OpenLobby.EU
Explore

European Association for Coal and Lignite

EURACOAL

EURACOAL is the umbrella organisation representing the European coal industry across the entire value chain.

Lobbying Activity

EURACOAL warns carcinogen limits threaten EU coking sector

21 Oct 2025
Topic — The initiative aims to set stricter occupational exposure limits for carcinogenic substances like PAHs.
Message — EURACOAL requests a socio-economic impact assessment before finalizing the benzo[a]pyrene limit. They argue the proposal is technically unachievable even using best available techniques.12
Why — Less restrictive limits would reduce compliance costs and maintain the viability of coke producers.34
Impact — Industrial workers face higher health risks if exposure limits are set at less protective levels.56
Read full response

Meeting with Carsten Schierenbeck (Head of Unit Research and Innovation)

12 Sept 2025 · RFCS and its future reform

Meeting with Jurgen Tiedje (Head of Unit Research and Innovation)

14 Apr 2025 · RFCS and the future reform

Coal industry demands easier exemptions from strict EU water rules

4 Mar 2025
Topic — This consultation plans a multi-annual strategy to achieve a water resilient Europe.
Message — EURACOAL requests more realistic targets and a prolongation of the 2027 deadline for water status. They argue that exemption mechanisms should be amended to better balance environmental protection with industrial needs.123
Why — This would reduce compliance costs and prevent legal obstacles to continued coal operations.45
Impact — Environmental protection would be weakened by prioritizing industrial exploitation over strict ecosystem standards.67
Read full response

Meeting with Auke Zijlstra (Member of the European Parliament) and Axpo Holding AG

10 Dec 2024 · Energy transition, CBAM

Meeting with Martin Hojsík (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

26 Sept 2024 · Soil law and mining industry

Meeting with András Gyürk (Member of the European Parliament)

12 Sept 2024 · Discussion on the policy priorities of the European coal industry

Meeting with Martin Hojsík (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

8 Mar 2024 · Soil Law

Coal industry group urges EU funding for carbon capture

31 Aug 2023
Topic — The consultation addresses the deployment of carbon capture, utilisation and storage technologies.
Message — EURACOAL requests including fossil fuel power plants in the carbon management strategy. They argue these plants should receive direct financial support from European Union funds. The group also demands faster government approval processes for their carbon capture projects.12
Why — This allows coal companies to transform operations while maintaining their long-term viability.3
Impact — Environmental groups lose when public money supports prolonging the life of coal plants.4
Read full response

EURACOAL warns revised air quality rules threaten energy security

14 Mar 2023
Topic — The European Commission is proposing tighter air pollutant limits aligned with WHO recommendations.
Message — EURACOAL argues that no revision is necessary because current laws already lead to improvements. They recommend focusing on better enforcement instead of setting stricter targets.12
Why — This would protect coal companies from costly upgrades and ensure their continued survival.34
Impact — Citizens lose health benefits as air pollution causes hundreds of thousands of premature deaths.5
Read full response

Meeting with Jens Geier (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

21 Feb 2023 · Exchange of Views on the Methane Regulation (Staff Level)

Coal group urges withdrawal of EU industrial pollution rules

22 Jun 2022
Topic — EU consultation on updating environmental standards for large industrial facilities.
Message — The association wants the proposal withdrawn during the current energy crisis. They argue against forcing all plants to meet the strictest emission limits. They also oppose giving environmental groups more power over industrial permits.123
Why — This would prevent costly technical upgrades and the early closure of coal plants.45
Impact — Environmental groups lose legal tools to challenge permits and seek health compensation.67
Read full response

Meeting with Silvia Sardone (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and International Association of Oil Gas Producers Europe

3 May 2022 · Meeting on Methane Regulation

Meeting with Guido Reil (Member of the European Parliament)

