OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Greenpeace European Unit

GPEU

Greenpeace European Unit is a non-profit organization monitoring EU institutions to protect nature and promote peace.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Martin Günther (Member of the European Parliament) and WWF European Policy Programme and

18 Nov 2025 · Exchange

Meeting with Lena Schilling (Member of the European Parliament)

18 Nov 2025 · COP30 Negotiations

Meeting with Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (Member of the European Parliament) and WWF European Policy Programme

18 Nov 2025 · EUDR

Meeting with Kira Marie Peter-Hansen (Member of the European Parliament) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

17 Nov 2025 · Sustainability omnibus - update for civil society

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament) and Attac Trägerverein e.V.

10 Nov 2025 · Online-Diskussion zu EU-Mercosur

Meeting with Mohammed Chahim (Member of the European Parliament)

5 Nov 2025 · COP30

Meeting with Lena Schilling (Member of the European Parliament)

4 Nov 2025 · COP30

Meeting with Kira Marie Peter-Hansen (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

3 Nov 2025 · Sustainability omnibus - update for civil society

Meeting with Ingeborg Ter Laak (Member of the European Parliament) and OXFAM INTERNATIONAL EU ADVOCACY OFFICE and Vereniging Milieudefensie

3 Nov 2025 · 2040 targe

Meeting with Jutta Paulus (Member of the European Parliament)

22 Oct 2025 · Uranium

Meeting with Tilly Metz (Member of the European Parliament)

22 Oct 2025 · Uranium

Meeting with Delara Burkhardt (Member of the European Parliament) and WWF European Policy Programme and

6 Oct 2025 · deforestation

Meeting with Kira Marie Peter-Hansen (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

2 Oct 2025 · Sustainability omnibus - update for civil society

Meeting with Daniel Buda (Member of the European Parliament) and Climate Action Network Europe

2 Oct 2025 · Mercosur

Meeting with Terry Reintke (Member of the European Parliament) and European Environmental Bureau and

30 Sept 2025 · Climate and Environmental Policies

Meeting with Hildegard Bentele (Member of the European Parliament) and European Environmental Bureau and

25 Sept 2025 · Climate target /ETS2

Meeting with Michal Wiezik (Member of the European Parliament)

3 Sept 2025 · EU-Mercosur agreement

Meeting with Kathleen Van Brempt (Member of the European Parliament)

3 Sept 2025 · Brazil's indigenous leaders: on trade and deforestation

Meeting with Myriam Jans (Cabinet of Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra) and Vereniging Milieudefensie and

3 Sept 2025 · Climate Policy

Meeting with Damian Boeselager (Member of the European Parliament)

2 Sept 2025 · Mercosur

Meeting with Manon Aubry (Member of the European Parliament)

2 Sept 2025 · EU-Mercosur agreement

Response to Export and import of hazardous chemicals

5 Aug 2025

Greenpeace EU welcomes the draft delegated act amending Regulation (EU) No 649/2012 on the export and import of hazardous chemicals, to the extent that it introduces new harmful chemicals in its scope. However, we would like to emphasise that export notifications, as provided under Regulation 649/2012, are fully insufficient when it comes to guaranteeing the protection of environmental and human health from hazardous chemicals. The EU must urgently and finally ban the export of hazardous chemicals altogether. The European Commission promised already back in 2020 that it would present measures to stop the production and export of all banned and hazardous chemicals by 2023, but it has so far failed to do so. Time is of the essence here. The impacts of these hazardous substances on people and nature can be devastating. Some of them are notorious bee-killers, others can lead to Parkinsons disease, some have endocrine disrupting and genotoxic properties, others are highly toxic to aquatic organisms even at low concentrations. Why are products which are deemed too dangerous for people and nature in the EU still being produced for export to other countries around the world? Together with more than 600 organisations worldwide (see: https://www.pan-europe.info/press-releases/2025/06/eu-should-keep-its-promise-and-end-toxic-trade-banned-pesticides), we call on the European Commission to urgently present a legislative proposal to prohibit the export of all pesticides and other hazardous chemicals that are banned in the EU, in order to protect human health and the environment. In addition, we would like to point out that this toxic double standard applies also to other goods beyond pesticides and other chemicals. In a 2024 briefing, hundreds of civil society organisations, Greenpeace included, exposed that the current EU legal framework still allows its companies to profit off the production and export to non-EU countries of other goods which are deemed too dangerous or unfit for the EU market and people - for instance, unsafe toys, single-use plastic products, or intrusive AI systems (see: https://www.greenpeace.org/static/planet4-eu-unit-stateless/2024/09/54eba298-toxic-double-standards-ngo-briefing-sept.-2024-with-corrections.pdf). Exporting products to other countries that EU lawmakers have deemed are unsafe for Europeans is hypocritical, cruel, unfair and intolerable. We therefore call on the European Commission to address this double standard in a more comprehensive manner, and close all existing loopholes through a EU horizontal legislation that prevents the export from the EU of goods whose sale, use or consumption in the EU are not allowed under EU law. The briefing with more details is attached to this submission.
Read full response

Meeting with Majdouline Sbai (Member of the European Parliament)

29 Jul 2025 · Mercosur

Meeting with Costas Kadis (Commissioner) and ClientEarth AISBL and

10 Jul 2025 · Review of the Common Fisheries Policy, Oceans Pact, and future situation of the fishing activity and marine environment

Meeting with Damian Boeselager (Member of the European Parliament)

26 Jun 2025 · Mercosur

Meeting with Michael Bloss (Member of the European Parliament) and Heinrich Böll Stiftung e.V. and

24 Jun 2025 · Klimapolitik

Meeting with Ricard Ramon I Sumoy (Acting Head of Unit Agriculture and Rural Development) and European Environmental Bureau and

24 Jun 2025 · Exchange on the Multiannual Financial Framework, Common Agricultural Policy, the Livestock Workstream, and Food

Meeting with Teresa Ribera Rodríguez (Executive Vice-President) and

19 Jun 2025 · Implementation of the clean transition agenda in Bulgaria

Meeting with Alisa Tiganj (Cabinet of Commissioner Christophe Hansen) and European Environmental Bureau and World Wide Fund for Nature Belgium

19 Jun 2025 · EBAF; CAP post-2027; Agriculture Omnibus (Q4); Follow up to the Vision for Agriculture and Strategic Dialogue

Meeting with César Luena (Member of the European Parliament) and Ecologistas en Accion and Mighty Earth

18 Jun 2025 · Deforestation

Meeting with Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz (Member of the European Parliament)

4 Jun 2025 · Energy Policy and Environmental Issues

Meeting with Luis Planas Herrera (Cabinet of Commissioner Jessika Roswall) and WWF European Policy Programme and

27 May 2025 · EUDR

Meeting with Dan Jørgensen (Commissioner) and OXFAM INTERNATIONAL EU ADVOCACY OFFICE and

23 May 2025 · Energy Union

Meeting with Kathleen Van Brempt (Member of the European Parliament)

14 May 2025 · Indigenous peoples' rights and trade policy

Meeting with Evelyn Regner (Member of the European Parliament)

14 May 2025 · General Exchange of Views

Meeting with Yvan Verougstraete (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

23 Apr 2025 · Demande de réunion pour discuter de la sortie du gaz

Meeting with Andrzej Celinski (Cabinet of Commissioner Piotr Serafin), Wouter Coussens (Cabinet of Commissioner Piotr Serafin)

7 Apr 2025 · Next MFF

Meeting with András Tivadar Kulja (Member of the European Parliament)

27 Mar 2025 · Green Deal

Meeting with Erik Marquardt (Member of the European Parliament) and SOLIDAR and Child Rights International Network

18 Mar 2025 · Export Ban/ PCD

Meeting with Katarina Koszeghy (Cabinet of Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra), Patrice Pillet (Cabinet of Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra)

24 Feb 2025 · EU environmental tax issues

Meeting with Teresa Ribera Rodríguez (Executive Vice-President) and

21 Feb 2025 · • Impact of a possible deregulation of measures to combat climate change • Strategic lines of the next Clean Industrial Deal • The Omnibus Package

Greenpeace urges EU to ban deep-sea mining and protect oceans

17 Feb 2025
Topic — The consultation establishes a holistic vision for coherent EU ocean-related policy making.
Message — Greenpeace calls for the BBNJ Agreement ratification and a deep-sea mining moratorium. They advocate for integrated governance to prioritize environmental protection across all sectors.123
Why — The group would gain a stronger legal basis for international marine conservation.4
Impact — The mining industry loses the ability to fast-track deep-sea resource extraction.5
Read full response

Meeting with Kathleen Van Brempt (Member of the European Parliament) and EUROPEAN TRADE UNION CONFEDERATION and International Trade Union Confederation

6 Feb 2025 · EU-Mercosur

Meeting with Luca De Carli (Head of Unit Climate Action)

5 Feb 2025 · Event on phasing out fossil fuels

Meeting with Christophe Hansen (Commissioner) and

3 Feb 2025 · Exchange of views on the Vision for Agriculture and Food and the European Board on Agriculture and Food

Meeting with Maria Ohisalo (Member of the European Parliament) and WWF European Policy Programme and Suomen luonnonsuojeluliitto - The Finnish Association for Nature Conservation

22 Jan 2025 · Forest Monitoring

Meeting with Catherine Geslain-Laneelle (Director Agriculture and Rural Development)

21 Jan 2025 · Vision for Agriculture and Food

Meeting with Lynn Boylan (Member of the European Parliament)

18 Dec 2024 · Planning for event on fossil fuel phase-out

Meeting with Pascal Canfin (Member of the European Parliament)

18 Dec 2024 · Mercosur/Deforestation

Meeting with Delara Burkhardt (Member of the European Parliament)

16 Dec 2024 · Deforestation

Meeting with Christian Ehler (Member of the European Parliament) and Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V. and

11 Dec 2024 · Climate, Energy and Industrial Policy

Meeting with Veronika Vrecionová (Member of the European Parliament, Committee chair) and Hnutí DUHA - Friends of the Earth Czech Republic and Arnika, z.s.

4 Dec 2024 · Future of CAP (incl. sustainable farming, pesticide management, animal welfare)

Meeting with Dan Barna (Member of the European Parliament) and European Trade Justice Coalition (formerly S2B Network)

4 Dec 2024 · The EU-Mercosur agreement

Meeting with Kurt Vandenberghe (Director-General Climate Action)

29 Nov 2024 · the alarming number of false solutions and political distractions

Meeting with Anna Cavazzini (Member of the European Parliament) and Bischöfliches Hilfswerk Misereor e.V. and PowerShift - Verein fuer eine oekologisch-solidarische Energie- Weltwirtschaft e.V.

