OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Ocelářská unie

To advance the interests of Czech steelmakers at EU level, primarily in the fields of climate, environment and trade.

Lobbying Activity

Response to Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism

18 Nov 2021

We welcome the opportunity to provide feedback within this important public consultation. We share the comments of Eurofer and Alliance of Energy Intensive Industries - please find them attached.
Read full response

Response to Revision of the Energy Tax Directive

18 Nov 2021

We welcome the opportunity to provide feedback within this important public consultation. We share the comments of Eurofer - please find them attached.
Read full response

Response to Revision of the Renewable Energy Directive (EU) 2018/2001

18 Nov 2021

We welcome the opportunity to provide feedback within this important public consultation. We share the comments of Eurofer - please find them attached in a pdf. documents.
Read full response

Response to Updating the EU Emissions Trading System

8 Nov 2021

Dear Commission, We would like to fully support the comments and their justification expressed by Eurofer in its position document (attached). While we are aware of the need to increase the EU ETS goal to reach the 55% emission reduction in the EU, we cannot accept that instead of strengthening carbon leakage protection adequatelly to the higher EU climate ambitions, the COM proposals would lead to the opposite situation (weakened protection). This would cause serious impacts not only on the side of EU installations but also on economy and people. In fact, it would also go against a progress which has already been achieved in climate and environment protection thanks to the European policies. Without an effective protection, there will be no succesful decarbonisation, but, converselly, the carbon leakage will become a reality. This must be avoided. In addition to the content of the attached paper, we would like to highlight also the following: 1) We see the increase of the EU ETS goal from 43% to 61% unnecessarily high, considering that the COM proposal itself states that the current legislation (aiming at 43% reduction) would lead to 51% mitigation. The new goal should be reconsidered or at least duly substantiated. 2) The Modernisation Funds rules e.g. in terms of eligibility of some types of investments or percentage for priority investments should be maintained as originally proposed, at least for the reason of predictability and enabling continuous decarbonisation in the next decade. 3) In its revision proposal, the COM should tackle the situation when non-EU ETS buyers and sellers of EUAS, be it banks or investors, have negative effect on the EU ETS market by causing artificial and often unpredictable movements in the EUA price to the detriment of emitters falling under EU ETS.
Read full response