21 Apr 2022 · Coal mining

EURACOAL warns methane rules threaten energy security and worker safety

18 Apr 2022
Topic — The consultation concerns new EU legislative provisions to reduce methane emissions within the energy sector.
Message — The organization requests a five-year implementation window and special exemptions for coal used in steelmaking. They also want to raise emission limits and remove carbon tax costs from methane capture projects.123
Why — These exemptions would significantly reduce operational costs and protect the profitability of existing coal mines.45
Impact — Global climate goals suffer if production shifts to foreign countries with weaker environmental oversight.6
Read full response

Meeting with Kadri Simson (Commissioner) and

11 Nov 2021 · Legislative proposal on methane emissions.

EURACOAL urges fewer restrictions on biomass burning

3 Nov 2021
Topic — The EU is revising its renewable energy directive to meet climate targets.
Message — The group wants to maintain subsidies for burning biomass and reject renewable targets. They also oppose mandatory electricity labelling for consumers.12
Why — Continuing fossil fuel use would help coal companies avoid high transition costs.34
Impact — The renewable energy industry loses potential market growth to cheaper fossil fuels.5
Read full response

EURACOAL demands fairer emissions burden across economic sectors

3 Nov 2021
Topic — The consultation reviews national greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for member states.
Message — The coal industry argues the current proposal for emission reductions is unbalanced between industrial and non-industrial sectors. They call for a fairer distribution of the heavy burden to meet climate targets. Additionally, they demand a detailed impact assessment on social and economic consequences for member states.123
Why — A balanced distribution would lower the heavy emission reduction requirements placed on the coal industry.45
Impact — Households and drivers would face higher costs if non-industrial sectors faced tougher emission targets.6
Read full response

EURACOAL warns of trade wars over carbon border levy

3 Nov 2021
Topic — The consultation concerns a mechanism placing a carbon price on certain imported goods.
Message — The association requests a cautious phase-out of free allowances to maintain export competitiveness. They advocate for a global emissions trading system and flexible exemptions for neighboring countries.123
Why — The mechanism would protect local producers from competitors who have laxer environmental standards.45
Impact — Small businesses face administrative burdens while regional consumers may suffer from higher costs.67
Read full response

EURACOAL demands energy tax reform based only on fuel content

3 Nov 2021
Topic — The consultation concerns restructuring the EU framework for taxing energy products and electricity.
Message — EURACOAL advocates for taxation based solely on energy content, opposing any carbon-based environmental components. They reject lower tax rates for fossil gas and insist on unanimous voting.12
Why — A purely energy-based tax prevents coal from facing a steep twenty-five percent price increase.3
Impact — Renewable energy providers and the gas industry lose competitive advantages over carbon-intensive coal.4
Read full response

EURACOAL demands market stability and compensation for coal transition

3 Nov 2021
Topic — Review of the EU Emissions Trading System to reach 2030 climate targets.
Message — EURACOAL requests adequate compensation for the coal industry and employees during the transition. They advocate for restoring the 12% market stability reserve intake rate for predictability. Methane reduction projects should be excluded from the emissions trading system's scope.123
Why — Higher reserve thresholds would prevent artificial price spikes and reduce the industry's financial burden.4
Impact — Low-income households face doubled energy costs if carbon pricing is fully implemented.5
Read full response

EURACOAL urges financial incentives over penalties for methane emissions

26 Jan 2021
Topic — New EU legislative proposal targeting methane emission reductions in the energy sector.
Message — EURACOAL advocates for financial incentive schemes rather than penalties to support emission reductions. They suggest prioritizing abandoned mine methane and establishing clear EU-wide reporting protocols.123
Why — This strategy would help coal operators avoid high costs and secure EU funding.4
Impact — Local communities face negative social impacts if penalties lead to sudden mine closures.5
Read full response

EURACOAL Urges EU to Halt Air Quality Law Revision

14 Jan 2021
Topic — A consultation on updating EU air quality laws to meet health standards.
Message — EURACOAL maintains that current air quality directives are adequate and do not require updating. They argue for better enforcement of existing laws and support for pollution control in neighboring countries.12
Why — The industry avoids high costs for coal plants approaching their end of life.34
Impact — Vulnerable populations and citizens lose protections against health risks from poor air quality.56
Read full response