26 Nov 2024 · EU-mercosur agreement

Meeting with Terry Reintke (Member of the European Parliament) and European Environmental Bureau and

21 Nov 2024 · New European Commission

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament)

18 Nov 2024 · Greening economic and monetary rules

Meeting with Lena Schilling (Member of the European Parliament) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment)

14 Nov 2024 · Maritime and freight policy, Aviation and rail policy, Road transport and passenger rights, Sustainability and over-tourism policies

Meeting with Tiemo Wölken (Member of the European Parliament)

8 Nov 2024 · Protecting Environmental Watchdogs in Romania (staff level)

Meeting with Lynn Boylan (Member of the European Parliament)

5 Nov 2024 · Trade of products banned in the EU; fossil fuel phase-out and fossil fuel lobbyists

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament) and WWF European Policy Programme and

15 Oct 2024 · deforestation

Meeting with Bernd Lange (Member of the European Parliament, Committee chair) and Eurogroup for Animals and Friends of the Earth Europe

14 Oct 2024 · General exchange of views

Meeting with Peter Van Kemseke (Cabinet of President Ursula von der Leyen)

9 Oct 2024 · EUDR (NGOs)

Meeting with Alexandr Vondra (Member of the European Parliament)

30 Sept 2024 · General consultation

Meeting with Anja Hazekamp (Member of the European Parliament)

25 Sept 2024 · Action

Meeting with Delara Burkhardt (Member of the European Parliament) and WWF European Policy Programme and

18 Sept 2024 · EUDR

Greenpeace urges EU to stop subsidizing forest biomass burning

11 Jul 2024
Topic — This consultation evaluates EU rules on land use, forestry, and climate target accountability.
Message — Greenpeace demands an end to subsidies for burning wood and energy crops. They oppose using land-based carbon removals to offset industrial pollution in other sectors.12
Why — This approach would advance Greenpeace's mission by prioritizing ecosystem restoration over industrial biomass.3
Impact — Energy companies and agricultural producers would lose access to lucrative bioenergy and crop subsidies.4
Read full response

Meeting with Bruno Tobback (Member of the European Parliament)

3 Jul 2024 · Climate, Green Deal and just transition files in the upcoming mandate

Meeting with Kathleen Van Brempt (Member of the European Parliament)

3 Jul 2024 · Rechtvaardig Europees milieukader/intergenerationeel klimaatbeleid

Greenpeace slams proposal to increase nitrogen limits in vulnerable zones

17 May 2024
Topic — The Commission is consulting on amending nitrogen load limits under the Nitrates Directive.
Message — Greenpeace rejects increasing nitrogen limits and opposes creating loopholes for new fertilisers. They urge the Commission to reduce intensive livestock herds and support agro-ecology. The proposal should focus on quality controls rather than loosening existing environmental protections.123
Why — Stricter limits prevent the expansion of industrial livestock operations that Greenpeace opposes.45
Impact — Small-scale farmers lose as industrial factory farms expand and erode their livelihoods.6
Read full response

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament)

23 Apr 2024 · Greening economic and monetary rules

Meeting with Michal Wiezik (Member of the European Parliament) and Global Witness

11 Apr 2024 · Financing of ecosystem risk activities

Meeting with César Luena (Member of the European Parliament)

21 Mar 2024 · New Genomic Techniques

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and Climate Action Network Europe and

21 Feb 2024 · gas package

Meeting with Terry Reintke (Member of the European Parliament) and Ecologistas en Accion

21 Feb 2024 · Climate policies, Sustainability, Ecological transformation

Meeting with Wopke Hoekstra (Commissioner)

16 Feb 2024 · Latest developments on the European Green Deal

Meeting with Maroš Šefčovič (Executive Vice-President) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

30 Jan 2024 · Green Deal, 2040 climate target, strategic dialogue on the future of agriculture in the EU

Meeting with Hildegard Bentele (Member of the European Parliament) and Seas At Risk and

26 Jan 2024 · Meeting mit Umweltverbänden: Resolution zu Tiefseebergbau in Norwegen

Meeting with Grace O'Sullivan (Member of the European Parliament)

19 Jan 2024 · Plastic pellets in Galicia

Meeting with Christophe Clergeau (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and Corporate Europe Observatory and Fédération Nature et Progrès

15 Dec 2023 · Nouveaux OGMs

Meeting with Damian Boeselager (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

12 Dec 2023 · Ukraine Facility & Treaty Change

Meeting with Maroš Šefčovič (Executive Vice-President) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

7 Nov 2023 · Transition towards sustainable food systems

Meeting with Christophe Clergeau (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and Friends of the Earth Europe and

26 Oct 2023 · Table ronde avec les représentants de la société civile sur la proposition de règlement sur les nouveaux OGM

Meeting with Jakop G. Dalunde (Member of the European Parliament) and Swedish Society for Nature Conservation and Världsnaturfonden WWF (WWF Sweden)

31 Aug 2023 · Fit for 55 and the future of Swedish Climate politics

Meeting with Camilla Laureti (Member of the European Parliament)

5 Jul 2023 · Dossier 2023

Meeting with Aurore Lalucq (Member of the European Parliament)

4 Jul 2023 · Industrial Emission Directive

Meeting with Aleksandra Tomczak (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and Climate Action Network Europe and

4 Jul 2023 · Electricity Market Design Reform

Meeting with Benoît Biteau (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and European Environmental Bureau

29 Jun 2023 · IED

Meeting with Roberto Reig Rodrigo (Cabinet of Commissioner Stella Kyriakides) and Friends of the Earth Europe and

27 Jun 2023 · New Genomic Techiniques.

Meeting with Frans Timmermans (Executive Vice-President) and Friends of the Earth Europe and

27 Jun 2023 · New genomic techniques

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament) and Heinrich Böll Stiftung e.V. and Leuphana Universität Lüneburg

19 Jun 2023 · Teilnahme Veranstaltung EU-Mercosur Handesabkommen

Meeting with David Cormand (Member of the European Parliament)

4 May 2023 · Own resources

Meeting with Martin Häusling (Member of the European Parliament)

2 May 2023 · Austausch zum Thema Pestizide und Mercosur-Abkommen

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament) and ClientEarth AISBL and

27 Apr 2023 · follow up on deforestation file

Meeting with Brando Benifei (Member of the European Parliament)

20 Apr 2023 · Discussion on the reform of the industrial emissions' directive

Meeting with Norbert Lins (Member of the European Parliament, Committee chair) and Deutscher Bauernverband and Confederazione Nazionale Coldiretti

19 Apr 2023 · Industrial Emissions Directive

Meeting with Ignazio Corrao (Member of the European Parliament)

19 Apr 2023 · Industrial Emission Directive

Meeting with Anja Hazekamp (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

19 Apr 2023 · AGRI industrial emissions

Meeting with Alexander Bernhuber (Member of the European Parliament)

19 Apr 2023 · EU trade relations with Mercosur

Meeting with Sarah Wiener (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

19 Apr 2023 · Agricultural policy in general, pesticide reduction, Green Deal and SUR

Meeting with Michal Wiezik (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

18 Apr 2023 · Industrial Emissions Directive

Meeting with Michèle Rivasi (Member of the European Parliament)

18 Apr 2023 · OGMs

Meeting with Aleksandra Tomczak (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and Fossil Free Politics

18 Apr 2023 · Role of fossil fuel companies in the EU clean energy transition and energy reforms

Meeting with Aleksandra Tomczak (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans), Anthony Agotha (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and

29 Mar 2023 · EU-Norway energy cooperation

Meeting with Rasmus Andresen (Member of the European Parliament)

23 Feb 2023 · Mercosur trade agreement

Meeting with David Cormand (Member of the European Parliament)

21 Feb 2023 · Own resources

Meeting with Michael Bloss (Member of the European Parliament)

31 Jan 2023 · 9€-Ticket und europäische Initiativen (Staff level meeting)

Meeting with Mohammed Chahim (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and ClientEarth AISBL

24 Jan 2023 · NGO meeting IED

Meeting with David Cormand (Member of the European Parliament)

28 Nov 2022 · Sustainable consumption

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and ClientEarth AISBL and

23 Nov 2022 · deforestation

Meeting with Frans Timmermans (Executive Vice-President) and Climate Action Network Europe and

15 Nov 2022 · Progress of COP27 negotiations

Meeting with Caroline Roose (Member of the European Parliament) and Friends of the Earth Europe and Green Finance Observatory

10 Nov 2022 · COP 15 : derniers développements en matière de financement de la biodiversité, y compris la compensation (Assistant·e·s)

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and ClientEarth AISBL and

26 Oct 2022 · deforestation

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

14 Oct 2022 · ocean / stop deep sea mining

Meeting with Radka Maxová (Member of the European Parliament)

7 Sept 2022 · Environmental policy

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and ClientEarth AISBL and

2 Sept 2022 · deforestation

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and Global Witness

27 Jun 2022 · deforestation

Meeting with Frans Timmermans (Executive Vice-President) and Finnish Forest Industries Federation (Metsäteollisuus ry) and

9 Jun 2022 · forest visit

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament)

8 Jun 2022 · taxonomy

Meeting with Marek Belka (Member of the European Parliament)

7 Jun 2022 · Meeting with Anna Ogniewska (Greenpeace Polska) on taxonomy

Meeting with Lukas Visek (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and European Environmental Bureau and Stichting BirdLife Europe

2 Jun 2022 · Sustainable food systems and CAP

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and Global Witness

1 Jun 2022 · deforestation

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

31 May 2022 · deforestation

Meeting with Saskia Bricmont (Member of the European Parliament)

10 May 2022 · Accords de libre échange / Initiative citoyenne contre la publicité pour produits issus des énergies fossiles

Meeting with Roberto Reig Rodrigo (Cabinet of Commissioner Stella Kyriakides) and Friends of the Earth Europe and

3 May 2022 · New Genomic Techinques

Meeting with Lukas Visek (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and Friends of the Earth Europe and

3 May 2022 · New genomic techniques

Meeting with Věra Jourová (Vice-President) and Civil Liberties Union for Europe and

