Union after the lawsuit was formally filed before the court earlier this year. The two groups accuse the bloc of failing to conduct essential assessments when setting climate targets for sectors including buildings, agriculture, waste, small industry, and transport, which together account for 57% of the bloc’s greenhouse gas emissions.

These sectors are not covered by the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) and are regulated instead through the EU’s Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR), a key component of the bloc’s climate policy to ensure all sectors contribute to reducing overall emissions.

The ESR sets binding national emission reduction targets for each EU member state to reduce emissions by 2030. It also defines annual emissions allocations (AEAs) from 2021 to 2030, with the Commission assigning each member state a specific amount of emissions allowances, measured in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, which decrease annually.

The AEA’s were revised and amended last year following the passing of the Fit for 55% legislative package, the bloc’s plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by the end of the decade compared to 1990 levels. But according to the plaintiffs, the new allocations are “grossly inadequate” to limit emissions and in breach of environmental law.

In particular, the two groups contend that the EU did not adequately evaluate the global emission reductions necessary to limit warming to 1.5C, nor did it determine a fair share of these reductions. Additionally, they allege that the bloc neglected to assess feasible domestic emissions reductions for 2030 and did not consider the possibility of achieving reductions beyond 55% or the impacts of climate change on fundamental rights.

The lawsuit, brought against the European Commission, follows a previous attempt by CAN Europe to sue the bloc for its climate targets, which was ultimately not admitted. An oral hearing is expected in the first half of 2025.

“We have to use all available channels to push the European Commission to bring the EU’s climate ambition on track with its fair share for the 1.5C goal of the Paris agreement. The EU has to ramp up emissions reduction and achieve at least a 65% cut by 2030 if it wants to be a credible actor,” said Sven Harmeling, head of climate at CAN Europe.

The groups hopes a recent landmark ruling brought to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) by a group of Swiss elderly women known as KlimaSeniorinnen (Senior Women for Climate Protection) will bolster their case. The ECHR in April found that the Swiss government’s failure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions was in breach of fundamental human rights.

Last year, Greenpeace filed a lawsuit against the European Commission over its decision to label nuclear energy and natural gas as climate-friendly investments. The case is still pending.