the decision
| date | action |
|---|---|
| february 2, 2022 | commission adopts complementary delegated act |
| july 6, 2022 | european parliament fails to block |
| january 1, 2023 | enters into force |
natural gas was classified as a “sustainable” investment under the eu taxonomy.
gas is a fossil fuel.
the emissions
| source | g CO2eq/kWh |
|---|---|
| coal | ~820 |
| natural gas | ~490 |
| solar | ~41 |
| wind | ~11 |
| nuclear | ~12 |
natural gas emits approximately 40x more than wind or solar per kilowatt-hour.
the political deal
| position | countries |
|---|---|
| pro-gas inclusion | germany, italy, central/eastern europe |
| pro-nuclear inclusion | france, finland, czech republic |
france wanted nuclear included. germany wanted gas included.
the compromise: include both.
the eu’s own scientific advisors did not recommend including gas.
the scientific position
| body | recommendation |
|---|---|
| eu technical expert group | did not recommend gas inclusion |
| platform on sustainable finance | expressed concerns |
| scientific consensus | gas is transition fuel at best |
the commission overrode its advisors.
the “transition” argument
official justification: gas as bridge from coal to renewables.
| issue | reality |
|---|---|
| lock-in effect | gas infrastructure lasts 30-40 years |
| 2050 carbon neutrality | incompatible with new gas assets |
| methane leakage | understated in official calculations |
| investment diversion | funds flow to gas instead of renewables |
the transition argument assumes temporary use. the infrastructure creates permanent dependency.
the lobbying
documented gas industry activity:
| entity | activity |
|---|---|
| eurogas | advocacy for gas inclusion |
| iogp | industry coordination |
| national gas associations | member state pressure |
meetings with commissioners are recorded in the transparency register. the timing correlation between lobbying intensity and decision timing is documented.
the mechanism
how taxonomy greenwashing works:
- define what counts as “green”
- include fossil fuel under technical conditions
- conditions are complex, hard to verify
- investment labeled “taxonomy-aligned”
- pension funds buy “green” gas bonds
- fossil fuel extraction continues
- eu claims green leadership
legal challenges
| plaintiff | venue | status |
|---|---|---|
| austria | cjeu | pending |
| greenpeace | cjeu | pending |
| clientearth | various | ongoing |
austria’s argument: gas inclusion violates the taxonomy regulation’s own criteria.
the pattern
| eu claim | eu action |
|---|---|
| ”climate leader” | gas = green in taxonomy |
| ”science-based policy” | overrode scientific advisors |
| ”green deal” | includes fossil fuel investment |
| ”net zero by 2050” | approving 30-40 year gas infrastructure |
the gap between rhetoric and policy is consistent.
what this suggests
- political deals override scientific advice
- fossil fuels can be labeled “green” with sufficient lobbying
- transition language obscures lock-in effects
- sustainable finance frameworks can be captured
- climate leadership claims are undermined by policy
calling natural gas “sustainable” is institutional greenwashing.
sources
- european commission. taxonomy delegated acts.
- eu technical expert group. taxonomy recommendations.
- platform on sustainable finance. opinions.
- eurostat. energy emissions data.
- ipcc. methane global warming potential.
- transparency register. gas industry lobbying.
- cjeu. pending case documentation.
rune.ᛞ