The UN Biodiversity Conference begins tomorrow in Montréal, Canada. Almost 200 countries will be negotiating a new global agreement on species protection until Dec. 19. Expectations are high: So far, all targets have been missed, now the meeting in Montréal is supposed to bring a much-needed turnaround. The EU environment ministers support the demand that 30 percent of the total area of each country be placed under protection by 2030. However, a number of questions remain unanswered. And that is not the only problem with the conference. Timo Landenberger gives an outlook.
Disposable e-cigarettes entered the market in the EU this year and have already achieved high market shares in a short time. Now, however, the industry is looking with concern at the ongoing trilogue on the EU Battery Regulation. If an agreement is reached on a take-back obligation for the lithium-ion battery from disposable e-cigarettes, this could mean the economic end for the product. Markus Grabitz has the details.
Expectations are high ahead of the 15th UN Biodiversity Conference in Montréal (CBD-COP15). From Dec. 7 to 19, the 196 signatory states to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) will negotiate a new global agreement on the protection of biological diversity.
After previous targets have all been missed, the destruction of natural habitats is finally to be stopped and reversed. Ecosystems are to be restored, harmful subsidies ended and funding increased. This is what the ambitious draft of the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) says.
In the wake of the far-reaching 2015 climate agreement, the negotiations are expected to produce a “Paris moment” for biodiversity. But the Paris conference was attended by more than 100 heads of state and government, and that alone created the necessary public awareness. No such meeting is planned in Montréal.
The conference comes at a difficult time. It is true that species conservation recently received a boost from the climate conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, where the need for intact ecosystems was once again underscored, including for climate protection. However, in the fight against multiple crises and to secure energy and food supplies, environmental protection ambitions have recently been delayed or paused in many countries. There is often a lack of political will. The question of financing is particularly contentious. In the run-up to the negotiations, positions are sometimes far apart.
It seems doubtful that COP15 will actually be a major game-changer after decades of missed targets. But a weak agreement could once again delay biodiversity protection by years. “An agreement with too low a level of ambition and without a solid and real possibility of implementation would be a red line for the EU,” Commissioner for the Environment, Oceans and Fisheries Virginijus Sinkevičius, who will lead the EU delegation, told the French news service “Contexte.”
EU environment ministers are also advocating an ambitious approach. In its latest decision, the Council supports the demand of the High Ambition Coalition, which in turn comprises around 100 countries, to place 30 percent of the total area of each country under protection by 2030. This corresponds to a doubling of the area on land and a quadrupling of the area at sea. 30×30 is the handy equivalent of the 1.5-degree target.
To avoid this becoming just another number without content, the global targets will be translated into national strategies (National Biodiversity Strategies and Actions Plans, NBSAP). In Montréal, countries will negotiate a mechanism that provides for uniform monitoring and regular reporting requirements to make progress visible and monitor it – similar to the climate targets (NDCs) from the Paris Climate Agreement.
But in contrast to the disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions, a comparable representation of the state of ecosystems is difficult. Questions about measurability and suitable indicators are still unresolved. Several countries have already criticized the unaffordable administrative costs of collecting data. Even in Europe, municipalities and regional administrations are up in arms against the expected wave of bureaucracy.
The 30 percent target also seems to come a bit out of thin air. There is still a lack of information, and it is not clear exactly where the areas to be protected are to be located. In the EU, for example, around 80 percent of all ecosystems are in poor conservation status, according to the Commission. The GBF draft therefore provides for parallel renaturation measures in 20 percent of the degenerated areas, although it remains unclear exactly how these will be defined.
In this context, the EU Council of Ministers emphasized the great potential of so-called nature-based solutions. Artificial coral reefs, the cultivation of seagrass and algae, the rewetting of moors or reforestation create habitats. They also bind CO2 on a large scale and thus also make a decisive contribution to climate protection. With the planned Nature Restoration Law, among other things, the EU wants to set a good example, but is still arguing about implementation itself.
