Will the electricity market reform in the Industry Committee go nuclear today? Just two weeks ago, the negotiators from S&D, EPP, Renew and the Greens proudly announced an agreement they had reached within a few months. The MEPs are also concerned not to be marginalized any longer after a year of emergency decisions. But the voting list for tomorrow shows several contentious issues.
As far as extending the operating lives of nuclear power plants is concerned, the lead motion wants to limit state support – and financial returns – to additional, substantial capacity. A countermotion by MEPs from France, Sweden and Eastern European countries wants to prevent just that: “ensuring their continued safe use” should also be eligible for funding. It is remarkable that in this dispute over finances, the argument is based on the safety of nuclear power plants.
The “core question” is also what makes Renew’s shadow rapporteur skeptical about whether the negotiated compromise will really pass in the plenary in September. You can read the interview I conducted with Morten Petersen on the eve of the ITRE vote in this issue. The Committee is also voting today on whether to take up the dossier again in plenary. Pro-nuclear deputies would like to do this in order to achieve changes after all, explained the Green Party’s Michael Bloss yesterday.
But that’s not all: Two countermotions want to overturn the CO2 criterion for capacity mechanisms and thus make the subsidization of coal-fired power plants possible for longer. One comes from EKR and ID, the other from the unusual alliance of two Polish MEPs: former Parliament President Jerzy Buzek (EPP) and PiS politician Zdzisław Krasnodębski (EKR). The aim of the motions: “complementary, exceptional procurement processes” for power plants. Truly exceptional times for the European electricity market.
Your Manuel Berkel
Feature
Electricity market reform: ‘I am cautious about the outcome of the plenary vote’
Danish MEP and Venstre politician Morten Petersen is Renew’s shadow rapporteur for the EU electricity market reform.
As a liberal, are you satisfied with the compromise on electricity market reform?
It’s still up for confirmation in plenary in September. But I’m very happy with what’s on the table. As of now, it introduces more flexibility in terms of instruments when rolling out renewable capacity. It has flexibility also in terms of use of potential revenues.
The report not only allows CfDs as direct price support schemes but also equivalent schemes. If they have to achieve the same goals anyway, why do we still need alternatives?
Because I don’t think it’s the right way to go to be so prescriptive in saying that it is a CFD-only approach. I mean, there might be innovative ways of doing things rather than CFD. So I think it’s extremely important to leave it open for the market, rather than having us at a central level prescribing that it has to be CFD.
‘Don’t dictate how revenue is distributed’
In times of high prices CfDs can generate additional revenues for member states. The list of things you can use these revenues for has become longer and longer. How much revenue from CfDs will there actually be to distribute?
That will depend on how you construct these arrangements. We don’t know yet what kind of revenues will be there if any at all. Again, flexibility is key in this because I don’t want to be too prescriptive in saying that in case there is revenue, it should be redistributed 1 to 1 to each household or industrial consumer. Some might be heavily in need of further expansion or upgrade of grids. Other countries might have other pressing needs or want to redistribute it.
Germany’s Habeck would like to establish an offshore wind energy pool backed by CfDs. It shall generate cheap electricity for energy-intensive industries. Will this scheme be possible according to the parliament’s position?
In theory, yes. This is a valuable instrument as we all know the North Sea is a crown jewel when it comes to wind energy. We need to be creative in how to use these resources in a sustainable way, but also at a much faster pace than we’ve managed to do so so far.
‘Proportionality must be maintained’
For France, CfDs are also an instrument to promote existing nuclear power plants. Do you think proportionality is the right way for a compromise that France can agree to?
I hope so. But this is also why I’m somewhat hesitant, given that we still have the vote in plenary in September. But the important thing here is to respect state aid and competition rules. So if you apply CfDs to existing assets, in my view there has to be proportionality in it. The adherence to state aid rules has been an important discussion also in our negotiations.
According to the amendments of the other political groups the Commission will have to submit quite a few reviews of the EMD in the next legislative term, for example an assessment of the short-term market. Are the other political groups setting the right priorities for the next Commission?
[sighs deeply] There are a lot of files that we have to go back to in the next mandate in order to ensure that the objectives and ambitions are aligned basically with the 2030 targets and 2040 targets. On the renewable directive, for example, you can discuss whether the target of 42 and a half percent is enough. I mean, the Commission in itself wanted 45, and it was also the ambition of my group. With the electricity market design, there’s a lot of assessing to be done by the commission, but that has also to do with the many initiatives in the Commission’s original text that were not ready to be implemented. So I think it’s a very good solution that we assess things prior to putting them into the directive.
Vote on CO2 standards ‘not going well’
One member of Renew is also the German FDP. When the Council wanted to approve the regulation on CO2 emissions for new cars the German Liberals delayed it, although there had already been a political agreement. Was the political goal of technology neutrality worth this move?
No, that didn’t go well. I think it’s important that we respect the processes. That implies that when you have a deal and all member states have signed this, obviously you should uphold this.
You’re also shadow rapporteur for the EPBD. Denmark, your home country, has already come a long way on the road to climate neutrality in the building sector. What were the arguments that convinced people to renovate their homes or connect to a district heating network?
This stems all the way back to the seventies and the first oil crisis, where a lot of decisions were made on district heating and energy efficiency, which has in hindsight proven to be extremely wise decisions. When you renovate and upgrade your buildings, there is so much energy to save and some measures can even be done in the short term to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels. So I’m very enthusiastic about our negotiations in the autumn with member states. Buildings are responsible for 40% of our energy consumption in Europe. So if we want to become independent from Russia, renovating homes is a key measure.
Renew
Raw materials: EU must strengthen value creation in partner countries
The summit of the EU and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) in Brussels earlier this week also served as a backdrop for the presentation of a new raw materials partnership: the EU and Chile signed a memorandum of understanding to establish cooperation in the field of sustainable raw materials value chains. With Chile, one of the world’s most important lithium exporters, the EU intends to implement joint raw material projects in the future, strengthening ESG standards, local infrastructure and education and training.
