Four environmental NGOs are taking the European Commission to the EU Court of Justice for refusing to remove gas from the 'taxonomy,' the classification system set up to determine which economic activities have a favourable impact on the environment, and to direct investment towards green activities.
The taxonomy labelling, adopted last year after months of controversy, includes gas energies that have “a role to play in facilitating the transition to renewables” and climate neutrality, i.e. in transitional use.
The NGOs – ClientEarth, World Wildlife Fund, Transport & Environment and BUND-Friends of the Earth Germany – point out that these uses of gas are unsustainable, given their negative environmental impact.
Labelling them as such would worsen the EU’s dependence on fossil fuels, with gas often having to be imported from outside the EU, they argue, noting that this comes with security-of-supply concerns and a potential impact on household bills.
It also runs counter to some EU rules, EU climate law and the Paris Agreement, and would damage the credibility of the green labelling scheme, they contend.
The Commission’s decision, which could not be opposed in the European Council or Parliament due to insufficient support, had even been criticised by the platform of experts on Sustainable Finance, chosen by the EU executive itself.
In this dossier, where gas was just as much a subject of debate as nuclear energy, the Commission had argued for pragmatism: alongside investments in renewable energy, already recognised as sustainable, investments in certain gas and nuclear activities should, it felt, be encouraged, insofar as they will make it possible to guarantee the energy supply until renewable energy – which suffers from its intermittent nature and is not advanced enough in certain Member States – takes over.
Early on, NGOs such as Greenpeace as well as some Member States had announced that they would fight this decision in court.