The biggest debate is expected around the issue of funding. Goal 19 of the draft GBF is seen as the Achilles’ heel of the negotiations and provides for an increase in the total budget for environmental protection to at least $200 billion per year. At least $10 billion is to be mobilized by rich countries to support poorer countries. The latter should not have to take any steps backward in their development in order to implement the goals, it is said. Some countries in the global south are calling for much higher sums.
To close the environmental funding gap, even $200 billion will not be enough. For this reason, the GBF draft calls for environmentally harmful subsidies in the order of at least $500 billion per year to be redirected or eliminated altogether. However, these subsidies have recently been increased in many countries to ensure energy and food security.
The private sector is also to be held accountable. GBF targets include that all companies and financial institutions monitor, assess and disclose their impacts on biodiversity. Negative impacts are to be phased out, positive ones increased. Under the umbrella of the Business for Nature initiative, around 330 corporations and financial institutions support this plan and are calling for mandatory reporting for companies, including the entire supply chain.
Exactly how this might look is still unclear and will be the subject of negotiations. Possible guidelines have been developed over the past few years by the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), among others. While climate reporting is now part of the corporate basics, disclosing the impact of one’s own actions on biodiversity is not only new territory for most companies, but also much more complicated.
The e-cigarette industry fears that the EU battery regulation will ruin the good business with disposable products. If the current trilogue – negotiations continue on Friday – should also agree on a take-back obligation for the lithium-ion battery from disposable e-cigarettes, this would mean the economic end. Small-scale retailers would not be able to set up a deposit system for single-use e-cigarettes. Disposable e-cigarettes only entered the market in the EU this year and have captured high market shares in a short time.
The product, which costs around €10 and ends up in the trash when it is empty, contributes around 40 percent of the industry’s sales in Germany, estimates the industry association Bündnis für Tabakfreien Genuss (BfTG). Monthly sales are around five million units. The industry made €410 million in sales in Germany in 2021. For 2022, sales of €575 million are expected. The increase is largely due to the new disposable e-cigarette product, which has attracted hundreds of thousands of new customers.
With the Battery Regulation, the EU is primarily focusing on products such as laptops, smartphones and battery-electric cars. The Commission’s proposal aims to ensure that more rechargeable batteries and normal batteries are recycled. Tighter regulations for the replaceability and removability of batteries are also planned.
The Commission also reserves the right to gradually ban device batteries that are not rechargeable by the end of 2030. According to reports from negotiating circles, e-cigarettes do not play a direct role in this. However, the industry fears that regulations will be issued that will then also apply to them. It is eagerly awaited what transition periods the co-legislators will agree on and which battery category disposable e-cigarettes will fall into. Ultimately, this will determine whether the Battery Regulation will mean the end of disposable e-cigarettes in regulatory terms either suddenly, gradually or not at all.
The Commission wants to increase the collection rates for portable batteries. Currently, they are at 45 percent. By the end of 2025, they are to be 60 percent, and by the end of 2027, 70 percent. Parliament wants to enforce even higher quotas. According to industry experts, higher collection rates would lead to member states enacting national regulations such as the obligation to take back batteries through retailers.
These are further uncertainties for e-cigarette manufacturers concerning battery regulation:
His grandparents were separated by the German-German border, and he went to school in Neustadt bei Coburg – in the immediate vicinity of the GDR. That may be one reason why Michael Gehler developed an interest in history early on. “I wanted to find out what was behind decisions. My interest in the history of the EU came about quite incidentally,” he says.
Since 2006, the Innsbruck native has taught Modern German and European History at the University of Hildesheim. The European Commission has already awarded him the Jean Monnet Chair four times – a mixture of funding and honor for a three-year course on European history. Gehler is one of the few German professors to have received this award.
The history professor also observes European energy policy with interest, because for a long time it did not play a major role in the EU. Today’s problems with the gas supply have been a long time coming: In 2014, when Günther Oettinger was still Energy Commissioner, Russia proved that it was ready to turn off the gas tap. At the time, Ukraine was attacked.
