European Parliament to Vote on Revising Air Pollution Rules
STRASBOURG — There’s a strong sense of déjà vu in Strasbourg.
Lawmakers are set to vote Wednesday on the European Parliament’s position on revising the bloc’s air pollution rules. But in what is quickly becoming a familiar story, major divisions between political groups means the vote will go down to the wire.
Although the upcoming vote has not drawn nearly as much attention, echoes of July’s vote on restoring degraded ecosystems are palpable.
Once again, there’s a key environmental vote in the European Parliament. Once again, lawmakers from the center-right European People’s Party (EPP) group are making an attempt to significantly downgrade the institution’s position — part of its broader efforts to dilute Green Deal legislation ahead of European Parliament election next year. And once again, the liberal Renew group remains split on the issue until the last minute.
You may like
Air Pollution Guidelines and WHO Recommendations
Ahead of a plenary debate on the subject Tuesday, Iratxe García Pérez, president of the center-left Socialists & Democrats (S&D) group, accused the EPP of joining forces with the far-right “to ensure that we don’t get this law through,” adding: “We saw that with the nature restoration law.”
The key controversy this time: Whether — and how quickly — to align the EU’s current guidelines on air pollution levels, which many countries already fail to meet, with the latest stricter recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO).
In its original proposal, published in October, the European Commission suggested tightening the EU’s current guidelines, but stopped short of immediately aligning them fully with the WHO recommendations — something NGOs and scientists are pushing for. Instead, the proposal sets out a broader vision of full alignment with the WHO by 2050.
This gradual approach would see lower limits by 2030 for annual average exposure to fine particulate matter, which has been linked to respiratory diseases, and for nitrogen dioxide, one of the main pollutants from transport. But those limits are still twice as high as the WHO considers safe for human health.
The Commission’s fear is that too stringent guidelines will hit the host of countries and municipalities already struggling to meet the current EU targets. WHO targets are even further out of reach: Nearly all of the bloc’s urban population — 97 percent — was exposed to fine particulate matter concentrations above WHO guidelines in 2021.
The European Parliament had a grander vision. In a tight vote in June, MEPs on Parliament’s leading environment committee, ENVI, voted to follow scientists’ advice and ensure full alignment with the WHO by 2030. Lead lawmaker Javi López, of the S&D, lauded the result, arguing it puts the EU on the path to “aligning our efforts with … science in combating the biggest environmental threat to our health.”
Pushback
But as the text heads to plenary, the EPP keeps pushing back.
“We should sit back for a bit, take a deep breath and keep our hands off this new burden on citizens, municipalities and industry,” Peter Liese, a German EPP lawmaker, told reporters ahead of the vote, arguing that “we can’t do too much at once.”
The EPP argues that air quality has improved in recent years and is leading a push for even less stringent guidelines than those suggested by the Commission. It wants tweaks to existing air pollution limits to be pushed to 2035 and language around WHO alignment by 2050 weakened.
That’s prompted López, as well as MEP Karin Karlsbro, the Renew group’s point person on the file, to put forward a new compromise aiming for WHO alignment by 2035, rather than 2030. They hope to rally support among skeptical lawmakers in their own political groups, as well as among the EPP — while also increasing the overall ambition of the original proposal.
“Following the worst health crisis in a century, we should recognize how much citizens value public efforts to protect their health and well-being,” said López, calling air pollution a “slow-motion pandemic.”
But, with little time left ahead of the vote, the Renew group remains divided on the issue, with some Renew MEPs sponsoring EPP amendments.
One parliamentary insider, granted anonymity to speak about closed-door talks, said they expect around 20 Renew MEPs to side with the EPP — which would make for an extremely close ballot. The insider also compared the scenario to July’s nature restoration vote.
Yet both sides still think they can tip the balance in their favor.
Renew MEP Pascal Canfin, who chairs the environment committee, told reporters on Monday he “expect[s] Renew to be widely united behind the [amendments] we tabled.”
Another parliamentary insider, who also spoke anonymously to discuss closed-door talks and who supports the amendments introduced by S&D and Renew, said that “we expect to have a very tight result, but with a positive outcome.”
But Norbert Lins, the lawmaker leading work on the file for the EPP who opposes the 2035 amendment, said he is “cautiously optimistic” that his group can still make changes to the Parliament position.
Clean Air Now
Meanwhile, scientists, health and environment NGOs keep ramping up the pressure, sticking to their original call for full WHO alignment as soon as possible.
Civil society organizations on Tuesday staged a protest — featuring huge inflatable lungs — outside the European Parliament, reiterating their call for an ambitious revision to current rules.
UNICEF called on governments to “ensure air quality standards are in line with [World Health Organization] guidelines”
SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis
1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?
- SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
- SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
- SDG 13: Climate Action
- SDG 15: Life on Land
The article discusses the European Parliament’s position on revising air pollution rules, which is directly related to the goal of ensuring good health and well-being (SDG 3). It also mentions the impact of air pollution on urban populations, highlighting the need for sustainable cities and communities (SDG 11). Additionally, the article touches on the environmental threat posed by air pollution and the need for climate action (SDG 13) and the protection of ecosystems and biodiversity (SDG 15).
2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?
- Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water, and soil pollution and contamination.
- Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management.
- Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies, and planning.
- Target 15.1: By 2020, ensure the conservation, restoration, and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services.
Based on the article’s content, the targets mentioned above are relevant to the issues discussed. These targets focus on reducing deaths and illnesses caused by air pollution, improving air quality in cities, integrating climate change measures into policies, and ensuring the conservation and restoration of ecosystems.
3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?
- Indicator 3.9.1: Mortality rate attributed to household and ambient air pollution.
- Indicator 11.6.2: Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter (e.g., PM2.5) in cities (population-weighted).
- Indicator 13.2.1: Number of countries that have communicated the establishment or operationalization of an integrated policy/strategy/plan that addresses climate change adaptation and mitigation.
- Indicator 15.1.1: Forest area as a proportion of total land area.
The article mentions the impact of air pollution on mortality rates, which can be measured using Indicator 3.9.1. It also discusses the levels of fine particulate matter in cities, which can be measured using Indicator 11.6.2. The integration of climate change measures can be measured using Indicator 13.2.1, and the conservation and restoration of ecosystems can be measured using Indicator 15.1.1.
SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Table
| SDGs | Targets | Indicators |
|---|---|---|
| SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being | Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water, and soil pollution and contamination. | Indicator 3.9.1: Mortality rate attributed to household and ambient air pollution. |
| SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities | Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management. | Indicator 11.6.2: Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter (e.g., PM2.5) in cities (population-weighted). |
| SDG 13: Climate Action | Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies, and planning. | Indicator 13.2.1: Number of countries that have communicated the establishment or operationalization of an integrated policy/strategy/plan that addresses climate change adaptation and mitigation. |
| SDG 15: Life on Land | Target 15.1: By 2020, ensure the conservation, restoration, and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services. | Indicator 15.1.1: Forest area as a proportion of total land area. |
Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.
Source: politico.eu
Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.