28 Apr 2022 · SLAPP

Meeting with Janusz Wojciechowski (Commissioner) and

22 Apr 2022 · Farm to Fork Strategy for food security

Response to Revision of EU rules on Gas

12 Apr 2022

Europe is currently facing the double challenge of the Ukraine war and the ongoing climate and ecological crisis. It is more urgent than ever to recognise the need to end our dependence on fossil fuels and adequately plan their phase out, with a clear roadmap that leaves no one behind. As they stand, the Commission’s proposals risk instead creating further gas lock-in and undermining the EU’s climate and energy targets without resolving the conflicts of interests at the heart of the current framework. These proposals should be an opportunity to provide a framework to reduce EU fossil gas consumption by 2030 and reach a complete phaseout by 2035. The dramatic change in the international context since the proposals were published in December 2021 should prompt the Commission to revise its impact assessment to address the effect Putin’s war will have on the future gas market , the costs and risks inherent in the current LNG diversification strategy, and the impact of prices on the future of fossil hydrogen to identify the most cost-effective phase-out pathway. In addition to this call for a new impact assessment, we have a number of key recommendations: 1 – Improve governance by: - Ensuring independent oversight and avoiding conflicts of interests in network planning by reducing the disproportionate influence of the ENTSOG through a complete separation between the ownership, control, and operation of fossil gas and hydrogen assets, for a truly fossil-free decision-making process. - Establishing processes integrating gas, electricity and hydrogen network planning at both EU and national level, with the involvement of the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change in integrated hydrogen infrastructure planning. - Aligning the conditions for granting exemptions with EU and national climate and energy targets and ensuring this process’ transparency through national public consultations. 2 – Create a framework for DSOs to prepare for a progressive business model change through: - An explicit transparency obligation for DSOs in the context of energy infrastructure planning and to ensure network plans are in line with EU and national climate and energy targets. - An invitation to start planning the decommissioning of uneconomic DSO networks. - The opening of network planning by DSOs to participation from communities, civil society and local governments, and linking it with local heating and cooling planning. 3 – Do not treat hydrogen as a silver bullet for decarbonisation: - 100% renewable-based hydrogen use should be prioritised for those sectors that are harder to decarbonise. - Hydrogen blending should be excluded from the Regulation as it does not bring any tangible climate benefit while increasing energy bills significantly. - Gas or electricity consumers should not end up subsiding the development of a hydrogen infrastructure they do not benefit from. Households’ connection to newly built (or repurposed) hydrogen distribution grids should therefore be banned. - Likewise, financial transfers between regulated services that are separate should be banned. - Regulators should review the cost effectiveness of supplying buildings with hydrogen, including the costly distribution grid upgrades. 4 – Remove any reference to “low carbon hydrogen”, since the only true “low carbon” production of hydrogen is through renewable electricity, and exclude food and feed-based feedstocks and roundwood from the definition for sustainably produced biogas. 5 – Remove any reference to energy communities, given the significant risk of corporate capture, and incorporate references from the REDII provisions on Renewable Energy Communities instead. The EU cannot afford to waste more time or money on any pathway other than one leading straight towards a 100% renewable energy system. You will find attached a full position paper from Greenpeace European Unit and a coalition of other like-minded NGOs on the Commission’s proposals.
Read full response

Response to Revision of EU rules on Gas

12 Apr 2022

Europe is currently facing the double challenge of the Ukraine war and the ongoing climate and ecological crisis. It is more urgent than ever to recognise the need to end our dependence on fossil fuels and adequately plan their phase out, with a clear roadmap that leaves no one behind. As they stand, the Commission’s proposals risk instead creating further gas lock-in and undermining the EU’s climate and energy targets without resolving the conflicts of interests at the heart of the current framework. These proposals should be an opportunity to provide a framework to reduce EU fossil gas consumption by 2030 and reach a complete phaseout by 2035. The dramatic change in the international context since the proposals were published in December 2021 should prompt the Commission to revise its impact assessment to address the effect Putin’s war will have on the future gas market , the costs and risks inherent in the current LNG diversification strategy, and the impact of prices on the future of fossil hydrogen to identify the most cost-effective phase-out pathway. In addition to this call for a new impact assessment, we have a number of key recommendations: 1 – Improve governance by: - Ensuring independent oversight and avoiding conflicts of interests in network planning by reducing the disproportionate influence of the ENTSOG through a complete separation between the ownership, control, and operation of fossil gas and hydrogen assets, for a truly fossil-free decision-making process. - Establishing processes integrating gas, electricity and hydrogen network planning at both EU and national level, with the involvement of the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change in integrated hydrogen infrastructure planning. - Aligning the conditions for granting exemptions with EU and national climate and energy targets and ensuring this process’ transparency through national public consultations. 2 – Create a framework for DSOs to prepare for a progressive business model change through: - An explicit transparency obligation for DSOs in the context of energy infrastructure planning and to ensure network plans are in line with EU and national climate and energy targets. - An invitation to start planning the decommissioning of uneconomic DSO networks. - The opening of network planning by DSOs to participation from communities, civil society and local governments, and linking it with local heating and cooling planning. 3 – Do not treat hydrogen as a silver bullet for decarbonisation: - 100% renewable-based hydrogen use should be prioritised for those sectors that are harder to decarbonise. - Hydrogen blending should be excluded from the Regulation as it does not bring any tangible climate benefit while increasing energy bills significantly. - Gas or electricity consumers should not end up subsiding the development of a hydrogen infrastructure they do not benefit from. Households’ connection to newly built (or repurposed) hydrogen distribution grids should therefore be banned. - Likewise, financial transfers between regulated services that are separate should be banned. - Regulators should review the cost effectiveness of supplying buildings with hydrogen, including the costly distribution grid upgrades. 4 – Remove any reference to “low carbon hydrogen”, since the only true “low carbon” production of hydrogen is through renewable electricity, and exclude food and feed-based feedstocks and roundwood from the definition for sustainably produced biogas. 5 – Remove any reference to energy communities, given the significant risk of corporate capture, and incorporate references from the REDII provisions on Renewable Energy Communities instead. The EU cannot afford to waste more time or money on any pathway other than one leading straight towards a 100% renewable energy system. You will find attached a full position paper from Greenpeace European Unit and a coalition of other like-minded NGOs on the Commission’s proposals.
Read full response

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and WWF European Policy Programme and

4 Apr 2022 · deforestation

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and WWF European Policy Programme and

18 Mar 2022 · deforestation

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and WWF European Policy Programme and

15 Mar 2022 · deforestation

Meeting with David Cormand (Member of the European Parliament)

2 Mar 2022 · Fossil free politics

Meeting with Marie Toussaint (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and WWF European Policy Programme and

23 Feb 2022 · deforestation

Meeting with David Cormand (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and CEE Bankwatch Network and Counter Balance

16 Feb 2022 · EIB

Response to Revision of the provision of air services

6 Dec 2021

Greenpeace welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback to the call for evidence for an impact assessment of the Air Services Regulation No 1008/2008. It is essential that the revision of the Air Services regulation not only addresses the learnings and resolves the shortcomings experienced during the COVID-19 crisis, but also reflects the objectives of the European Green Deal, including the 55 % greenhouse gas reduction target by 2030 and the EU’s goal to reach climate neutrality by 2050. The revision therefore offers good opportunities to assess and lower the environmental impact of the aviation industry. In this respect it should be viewed in the context of an overarching goal to transit to environmentally sound transport solutions. Greenpeace agrees with the Commission’s assessment that the legal framework is not sufficiently aligned with the current policy objectives laid down in the Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy in terms of promoting sustainable and socially responsible connectivity. The instruments proposed under the Fit for 55 package, such as on sustainable aviation fuels or the EU Emissions Trading System, will not be sufficient to reduce emissions from aviation. A reduction in air traffic is necessary to limit global warming to 1.5°C but, without political action to counter its growth prospects, the aviation industry will have consumed 27% of the global carbon budget for 1.5°C by 2050. In order to implement this necessary reduction, Greenpeace recommends that the option in Article 20 of the Air Services Regulation for Member States to suspend flights in the light of serious environmental problems be converted into an obligation. Short-haul flights, for which there is an alternative as described above, pose an intolerable threat to the general public against the backdrop of the looming climate crisis and the EU's climate protection goals. We recommend the following adaptation of the text: Article 20 Environmental measures 1. When serious environmental problems exist, or in order to achieve the EU's climate targets, the Member State responsible must refuse the exercise of traffic rights in particular when other modes of transport provide appropriate levels of service, or may be developed for that purpose. The measure must be implemented without exemption for transfer flights and be applied to all flights departing and arriving from and to all EU airports. The measure shall be non-discriminatory and shall not distort competition between air carriers, as it applies equally to all air carriers. Safe when adopted to achieve the EU’s climate targets, the measure shall not be more restrictive than necessary to relieve the problems, and shall have a limited period of validity, not exceeding three years, after which it shall be reviewed. Explanation: Appropriate levels of service means the availability of other more climate-friendly modes of transport, especially trains and ferries, with a journey time of under 6 hours or overnight solutions. All other sections of the present legal text shall be adapted accordingly in the sense of this revision. Please find attached our full feedback with a detailed explanation of the proposed adoptions and further sources. With the request for your esteemed consideration and best regards. Klara Maria Schenk Climate & Transport Campaigner for the Greenpeace EU Mobility For All Campaign
Read full response

Meeting with Kadri Simson (Commissioner) and

3 Dec 2021 · Discussion on upcoming Hydrogen and Decarbonised Gas Markets Package (adoption foreseen for 14.12.2021)

Meeting with Frans Timmermans (Executive Vice-President)

11 Nov 2021 · debrief from the Executive Vice-President’s role at the COP, discussion on ambition, climate finance, carbon markets and the cover decision

Meeting with Markus Pieper (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Climate Action Network Europe and

9 Nov 2021 · RED III

Meeting with Thierry Breton (Commissioner) and

9 Nov 2021 · Governance, hydrogen

Meeting with Jorge Pinto Antunes (Cabinet of Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski) and WWF European Policy Programme and

9 Nov 2021 · Forestry

Meeting with Andrea Beltramello (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis) and WWF European Policy Programme

8 Nov 2021 · Taxonomy

Meeting with Katherine Power (Cabinet of Commissioner Mairead Mcguinness) and WWF European Policy Programme

8 Nov 2021 · Sustainable Finance, Taxonomy

Meeting with Janusz Wojciechowski (Commissioner) and

26 Oct 2021 · Review of the EU agricultural promotion policy

Meeting with Aleksandra Tomczak (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans)

8 Sept 2021 · Speaking engagement on just transition in Romania

Meeting with Pascal Canfin (Member of the European Parliament) and WWF European Policy Programme

11 Jun 2021 · CAP

Meeting with Aleksandra Tomczak (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans), Antoine Colombani (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and European Environmental Bureau