EURACOAL rejects expanding environmental NGO legal review rights

10 Dec 2020
Topic — The consultation examines improving administrative and judicial review of environmental decisions.
Message — EURACOAL rejects the proposal because extending legal rights contradicts EU law requiring equal access. The Commission should renegotiate the international treaty instead of changing EU regulations.12
Why — This would prevent costly delays and uncertainty for major energy infrastructure investments.3
Impact — Environmental organizations lose the opportunity to challenge general policy decisions in court.4
Read full response

EURACOAL opposes binding EU laws for new soil strategy

10 Dec 2020
Topic — The European Commission is updating policy to address soil degradation and contamination.
Message — EURACOAL rejects any binding legislative acts on the EU-level regarding the soil strategy. They recommend focusing on research and methodologies for assessing land degradation.12
Why — Avoiding EU legislation prevents unnecessary bureaucracy and protects national flexibility for mining activities.3
Impact — The European Commission loses the ability to mandate uniform soil decontamination efforts.4
Read full response

EURACOAL urges voluntary nature targets and water rule changes

2 Dec 2020
Topic — The Commission is establishing legally binding targets to restore Europe's degraded ecosystems.
Message — EURACOAL advocates for a voluntary 'temporary nature' instrument instead of new legal frameworks. They also call for replacing the rigid 'one-out-all-out' water quality principle with more flexible reporting.12
Why — The industry would avoid new compliance burdens by relying on existing reclamation practices.34
Impact — Ecological advocates lose strict legal protections against any localized deterioration in water quality.5
Read full response

EURACOAL warns against carbon price hikes to protect coal power

26 Nov 2020
Topic — EU consultation on updating member state emission targets for the 2030 climate plan.
Message — EURACOAL requests that the emissions trading system remains the sole climate instrument. They argue member states must remain free to retain their coal assets.12
Why — Maintaining current rules prevents further bankruptcies and protects the viability of coal producers.3
Impact — Transport and building sectors would lose their lighter regulatory burden under these proposals.4
Read full response

EURACOAL warns against disruptive interventions in the carbon market

26 Nov 2020
Topic — The consultation reviews the EU Emissions Trading System to increase 2030 climate ambitions.
Message — EURACOAL insists the ETS remain the sole instrument for energy sector emissions. They reject cap reductions, floor prices, and market stability reserve changes.12
Why — This would protect lignite producers from punitive costs and avoid electricity supply shocks.34
Read full response

Coal industry association says EU zero-pollution plan is unnecessary

29 Oct 2020
Topic — This consultation addresses the EU's proposed action plan to eliminate pollution in air, water, and soil.
Message — The association claims a new plan is not needed because current laws already ensure high standards. They urge the Commission to focus on enforcing existing rules instead of creating new requirements.12
Why — This would protect coal power plants from extra costs during their final years of operation.3
Impact — Environmental groups lose because the industry opposes granting them legal rights to challenge permits.4
Read full response

Coal association warns of reporting costs and data risks

26 Oct 2020
Topic — A revision of European rules for reporting industrial pollution and environmental data access.
Message — EURACOAL requests that the Commission quantify the real costs of data collection for industry. They also urge protecting commercial confidentiality and competitiveness regarding sensitive production data.12
Why — Industry protects its competitiveness by preventing non-EU rivals from accessing sensitive production process data.3
Impact — The general public would lose the benefit of easier access to environmental information.4
Read full response

Response to Revision of Decision 2003/76 on the financial consequences of the expiry of the ECSC Treaty and on the RFCS