The EU is in a dilemma when it comes to energy: “We have the dream of a European energy pool. But everything is regulated nationally in a wide variety of ways.”
Putin’s war in Ukraine is also putting pressure on the EU in the area of defense. The once so pacifist institution is now confronted with a war right outside its own gates. Gehler is not unaffected by this personally. His father fought on the Eastern Front, later served as a Russian prisoner of war, and inculcated in his son: “You will never pick up a weapon!” With a historian’s eye, however, Gehler comes to different conclusions, “I have to say frankly, had these arms deliveries not taken place, I’m afraid Kyiv and western Ukraine would probably already be in Russian hands.”
He is nevertheless critical of the current focus on defense, “The way we are currently implementing peace is reflected in the hype of the arms industry and a special fund of €100 billion. Such investments are at the expense of education, research and social policy.” He cannot imagine a European army at the moment. Emmanuel Macron is the supreme commander of the French army, the German army is a parliamentary army – it is difficult to unite these interests, he said.
With three million refugees in Turkey, Brexit and the war in Ukraine, the future of the EU lies primarily in preserving the Union, he said. “If we manage to maintain the current state and cohesion, a lot has already been achieved,” Gehler said. The EU still has the opportunity to inspire other countries, he said. “They can sue their own state in Europe and claim human rights, even if it’s complicated. In that way, Europe is unique.”
Gehler’s greatest hope, however, lies in the small things: “The EU can best be experienced in the cities. As long as we have European mayors and town twinning, things will move forward. We should not forget the regions. If they can represent their interests in the EU, many a tension with the states can also be cushioned.”
Michael Gehler has passed on his attachment to the European Union to his children. Three of them have already spent an Erasmus semester in another EU country. Svenja Schlicht
It was the news of the day yesterday in Luxembourg: Jean Asselborn, passionate racing cyclist, underwent knee surgery. A tragedy in four stages.
Gloomy mood among Luxembourg’s Socialists. Next year there will be parliamentary elections in Luxembourg. What if the loyal socialist draught horse, vote catcher and man of the people, can’t get on his racing bike?
The relationship between the foreign minister and his bicycle is of national interest. As long as Jean can get up Mont Ventoux, he wants to continue serving the country – as minister and the second most popular politician since Deputy Prime Minister “Paulette nationale” came into existence.
Mont Ventoux. This is the dreaded mountain of all Tour de France riders and would-be cycling legends. Length: 21 kilometers. Highest point: 1901 meters. Average gradient: 7.5 percent.
Every summer, when the average politician is taking a nap on the beach, Jean Asselborn gets on his racing bike in a tight sportsman’s outfit and sets off. Wind, sun or rain can’t stop him. Europe’s longest-serving foreign minister imitates the likes of Jan Ulrich and Frank Schleck and conquers Mont Ventoux.
It’s the highlight of the summer break: Bored vacationers and journalists looking for topics can follow Jang’s progress live – thanks to selfies and Facebook! In fact, Asselborn’s Facebook profile consists largely of photos showing him on his bike.
Example: Aug. 13, 2022. Neon yellow vest, black leggings. Jean sat on his bike for a whole 4 hours and 13 minutes. Distance: 86.74 kilometers. Average speed: 20.5 kilometers per hour. 752 calories burned. That’s how a professional foreign minister metabolizes the many state banquets, dinners and working lunches.
So what if Asselborn, popularly known as Quasselborn (from Luxembourgish “quasselen”, to talk a lot, sometimes nonsense), has to do without his bike tours this year? And even in the election year, he won’t be able to show up every weekend on his bicycle at a village celebration (Luxembourgish: Dëppefest) and record his closeness to the people in a photo.
It’s good that Jean Asselborn calms the people with his usual optimism on the day before his surgery. The bike is already propped up and ready to be used in the living room, so that the knee is trained again directly after the surgery. “There are people who are operated on both knees and both sides of the hip and still ride a bike. You can take away my politics, but not the bike,” he told the “Tageblatt“.
Sighs of relief at party headquarters. The elections are saved.
We wish you a speedy recovery.