31 May 2021 · State aid and coal in Romania

Response to New EU urban mobility framework

25 May 2021

Putting people and nature, not cars, at the centre of urban transport planning will not only transform city living, it will also help protect the climate. Cars and vans are responsible for the biggest share of transport greenhouse gas emissions. Air pollution from all sources is responsible for over 400,000 premature deaths every year - with a vast number attributable to road transport. It is estimated that the average car is only used 5% of the time. The current system, where privately owned cars dominate global transport, is remarkably inefficient. Internal combustion engines in cars must be phased out as soon as possible but replacing every car on the road today with an electric car is not a sustainable solution. In 2020, Greenpeace published a transport decarbonisation roadmap to deliver a fair EU contribution to limiting global warming to 1.5°C. It shows that the number of privately owned passenger cars has to be drastically reduced (by 27% by 2030 and by 47% by 2040, compared to 2015 levels) and a large-scale shift towards alternative modes of transport is necessary. Local authorities and national governments must redesign urban mobility to reduce private car usage and prioritise walking, cycling and public and shared transport and invest in their development. So far, the European Commission has issued recommendations, but “in the absence of legislative compulsion, there was limited take-up of the Commission’s guidance on the part of many Member States and cities – notably in terms of preparing ‘Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans’” (European Court of Auditors, 2020). Our recommendations: 1) Align sustainable urban mobility plans (SUMPs) with the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement and make SUMPs mandatory for cities Local authorities should include the following targets and efficient measures in their compulsory mobility plans : - Compliance with the air quality standards of the World Health Organisation, and greenhouse gases emissions reductions targets in line with the 1,5°C goal. - Planning policy to minimise unnecessary journeys (multi-purpose neighborhoods with education, work, leisures, affordable food and housing) - Reduction of public space allocated to motorised transport (parking, roads, etc.), increase in car free zones, even banning cars from cities altogether, to allow a better access to green public space for all. - Decrease in car modal share and increase in active mobility (cycling and walking) and increase of public transport modal share - Use planning and transport policy to reduce inequalities (eg. avoid gentrification processes and deviation of traffic from rich to poor areas) - Speed limit decrease for motor vehicle - Expand cycling and walkable paths as well as green public space - Expand public transport networks powered with renewable electricity, improve linkages and introduce social fares - Phase out cars with ICE - Shared mobility services provided or facilitated by the local government - Invest in local and regional train networks to connect cities with the surrounding areas and improve intermodality. If local authorities do not have such SUMPs aligned with the 1,5°C goal, they should not be allowed to access EU funds. A 2020 report by the Court of Auditors showed that EU cities are not showing a clear indication to shift the urban traffic to more sustainable modes of transport. The Court recommends making access to EU funds conditional on the adoption of SUMP. 2) The EU should increase funding, investment, incentives for interconnected, clean mobility solutions such as active mobility, shared mobility and public transport that are accessible to everyone. All public funding to airport and motorway projects must end. 3) Binding targets for the reduction of car use in urban areas and the increase of the modal shares of cycling, walking, shared mobility and public transport. 4) The European Commission must propose a ban on sales of new ICE cars (including hybrids) by 2028 at the latest.
Read full response

Meeting with Roberto Reig Rodrigo (Cabinet of Commissioner Stella Kyriakides) and Friends of the Earth Europe and

11 May 2021 · VTC Meeting - New Genomic Techniques and Gene drives

Meeting with Eglantine Cujo (Cabinet of Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius) and WWF European Policy Programme and

7 May 2021 · Discussion about Commission's legislative proposal on deforestation and forest degradation

Meeting with Diana Montero Melis (Cabinet of Commissioner Jutta Urpilainen) and WWF European Policy Programme and

30 Apr 2021 · upcoming regulation on deforestation

Meeting with Jorge Pinto Antunes (Cabinet of Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski) and WWF European Policy Programme and

29 Apr 2021 · Deforestation and forest degradation.

Meeting with Virginijus Sinkevičius (Commissioner) and

28 Apr 2021 · Bialowieza forest

Meeting with Lukas Visek (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and European Environmental Bureau and

23 Apr 2021 · Discussion on CAP

Meeting with Pascal Canfin (Member of the European Parliament)

19 Apr 2021 · Green Deal

Meeting with Sarah Wiener (Member of the European Parliament)

11 Mar 2021 · Animal welfare / turkeys

Response to Revision of the guidelines for trans-European Energy infrastructure

8 Mar 2021

Please find Greenpeace's response to this public consultation in the attached file. It consists of two documents: 1) A response to the European Commission's TEN-E regulation proposal (in an NGOs briefing) 2) A response to the European Commission's TEN- regulation proposal by the Fossil Free Politics Coalition
Read full response

Meeting with Florika Fink-Hooijer (Director-General Environment)

26 Jan 2021 · EU legislation on Forest and Ecosystem Risk Commodities

Meeting with Stella Kyriakides (Commissioner) and Friends of the Earth Europe and

15 Jan 2021 · VC Meeting - Farm to Fork Strategy and GMOs

Meeting with Kitti Nyitrai (Cabinet of Commissioner Kadri Simson) and Climate Action Network Europe and

14 Jan 2021 · TEN-E

Meeting with Virginijus Sinkevičius (Commissioner) and

12 Jan 2021 · To discuss the implementation of the Biodiversity strategy, the actions under the zero-pollution ambition as well as green funding under the new MFF and the recovery funds.

Response to Climate change mitigation and adaptation taxonomy

18 Dec 2020

Greenpeace welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback on the Taxonomy draft delegated acts for climate change adaptation and mitigation. It is essential for the taxonomy to truly be a science-based classification system for sustainable activities, rather than being a tool for greenwashing unsustainable activities and promoting false solutions, as it risks becoming in its current form. In order to ensure that the taxonomy truly is a tool for promoting sustainable investment, we would like to submit the following recommendations for improvement to the draft delegated acts. Our full list of recommendations can be found in the attached Annexe. 1- No fossil fuel should be labelled as sustainable Make the threshold for electricity generation from gaseous and liquid fuels 0 CO2/kWh. Despite the 100g CO2/kWh threshold effectively excluding most fossil gas projects, when combined with carbon capture and storage (CCS), which is allowed under the Taxonomy Regulation, this limit still risks locking Europe into using fossil gas. The taxonomy must not impede progress towards climate neutrality by giving fossil fuels a green label, exacerbating the spiralling climate emergency. False solutions like fossil gas, with or without CCS, should not be eligible to receive a sustainable investment label. 2 - Remove energy production from food crops and forest Exclude the use of food and feed crops for energy. The delegated acts correctly exclude food and feed crops, such as maize, from being used for transport fuels, and yet allow them to be used for other kinds of energy, such as biogas. The Commission should remove this inconsistency and exclude food and feed crops not only from biofuel use but also from any other energy use. Exclude all biomass from forests, including forestry residues. The recommendation by the Technical Expert Group (TEG) was a step in the right direction but the draft delegated acts rely on the current sustainability criteria of the Renewable Energy Directive which are clearly insufficient when it comes to securing climate benefits and avoiding biodiversity harm from forest biomass use. 3 - Cars are not a sustainable form of transportation or a low carbon manufacturing activity Exclude cars from financing under the taxonomy. Cars are not a sustainable form of travel and should therefore not be given a green label. In addition, the threshold for Do No Significant Harm should be set at 1g CO2/km, to ensure vehicles other than electric vehicles are not supported. 4 - Do not greenwash the intensification of farming and agriculture systems Remove the livestock sector from the taxonomy. The current proposal gives a green label to livestock-related projects that allow an increase in the number of animals, thereby increasing absolute greenhouse gas emissions, as well as negatively impacting climate, biodiversity and land use. The taxonomy should promote agricultural and farming activities that bring about an absolute reduction in emissions by promoting the transition to agro-ecology and ecological livestock management. 5 - Exclude nuclear energy Reintroduce the explicit exclusion of nuclear energy from taxonomy, as was recommended by the TEG, due to its causing significant harm to other taxonomy areas, in particular the circular economy. As the TEG rightly noted (page 210, Annex Taxonomy TEG report), no “viable, safe and long-term underground repository been established” for its waste, which makes nuclear energy incompatible with taxonomy. Including nuclear energy in the list of sustainable investments also carries the risk of diverting funding from real energy solutions like renewables.
Read full response

Meeting with Frans Timmermans (Executive Vice-President) and WWF European Policy Programme

14 Dec 2020 · Handover of 1 mln signatures for action on deforestation

Response to Land use, land use change and forestry – review of EU rules

26 Nov 2020

The review of the EU LULUCF regulation must end allowing member states to reduce their forest sinks as currently planned by many (by means of projected forest reference levels allowing to further increase wood harvesting). Declining sinks are equivalent to increased emissions and therefore goes against the Paris Climate Agreement. Instead, the EU needs to adopt separate climate targets for natural sinks in the LULUCF sector such as forests, peatlands etc. This natural sink target must be completely separate from existing GHG reduction targets for sectors such as energy, transport and agriculture. Needed emission reduction targets in these sectors should not be undermined with net-emission reduction targets that would allow to use natural sinks as offsets for emissions from other sectors. This target should be much more ambitious than the current LULUCF regulation’s target, which only requires Member States to ensure that the LULUCF sector does not turn from a sink to a net emitter. Rather the EU should aim at doubling the CO2 removals by sinks by 2030. Recent studies have shown that the carbon storage potential of just the EU's forests could be close to 490 million tons of CO2 annually in the coming decade, compared to the current level of about 250 million tons of CO2 / year, if wood harvesting rates were reduced at least one third. Such an increase in the carbon storage potential of forests in combination with the targets of the EU Biodiversity Strategy will require a significant reduction in the wood harvest volume and a phase-out of the use of forest wood for energy. Forest energy wood does not mitigate climate change or contribute to lowering the CO2 content in the atmosphere, yet the harvesting of energy wood has been the main driver of increased overall wood harvesting volumes in the last two decades. As a first step all subsidies or other incentives for wood-based energy must be cut.
Read full response

Meeting with Lukas Visek (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and European Environmental Bureau and

24 Nov 2020 · Discussion on CAP

Meeting with Wolfgang Burtscher (Director-General Agriculture and Rural Development) and European Environmental Bureau and Stichting BirdLife Europe

20 Nov 2020 · Green architecture CAP

Meeting with Frans Timmermans (Executive Vice-President)

19 Nov 2020 · Exchange of views on the need for an EU legislative proposal to curtail the imports of products that lead to deforestation.