The signing joins other planned and agreed raw material partnerships – an important pillar of the EU’s raw materials strategy. For despite its ambitions to strengthen domestic value creation, Europe will continue to rely to a considerable extent on imports of critical raw materials. At the same time, the EU wants to reduce its dependence on countries like China, and plans, for example in the draft Critical Raw Materials Act, to source no more than 65 percent of a given raw material from a single country from 2030. This requires more diverse supply chains and more reliable partners.
The EU Commission announced that the EU will “seek mutually beneficial partnerships with emerging and developing countries“, particularly under its Global Gateway Strategy. With this program, the EU aims to mobilize investments of up to €300 billion in global infrastructure projects by 2027, thus bridging the interests of both sides in raw materials partnerships.
EU to support value creation in partner countries
EU officials repeatedly emphasize that the EU wants to build “win-win” partnerships. By helping to promote value chains in partner countries, they say, it can support their economic development – and at the same time diversify and secure its own value chains. In addition to the development of raw materials projects, the partnerships are therefore to include a package of other measures, for example renewable energies, infrastructure development, training of skilled workers and research projects.
In June 2021, the EU Commission concluded its first strategic raw materials partnership with Canada, one of the world’s most important mining countries. Shortly thereafter, it also signed a partnership with Ukraine, where a large number of raw materials critical to the EU are located. Preparations are currently being made for investments in raw materials projects there, which could be made following the Russian war of aggression. In addition, the EU already has raw materials partnerships with Kazakhstan, Namibia and Argentina.
However, major raw material suppliers also have competitors like China on their doorstep – with similar offers for investments in infrastructure. “Due to the increased demand for mineral raw materials, many mining countries can now choose their partners“, write researchers from the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) in a recent analysis. “Therefore, Germany and the EU must make attractive offers.”
SWP: selective raw material partnerships as a seal of quality
For many mining countries, dependence on raw material exportshas become an obstacle to development because, for example, more and more jobs in mining are being replaced by increasing mechanization. A major incentive for them is therefore the promotion of local value creation, because this can contribute to economic development.
On the other hand, not all potential partners might be able to meet the requirement of establishing the EU’s high sustainability and human rights standards in their cooperations. The SWP analysis therefore recommends a reform of the commodity partnerships and the establishment of different cooperation models:
Commodity partnerships as a kind of seal of approval for selected, democracy- and reform-oriented partners with whom high sustainability and human rights standards can realistically be implemented;
Forms of selective commodity cooperation with countries that are relevant to the commodity economy but unsuitable for innovative partnerships;
Measures to strengthen regional cooperation approach to include difficult partners and reduce the risk of intensifying competition among resource-rich states.
Selective cooperation would be suitable, for example, in the case of authoritarian states such as Saudi Arabia and China. Germany or the EU should make targeted offers to countries such as Indonesia and those of the “lithium triangle” (Bolivia, Chile and Argentina), which predominantly follow national interests and have shown little willingness to cooperate.
Partnership with South Africa conceivable
In addition to Canada, South Africa, for example, is a suitable partner for comprehensive cooperation with high standards, as it is home to more than 80 percent of global platinumdeposits. “Immense raw material deposits, existing processing infrastructures and established environmental and social standards make South Africa an interesting raw material partner”, the analysis states. However, the rapid expansion of the mining sector has repeatedly been prioritized over the achievement of sustainability and human rights goals, the analysis states, adding that corruption and a lack of capacity have exacerbated this problem. The SWP therefore recommends initially offering South Africa increased selective cooperation and expanding this into a raw materials partnership in the medium term, subject to political stability and the fight against corruption.
To increase local value creation, SWP researchers enumerate the following prerequisites in another recent publication:
geopolitical stability;
interest in implementing human rights, environmental standards and due diligence obligations;
national and/or regional incentive system for the creation or expansion of a coupling of the individual sectors of raw material extraction (exploration, extraction, further processing);
economic framework conditions: Availability of raw material deposits on a certain scale, quality and condition allowing extraction and further processing, economic profitability of the extraction project, expected environmental, social and societal impacts and associated requirements for mining companies;
availability of qualified specialists.
Beer: ‘Value creation in Europe and partner countries necessary’
But there is also criticism of the EU’s approach. The promise to extend value creation in partner countries contradicts the EU’s goal of boosting processing capacity in Europe and increasing it to 40 percent by 2030, criticized Michael Reckordt, a raw materials expert at the NGO Power Shift, for example. By aiming to bring 40 percent of the processing of raw materials to the EU, it was torpedoing the interest of resource-rich countries, he said.
“It is clear that Europe will not be able to meet its demand for critical raw materials in the future from its own capacities alone, neither in mining nor in processing“, said Nicola Beer (FDP), rapporteur in the EU Parliament for the CRMA, on the other hand. “Due to the volume and variety of raw materials needed, value creation will be necessary both in the partner countries and in Europe.”
The production steps that can be carried out in the partner countries and those that can be carried out in Europe must be weighed up on an individual and project-specific basis. Value creation in the partner countries must go hand in hand with further processing and recycling in Europe. This is precisely Europe’s competitive advantage over China and Russia.
Under the Global Gateway Initiative, commodity projects are tobecome a priority in the future, said Hildegard Bentele (EPP), shadow rapporteur for the CRMA. The program, she said, is being asked to put EU-owned money into commodity partnerships. “This is very important for the credibility of the EU.”
Rohstoffstrategie
News
Mercosur agreement: von der Leyen ‘very confident’
Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is counting on a conclusion of trade talks with the Mercosur countries by the end of the year. She was “very confident, especially after the past two days”, that the negotiations could be concluded in the coming months, von der Leyen said after the summit meeting with the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) in Brussels.
The talks with President Lula da Silva had shown a “strong consensus” with regard to climate protection and biodiversity, she said. The president has made great progress since taking office at the beginning of the year, for example in protecting the rainforest.
Chancellor Olaf Scholz said he had gained the impression in his talks that the Mercosur states “also want to bring it to a conclusion quickly and soon at all costs”. He said he hoped that the momentum that had been created would make it possible to remove the remaining obstacles. The EU is demanding further assurances from Brazil in particular on climate protection and workers’ rights. Lula, in turn, ties his agreement to improvements for domestic industry. However, there is also considerable resistance to the agreement in some member states, such as France, the Netherlands and Austria.