The UN Biodiversity Conference begins tomorrow in Montréal, Canada. Almost 200 countries will be negotiating a new global agreement on species protection until Dec. 19. Expectations are high: So far, all targets have been missed, now the meeting in Montréal is supposed to bring a much-needed turnaround. The EU environment ministers support the demand that 30 percent of the total area of each country be placed under protection by 2030. However, a number of questions remain unanswered. And that is not the only problem with the conference. Timo Landenberger gives an outlook.
Disposable e-cigarettes entered the market in the EU this year and have already achieved high market shares in a short time. Now, however, the industry is looking with concern at the ongoing trilogue on the EU Battery Regulation. If an agreement is reached on a take-back obligation for the lithium-ion battery from disposable e-cigarettes, this could mean the economic end for the product. Markus Grabitz has the details.
Expectations are high ahead of the 15th UN Biodiversity Conference in Montréal (CBD-COP15). From Dec. 7 to 19, the 196 signatory states to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) will negotiate a new global agreement on the protection of biological diversity.
After previous targets have all been missed, the destruction of natural habitats is finally to be stopped and reversed. Ecosystems are to be restored, harmful subsidies ended and funding increased. This is what the ambitious draft of the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) says.
In the wake of the far-reaching 2015 climate agreement, the negotiations are expected to produce a “Paris moment” for biodiversity. But the Paris conference was attended by more than 100 heads of state and government, and that alone created the necessary public awareness. No such meeting is planned in Montréal.
The conference comes at a difficult time. It is true that species conservation recently received a boost from the climate conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, where the need for intact ecosystems was once again underscored, including for climate protection. However, in the fight against multiple crises and to secure energy and food supplies, environmental protection ambitions have recently been delayed or paused in many countries. There is often a lack of political will. The question of financing is particularly contentious. In the run-up to the negotiations, positions are sometimes far apart.
It seems doubtful that COP15 will actually be a major game-changer after decades of missed targets. But a weak agreement could once again delay biodiversity protection by years. “An agreement with too low a level of ambition and without a solid and real possibility of implementation would be a red line for the EU,” Commissioner for the Environment, Oceans and Fisheries Virginijus Sinkevičius, who will lead the EU delegation, told the French news service “Contexte.”
EU environment ministers are also advocating an ambitious approach. In its latest decision, the Council supports the demand of the High Ambition Coalition, which in turn comprises around 100 countries, to place 30 percent of the total area of each country under protection by 2030. This corresponds to a doubling of the area on land and a quadrupling of the area at sea. 30×30 is the handy equivalent of the 1.5-degree target.
To avoid this becoming just another number without content, the global targets will be translated into national strategies (National Biodiversity Strategies and Actions Plans, NBSAP). In Montréal, countries will negotiate a mechanism that provides for uniform monitoring and regular reporting requirements to make progress visible and monitor it – similar to the climate targets (NDCs) from the Paris Climate Agreement.
But in contrast to the disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions, a comparable representation of the state of ecosystems is difficult. Questions about measurability and suitable indicators are still unresolved. Several countries have already criticized the unaffordable administrative costs of collecting data. Even in Europe, municipalities and regional administrations are up in arms against the expected wave of bureaucracy.
The 30 percent target also seems to come a bit out of thin air. There is still a lack of information, and it is not clear exactly where the areas to be protected are to be located. In the EU, for example, around 80 percent of all ecosystems are in poor conservation status, according to the Commission. The GBF draft therefore provides for parallel renaturation measures in 20 percent of the degenerated areas, although it remains unclear exactly how these will be defined.
In this context, the EU Council of Ministers emphasized the great potential of so-called nature-based solutions. Artificial coral reefs, the cultivation of seagrass and algae, the rewetting of moors or reforestation create habitats. They also bind CO2 on a large scale and thus also make a decisive contribution to climate protection. With the planned Nature Restoration Law, among other things, the EU wants to set a good example, but is still arguing about implementation itself.
