Today, the European Parliament’s Committee on Environment voted on the provisional agreement on the Carbon Removal Certification Framework and was approved by a large majority of 56 votes, with 19 against and 5 abstentions. The vote follows the approval of the text in Coreper, which took place on Friday 8 March. The text will now need to be formally adopted by both institutions (both in plenary and the Council), following revisions by lawyer-linguists, before it can be published in the EU’s Official Journal and enter into force.
From the outset of the initiative launched by the Commission, Copa and Cogeca have backed the establishment of this pioneering framework. However, the compromise reached is not flawless, especially concerning livestock farming and complex additional criteria.
The core issue in this proposal was obviously the definition of the scope of activities that could be included in the final framework. The agreement extends to soil emission reductions and maintains an open definition of carbon removals which was a key claim for Copa and Cogeca.
However, we regret that the proposed scope of application fails to properly and timely recognise the importance of livestock management practices. In fact, the inclusion of methane reductions will only be considered in 2026. This political compromise was reached through a crucial concession in the European Parliament’s negotiating mandate. On the ground, this decision makes no sense as for livestock farms already involved in carbon farming mechanisms, this is a step backwards, and for those who saw carbon farming as a new tool, it’s a new disillusion.
This compromise simply fails to recognise obvious synergies between livestock farming, land management practices capable of capturing carbon, and of enhancing alternative energy sources! Yet at least the Commission has been asked to develop the methodologies to include emissions from enteric and manure fermentation. Such methodologies should be ready by 2026.
Carbon farming activities will also have “to generate at least a biodiversity co-benefit”, promoting soil health and avoiding land degradation while “complying with the principle of the cascading use of biomass”. For Copa and Cogeca, it is clear that co-benefits should be considered as additional benefits, not mandatory requirements.
Farmers and agri-cooperatives will be closely monitoring these developments, as it is essential for the system’s popularity that it remains simple to understand and apply.
Following the adoption of both institutions, the Commission will (with the support of the expert group) develop tailored certification methodologies through delegated acts. The expert group will have its next meeting from 15th to 17th April where items such as factors to establish a baseline and additionality should be considered. Due consideration must be paid to the specific characteristics of each sector.
Fonte: Copa Cogeca
