The European Green Deal is designed to cut greenhouse gas emissions within the European Union, but it is expected to inadvertently raise emissions by over two times in other regions.
The European Union has committed to achieving carbon neutrality by the year 2050 as part of the extensive Green Deal established four years ago. However, a thorough review of the policy documents related to the practical implementation of the Green Deal reveals that while it will lower carbon emissions within Europe, it will also significantly increase emissions outside the EU—by more than double the reduction achieved inside the EU. This conclusion comes from an analysis recently published in Nature Sustainability on by a collaborative team of researchers, led by Klaus Hubacek, who is a Professor of Science, Technology, and Society at the University of Groningen.
The European Green Deal consists of initiatives aimed at fully achieving decarbonization by 2050, while also pushing for clean energy generation and ecological rehabilitation. Hubacek and his colleagues from the United States and China conducted comprehensive analyses of the supply chains associated with the policy documents that form the basis of the Green Deal. Their findings indicate that, under its current configuration, the Green Deal may lead to a staggering 244.8% increase in emissions in countries outside the EU compared to the emissions reduction target set for land, land use change, and forestry activities within the EU.
Skeptical
One specific initiative includes adding three billion trees in Europe to enhance biodiversity. However, Hubacek points out, ‘Trees need a considerable amount of land, which could otherwise be used for growing food. Consequently, food production may shift to other areas, leading to the conversion of forests into farmland. This ultimately raises carbon dioxide emissions and diminishes biodiversity.’ The EU might successfully reduce emissions within its territory yet end up ‘exporting’ those emissions to countries that are responsible for food production, such as those in Africa or South America.
While the Green Deal contains regulations against importing products (like meat or animal feed) for which forested areas are turned into agricultural land, Hubacek expresses doubt: ‘There is nothing to prevent these nations from utilizing existing farmland for crops for Europe and clearing forests for local consumption. There are numerous uncertainties surrounding these regulations.’ The Green Deal also advocates for increased organic farming, yet this demands more farmland in Europe. Hubacek notes, ‘Again, there is a lack of comprehensive information regarding the implications for land use.’
No free lunch
Nevertheless, the scientists did not solely focus on the adverse effects of the Green Deal on global ecology. They also evaluated different scenarios to determine if overall reductions in carbon emissions could be improved. Hubacek remarks, ‘We discovered one very effective approach to achieve this.’ By adopting a more plant-centric “planetary health diet,” it could drastically reduce carbon emissions. Another strategy is to eliminate food-based biofuels from the EU, which would decrease the necessary farmland and consequently minimize carbon emissions while preserving biodiversity. Additionally, the EU could lend support to developing areas to enhance their agricultural efficiency, further reducing land usage.
Even though the article in Nature Sustainability suggests that the current model of the European Green Deal may result in negative repercussions for the global environment, the researchers conclude that improvements are feasible. ‘Embracing the planetary health diet is relatively straightforward,’ states Hubacek. However, he emphasizes an additional requirement for change: ‘The initiative leans heavily on technological optimism, but our review underscores that nothing comes without a cost. I am highly skeptical that “Green Growth” is attainable, as every production process demands input of resources. Thus, we genuinely need to reduce consumption.’ With global warming poised to exceed the 1.5-degree threshold established by the 1995 Paris Agreement, alongside numerous other environmental limits being breached, Hubacek asserts: ‘It is time to take action that genuinely works.’