Von der Leyen also expressed optimism that the modernization of the free trade agreement with Mexico would soon be finalized. A large number of investment projects under the Global Gateway Initiative had also been agreed at the summit.
Ukraine war a ‘great concern’
The summit brought together the 60 EU and CELAC states for the first time since 2015. The wording of the final declaration on the war in Ukraine triggered an intense diplomatic tug-of-war. The Europeans wanted to achieve a joint condemnation of the Russian war of aggression, but were unable to prevail with this against the resistance of certain states in Latin America. Instead, the declaration expressed “great concern about the continuing war against Ukraine“, including consequences such as rising prices.
Countries allied with Russia in particular, such as Nicaragua, Venezuela and Cuba, threatened to block the joint declaration. In the end, only one country (Nicaragua) took a different position, Scholz said. “That’s why it’s all the more remarkable that overall such an understanding was reached here.” Argentine President Alberto Ángel Fernández stressed that the vast majority of states had already condemned the Russian invasion within the framework of the United Nations.
Both sides want to exchange ideas more intensively in the future. The next summit is scheduled to take place in Colombia in 2025. Until then, a variety of dialogs are to take place at different levels. tho
NZIA: Parliament also wants to promote nuclear power
The European Parliament is expected to vote in favor of classifying nuclear power as eligible technologies in the Net-Zero Industry Act (NZIA). “We have agreed that nuclear power is on the list”, rapporteur Christian Ehler (CDU) said Tuesday. A draft of the compromise motions specifically names nuclear fission and fusion energy as fields of application; it is available to Table.Media.
In the case of the Greens, the agreement was confirmed. The classification of nuclear technologies is one of the most contentious issues in the NZIA negotiations. Associated with this are benefits such as faster licensing procedures. The groups in the European Parliament are currently working on compromises, and in November the position for the negotiations with the Council will then be voted on in plenary.
CCS and CCU also net-zero technologies
The rapporteurs also want to include processes for the capture, storage and use of CO2 (CCS/CCU) on the list of net-zero technologies. The compromise text also provides for precursors to be taken into account, such as silicon for solar cells.
The shadow rapporteurs from the other groups also support Ehler’s proposal to promote regional industry clusters, so-called Net-Zero Valleys. The member states should also reserve a quarter of their revenues from European emissions trading for corresponding projects.
Ehler criticized that the ambitions of the NZIA and the new financing platform STEPwere not in line with the financial resources earmarked for them. The US attracted numerous investors with the help of the subsidies and tax credits of the Inflation Reduction Act. The European response to this is not seen as equivalent by the industry. tho
CRMA: Economic and Environmental Committees adopt opinions
The Economic Committee (ECON) and the Environment Committee (ENVI) in the EU Parliament adopted their opinions on the Critical Raw Materials Act on Monday and Tuesday.
In its opinion, the ECON Committee proposes the following amendments to the Commission’s draft:
Priority is to be given to private investment for the financing of strategic projects.
More attention is to be paid to the market impact on EU companies on the supply side.
Fast and transparent communication should be ensured in the approval process.
The Commission is to monitor the financial viability of strategic projects and propose remedial action as necessary.
The impact of extractive projects on local communities should be given greater attention in monitoring.
In particular, the Environment Committee strengthens the specifications on sustainability and recyclability of critical raw materials, such as the measures for recycling and recovery, the definition of criteria for the CO2 footprint and the involvement of the competent national authorities and public consultation during the approval procedures.
The committees are two of five co-advisory committees in the legislative process. The opinions and amendments are now submitted and attached to the report of the lead industry committee; the latter may decide to take the requests into account. leo
ENVI
Still legal gap in risk assessment of glyphosate and co.
Are the decisions of EU authorities, for example, on the toxicity of pesticides, based on objective data? The European Parliament addressed this question in a public hearing yesterday. Most recently, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) gave the green light for the extension of the controversial herbicide glyphosate in its risk assessment, prompting criticism.
The reason for this was a study by the Stockholm scientists Axel Mie and Christina Rudén. The researchers had looked at which toxicity studies, i.e. studies investigating the effect of a substance on brain development, applicants had submitted to the US regulatory authority EPA and the European EFSA respectively. The result: A quarter of the studies that went to the EPA were not submitted to the EFSA.
A majority of these omitted studies could have had an impact on the risk assessment, Axel Mie stressed yesterday to members of the Environment and Agriculture Committee. “It is the responsibility of companies to forward the studies to the authorities”, the researcher stressed. Companies such as Bayer and Syngenta, both represented yesterday, had not fulfilled their responsibility, he said.
McGuinness: ‘Every study counts‘
Both the Commission and regulators EFSA and ECHA see this as a breach of the law. “From the Commission’s point of view, it was not done correctly. Not all relevant information was provided”, said Commission representative Claire Bury.
The representatives of Syngenta and Bayer rejected the accusation. They had always submitted all relevant studies. ECHA Director Sharon McGuinness argues that it is not up to the manufacturers to judge which studies are relevant and which are not: “Every study counts for a complete risk assessment.”
Responsibility lies with member states
A new law has been in force since 2021: the Regulation on Transparency and Sustainability of EU Food Chain Risk Assessment. Although the Stockholm study focuses on the period before the new law, the results point to agap in the new regulation. According to the regulation, applicants must inform the Food Safety Authority (EFSA) of all commissioned studies. The raw data will then also be made public. However,this only applies to new studies. Existing studies are not covered.“The problem is not solved with this law”, says researcher Mie.
Another problem that became clear at the hearing: The responsibility to check whether an applicant’s dossier is complete lies with member states, not the EFSA. And only they can impose penalties or sanctions if studies are missing. In the cases investigated by the Stockholmers, there were no sanctions. And now it is too late, emphasized Commission representative Bury.
EFSA chief: improve system through more controls
In addition, the manufacturers themselves must prove that their product is safe. In other words, it is up to them to conduct and pay for the necessary studies. The Stockholm researchers see this as an inherent conflict of interest: The manufacturers who commission studies are interested in a positive result. The laboratories do not want to lose their clients.
