🇪🇺Parliament just rejected the #taxonomy list of investments considered green, which controversially included both #nuclear & #gas as a result of a delicately crafted compromise between national governments
76 members of ECON & ENVI committees voted to reject, 62 voted to accept
76 members of ECON & ENVI committees voted to reject, 62 voted to accept
"Russia's invasion changed the thinking on this " one EP source tells me.
Here's the background of how we ended up with this 🇪🇺 proposal to deem nuclear & gas as green.
TLDR: it was a political compromise between anti-nuclear🇩🇪 & anti-gas 🇫🇷.
energymonitor.ai/finance/report…
Here's the background of how we ended up with this 🇪🇺 proposal to deem nuclear & gas as green.
TLDR: it was a political compromise between anti-nuclear🇩🇪 & anti-gas 🇫🇷.
energymonitor.ai/finance/report…
The taxonomy list proposal was made before the #UkraineWar.
The thinking is it probably would have gotten through the parliament were it not for Russia's invasion. But the idea of including gas as a 'transition fuel' eligible for green funds is now unpalatable.
The thinking is it probably would have gotten through the parliament were it not for Russia's invasion. But the idea of including gas as a 'transition fuel' eligible for green funds is now unpalatable.
It's not over yet, however. This next heads to a plenary vote of full parliament in July. If rejected, it's dead. Plenaries usually back committee votes
Some want to remove gas & keep nuclear. But with this type of legislation, Parl & Council can only accept or reject, not amend
Some want to remove gas & keep nuclear. But with this type of legislation, Parl & Council can only accept or reject, not amend
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
