Earlier this month, the European Commission (EC) presented recommendations for cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 90 % by 2040 [1], building on the EU’s 2030 Fit for 55 objective, and part of the broader goal of reaching climate neutrality by 2050. Notably, however, while the report states a target of less than 850 MtCO₂-eq remaining at 2040, the scope of the final document was reduced. Reuters reported that the EU’s draft target required agriculture to reduce non-CO₂ emissions by 30% compared to 2015 to meet the overall climate target, but claimed that this section was removed from the final draft [2]. Moreover, emissions from the land use, land use change, and forestry (LULUCF) sector are not included [1], as well as the 90% reduction being reliant on 400 MtCO₂ being extracted through both land based and industrial forms of carbon capture.

The report stated that its purpose was solely “to initiate the political debate and inform the preparation of the post-2030 framework”, with no new policy propositions or sector-specific targets set according to the EC [1]. However, the creative accounting of the report puts a particular frame on climate change, and the solutions to it. Frames have been described to have the power to define problems, diagnose causes, make moral judgements and from there suggest remedies [3]. Thinking of the recommendations in this light, shows how the chosen framing can lead the political debate to focus less on animal agriculture, and more on carbon capture and storage (CCS), producing policies to this effect.

This particular framing is alarming for several reasons. Firstly, while atmospheric levels of CO₂ have increased by roughly 50 %, atmospheric methane levels have seen a much greater increase of 162 % [4]. These exceptions create a framing where National energy and Climate plans (NECPs) are not encouraged to recognise agricultural emissions, particularly methane which the European Environment Agency (EEA) states is 80 times more potent than CO₂ over a 20 year period [5].

Nevertheless, in the EC’s report, they account for GHG emissions with an adjustment of Global Warming Potentials (GWPs) over a 100 year period. For this timeframe, the potency of methane drops to 27 times the equivalent of CO₂, thus diminishing the perceived threat. The IPCC has also recognised this misapplication of GWPs, stating:

“GWP100 is not well-suited to estimate the cumulative effect on climate from sustained SLCF emissions [Short-lived climate forcers, including aerosols, methane and nitrogen oxides] and the resulting warming at specific points in time” [6].

Accounting for SLCFs in such a way, will protract their effect over time under the proposed recommendations, and misrepresents the scale of their impact in the short-term, leading to the illusion of far more time to offset the emissions than is available. When adjusting EU GHG emissions data for 2021 [7] to a 20 year warming period, methane accounts for 1.52Bt of CO₂e with CO₂ at 2.76Bt for the same year. Measured this way, methane is shown to be a compound that demands far more attention than the EC affords it, representing 55 % of its prominent counterpart CO₂’s environmental impact. When considering a shorter term perspective, this highlights the dangers of the EC’s oversight when considering SLCFs.

The dangers of neglecting methane however, does not only lead to a miscalculation of warming potential. Elevated atmospheric methane levels can increase all-cause mortalities, particularly through promoting cardiovascular and respiratory problems [8]. Methane itself is also a marker of the volume of animal agriculture in a society, which not only causes the suffering of billions of sentient animals, but also contributes to poor public health through the risk of zoonotic diseases [9]. From a localised perspective, animal agriculture typically causes the degradation of soil and water quality, requiring significant treatment for bacteria and pathogens [10].

The decision to tactically disclude agricultural emissions and the withdrawal of the planned halving of pesticide use demonstrates the success of recent farmer protests sparking across Europe [11]. Excluding agricultural emissions means that GHG emissions far more potent than CO₂ are excluded from the climate target. Emissions such as methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (NO₂), are largely caused by farm animals and fertiliser runoff.

Leading to the second issue of GHG capture, methane capture specifically has been found to be particularly ineffective [12], while also often using methods that do not negate emissions altogether, but rather transform the methane, into the less potent CO₂ and water. Achieving the aforementioned target of 400 MtCO₂ is stated in the report to require “faster investments for deployment of novel low carbon technologies such as hydrogen production by electrolysis, carbon capture and use and industrial carbon removals between 2031 and 2040”. While there is recognised future potential for various carbon capture and storage methods, their benefits are likely to appear in the  second half of the century, due to both recognised legislative barriers [13], as well financial barriers and a lack of political will, stunting the R&D of high performance CCS solutions [14].

Greenpeace’s EU climate and energy campaigner Silvia Pastorelli stated: “Without honesty about an end to fossil fuels and finally tackling farming emissions, it’s hard to see how the EU will even clear this too-low bar it’s setting itself” [12].

The EC’s recent recommendations for cutting greenhouse gas emissions represent a significant step toward combating climate change. However, the decision to exclude agricultural emissions from the final draft and the reliance on carbon capture and storage (CCS) solutions raises concerns about the effectiveness of the proposed measures. 

By framing the climate debate in a way that prioritises certain emissions over others, there is a risk of overlooking critical contributors to global warming, and other societal ills, which demands urgent attention. This should be considered when the new EC and European Parliament (EP) are to pass the final emission target for 2040 after the EP elections in June.