“We are paving the way for us to exchange ideas again here in a few years”, said researcher Mie. EFSA chief Bernhard Url doesn’t see the problem. You can’t just take a fundamentally different approach, he said. But you can improve the system through more audits and controls, he explained. Because, as became clear at the hearing, public authorities likeEFSA and ECHA don’t have the budget to commission or conduct studies. cw
Agricultural Policy
Agriculture
Climate & Environment
Food
Nutrition
Pesticides
DSA stress test: TikTok is not yet ready
First Twitter, now TikTok. In preparation for the DSA, the Commission has now also stress-tested the Chinese platform Tiktok at its European site in Dublin. On Tuesday, Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton briefed CEO Shou Zi Chew on the results of the exercise.
Breton welcomed the fact that TikTok had volunteered to conduct a stress test. In doing so, he noted that TikTok was committing significant resources to compliance. “These are the first signs of a serious commitment to the DSA”, Breton said. The stress test results showed, however, that more work is needed to meet the Aug. 25 compliance deadline. Commission staff are currently not allowed to use TikTok because of security concerns.
The test covered areas such as child protection, recommendation systems, content moderation and combating illegal content, data access and transparency. “Now is the time to hurry up to fully comply”, Breton warned in a tweet.
On April 25, 2023, Breton named the first companies to be considered Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) or Very Large Online Search Engines (VLOSEs) under the DSA, including Twitter and TikTok. Under the decision, which Amazon and Zalando are opposing, the companieshave four months to comply with their obligations under the DSA. Then they must conduct an initial annual risk assessment and submit it to Brussels. vis
Digital Services Act
Poland wants to transport more Ukrainian grain
Poland is ready to transport more Ukrainian grain through the country after Russia’s cancellation of the Black Sea Grain Agreement, Agriculture Minister Robert Telus said Tuesday. But that will take time, he said, and the European Union will have to help develop the infrastructure.
Warsaw had closed its borders to imports of Ukrainian grain in April after farmers protested that their own supplies had lost value because of the additional competition. Agriculture Minister Telus accused Russia of using “grain as ammunition“. He also said that the harvest in Poland had just begun and that the additional transit would not be immediate. “We must force the EU to help improve infrastructure”, he said.
Already 60 percent of exports overland
EU officials said Tuesday they are seeking greater use of so-called solidarity corridors, road and rail links through Ukraine’s neighbors such as Poland or Moldova. Already, about 60 percent of Ukraine’s grain exports to the EU are transported along these routes, according to the commission. Before Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, exports ran almost exclusively through Black Sea ports.
Protests by farmers from countries bordering Ukraine prompted Brussels in May to restrict imports of Ukrainian grain by land and allow only transit shipments. Telus, who is meeting today with his counterparts from Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia and Moldova, said Warsaw will push for a renewed extension of the embargo on Ukrainian grain imports beyond Sept. 15. rtr
Macron criticizes hiring of Scott Morton
French President Emmanuel Macron on Tuesday criticized EU Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager’s decision to appoint US economist Fiona Scott Morton to a key position at the EU antitrust agency. It suggests “that we have a very serious problem with all academic systems in Europe“, Macron said. He said he was surprised that no EU national could be found for the job. Another criticism Macron pointed out: Scott Morton has previously worked for “many companies”, which could lead to potential conflicts of interest at the antitrust agency.
The appointment of Scott Morton, the former chief economist at the US Department of Justice under Barack Obama, to the post of chief economist in the Directorate-General for Competition was criticized by France and the leaders of political groups in the European Parliament. Concerns centered on why a non-EU citizen was chosen to advise the Commission on its investigations into big tech and on enforcing rules to curb tech giants.
Vestager defends herself
Vestager defended her decision at a European Parliament committee hearing, saying: “I find it questionable to assume that a person’s nationality automatically leads to a bias in favor of companies that come from the same nationality.” She said the Commission had opened up the post to non-EU nationals in its search for the best business advisers.
Vestager stressed that former chief economists at the commission had also previously served as consultants, with no problems. “If anything, their experience in the private sectorshould bean asset, not a hindrance.” It is common for economists at this level to work as consultants in parallel with their academic work, she said. rtr
Dessert
¿Siesta alemana?
“Doctors recommend siesta in Germany”, headlined numerous media yesterday. The chairman of the German Association of Medical Officers, Johannes Nießen, had told Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland (RND) that in the hot summer months we in northern Europe should take our cue from the working practices of southern countries: “Get up early, work productively in the morning and take a siesta at noon.”
The siesta, which for decades has been the subject of stereotypical Spanish jokes alluding to a supposedly subdued eagerness to work, is now seriously coming under the spotlight of German public health officials. Apart from the fact that in the reporting of established German media all Spain clichés from paella to bullfighting are lumped together with the siesta, above all the cheerful framingis questionable. The issue is serious: climate change not only requires adjustments in various areas of life, but also poses real risks to health and thus to performance.
WHO: climate change ‘greatest health threat to mankind’
The World Health Organization (WHO) describes climate change as “the greatest health threat to mankind“. In this regard, the Robert Koch Institute published: “Heat may have particular health effects on the cardiovascular system and contribute not only to morbidity but also mortality.” Especially people of high age with pre-existing conditions, pregnant people, marginalized people and those with low socioeconomic status are affected by the health effects of extreme heat, the paper said.
The increasingly high temperatures in Germany as a result of climate change are now opening up a controversial discussion about a structural change in the working day. Apart from the health risks, according to the head of the Medical Officers Association, a shift in working hours to the early morning hours and a break during the warmest hours of the day would also be a trend-setting recommendation from the point of view of productivity. “In intense heat, people are not as productive as usual. Poor sleep in the absence of cooling down at night additionally leads to concentration problems.”