7 Sept 2020

EURACOAL supports the intention to modernise the management of the RFCS and its assets. We do, however, wish to see greater consideration given to the scope of future coal-related research which should be more ambitious than proposed by the Commission. Key Points • The RFCS was created by member states in 2002 to fund research of benefit to the coal and steel industry. It uses assets that were collected from the industry in the form of levies. • The fund is managed by the European Commission on behalf of member states, and the RFCS research programme sits outside the EU framework programme for research. • EURACOAL welcomes the proposal to continue the RFCS collaborative research programme and suggests that this should be maintained at the level of €60 million per year, recognising that this means drawing down the assets. • Furthermore, EURACOAL welcomes the proposal to support larger industrial research projects with an additional €71 million per year, linked in the case of coal to the Just Transition Mechanism. Further details on how this support will be allocated are needed. • As the assets were collected from industry, they should be used mainly to support industrial research. The RFCS should not finance purely regional development projects as these will be eligible for funding under the Just Transition Mechanism. • The Commission’s proposal excludes coal research from the RFCS. Given that coal remains globally important and carbon chemistry is fundamental to a circular economy, more flexibility is called for. • The Coal and Steel Committee of member state representatives (COSCO) should continue to have oversight of the RFCS projects funded and a say on research topics. • The proposed RFCS modernisation package must be agreed and approved by EU member states before it can be implemented. The European Parliament must give its consent to the change of legal basis and its opinion on the technical and financial guidelines.
Read full response

Response to EU rules on industrial emissions - revision

21 Apr 2020

The IED is well-drafted and provides a structured framework for a techno-economic process for the preparation of BAT conclusions. However, the “Seville process” appears to be in need of improvement. Based on our experience with updating the LCP BREF, the process was biased towards political considerations rather than the technical and economic factors specified in the IED. In the case of combustion plants, existing legislation gives comprehensive coverage, namely the IED for LCPs and, for smaller plants, the MCP Directive. There is no need to extend the scope of either directive as there are no gaps. In the case of extractive industries, we see no need to address this sector given that mines, quarries, plant and mobile machinery are already covered under existing legislation. Extractive industries are tied to particular mineral deposit locations, and their environmental impacts are not comparable to those of industries covered by the IED. In accordance with TFEU Art.193, the IED does not prevent Member States from maintaining or introducing more stringent protective measures, provided that such measures are compatible with the Treaties and are notified to the Commission. The EU principles of subsidiarity and proportionality mean that Member States should be given flexibility on how to achieve pollution control objectives. The IED has provided that flexibility and it should remain. When selecting certain emission limit values in the revised LCP BREF, we believe that the Commission went beyond its delegated powers. In particular, the BAT-associated emission levels for NOx and mercury ignore the IED requirement for techniques to be available “under economically and technically viable conditions”, thus placing a disproportionate burden on plant operators. For the future, and in line with the Better Regulation Guidelines, impact assessments should be required when Commission decisions, “are likely to have significant economic, environmental or social impacts”. Thus, pollution control legislation should be proportionate in terms of the potential emission reduction per euro invested compared with other possible measures. EURACOAL fully supports actions brought by groups of citizens where there is a clearly defined failure to implement environmental law which has led to an identifiable and specific harm. EURACOAL supports equal access to justice for all. If NGOs are granted greater rights to legal redress in the field of environmental protection, then enterprises, industry associations and trade unions should have the same rights to defend themselves from any far-reaching environmental legislation where a priori impact assessments fail to reveal the true socio-economic impacts at the micro and macro levels. The IIA correctly states that, “Industry is likely to need to make significant investments in the future to support the move to climate neutrality.” However, these investments are driven by other policy measures, such as the EU ETS which should remain the principle means at the EU level of reducing CO2 emissions in a predictable, cost-effective way to meet politically agreed targets via a market-based mechanism. The Commission proposes to examine how to make pollution control legislation fully consistent with its climate, energy and circular economy policies. To do so would carry many risks as it could massively extend the scope of industrial emissions legislation to cover GHG emissions which do not directly harm human health or the quality of the environment. One must therefore ask about the limits to the powers granted under TFEU Articles 191 and 192. The impact assessment should take into account the current economic crisis caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. Already, EURACOAL is aware of issues in implementing current ELVs in the recently revised LCP BREF which must be in place by mid-2021. Supply of the necessary pollution equipment is delayed, because of the crisis, and schedules are slipping. Leniency is called for.
Read full response