Meeting with Pascal Canfin (Member of the European Parliament) and WWF European Policy Programme

12 Nov 2020 · CAP

Meeting with Virginijus Sinkevičius (Commissioner) and

26 Oct 2020 · To discuss deforestation and forest degradation – European Commission initiative for reducing the impact of products placed on the European Union market

Meeting with Pascal Canfin (Member of the European Parliament) and European Environmental Bureau and Stichting BirdLife Europe

15 Oct 2020 · CAP

Meeting with Janusz Wojciechowski (Commissioner) and

13 Oct 2020 · CAP reform and Farm to Fork Strategy.

Meeting with Pascal Canfin (Member of the European Parliament) and WWF European Policy Programme

12 Oct 2020 · CAP

Greenpeace Demands Higher Climate Targets and Fossil Fuel Phase-out

21 Sept 2020
Topic — Revision of the Renewable Energy Directive to align with new EU climate goals.
Message — Greenpeace calls for an EU commitment to at least 65% emission cuts and a 50% renewable energy share by 2030. They demand the urgent removal of fossil fuel subsidies and a radical reform of bioenergy sustainability criteria to protect forests.123
Why — These measures would accelerate the transition to a carbon-neutral economy while protecting global forest ecosystems.45
Impact — The fossil fuel and nuclear industries would lose billions in annual subsidies and market share.67
Read full response

Meeting with Didier Reynders (Commissioner) and

22 Jul 2020 · Anti-SLAPPs measures

Meeting with Annukka Ojala (Cabinet of Commissioner Stella Kyriakides), Roberto Reig Rodrigo (Cabinet of Commissioner Stella Kyriakides) and

25 Jun 2020 · VC-meeting on Farm to Fork Strategy and Pesticides.

Greenpeace urges EU to prioritize renewable hydrogen over fossil gas

8 Jun 2020
Topic — This consultation explores the potential of clean hydrogen to help decarbonise the European economy.
Message — EU support should not fund hydrogen produced from fossil fuels. Hydrogen use must be restricted to industrial processes that cannot be directly electrified. Color-coded definitions should be removed to prevent misleading consumers about environmental impacts.123
Why — This proposal would accelerate the transition to a purely renewable energy system.4
Impact — The fossil fuel industry loses subsidies and the ability to greenwash gas production.5
Read full response

Response to Climate Law

1 May 2020

The political response to the climate emergency is the defining issue of our time. But progress has been painfully slow. The EU has staked its credibility on showing the world that it can decarbonise as extensively as science demands, while ensuring no-one is left behind. With no plans for a science-based 2030 target, nor measures to end fossil fuel subsidies, the Commission's draft climate law is setting ourselves up for failure. Greta Thunberg and youth climate activists branded the European Commission’s proposals a “surrender”, with scientists warning that cuts in greenhouse gas emissions over the next ten years will determine the success or failure of climate action. Targets: The Commission has suggested an emission reduction target of 50-55% for 2030. This target would not be sufficient to limit global heating to 2°C, let alone to 1.5°C. The longer governments wait to reduce emissions, the steeper and tougher these cuts will need to be in future. A recent UN report calculated that without taking equity and the historic responsibility into account, the EU must commit to yearly reductions of 7.6% a year between 2020 and 2030, reaching just over a 65% cut in emissions by 2030. Even steeper cuts will be needed if governments do not start drastically reducing emissions now. Independent scientific body: To check climate action against the most up to date science, the EU should also establish an independent scientific body, reporting to the European Parliament and Council, to advise on EU targets, scrutinise EU plans and policies and require the review of legislation that cause significant harm. This is a standard feature of national climate laws. Consistency of EU and national policy: Scrap or change EU policies that aren’t consistent with the EU’s climate objectives. No new legislation should be allowed to increase the overall emissions or slow down climate action efforts, and all new policies must include a carbon budget and should be analysed for their climate and environmental impacts. Phase out climate harming subsidies including fossil fuels now: The EU and several EU governments committed ten years ago at the G20 to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies by 2025. Despite this, no EU government has a plan to phase out fossil fuel subsidies, and the lion’s share of the EU’s budget, including finance under the Green Deal continues to do so. This phase out should be expanded to other climate harming subsidies including aviation, the internal combustion engine and industrial agriculture. The climate law should require national governments and the European Commission to come up with legislation and strategies to phase out climate harming subsidies immediately. Sector targets: The law should require the Commission to propose updated sectoral emissions reduction targets for 2030 including for renewable energy, energy efficiency, agriculture and transport. This will require a reduction target for meat and dairy consumption and a phase-out of new petrol and diesel cars to be able to meet the required emission reductions in transport and agriculture. Fossil Free politics: With the fossil fuel era coming to an end, fossil fuel companies should no longer be allowed to water down EU climate action. The climate law must therefore ban lobbying, advertising and sponsorship of fossil fuels companies. Access to justice and public participation: In line with the Aarhus Convention Greenpeace calls for a reinterpretation of the Court's jurisprudence, that has interpreted the Treaty too strictly up until now, clarifying that citizens and their representatives are directly and individually concerned by the compliance of the EU’s bodies with the Paris agreement goals. Citizens and communities need to be engaged at all policy levels to further policy design with the aim to be a basis for a deep and just transition.
Read full response

Response to Climate change mitigation and adaptation taxonomy

27 Apr 2020

Greenpeace welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback on the roadmap for the EU taxonomy on sustainable finance. The EU taxonomy must set the financial classification for the EU to cut material consumption, to protect the ecosystems and cut emissions to comply with the 1.5°C Paris Agreement goal. Therefore activities which are not compatible with these goals must be clearly distinguished. 1 - Activities which should be added to the sustainable taxonomy Active mobility: cycling and walking should be added to the list of sustainable economic activities in the Taxonomy. Walking, cycling and public transport in cities remain the greenest mobility options (EEA 2020). In 2014, 655,000 people were working in the cycling related sectors in the EU (ECF). 2- Economic activities that should remain out - Fossil fuels: Under the TEG proposal energy generated from fossil fuels is excluded above 100gCO2/KWh, as the emissions produced are on average much higher. However, to avoid lock-in to technologies and activities incompatible with the net-zero target, the threshold should be further reduced. - Nuclear energy: Due to the inherent risk involved in operating and fuelling power stations, as well as in dealing with radioactive waste, the TEG found that nuclear energy breaches the ‘Do No Significant Harm’ criteria. Nuclear energy does not meet the criteria for sustainable investment because it produces waste for which there are no foreseeable solutions and it exposes people and the environment to the risk of serious accidents with substantial emissions of radioactive substances. and nuclear energy has a negative learning curve – due to its inherent need for caution and safety, the technology grows in complexity, with resulting spiralling costs, meaning it is unable to compete with renewable alternatives. - Waste incineration : must also remain out. 3- Activities that should be also removed from sustainable finance - Forest management in existing forests: Any logging activities in existing forests are already economically beneficial and do not contribute to increasing the forests’ carbon sink function overall. Forestry measures contributing to climate change mitigation or adaptation are already sufficiently defined under the criteria by the TEG on afforestation, restoration, reforestation and conservation. - Livestock production: This is a high-emitting and polluting industry linked with drivers of global deforestation. Meat and dairy products are already over-produced in Europe. Any tweaking of existing livestock production should not be included in sustainable finance criteria but rather aim to reduce livestock numbers in animal farming. - Biofuels and biogas use in transport: Under the TEG’s proposals, trucks, coaches, and vessels that use liquid biofuels or biogas would be eligible. But such vehicles and vessels can also use fossil diesel or gas, so a truck could use advanced biofuels one day and diesel the next. As enforcement is impossible, the taxonomy should exclude trucks, coaches, and ships, and the related refuelling infrastructure, that can also run on fossil diesel or gas. 4- Activities where further improvements are needed - Manufacture of biomass, biofuels, biogas: For any energy uses (electricity, heating or transport) the Commission should follow the recommendations of the TEG (technical annex section 4.13) and further improve it by removing feedstocks used only to those significantly limiting emissions compared to fossil fuels i.e. by removing tree trunks, stumps, energy crops and so called ‘low indirect land-use change-risk’ food and feed crops. - Internal combustion engines : The final TEG taxonomy report allows for vehicles with tailpipe emission intensity of 50 g CO2/km to be eligible until 2025. The threshold for this activity should be set at 0g of CO2/km for health reasons and for full compliance with the 1,5 limit. An additional limit on weight and size of the vehicles would prevent investments in harmful SUVs.
Read full response

Meeting with Valdis Dombrovskis (Executive Vice-President) and

24 Apr 2020 · Economic recovery, sustainable finance taxonomy, EIB energy lending policy, Just Transition Mechanism, Industrial Strategy, Integrating SDGs in the European Semester

Meeting with Wolfgang Burtscher (Director-General Agriculture and Rural Development) and European Environmental Bureau and

17 Apr 2020 · Exchange of views on CAP and Green Deal

Meeting with Thierry Breton (Commissioner) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

15 Apr 2020 · Priorities for the Coronavirus recovery

Response to Revision of the Energy Tax Directive

1 Apr 2020

Greenpeace welcomes the initiative by the European Commission to bring the Energy Taxation Directive and wider EU and national taxation policies in line with the EU's climate commitments. This submission spells out the key elements that Greenpeace believes the EU should take into account for the next revision of the ETD in 2021. Care for each other and the environment, and a strong rooting in science must underpin any political decision-making. With these principles in mind, the future energy taxation system must contribute to help the EU transition away from the current social and economic model, which drives inequality, climate breakdown and environmental destruction. - Carbon and energy pricing are a necessary part of a group of policy reforms to deliver on the Paris Agreement goals. Thus, a new ETD must be designed to contribute to a at least 65% decrease in EU greenhouse gases emissions by 2030, in order to be aligned with the goal to limit global warming to 1,5 °C (1). - Fossil fuels are currently not sufficiently taxed to incentivise the required decrease in total energy production and consumption and rapid switch to 100% renewable energy. The new ETD should send the right pricing signals to influence investment towards energy efficiency and renewable energy sources, and low carbon transport solutions such as trains, public transport, cycling and electric mobility. The price should reflect the costs of environmental and climate externalities. - The EU and several European governments committed ten years ago at the G20 to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies by 2025. Despite this, no EU government currently has a plan to phase out fossil fuel subsidies (2), and energy and fuel tax exemptions continue to exist at the EU level. The new ETD should phase out all EU tax exemptions that are incompatible with the Paris Agreement and should require national governments to develop legislation and strategies to phase out climate-harming subsidies immediately and build a just and green taxation system. - In the transport sector, which accounts for 27% of the EU’s emissions, taxation must be significantly revised to accelerate the decarbonisation of all transport modes, improve their energy efficiency and spur modal shift. Greenpeace calls for an end to distortions in competition created by current taxation that favours the most polluting modes of transport. Ending the exemption for kerosene fuel taxation and allowing the introduction of EU-wide kerosene taxation on airline routes within the EU, as well as departing from Europe, must be a priority for both equity and climate reasons. According to a study commissioned by the European Commission (published in May 2019), aviation CO2 emissions could decrease by at least 10% thanks to a kerosene tax. Greenpeace believes that taxation is only one of the required EU policies to mitigate global heating and that it should be completed with a set of norms, public investments and support measures to ensure a fair transition for all, which puts the most vulnerable people and sectors first. (1) A recent UN report calculated that to restrict global heating to 1.5°C, global emissions should be cut by an average of 7.6% a year. Even without taking equity and historic responsibility for emissions into account, this means that the EU must commit to yearly reductions of at least 7.6% between 2020 and 2030, reaching just over a 65% cut in emissions by 2030, compared to 1990 levels. The longer governments wait to reduce emissions, the steeper and tougher these cuts will need to be. https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/30797/EGR2019.pdf (2) Fossil Fuel Subsidies https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/resource-documents/12895.pdf
Read full response