The biggest debate is expected around the issue of funding. Goal 19 of the draft GBF is seen as the Achilles’ heel of the negotiations and provides for an increase in the total budget for environmental protection to at least $200 billion per year. At least $10 billion is to be mobilized by rich countries to support poorer countries. The latter should not have to take any steps backward in their development in order to implement the goals, it is said. Some countries in the global south are calling for much higher sums.
To close the environmental funding gap, even $200 billion will not be enough. For this reason, the GBF draft calls for environmentally harmful subsidies in the order of at least $500 billion per year to be redirected or eliminated altogether. However, these subsidies have recently been increased in many countries to ensure energy and food security.
The private sector is also to be held accountable. GBF targets include that all companies and financial institutions monitor, assess and disclose their impacts on biodiversity. Negative impacts are to be phased out, positive ones increased. Under the umbrella of the Business for Nature initiative, around 330 corporations and financial institutions support this plan and are calling for mandatory reporting for companies, including the entire supply chain.
Exactly how this might look is still unclear and will be the subject of negotiations. Possible guidelines have been developed over the past few years by the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), among others. While climate reporting is now part of the corporate basics, disclosing the impact of one’s own actions on biodiversity is not only new territory for most companies, but also much more complicated.
The e-cigarette industry fears that the EU battery regulation will ruin the good business with disposable products. If the current trilogue – negotiations continue on Friday – should also agree on a take-back obligation for the lithium-ion battery from disposable e-cigarettes, this would mean the economic end. Small-scale retailers would not be able to set up a deposit system for single-use e-cigarettes. Disposable e-cigarettes only entered the market in the EU this year and have captured high market shares in a short time.
The product, which costs around €10 and ends up in the trash when it is empty, contributes around 40 percent of the industry’s sales in Germany, estimates the industry association Bündnis für Tabakfreien Genuss (BfTG). Monthly sales are around five million units. The industry made €410 million in sales in Germany in 2021. For 2022, sales of €575 million are expected. The increase is largely due to the new disposable e-cigarette product, which has attracted hundreds of thousands of new customers.
With the Battery Regulation, the EU is primarily focusing on products such as laptops, smartphones and battery-electric cars. The Commission’s proposal aims to ensure that more rechargeable batteries and normal batteries are recycled. Tighter regulations for the replaceability and removability of batteries are also planned.
The Commission also reserves the right to gradually ban device batteries that are not rechargeable by the end of 2030. According to reports from negotiating circles, e-cigarettes do not play a direct role in this. However, the industry fears that regulations will be issued that will then also apply to them. It is eagerly awaited what transition periods the co-legislators will agree on and which battery category disposable e-cigarettes will fall into. Ultimately, this will determine whether the Battery Regulation will mean the end of disposable e-cigarettes in regulatory terms either suddenly, gradually or not at all.
The Commission wants to increase the collection rates for portable batteries. Currently, they are at 45 percent. By the end of 2025, they are to be 60 percent, and by the end of 2027, 70 percent. Parliament wants to enforce even higher quotas. According to industry experts, higher collection rates would lead to member states enacting national regulations such as the obligation to take back batteries through retailers.
These are further uncertainties for e-cigarette manufacturers concerning battery regulation:
His grandparents were separated by the German-German border, and he went to school in Neustadt bei Coburg – in the immediate vicinity of the GDR. That may be one reason why Michael Gehler developed an interest in history early on. “I wanted to find out what was behind decisions. My interest in the history of the EU came about quite incidentally,” he says.
Since 2006, the Innsbruck native has taught Modern German and European History at the University of Hildesheim. The European Commission has already awarded him the Jean Monnet Chair four times – a mixture of funding and honor for a three-year course on European history. Gehler is one of the few German professors to have received this award.
The history professor also observes European energy policy with interest, because for a long time it did not play a major role in the EU. Today’s problems with the gas supply have been a long time coming: In 2014, when Günther Oettinger was still Energy Commissioner, Russia proved that it was ready to turn off the gas tap. At the time, Ukraine was attacked.