“Siesta in the heat is certainly not a bad suggestion”, German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach also wrote on Twitter. “Medically certainly sensible for many professions.” However, he does not see politics as being called upon; employers and employees should negotiate this themselves. Leonie Düngefeld
Will the electricity market reform in the Industry Committee go nuclear today? Just two weeks ago, the negotiators from S&D, EPP, Renew and the Greens proudly announced an agreement they had reached within a few months. The MEPs are also concerned not to be marginalized any longer after a year of emergency decisions. But the voting list for tomorrow shows several contentious issues.
As far as extending the operating lives of nuclear power plants is concerned, the lead motion wants to limit state support – and financial returns – to additional, substantial capacity. A countermotion by MEPs from France, Sweden and Eastern European countries wants to prevent just that: “ensuring their continued safe use” should also be eligible for funding. It is remarkable that in this dispute over finances, the argument is based on the safety of nuclear power plants.
The “core question” is also what makes Renew’s shadow rapporteur skeptical about whether the negotiated compromise will really pass in the plenary in September. You can read the interview I conducted with Morten Petersen on the eve of the ITRE vote in this issue. The Committee is also voting today on whether to take up the dossier again in plenary. Pro-nuclear deputies would like to do this in order to achieve changes after all, explained the Green Party’s Michael Bloss yesterday.
But that’s not all: Two countermotions want to overturn the CO2 criterion for capacity mechanisms and thus make the subsidization of coal-fired power plants possible for longer. One comes from EKR and ID, the other from the unusual alliance of two Polish MEPs: former Parliament President Jerzy Buzek (EPP) and PiS politician Zdzisław Krasnodębski (EKR). The aim of the motions: “complementary, exceptional procurement processes” for power plants. Truly exceptional times for the European electricity market.
Your Manuel Berkel
Feature
Electricity market reform: ‘I am cautious about the outcome of the plenary vote’
Danish MEP and Venstre politician Morten Petersen is Renew’s shadow rapporteur for the EU electricity market reform.
As a liberal, are you satisfied with the compromise on electricity market reform?
It’s still up for confirmation in plenary in September. But I’m very happy with what’s on the table. As of now, it introduces more flexibility in terms of instruments when rolling out renewable capacity. It has flexibility also in terms of use of potential revenues.
The report not only allows CfDs as direct price support schemes but also equivalent schemes. If they have to achieve the same goals anyway, why do we still need alternatives?
Because I don’t think it’s the right way to go to be so prescriptive in saying that it is a CFD-only approach. I mean, there might be innovative ways of doing things rather than CFD. So I think it’s extremely important to leave it open for the market, rather than having us at a central level prescribing that it has to be CFD.
‘Don’t dictate how revenue is distributed’
In times of high prices CfDs can generate additional revenues for member states. The list of things you can use these revenues for has become longer and longer. How much revenue from CfDs will there actually be to distribute?
That will depend on how you construct these arrangements. We don’t know yet what kind of revenues will be there if any at all. Again, flexibility is key in this because I don’t want to be too prescriptive in saying that in case there is revenue, it should be redistributed 1 to 1 to each household or industrial consumer. Some might be heavily in need of further expansion or upgrade of grids. Other countries might have other pressing needs or want to redistribute it.
Germany’s Habeck would like to establish an offshore wind energy pool backed by CfDs. It shall generate cheap electricity for energy-intensive industries. Will this scheme be possible according to the parliament’s position?
In theory, yes. This is a valuable instrument as we all know the North Sea is a crown jewel when it comes to wind energy. We need to be creative in how to use these resources in a sustainable way, but also at a much faster pace than we’ve managed to do so so far.
‘Proportionality must be maintained’
For France, CfDs are also an instrument to promote existing nuclear power plants. Do you think proportionality is the right way for a compromise that France can agree to?
I hope so. But this is also why I’m somewhat hesitant, given that we still have the vote in plenary in September. But the important thing here is to respect state aid and competition rules. So if you apply CfDs to existing assets, in my view there has to be proportionality in it. The adherence to state aid rules has been an important discussion also in our negotiations.
According to the amendments of the other political groups the Commission will have to submit quite a few reviews of the EMD in the next legislative term, for example an assessment of the short-term market. Are the other political groups setting the right priorities for the next Commission?
[sighs deeply] There are a lot of files that we have to go back to in the next mandate in order to ensure that the objectives and ambitions are aligned basically with the 2030 targets and 2040 targets. On the renewable directive, for example, you can discuss whether the target of 42 and a half percent is enough. I mean, the Commission in itself wanted 45, and it was also the ambition of my group. With the electricity market design, there’s a lot of assessing to be done by the commission, but that has also to do with the many initiatives in the Commission’s original text that were not ready to be implemented. So I think it’s a very good solution that we assess things prior to putting them into the directive.
Vote on CO2 standards ‘not going well’
One member of Renew is also the German FDP. When the Council wanted to approve the regulation on CO2 emissions for new cars the German Liberals delayed it, although there had already been a political agreement. Was the political goal of technology neutrality worth this move?
No, that didn’t go well. I think it’s important that we respect the processes. That implies that when you have a deal and all member states have signed this, obviously you should uphold this.
You’re also shadow rapporteur for the EPBD. Denmark, your home country, has already come a long way on the road to climate neutrality in the building sector. What were the arguments that convinced people to renovate their homes or connect to a district heating network?
This stems all the way back to the seventies and the first oil crisis, where a lot of decisions were made on district heating and energy efficiency, which has in hindsight proven to be extremely wise decisions. When you renovate and upgrade your buildings, there is so much energy to save and some measures can even be done in the short term to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels. So I’m very enthusiastic about our negotiations in the autumn with member states. Buildings are responsible for 40% of our energy consumption in Europe. So if we want to become independent from Russia, renovating homes is a key measure.
Renew
Raw materials: EU must strengthen value creation in partner countries
The summit of the EU and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) in Brussels earlier this week also served as a backdrop for the presentation of a new raw materials partnership: the EU and Chile signed a memorandum of understanding to establish cooperation in the field of sustainable raw materials value chains. With Chile, one of the world’s most important lithium exporters, the EU intends to implement joint raw material projects in the future, strengthening ESG standards, local infrastructure and education and training.