EURACOAL urges cautious approach to revised 2030 climate targets

15 Apr 2020
Topic — Consultation on increasing the EU greenhouse gas emission reduction target for 2030.
Message — EURACOAL recommends maintaining the existing target as a necessary baseline option. They also demand that all modeling code and data inputs remain publicly available.12
Why — This prevents economic disruption and the premature loss of valuable mining assets.3
Impact — Environmental advocates lose as a slower pace hinders urgent global climate protection.4
Read full response

EURACOAL rejects expanding environmental legal action rights for NGOs

3 Apr 2020
Topic — The initiative aims to amend EU rules concerning access to justice in environmental matters.
Message — The association rejects expanding legal action rights beyond administrative acts to preserve stability. They argue that broad issues like climate change require political rather than judicial decisions. They suggest the Commission should renegotiate the Aarhus Convention internationally instead of amending current regulations.123
Why — This approach preserves planning certainty for coal enterprises and prevents infrastructure project delays.4
Impact — Environmental groups lose the ability to challenge broad policies like climate change through courts.5
Read full response

Coal association favors global trading over selective EU border tariffs

1 Apr 2020
Topic — The consultation seeks views on implementing a mechanism to price carbon imports to prevent industrial carbon leakage.
Message — EURACOAL recommends the Commission prioritize diplomatic efforts to establish a global carbon trading system. They argue any border mechanism must cover all sectors, including electricity, to ensure fair competition. They suggest a simple tariff based on a country's total emissions per unit of GDP.123
Why — The association would gain protection for EU coal producers against cheaper, high-carbon energy imports.45
Impact — Developing nations with high emissions intensity face trade barriers and potential economic impoverishment.6
Read full response

EURACOAL opposes additional energy taxes for power sectors

1 Apr 2020
Topic — The European Commission is revising energy taxation to align with its climate goals.
Message — The association demands that industries already participating in emissions trading are exempt from further energy taxes. They also reject moving to majority voting for tax decisions.12
Why — This would shield coal producers from increased operational expenses and double taxation burdens.3
Impact — Renewable energy producers lose the competitive advantage that preferential tax rates would provide.4
Read full response

Coal group EURACOAL demands bigger budget for Just Transition Fund

12 Mar 2020
Topic — The consultation concerns establishing a Just Transition Fund to support climate neutrality goals.
Message — EURACOAL calls for a larger budget to match the true size of the transition challenge. They want funding prioritised for active coal regions and higher state aid for energy projects. They also propose including coal companies as strong partners in regional planning.1234
Why — This would provide coal companies with compensation for lost profits and support for infrastructure rehabilitation.56
Impact — Other industrial sectors and diverse regions would face reduced funding due to narrow prioritisation.7
Read full response

EURACOAL warns against rushing transition to climate neutrality

6 Feb 2020
Topic — Proposed European Climate Law to legally enshrine the target of climate neutrality by 2050.
Message — EURACOAL asks for a transition that is not sudden, taking decades in some countries. They argue this transformation should not compromise energy security by overdepending on renewables. Finally, they request that coal value chains form the basis for new growth.123
Why — This slower timeline protects the coal sector's existing infrastructure and economic value chains.4
Impact — The renewable energy sector loses as the industry calls to limit reliance on non-commercial technologies.5
Read full response

EURACOAL urges macro-level cost assessments for industrial emissions

4 Dec 2018
Topic — Evaluation of the Industrial Emissions Directive's effectiveness in reducing pollution from large-scale factories.
Message — The association requests a more balanced cost-benefit analysis that includes the social impact of regulations. They argue that the current focus on health benefits ignores potential job losses and reduced economic activity. They also suggest revisiting compliance timelines to avoid excessive industry costs.123
Why — This would allow the industry to avoid expensive technology upgrades and prevent premature plant closures.45
Impact — Public health may suffer if emission reductions are delayed to protect industrial profitability.6
Read full response

Meeting with Christian Linder (Cabinet of Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič), Dagmara Koska (Cabinet of Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič), Dagmara Koska (Cabinet of Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič)

7 Mar 2016 · Social aspect of energy transition

Meeting with Maroš Šefčovič (Vice-President)

28 Jan 2015 · Energy Union