The EU is in a dilemma when it comes to energy: “We have the dream of a European energy pool. But everything is regulated nationally in a wide variety of ways.”
Putin’s war in Ukraine is also putting pressure on the EU in the area of defense. The once so pacifist institution is now confronted with a war right outside its own gates. Gehler is not unaffected by this personally. His father fought on the Eastern Front, later served as a Russian prisoner of war, and inculcated in his son: “You will never pick up a weapon!” With a historian’s eye, however, Gehler comes to different conclusions, “I have to say frankly, had these arms deliveries not taken place, I’m afraid Kyiv and western Ukraine would probably already be in Russian hands.”
He is nevertheless critical of the current focus on defense, “The way we are currently implementing peace is reflected in the hype of the arms industry and a special fund of €100 billion. Such investments are at the expense of education, research and social policy.” He cannot imagine a European army at the moment. Emmanuel Macron is the supreme commander of the French army, the German army is a parliamentary army – it is difficult to unite these interests, he said.
With three million refugees in Turkey, Brexit and the war in Ukraine, the future of the EU lies primarily in preserving the Union, he said. “If we manage to maintain the current state and cohesion, a lot has already been achieved,” Gehler said. The EU still has the opportunity to inspire other countries, he said. “They can sue their own state in Europe and claim human rights, even if it’s complicated. In that way, Europe is unique.”
Gehler’s greatest hope, however, lies in the small things: “The EU can best be experienced in the cities. As long as we have European mayors and town twinning, things will move forward. We should not forget the regions. If they can represent their interests in the EU, many a tension with the states can also be cushioned.”
Michael Gehler has passed on his attachment to the European Union to his children. Three of them have already spent an Erasmus semester in another EU country. Svenja Schlicht
It was the news of the day yesterday in Luxembourg: Jean Asselborn, passionate racing cyclist, underwent knee surgery. A tragedy in four stages.
Gloomy mood among Luxembourg’s Socialists. Next year there will be parliamentary elections in Luxembourg. What if the loyal socialist draught horse, vote catcher and man of the people, can’t get on his racing bike?
The relationship between the foreign minister and his bicycle is of national interest. As long as Jean can get up Mont Ventoux, he wants to continue serving the country – as minister and the second most popular politician since Deputy Prime Minister “Paulette nationale” came into existence.
Mont Ventoux. This is the dreaded mountain of all Tour de France riders and would-be cycling legends. Length: 21 kilometers. Highest point: 1901 meters. Average gradient: 7.5 percent.
Every summer, when the average politician is taking a nap on the beach, Jean Asselborn gets on his racing bike in a tight sportsman’s outfit and sets off. Wind, sun or rain can’t stop him. Europe’s longest-serving foreign minister imitates the likes of Jan Ulrich and Frank Schleck and conquers Mont Ventoux.
It’s the highlight of the summer break: Bored vacationers and journalists looking for topics can follow Jang’s progress live – thanks to selfies and Facebook! In fact, Asselborn’s Facebook profile consists largely of photos showing him on his bike.
Example: Aug. 13, 2022. Neon yellow vest, black leggings. Jean sat on his bike for a whole 4 hours and 13 minutes. Distance: 86.74 kilometers. Average speed: 20.5 kilometers per hour. 752 calories burned. That’s how a professional foreign minister metabolizes the many state banquets, dinners and working lunches.
So what if Asselborn, popularly known as Quasselborn (from Luxembourgish “quasselen”, to talk a lot, sometimes nonsense), has to do without his bike tours this year? And even in the election year, he won’t be able to show up every weekend on his bicycle at a village celebration (Luxembourgish: Dëppefest) and record his closeness to the people in a photo.
It’s good that Jean Asselborn calms the people with his usual optimism on the day before his surgery. The bike is already propped up and ready to be used in the living room, so that the knee is trained again directly after the surgery. “There are people who are operated on both knees and both sides of the hip and still ride a bike. You can take away my politics, but not the bike,” he told the “Tageblatt“.
Sighs of relief at party headquarters. The elections are saved.
We wish you a speedy recovery.