The signing joins other planned and agreed raw material partnerships – an important pillar of the EU’s raw materials strategy. For despite its ambitions to strengthen domestic value creation, Europe will continue to rely to a considerable extent on imports of critical raw materials. At the same time, the EU wants to reduce its dependence on countries like China, and plans, for example in the draft Critical Raw Materials Act, to source no more than 65 percent of a given raw material from a single country from 2030. This requires more diverse supply chains and more reliable partners.
The EU Commission announced that the EU will “seek mutually beneficial partnerships with emerging and developing countries“, particularly under its Global Gateway Strategy. With this program, the EU aims to mobilize investments of up to €300 billion in global infrastructure projects by 2027, thus bridging the interests of both sides in raw materials partnerships.
EU to support value creation in partner countries
EU officials repeatedly emphasize that the EU wants to build “win-win” partnerships. By helping to promote value chains in partner countries, they say, it can support their economic development – and at the same time diversify and secure its own value chains. In addition to the development of raw materials projects, the partnerships are therefore to include a package of other measures, for example renewable energies, infrastructure development, training of skilled workers and research projects.
In June 2021, the EU Commission concluded its first strategic raw materials partnership with Canada, one of the world’s most important mining countries. Shortly thereafter, it also signed a partnership with Ukraine, where a large number of raw materials critical to the EU are located. Preparations are currently being made for investments in raw materials projects there, which could be made following the Russian war of aggression. In addition, the EU already has raw materials partnerships with Kazakhstan, Namibia and Argentina.
However, major raw material suppliers also have competitors like China on their doorstep – with similar offers for investments in infrastructure. “Due to the increased demand for mineral raw materials, many mining countries can now choose their partners“, write researchers from the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) in a recent analysis. “Therefore, Germany and the EU must make attractive offers.”
SWP: selective raw material partnerships as a seal of quality
For many mining countries, dependence on raw material exportshas become an obstacle to development because, for example, more and more jobs in mining are being replaced by increasing mechanization. A major incentive for them is therefore the promotion of local value creation, because this can contribute to economic development.
On the other hand, not all potential partners might be able to meet the requirement of establishing the EU’s high sustainability and human rights standards in their cooperations. The SWP analysis therefore recommends a reform of the commodity partnerships and the establishment of different cooperation models:
Commodity partnerships as a kind of seal of approval for selected, democracy- and reform-oriented partners with whom high sustainability and human rights standards can realistically be implemented;
Forms of selective commodity cooperation with countries that are relevant to the commodity economy but unsuitable for innovative partnerships;
Measures to strengthen regional cooperation approach to include difficult partners and reduce the risk of intensifying competition among resource-rich states.
Selective cooperation would be suitable, for example, in the case of authoritarian states such as Saudi Arabia and China. Germany or the EU should make targeted offers to countries such as Indonesia and those of the “lithium triangle” (Bolivia, Chile and Argentina), which predominantly follow national interests and have shown little willingness to cooperate.
Partnership with South Africa conceivable
In addition to Canada, South Africa, for example, is a suitable partner for comprehensive cooperation with high standards, as it is home to more than 80 percent of global platinumdeposits. “Immense raw material deposits, existing processing infrastructures and established environmental and social standards make South Africa an interesting raw material partner”, the analysis states. However, the rapid expansion of the mining sector has repeatedly been prioritized over the achievement of sustainability and human rights goals, the analysis states, adding that corruption and a lack of capacity have exacerbated this problem. The SWP therefore recommends initially offering South Africa increased selective cooperation and expanding this into a raw materials partnership in the medium term, subject to political stability and the fight against corruption.
To increase local value creation, SWP researchers enumerate the following prerequisites in another recent publication:
geopolitical stability;
interest in implementing human rights, environmental standards and due diligence obligations;
national and/or regional incentive system for the creation or expansion of a coupling of the individual sectors of raw material extraction (exploration, extraction, further processing);
economic framework conditions: Availability of raw material deposits on a certain scale, quality and condition allowing extraction and further processing, economic profitability of the extraction project, expected environmental, social and societal impacts and associated requirements for mining companies;
availability of qualified specialists.
Beer: ‘Value creation in Europe and partner countries necessary’
But there is also criticism of the EU’s approach. The promise to extend value creation in partner countries contradicts the EU’s goal of boosting processing capacity in Europe and increasing it to 40 percent by 2030, criticized Michael Reckordt, a raw materials expert at the NGO Power Shift, for example. By aiming to bring 40 percent of the processing of raw materials to the EU, it was torpedoing the interest of resource-rich countries, he said.
“It is clear that Europe will not be able to meet its demand for critical raw materials in the future from its own capacities alone, neither in mining nor in processing“, said Nicola Beer (FDP), rapporteur in the EU Parliament for the CRMA, on the other hand. “Due to the volume and variety of raw materials needed, value creation will be necessary both in the partner countries and in Europe.”
The production steps that can be carried out in the partner countries and those that can be carried out in Europe must be weighed up on an individual and project-specific basis. Value creation in the partner countries must go hand in hand with further processing and recycling in Europe. This is precisely Europe’s competitive advantage over China and Russia.
Under the Global Gateway Initiative, commodity projects are tobecome a priority in the future, said Hildegard Bentele (EPP), shadow rapporteur for the CRMA. The program, she said, is being asked to put EU-owned money into commodity partnerships. “This is very important for the credibility of the EU.”
Rohstoffstrategie
News
Mercosur agreement: von der Leyen ‘very confident’
Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is counting on a conclusion of trade talks with the Mercosur countries by the end of the year. She was “very confident, especially after the past two days”, that the negotiations could be concluded in the coming months, von der Leyen said after the summit meeting with the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) in Brussels.
The talks with President Lula da Silva had shown a “strong consensus” with regard to climate protection and biodiversity, she said. The president has made great progress since taking office at the beginning of the year, for example in protecting the rainforest.
Chancellor Olaf Scholz said he had gained the impression in his talks that the Mercosur states “also want to bring it to a conclusion quickly and soon at all costs”. He said he hoped that the momentum that had been created would make it possible to remove the remaining obstacles. The EU is demanding further assurances from Brazil in particular on climate protection and workers’ rights. Lula, in turn, ties his agreement to improvements for domestic industry. However, there is also considerable resistance to the agreement in some member states, such as France, the Netherlands and Austria.
