Don’t leave ‘2040 climate targets '

The Scientific Advisory Board of the European Climate Change (ESABCC) warned that Brussels publishes 2040 targets with a harsh counter-out to the expectations in the direction of weakening, the European Union (EU) warned that international carbon loans do not use it to achieve climate targets. Experts stressed that EU’s greenhouse gas emissions up to 2040 compared to 1990 levels should be reduced by 90-95 percent in domestic ways, and as far as this goal can be applied, Europe’s strategic removal. Prof. Jette Bredahl Jacobsen, Deputy Chairman of the Advisory Board, “90-95% domestic emission reduction target for 2040 is both applicable and suitable for strategic removal of Europe. We have to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and the technologies needed for this are largely available.". While experts who pay attention to the importance of “Local” highlight are able to transfer emissions reduction to other countries through carbon loans, this approach draws gold that will be wrong in many ways according to scientists and climate defenders.

What is the 2040 climate plan of the EU?]
The EU has been committed to neutralizing climate up to 2050 and recorded a large progress in the target of 55 percent reduction in emissions for 2030. However, the search target for 2040 is not yet legally determined. President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, responsible for climate authorities Wopke Hoekstra and Teresa Ribera, together with a 90 percent reduction target for 2040 years ago. This rate is located at the bottom limit of the range ESABCC recommended in 2023. But on the objections from some governments, Hoekstra postponed the revision of the European Climate Act on July 2. Now, 2040 ways to make the target more flexible, for example, the use of carbon loans is reported. [

What is the problem with carbon credits?]
Within the scope of a supported framework of the United Nations (BM) adopted at the COP29 climate peak last year, carbon loans allow countries to count on their behalf by financing emissions reduction projects in other countries. The supporters defend that this system is more cost effective than domestic solutions and provides climate finance to poor countries. However, scientists and critics on the Advisory Board say that the resources of this system can remove from domestic investments and weaken environmental integrity. News. Jacobsen said, “It is the risk to melt my hands or trust international carbon loans, modernizing the EU economy, creating quality jobs and strengthening the position of Europe in its clean technology leadership.” ESABCC, a responsible organ to provide advice to individual and legally climate policies, hadn’t been involved in this way while a political discussion continues. In the 60-page report of the board, there are only 16 percent of the credit given under different carbon credit programs.

Green NGOs welcomed this exit from the board.
The WWF (Natural Life Protection Foundation) said Michael Sicaud-Clyet means ‘doubted money of those who have reduced their emissions by giving money to projects in other countries; “As the Prime Countries send to school and try to print their diploma and success into their own household.”

Science wants people to plan a more powerful fit]
The report also clearly states that there is no need for international carbon loans. The net domestic emission reduction between 90 percent and 95 percent on the face makes both scientifically possible and the EU’s contribution to global justice more fair. It should be strengthened not only reducing, but also compliance policies. The Advisory Board calls more powerful measures to protect European citizens from increased climate risks. Increased greenhouse gas emissions have increased global temperatures to 1.3-1.4°C level, and this situation has increased extreme weather events in Europe and around the world. However, according to the authors of the report, the EU’s current compliance policy lacks a measured goals and a solid legal basis. Deputy Chairman of the Board Prof. Laura Diaz Anadon, “The risks arising from the change of hope are increasing, and the cliff between the current one is growing. The EU should clarify the vision of climate resistance and support it with governance, legal tools and measurable targets. Without a stronger compliance policy, the European climate change faces the risk of getting behind. “