Meeting with Jorge Pinto Antunes (Cabinet of Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski) and European Environmental Bureau and Stichting BirdLife Europe

6 Mar 2020 · Biodiversity and Farm to Fork Strategies

Meeting with Jorge Pinto Antunes (Cabinet of Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski) and Friends of the Earth Europe and Slow Food

4 Mar 2020 · Transition Towards Sustainable Food Systems and European Green Deal

Response to Illegal logging – evaluation of EU rules (fitness check)

26 Feb 2020

The EUTR fitness check should assess the legislation in light of its environmental goals and legal basis (Art. 192 TFEU), and in terms of its contribution to the EU’s forest protection objectives. An evaluation limited to the economic costs and benefits for the stakeholders involved would not be appropriate for the EUTR, as its primary objective is environmental, not economic. The fitness check should explore and identify the factors (legal and operational) that affect the EUTR’s effective enforcement. As emerged in the 2016 and 2018 Commission reports (COM/2016/074 and COM/2018/668), Member States’ enforcement failures have significantly hampered the EUTR. Greenpeace has highlighted this issue several times since 2013 (e.g. our response to the “consultation on the EUTR evaluation two years after its entry into application”, or our complaint of 1 May 2017 on Belgium’s failure to enforce the Regulation (CHAP (2017) 1450)). With this fitness check the Commission should assess whether Member States have remedied the shortcomings shown in the above reports, and how to strengthen the enforcement of the EUTR by Competent Authorities (CAs), foster coordination and improve the Commission’s guidance. Given the EU ambition to step up action to protect forests, maintaining robust rules to keep illegal timber out of the EU market is crucial. The implementation of these rules should be strengthened. In the EUTR fitness check, the Commission should consider the following additional questions and issues: On national implementation laws: Do national implementing laws have appropriate penalties (proportionate, dissuasive and effective) for violations of the EUTR? Do rules on CAs ensure their independence and effectiveness? Do they have sufficient resources? Do national rules governing the relation between CAs and customs, other enforcement agencies and public prosecutors allow effective coordination? Are rules on transparency of CAs’ activities fit to ensure public accountability and to allow oversight by the Commission? Do criteria to handle substantiated concerns provided by third parties guarantee their appropriate treatment? On CAs: Have CAs carried out sufficient, adequate, effective and timely checks to achieve the Regulation’s objectives? Have quantitative and qualitative aspects of enforcement improved since 2016 and 2018? If not, why? Do CAs systematically apply effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties when they find infringements? If not, why? Do CAs comply with rules on transparency and disclosure of information, in particular in relation to checks and penalties? Is lack of transparency affecting the effectiveness of the CAs’ action? How could compliance with Directive 2003/4 be ensured? Do CAs respond to substantiated concerns transparently, impartially and effectively? Is the current “reactive” model the most efficient one? Could a system of mandatory reporting and transparency of operators’ due diligence facilitate oversight by CAs and reduce burden/costs for enforcement activities? On the Commission’s role and coordination at EU level: Is the Commission’s role in the EUTR adequate to ensure uniform and effective enforcement across the EU? Can a different organisational structure help with implementation at the national level? Are the EUTR’s rules on coordination between CAs sufficient to ensure effective EU-wide enforcement? How can their implementation be improved? Are tools such as the UNEP/WCMC overview of timber source countries being duly taken into account by CAs and operators? If not, how can these be incorporated in enforcement (by CAs) and due diligence (by operators)? To conclude, many products that contain wood currently fall outside the scope of the EUTR. These gaps prevent the law from reaching its objectives and must be closed. In light of the 2018 consultation on this issue, we urge the Commission to make proposals to amend the EUTR product scope as soon as possible.
Read full response

Response to Minimising the risk of deforestation and forest degradation associated with products placed on the EU market

26 Feb 2020

Greenpeace European Unit welcomes this consultation and would like to share the following remarks: - The clear lesson learned after a decade of pledges to clean up the supply chains of commodities like meat, palm oil, timber and soy fed to animals from forest destruction is that industry self-regulation initiatives have failed to deliver. Binding legislation is necessary, and the most effective means of delivering on the goal set out by the Commission for the initiative. - Non-legislative measures are no alternative to binding legal acts, and alone would fail to correct the “market and regulatory failure” referred to in the report. -As the Commission itself has stated, “were the EU not to act, the problem of deforestation and forest degradation related to EU consumption would persist”. Inaction, therefore is not an option either and should be explicitly ruled out. - References to labelling, mandatory or not, as a viable option to tackle forest destruction raise serious concerns for us. The nature and scale of the challenge requires more than simply informing consumers about the social and environmental impact of the products they buy and saddling them with the ultimate responsibility of tackling the EU’s environmental footprint. This responsibility is beyond doubt incumbent on regulators and businesses. Regulators must ensure that the internal market is closed to unsustainable products, and businesses must fulfil the expectations of EU consumers that they are not fuelling environmental destruction when they purchase goods to feed their families. - Accordingly, the Commission should propose a legislative measure to ensure that all commodities and products placed on the EU market are sustainable and deforestation-free, and can be traced back to the source. This should be combined with measures to ensure EU financial institutions do not fund economic actors whose products and production methods fail to meet EU sustainability standards as described above. The new EU laws should follow a cross-commodity/product approach to ensure consistency across the market. They should foresee a robust enforcement regime, including effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties. - Please note that “deforestation-free” has become a shorthand for many things. It should be understood to mean, for the purpose of this initiative, products and production methods that are not linked to the conversion or degradation of forest and other natural land ecosystems, and related human rights abuses. This wide scope is also necessary to reduce the risk of ecosystem conversion leakage from forests to other natural land ecosystems. - As action is urgent, the Commission should aim to issue proposals to the Council and the Parliament by the end of 2020 at the latest. - The assessment of socio-economic impacts should be extended to include the benefits the new measures will bring to frontrunners in the industry and virtuous producers, as well as to society as whole (inter alia by assessing the costs of inaction - e.g. due to biodiversity loss, climate change, and associated impact on economies and societies). It should also consider the opportunities that the new legal framework will create for SMEs, for instance, by opening a market segment presently occupied by polluters, and offering space for innovation and creative services. - In addition to new legislation to clean up supply chains, the Commission needs to drastically reduce the scale of the EU’s overall land demand, including by formulating policy proposals aimed at promoting a reduction in the EU’s consumption of meat and dairy products, and by removing incentives (such as in the Renewable Energy Directive) for bioenergy that increases pressure on land and forests.
Read full response

Meeting with Annukka Ojala (Cabinet of Commissioner Stella Kyriakides), Giorgos Rossides (Cabinet of Commissioner Stella Kyriakides), Roberto Reig Rodrigo (Cabinet of Commissioner Stella Kyriakides) and

19 Feb 2020 · Farm to Fork

Meeting with Karolina Herbout-Borczak (Cabinet of Commissioner Stella Kyriakides), Lukas Visek (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and

19 Feb 2020 · Sustainable food systems

Response to Climate Law

6 Feb 2020

EU emissions may be down, but since the Paris Agreement they have stagnated, only reducing by an average of 1% a year. The Climate Law must set the overall framework for the EU to achieve the required emission cuts and restrict those industries that are causing the climate emergency. 1. The IPCC 1.5C special report says that action until 2030 will determine whether we limit global heating to 1.5C. The European Green Deal promises to tackle the runaway climate crisis, however even the 55% target by 2030 suggested by the Commission would not be sufficient to limit global heating to 2C, let alone the 1.5C. A recent UN report said “had serious climate action begun in 2010, the [global] cuts required per year to meet the project emissions levels for 1.5°C would only have been 3.3% per year on average. However, since this did not happen the required cuts in emissions are now 7.6% a year on average” and cuts will need to be steeper yet if we do not act now. This means that the EU must commit to yearly reductions of at least 7.6% a year, reaching at a minimum 65% cut in emissions by 2030. The EU should achieve net-zero emissions in 2040 at the latest. These targets should not be achieved through offsets or LULUCF credits. 2. To prevent backsliding and to take account of developments in climate science and technology, the targets and long term strategy should be subject to a five year review and ratcheting up process, consistent with the Paris Agreement. 3. To check climate action against the most up to date science, the EU should also establish an independent scientific body, reporting to the European Parliament and Council, to advise on EU targets, scrutinise EU plans and policies and require the review of legislation that cause significant harm. 4. Scrap or change EU policies that aren’t consistent with the EU’s climate objectives. No new legislation should be allowed to increase the overall emissions and all new policies must include a carbon budget and should be analysed for their climate and environmental impacts. This should include for example ETS, land use, energy efficiency, renewable energy, bioenergy, agriculture (CAP), trade and transport. 5. Agreeing to net-zero GhG emissions means that the fossil fuel era is coming to an end. The climate law should therefore put in place deadlines for the phase out of coal (2030), gas and oil (2040) and transition to 100% renewables by 2040. The climate law must also deliver on the promise to urgently end all subsidies (incl. capacity mechanisms) and public finance (incl.projects of common Interest). 6. With the fossil fuel era coming to an end, fossil fuel companies should no longer be allowed to water down EU climate action. The climate law must therefore ban lobbying, advertising and sponsorship of fossil fuels companies. Since the Paris Agreement, the biggest fossil fuels corporations have spent over $1 billion on lobbying and advertising to undermine climate action. 7. The Commission should put in place an emission reduction target for the agriculture sector and in particular for livestock. The livestock sector alone is responsible for 12-17% of EU GHG emissions. Recent studies show that halving the EU’s consumption of meat, dairy and eggs could cut EU agricultural GHG emissions by 25-40%. This is echoed by the UN’s Panel on Climate Change which concluded that “the potential to reduce emissions through changes in consumption was found to be substantially higher than that of technical mitigation measures [such as improved cropland or livestock management]”. 8. The European Commission must take urgent action to roll out a sustainable transport revolution to enable full transport decarbonisation by 2040. The phase out of new petrol and diesel cars in 2028 must be written in law and additional measures must be adopted to cut the increasing mobility demand and to accelerate the modal shift from cars and planes to alternatives like walking, cycling, trains and public transport.
Read full response