Von der Leyen also expressed optimism that the modernization of the free trade agreement with Mexico would soon be finalized. A large number of investment projects under the Global Gateway Initiative had also been agreed at the summit.
Ukraine war a ‘great concern’
The summit brought together the 60 EU and CELAC states for the first time since 2015. The wording of the final declaration on the war in Ukraine triggered an intense diplomatic tug-of-war. The Europeans wanted to achieve a joint condemnation of the Russian war of aggression, but were unable to prevail with this against the resistance of certain states in Latin America. Instead, the declaration expressed “great concern about the continuing war against Ukraine“, including consequences such as rising prices.
Countries allied with Russia in particular, such as Nicaragua, Venezuela and Cuba, threatened to block the joint declaration. In the end, only one country (Nicaragua) took a different position, Scholz said. “That’s why it’s all the more remarkable that overall such an understanding was reached here.” Argentine President Alberto Ángel Fernández stressed that the vast majority of states had already condemned the Russian invasion within the framework of the United Nations.
Both sides want to exchange ideas more intensively in the future. The next summit is scheduled to take place in Colombia in 2025. Until then, a variety of dialogs are to take place at different levels. tho
NZIA: Parliament also wants to promote nuclear power
The European Parliament is expected to vote in favor of classifying nuclear power as eligible technologies in the Net-Zero Industry Act (NZIA). “We have agreed that nuclear power is on the list”, rapporteur Christian Ehler (CDU) said Tuesday. A draft of the compromise motions specifically names nuclear fission and fusion energy as fields of application; it is available to Table.Media.
In the case of the Greens, the agreement was confirmed. The classification of nuclear technologies is one of the most contentious issues in the NZIA negotiations. Associated with this are benefits such as faster licensing procedures. The groups in the European Parliament are currently working on compromises, and in November the position for the negotiations with the Council will then be voted on in plenary.
CCS and CCU also net-zero technologies
The rapporteurs also want to include processes for the capture, storage and use of CO2 (CCS/CCU) on the list of net-zero technologies. The compromise text also provides for precursors to be taken into account, such as silicon for solar cells.
The shadow rapporteurs from the other groups also support Ehler’s proposal to promote regional industry clusters, so-called Net-Zero Valleys. The member states should also reserve a quarter of their revenues from European emissions trading for corresponding projects.
Ehler criticized that the ambitions of the NZIA and the new financing platform STEPwere not in line with the financial resources earmarked for them. The US attracted numerous investors with the help of the subsidies and tax credits of the Inflation Reduction Act. The European response to this is not seen as equivalent by the industry. tho
CRMA: Economic and Environmental Committees adopt opinions
The Economic Committee (ECON) and the Environment Committee (ENVI) in the EU Parliament adopted their opinions on the Critical Raw Materials Act on Monday and Tuesday.
In its opinion, the ECON Committee proposes the following amendments to the Commission’s draft:
Priority is to be given to private investment for the financing of strategic projects.
More attention is to be paid to the market impact on EU companies on the supply side.
Fast and transparent communication should be ensured in the approval process.
The Commission is to monitor the financial viability of strategic projects and propose remedial action as necessary.
The impact of extractive projects on local communities should be given greater attention in monitoring.
In particular, the Environment Committee strengthens the specifications on sustainability and recyclability of critical raw materials, such as the measures for recycling and recovery, the definition of criteria for the CO2 footprint and the involvement of the competent national authorities and public consultation during the approval procedures.
The committees are two of five co-advisory committees in the legislative process. The opinions and amendments are now submitted and attached to the report of the lead industry committee; the latter may decide to take the requests into account. leo
ENVI
Still legal gap in risk assessment of glyphosate and co.
Are the decisions of EU authorities, for example, on the toxicity of pesticides, based on objective data? The European Parliament addressed this question in a public hearing yesterday. Most recently, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) gave the green light for the extension of the controversial herbicide glyphosate in its risk assessment, prompting criticism.
The reason for this was a study by the Stockholm scientists Axel Mie and Christina Rudén. The researchers had looked at which toxicity studies, i.e. studies investigating the effect of a substance on brain development, applicants had submitted to the US regulatory authority EPA and the European EFSA respectively. The result: A quarter of the studies that went to the EPA were not submitted to the EFSA.
A majority of these omitted studies could have had an impact on the risk assessment, Axel Mie stressed yesterday to members of the Environment and Agriculture Committee. “It is the responsibility of companies to forward the studies to the authorities”, the researcher stressed. Companies such as Bayer and Syngenta, both represented yesterday, had not fulfilled their responsibility, he said.
McGuinness: ‘Every study counts‘
Both the Commission and regulators EFSA and ECHA see this as a breach of the law. “From the Commission’s point of view, it was not done correctly. Not all relevant information was provided”, said Commission representative Claire Bury.
The representatives of Syngenta and Bayer rejected the accusation. They had always submitted all relevant studies. ECHA Director Sharon McGuinness argues that it is not up to the manufacturers to judge which studies are relevant and which are not: “Every study counts for a complete risk assessment.”
Responsibility lies with member states
A new law has been in force since 2021: the Regulation on Transparency and Sustainability of EU Food Chain Risk Assessment. Although the Stockholm study focuses on the period before the new law, the results point to agap in the new regulation. According to the regulation, applicants must inform the Food Safety Authority (EFSA) of all commissioned studies. The raw data will then also be made public. However,this only applies to new studies. Existing studies are not covered.“The problem is not solved with this law”, says researcher Mie.
Another problem that became clear at the hearing: The responsibility to check whether an applicant’s dossier is complete lies with member states, not the EFSA. And only they can impose penalties or sanctions if studies are missing. In the cases investigated by the Stockholmers, there were no sanctions. And now it is too late, emphasized Commission representative Bury.
EFSA chief: improve system through more controls
In addition, the manufacturers themselves must prove that their product is safe. In other words, it is up to them to conduct and pay for the necessary studies. The Stockholm researchers see this as an inherent conflict of interest: The manufacturers who commission studies are interested in a positive result. The laboratories do not want to lose their clients.
