Many argue that the European Union (EU) is shifting its environmental policy focus from biodiversity protection to prioritizing climate change mitigation. Considering the EU’s use of legal instruments, including the Renewable Energy Directive (RED III) and the Nature Restoration Law, efforts are underway to streamline the renewable energy transition, sometimes at the expense of environmental and biodiversity protections.
Some Quick Facts and Important Questions:
The analysis below suggests a transformative movement in EU environmental policy but warns of potential legal certainty risks in sidelining biodiversity concerns in favour of climate action.
1. Insufficient Climate Progress and Biodiversity Risks:
- Despite climate goals, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions continue to rise, reaching 57.1 GtCO2e in 2023.
- Transitioning to renewable energy requires extensive mining for raw materials, threatening ecosystems and biodiversity.
2. Shift in Legal Prioritization in EU Law:
- The revised Renewable Energy Directive (RED III) introduced a presumption of “overriding public interest” for renewable energy projects, allowing derogations from environmental protections.
- This presumption might normalize exceptions, potentially sidelining biodiversity protections.
The Four-Phase Process Underlying the Shift in Priorities
1. Premise: The European Green Deal (2019)
- Ambitious policies drafted, aimed at climate neutrality and biodiversity protection by 2030.
- Sets the foundation for increased renewable energy targets but maintains strong environmental scrutiny.
2. The Energy Crisis (2022-2023)
- The Ukraine war intensified energy insecurity, prompting emergency measures under the REPowerEU Plan to accelerate renewable energy deployment.
- Temporary regulations introduced “renewable go-to areas” exempt from detailed environmental assessments, justified by the presumption of overriding public interest.
3. The Renewable Energy Directive (2023)
- RED III institutionalized emergency measures into permanent policy, broadening exemptions for renewable energy projects.
- Provisions like environmental impact assessment exemptions were included, but they retained “temporary” language, linking their validity to the achievement of climate neutrality.
4. The Nature Restoration Law (2024)
- Strengthened the presumption of overriding public interest, removing time limits and further loosening biodiversity protection obligations.
- Positioned climate change mitigation as an overarching objective in EU environmental law.
The Implications for the Environment:
1. Prioritization of Climate over Biodiversity:
- The EU’s approach reflects a clear legal hierarchy where climate objectives take precedence over biodiversity concerns.
- Critics argue that this shift undermines the synergetic goals of the European Green Deal.
2. Concerns over Temporary Measures Becoming Permanent:
Emergency measures introduced during crises are increasingly embedded into long-term policy frameworks, raising questions about their duration and legitimacy.
3. Potential Risks and Precedents:
- Broad exemptions for renewable energy projects may set a precedent for relaxing environmental laws for other sectors or climate technologies like geoengineering.
- This could weaken environmental protections and reduce the EU’s ability to balance biodiversity and climate objectives.
The Questions that remain open – what we should reflect on:
- How will these legislative shifts affect long-term biodiversity goals?
- Could the prioritization of climate change mitigation justify similar exemptions for other environmental challenges?
- Are synergies between climate and biodiversity goals sustainable under this new hierarchy?