Response to EU 2030 Biodiversity Strategy

20 Jan 2020

Greenpeace welcomes this initiative to provide feedback on the biodiversity roadmap. Our feedback is focused on protecting biodiversity in the oceans. According to scientists, a network of effectively managed ocean sanctuaries is the most cost-effective measure to protect and help restore marine biodiversity, as well as climate. The European Parliament Resolution on the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) COP15 (adopted 16.01.2020) calls for clear global conservation objectives of at least 30% of natural areas by 2030, whereas the Parliament also calls for a binding target increasing the coverage of marine protected areas within the EU to at least 30% by 2030 (European Parliament resolution on European Green Deal, adopted 15.01.2020). This ambition needs to be reflected in the EU biodiversity strategy as an objective and commitment to create a global network of fully protected, effectively and equitably managed ocean sanctuaries, extending to areas beyond national jurisdiction. A description of the 30x30 target, and a link on how to achieve the protected areas is provided below: Ocean sanctuaries, i.e. fully protected marine reserves where all extractive activities are prohibited, are a key tool for protecting habitats and species, rebuilding ocean biodiversity, and increasing the coping capacity of marine life to the multiple stresses unleashed by overfishing, habitat destruction, climate change, ocean acidification and deoxygenation. Establishing a global network of ocean sanctuaries encompassing a portfolio of ecosystems is vital to safeguarding biological diversity and natural stores of CO2 in the ocean ('blue carbon') —thus keeping the planet healthy, and protecting the livelihoods of the millions of people who depend on healthy oceans. Such a network must also extend to areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ), which represent 2/3 of the oceans and are currently among the least protected areas on the Planet. Today, only 0.8% of these waters are fully protected. There is currently no global framework for the establishment of ocean sanctuaries in ABNJ. Filling such a gap is crucial to deliver effective protection to the global oceans and to complement and ensure the effectiveness of the extensive EU legal and policy framework aimed to protect, restore and sustainably manage natural habitats, species and ecosystems in European waters. At the 2020 Convention on Biological Diversity's Conference of the Parties (COP 15), the European Union must: • champion globally binding, protected area targets, with protection of at least 30% of the ocean by 2030 through the establishment of networks of fully protected ocean sanctuaries, including in areas beyond national jurisdiction; To ensure that the 30% target is implemented at a global scale, the EU must also: • demonstrate leadership at the United Nations negotiations towards a strong Global Ocean Treaty to be agreed in 2020, with a robust global framework to establish and govern ocean sanctuaries in areas beyond national jurisdiction, the largest ecosystem on the planet, thus filling current gaps in ocean governance and enabling meeting biodiversity and climate protection goals. to achieve this target (attached): 30×30: A Blueprint For Ocean Protection. University of York, University of Oxford and Greenpeace. Scientists are calling for at least 30% of the world’s oceans to be protected as ocean sanctuaries, and this study charts how this 30% figure could be achieved: https://www.greenpeace.org/international/publication/21604/30x30-a-blueprint-for-ocean-protection/ UK Government Press release on 30% Marine Protected Areas by 2030, supported by 10 countries and growing: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-creates-global-alliance-to-help-protect-the-worlds-ocean
Read full response

Meeting with Virginijus Sinkevičius (Commissioner) and

8 Jan 2020 · European Green Deal and the planed implementation of circular economy and biodiversity initiatives of the European Commission

Meeting with Frans Timmermans (Executive Vice-President)

5 Dec 2019 · Discussion on the European Green Deal

Meeting with Frans Timmermans (First Vice-President) and Natuur Milieu and

15 Oct 2019 · Discussion on climate and biodiversity

Meeting with Helena Braun (Cabinet of First Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and WWF European Policy Programme and

3 Jul 2019 · discussion on EU action on fighting deforestation

Meeting with Léon Delvaux (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker) and Pesticide Action Network Europe and

20 Jun 2019 · Pesticides

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

4 Jun 2019 · Debate on the strategic agenda and its relevance for climate and energy, NECP recommendations

Response to High and low Indirect Land-Use Change (ILUC) - risks biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels

8 Mar 2019

Dear President Juncker, Vice Presidents Mogherini and Timmermans, Commissioners Cañete, and Malmström Please find our critical feedback on the current draft delegated regulation on ‘High and Low Indirect Land-Use Change (ILUC) - risks biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels’ in the attached document. After years of discussion on ILUC, the revised Renewable Energy Directive laid the foundation to phase out all biofuels with a high ILUC risk, i.e. those biofuels with the worst climate impacts. According to data from a study commissioned by the EU Commission, biofuels from several crops cause higher overall greenhouse gas emissions than fossil fuels, the worst being soy and palm oil. In its draft delegated regulation, however, the Commission fails to implement the notion of the directive. By proposing a low ILUC risk certification scheme for high ILUC risk commodities instead of using macro-economic modelling, this draft delegated regulation chooses the wrong approach. Macro-economic modelling is the only relevant way to assess indirect - not direct - impact on lands by the growing demand for crops, amplified by the promotion of agrofuels by EU legislation. Second, the criteria for “low indirect land-use change risk biofuels” are so weak that even soy will not need to be phased out at all. Third, while classifying palm oil in principle as a high ILUC risk commodity, with its derogations the Commission leaves the door wide open for dirty palm oil to continue to end up in European tanks. Adopting this delegated regulation in its current form would be a major setback to the EU’s broader climate policies and would cast a shadow over those achievements, demonstrating that the power of certain destructive industrial interests prevails over science and climate action. The issue is very sensitive in the public opinion, that is - according to polls - firmly opposed to burning palm oil or soy in their cars. It would be irresponsible of the EU Commission to so blatantly ignore the opinion of its constituency. In addition to our critique on the draft delegated regulation, Greenpeace also wants to stress that the EU’s approach to biofuels has been flawed from the beginning, as it ignores basic dynamics in a demand driven commodity sector, where all major vegetable oil types are part of one global market, where any demand increase in one sector and for one type of oil has direct impacts on nearly all other sectors and oil types. Banning e.g. palm oil from use in biodiesel in Europe, without reducing overall demand from this sector simply leads to EU biodiesel being made from other vegetable oils, with palm oil covering the gaps this creates in the sectors where these oils had been used before. It will not, however, lead to an overall reduction of market demand for palm oil, or any other ‘high ILUC-risk’ commodity. Hence this is why Greenpeace calls for a complete phase out of all crop based biofuels, supporting only those that are made from waste and residues.
Read full response

Response to Review of Agricultural Block Exemption Regulation

27 Feb 2019

Please, see document attached.
Read full response

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and Climate Action Network Europe and Sociedad Española de Ornitología

22 Feb 2019 · Climate neutral strategy

Meeting with Helena Braun (Cabinet of First Vice-President Frans Timmermans) and Friends of the Earth Europe and

18 Oct 2018 · discussion on Plastics Strategy

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

27 Sept 2018 · Long-Term Strategy, Preparations for COP24 and October ENV Council

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

13 Jun 2018 · MOCA, Petersberg Dialogue, Trilogues, Long Term decarbonisation Strategy

Response to EU implementation of the Aarhus Convention in the area of access to justice in environmental matters

5 Jun 2018

Please find attached Greenpeace's response to the consultation on the EU implementation of the Aarhus Convention in the area of access to justice in environmental matters.
Read full response

Meeting with Marco Valletta (Cabinet of Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis) and WWF European Policy Programme and European Public Health Alliance

25 Apr 2018 · Common Agricultural Policy reform

Meeting with Vytenis Andriukaitis (Commissioner) and

20 Apr 2018 · General Food Law

Meeting with Léon Delvaux (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker) and Avaaz Foundation and

6 Apr 2018 · Neonicotinoids

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and Ecologistas en Accion and

9 Feb 2018 · Politique europénne sur le climat et l'énergie

Meeting with Andras Inotai (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella) and WWF European Policy Programme and

11 Jan 2018 · Fisheries Control Regulation

Meeting with Léon Delvaux (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker), Martin Selmayr (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker)

21 Nov 2017 · Glyphosate

Meeting with Joachim Balke (Cabinet of Vice-President Miguel Arias Cañete)

10 Oct 2017 · Electricity and Market Design

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

26 Sept 2017 · Clean energy package, cars and vans, international agenda

Meeting with Richard Szostak (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker)

30 May 2017 · Climate aspects G7 and EU-China Summit

Meeting with Léon Delvaux (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker)

18 May 2017 · GMOs

Meeting with Léon Delvaux (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker)

28 Apr 2017 · Comitology Files

Meeting with Nathalie Chaze (Cabinet of Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis)

24 Apr 2017 · Issues related to GMOs and pesticides (e.g. neonicotinoids, glyphosate)

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

11 Apr 2017 · mobility package 2017,ETS, ESR,Clean Energy Package

Meeting with Telmo Baltazar (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

1 Feb 2017 · A Union of Democratic Change; Energy Union; Jobs, Growth and Investment; A stronger Global Actor

Meeting with Soren Schonberg (Cabinet of Commissioner Margrethe Vestager)

12 Jan 2017 · State Aid and Environmental issues

Meeting with Nathalie Chaze (Cabinet of Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis)

19 Dec 2016 · Neonicotinoids. REFIT of plant protection products legislation.

Response to Draft Commission Directive updating the environmental risk assessment of GMOs