“We are paving the way for us to exchange ideas again here in a few years”, said researcher Mie. EFSA chief Bernhard Url doesn’t see the problem. You can’t just take a fundamentally different approach, he said. But you can improve the system through more audits and controls, he explained. Because, as became clear at the hearing, public authorities likeEFSA and ECHA don’t have the budget to commission or conduct studies. cw
Agricultural Policy
Agriculture
Climate & Environment
Food
Nutrition
Pesticides
DSA stress test: TikTok is not yet ready
First Twitter, now TikTok. In preparation for the DSA, the Commission has now also stress-tested the Chinese platform Tiktok at its European site in Dublin. On Tuesday, Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton briefed CEO Shou Zi Chew on the results of the exercise.
Breton welcomed the fact that TikTok had volunteered to conduct a stress test. In doing so, he noted that TikTok was committing significant resources to compliance. “These are the first signs of a serious commitment to the DSA”, Breton said. The stress test results showed, however, that more work is needed to meet the Aug. 25 compliance deadline. Commission staff are currently not allowed to use TikTok because of security concerns.
The test covered areas such as child protection, recommendation systems, content moderation and combating illegal content, data access and transparency. “Now is the time to hurry up to fully comply”, Breton warned in a tweet.
On April 25, 2023, Breton named the first companies to be considered Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) or Very Large Online Search Engines (VLOSEs) under the DSA, including Twitter and TikTok. Under the decision, which Amazon and Zalando are opposing, the companieshave four months to comply with their obligations under the DSA. Then they must conduct an initial annual risk assessment and submit it to Brussels. vis
Digital Services Act
Poland wants to transport more Ukrainian grain
Poland is ready to transport more Ukrainian grain through the country after Russia’s cancellation of the Black Sea Grain Agreement, Agriculture Minister Robert Telus said Tuesday. But that will take time, he said, and the European Union will have to help develop the infrastructure.
Warsaw had closed its borders to imports of Ukrainian grain in April after farmers protested that their own supplies had lost value because of the additional competition. Agriculture Minister Telus accused Russia of using “grain as ammunition“. He also said that the harvest in Poland had just begun and that the additional transit would not be immediate. “We must force the EU to help improve infrastructure”, he said.
Already 60 percent of exports overland
EU officials said Tuesday they are seeking greater use of so-called solidarity corridors, road and rail links through Ukraine’s neighbors such as Poland or Moldova. Already, about 60 percent of Ukraine’s grain exports to the EU are transported along these routes, according to the commission. Before Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, exports ran almost exclusively through Black Sea ports.
Protests by farmers from countries bordering Ukraine prompted Brussels in May to restrict imports of Ukrainian grain by land and allow only transit shipments. Telus, who is meeting today with his counterparts from Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia and Moldova, said Warsaw will push for a renewed extension of the embargo on Ukrainian grain imports beyond Sept. 15. rtr
Macron criticizes hiring of Scott Morton
French President Emmanuel Macron on Tuesday criticized EU Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager’s decision to appoint US economist Fiona Scott Morton to a key position at the EU antitrust agency. It suggests “that we have a very serious problem with all academic systems in Europe“, Macron said. He said he was surprised that no EU national could be found for the job. Another criticism Macron pointed out: Scott Morton has previously worked for “many companies”, which could lead to potential conflicts of interest at the antitrust agency.
The appointment of Scott Morton, the former chief economist at the US Department of Justice under Barack Obama, to the post of chief economist in the Directorate-General for Competition was criticized by France and the leaders of political groups in the European Parliament. Concerns centered on why a non-EU citizen was chosen to advise the Commission on its investigations into big tech and on enforcing rules to curb tech giants.
Vestager defends herself
Vestager defended her decision at a European Parliament committee hearing, saying: “I find it questionable to assume that a person’s nationality automatically leads to a bias in favor of companies that come from the same nationality.” She said the Commission had opened up the post to non-EU nationals in its search for the best business advisers.
Vestager stressed that former chief economists at the commission had also previously served as consultants, with no problems. “If anything, their experience in the private sectorshould bean asset, not a hindrance.” It is common for economists at this level to work as consultants in parallel with their academic work, she said. rtr
Dessert
¿Siesta alemana?
“Doctors recommend siesta in Germany”, headlined numerous media yesterday. The chairman of the German Association of Medical Officers, Johannes Nießen, had told Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland (RND) that in the hot summer months we in northern Europe should take our cue from the working practices of southern countries: “Get up early, work productively in the morning and take a siesta at noon.”
The siesta, which for decades has been the subject of stereotypical Spanish jokes alluding to a supposedly subdued eagerness to work, is now seriously coming under the spotlight of German public health officials. Apart from the fact that in the reporting of established German media all Spain clichés from paella to bullfighting are lumped together with the siesta, above all the cheerful framingis questionable. The issue is serious: climate change not only requires adjustments in various areas of life, but also poses real risks to health and thus to performance.
WHO: climate change ‘greatest health threat to mankind’
The World Health Organization (WHO) describes climate change as “the greatest health threat to mankind“. In this regard, the Robert Koch Institute published: “Heat may have particular health effects on the cardiovascular system and contribute not only to morbidity but also mortality.” Especially people of high age with pre-existing conditions, pregnant people, marginalized people and those with low socioeconomic status are affected by the health effects of extreme heat, the paper said.
The increasingly high temperatures in Germany as a result of climate change are now opening up a controversial discussion about a structural change in the working day. Apart from the health risks, according to the head of the Medical Officers Association, a shift in working hours to the early morning hours and a break during the warmest hours of the day would also be a trend-setting recommendation from the point of view of productivity. “In intense heat, people are not as productive as usual. Poor sleep in the absence of cooling down at night additionally leads to concentration problems.”
“Siesta in the heat is certainly not a bad suggestion”, German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach also wrote on Twitter. “Medically certainly sensible for many professions.” However, he does not see politics as being called upon; employers and employees should negotiate this themselves. Leonie Düngefeld