8 Dec 2016

For the first time in 15 years, the Commission has proposed an update of Annexes II, III and IV of Directive 2001/18 on the principles for the environmental risk assessment of GMOs and information required from applicants. (1) The Commission proposal comes late. Environment ministers asked for an improvement of the environmental risk assessment of GMOs as early as 2008. (2) The proposal fails to reflect all relevant guidance by EFSA. It only reflects the 2010 guidance on GM annual plants, not the 2013 guidance on GM animals. In relation to GM plants, EFSA has published work on the selection of comparators, on agronomic and phenotypic characterization and on statistical significance. These documents should be incorporated, despite their weaknesses. (3) The proposal is limited to Annexes II, III and IV. It would be desirable to also update Annex VII on monitoring plans based on 2011 EFSA guidance on Post-Market Environmental Monitoring (PMEM), given the negative experience with Monsanto’s monitoring of MON810. (4) The proposal reflects important shortcomings of the 2010 guidance on GM plants, which need to be addressed: • It leaves open which tests are considered adequate, including for comparative analysis and for the assessment of potential negative effects on non-target organisms. • Unintended effects are only considered when they are constantly present and not when they appear only under conditions of stress, such as drought. • The interaction between GM plants and their microbiome is not assessed. • There is no requirement to test GM plants under environmental stress, such as heat. • For herbicide-tolerant (HT) GM plants, there is no requirement to test the impact of complementary herbicide residues. • For GM plants that combine several pesticidal and/or HT traits, the combined effects of Bt toxins and herbicides are not assessed. In response to concerns regarding combinatorial effects of Bt toxins and Roundup (Bøhn et al 2016. Food Chem Toxicol 91: 130–140) EFSA stated: “The risk assessment of herbicidal active substances is (…) not in the remit of the GMO legislation.” • The criteria for EFSA to issue a positive or negative opinion on environmental safety grounds are not specified. For example, GM plants that show a high potential for persistence and outcrossing into non-GM crops, or GM plants that lead to unsustainable farming practices (e.g. overuse of pesticides) should not receive a positive opinion. (5) The proposal weakens the ESFA approach with regard to stacked GM events. The 2010 guidance states: “The ERA of higher stacked events shall cover all sub-combinations of these events.” The proposed Annex II section C.1 reads: “The notifier shall … assess the need to consider sub combinations of the higher stack in the risk assessment.” This should be amended (6) The proposed Annex II section C.2 states that “(w)here applicable, data already available from the scientific literature may be used.” The use of peer-reviewed open literature should be mandatory in addition to applicant data. (7) The phrasing in Annex II section C.3 that “(t)he overall risk evaluation and conclusions shall determine the requirements for the PMEM plan of the GMO(s)" implies that each GMO assessed will receive a positive opinion. It should be amended. (8) The proposal fails to acknowledge that, in relation to pesticidal GM crops, both a pesticide risk assessment and a GMO risk assessment need to be applied. (9) The proposal demonstrates a need for EFSA to develop guidance on perennial plants and trees, single celled organisms etc, which should be incorporated into the Annexes without waiting for “sufficient experience with notifications”. The potential to apply “-omics” technologies should be further investigated, as stated in the EFSA guidance for risk assessment of GM food and feed. (10) Commission Decision 2002/623/EC includes some important additional detail and should not be scrapped.
Read full response

Meeting with Léon Delvaux (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker)

22 Nov 2016 · discuss EU-wide authorisation procedures in certain sensitive sectors

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

18 Nov 2016 · COP22

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

17 Nov 2016 · COP 22

Meeting with Vytenis Andriukaitis (Commissioner) and

17 Nov 2016 · Roundtable on the future of the General Food Law Regulation

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

15 Nov 2016 · COP 22

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

14 Nov 2016 · COP 22

Meeting with Mathieu Fichter (Cabinet of Commissioner Corina Crețu)

10 Nov 2016 · Energy Citizens

Meeting with Christiane Canenbley (Cabinet of Commissioner Phil Hogan) and Friends of the Earth Europe

9 Nov 2016 · presentation of their new study on the potential of energy citizens in the EU

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and Climate Action Network Europe

8 Nov 2016 · COP 22 and the winter energy package

Meeting with Dominique Ristori (Director-General Energy) and Friends of the Earth Europe and European Renewable Energies Federation asbl

8 Nov 2016 · Energy Union, renewable energy, energy efficiency

Meeting with Grzegorz Radziejewski (Cabinet of Vice-President Jyrki Katainen)

7 Nov 2016 · the role of Energy Citizens and Cooperatives in the Commission's upcoming winter package

Meeting with Robert Schröder (Cabinet of Commissioner Carlos Moedas)

11 Oct 2016 · Energy Citizens in the EU

Meeting with Yvon Slingenberg (Cabinet of Vice-President Miguel Arias Cañete)

15 Sept 2016 · Prosumer rights

Meeting with Joachim Balke (Cabinet of Vice-President Miguel Arias Cañete)

15 Sept 2016 · Market design and renewables

Meeting with Gonzalo De Mendoza Asensi (Cabinet of Vice-President Miguel Arias Cañete)

28 Jul 2016 · Nuclear Pack II

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

14 Jul 2016 · ESD/LULUCF- Energy efficiency - update- Ratification Paris Agreement

Meeting with Aurore Maillet (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella)

7 Jun 2016 · Forests

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and Ibec and

13 May 2016 · EU energy and climate agenda for 2016

Meeting with Mathieu Fichter (Cabinet of Commissioner Corina Crețu) and Climate Action Network Europe and

12 Apr 2016 · Upcoming legislative proposals related to energy efficiency and renewable energy.

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

11 Mar 2016 · Implications of the Paris Agreement in the EU climate and energy policies

Meeting with Nathalie Chaze (Cabinet of Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis) and Pesticide Action Network Europe and Corporate Europe Observatory

9 Mar 2016 · Glyphosate

Meeting with Hilde Hardeman (Cabinet of Vice-President Jyrki Katainen)

24 Feb 2016 · New plant breeding techniques

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and BUSINESSEUROPE and

18 Feb 2016 · Market design

Meeting with Dermot Ryan (Cabinet of Commissioner Phil Hogan)

5 Feb 2016 · new plant breeding techniques

Meeting with Léon Delvaux (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker) and EcoNexus

5 Feb 2016 · New Plant Breeding

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

21 Jan 2016 · COP21 and oncoming legislative package

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

10 Dec 2015 · State of play climate negotiations COP21

Meeting with Nathalie Chaze (Cabinet of Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis)

9 Dec 2015 · GMO, glyphosate

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

9 Dec 2015 · state of play climate negotiations COP21

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

8 Dec 2015 · State of play Climate negotiations

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

6 Dec 2015 · COP21

Meeting with Yvon Slingenberg (Cabinet of Vice-President Miguel Arias Cañete)

16 Nov 2015 · Renewables in the context of the Energy Union

Meeting with Joao Aguiar Machado (Director-General Maritime Affairs and Fisheries) and WWF European Policy Programme and

10 Nov 2015 · Implementation of CFP / fighting against IUU

Meeting with Vytenis Andriukaitis (Commissioner) and

28 Sept 2015 · New breeding techniques, GMO

Meeting with Karmenu Vella (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

28 Sept 2015 · Ocean Governance, IUU

Meeting with Karmenu Vella (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

22 Sept 2015 · Common Fisheries Policy

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and

17 Sept 2015 · Environment Council Preparation

Meeting with Joao Aguiar Machado (Director-General Maritime Affairs and Fisheries) and FUNDACION OCEANA and Sociedad Española de Ornitología

7 Sept 2015 · Courtesy visit / Common Fisheries Policy

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and

4 Sept 2015 · International Climate negotiations and Commission Working Programme

Meeting with Heidi Jern (Cabinet of Vice-President Jyrki Katainen), Juho Romakkaniemi (Cabinet of Vice-President Jyrki Katainen) and

9 Jul 2015 · Green growth

Meeting with Karmenu Vella (Commissioner) and WWF European Policy Programme and

23 Jun 2015 · Ocean Governance

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and

23 Jun 2015 · ETS review, Energy Union implementation and International Climate negotiations

Meeting with Richard Szostak (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker)

18 Jun 2015 · The EU's Arctic Policy, G7 and EU commitments on climate, Free speech and Greenpeace in India

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and

30 Apr 2015 · International climate talks and EU climate diplomacy. State of play of legislative files

Meeting with Peter Van Kemseke (Cabinet of Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič)

7 Apr 2015 · Energy Union Governance

Meeting with Karmenu Vella (Commissioner) and BUSINESSEUROPE and

24 Mar 2015 · Circular Economy

Meeting with Nathalie Chaze (Cabinet of Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis)

19 Mar 2015 · GMO & PESTICIDES

Meeting with Gabriella Pace (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella) and The Pew Charitable Trusts

11 Mar 2015 · CFP implementation

Meeting with Léon Delvaux (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker)

3 Mar 2015 · GMO review

Meeting with Andras Inotai (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella)

24 Feb 2015 · EU Arctic Dialogue event organised by Greenpeace

Meeting with Peter Van Kemseke (Cabinet of Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič)

17 Feb 2015 · Coal and climate policy

Meeting with Pierre Schellekens (Cabinet of Vice-President Miguel Arias Cañete)

17 Feb 2015 · Energy Union and Climate Action

Meeting with Frans Timmermans (First Vice-President) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

13 Feb 2015 · Meeting with Representatives of Green 10 on CWP 2015

Meeting with Maroš Šefčovič (Vice-President)

22 Jan 2015 · Bilateral meeting with John Sauven

Meeting with Aurore Maillet (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella) and WWF European Policy Programme and Fern

19 Jan 2015 · Deforestation

Meeting with Giulia Del Brenna (Cabinet of Commissioner Carlos Moedas) and Corporate Europe Observatory and Health & Environment Alliance

15 Jan 2015 · Meeting on principles of scientific advice

Meeting with Antoine Kasel (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker)

15 Jan 2015 · Meeting on principles of scientific advice

Meeting with Andras Inotai (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella), Gabriella Pace (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella)

10 Dec 2014 · Implementation of CFP

Meeting with Andras Inotai (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella), Gabriella Pace (Cabinet of Vice-President Karmenu Vella)

10 Dec 2014 · Implementation of the reformed Common Fisheries Policy

Meeting with Iwona Piorko Bermig (Cabinet of High Representative / Vice-President Federica Mogherini)

9 Dec 2014 · EU Arctic Policy

Meeting with Karmenu Vella (Commissioner) and

4 Dec 2014 · Implementation of the reformed Common Fisheries Policy, Ocean Governance, Deep Sea Access

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and

13 Nov 2014 · Lima climate talks; climate and energy priorities