The EU Green Deal Lacks Eastern Support

The European Union’s Green Deal, which is the product of the European Commission’s President Ursula von der Leyen, has the goal of making all of Europe carbon-neutral by 2050, entailing a net-zero carbon footprint, meaning that carbon emissions and carbon removal combine to equal zero. The Green Deal has another goal: to encourage sustainable development of Europe’s stagnating economy. Some important aspects of the deal include renovating old buildings to be more energy efficient, update public and private transportation systems to decrease excessive emissions, and decrease dependence on carbon-based energy sources. Not only does the plan focus on emissions, but also on decreasing and eliminating physical waste, such as non-biodegradable plastics. Although establishing environmental goals for EU member states may improve publicity, many former Eastern-Bloc countries will struggle to meet different markers showing progress due to lack of funding, interest, and relevant infrastructure. In recent years, this has been a common critique of the EU, as many Eastern countries hastily entered the EU without proper integration, leaving them asking for more money and richer countries complaining about giving it. 

Many of these qualms confused me until I learned more about how the EU functions. I spent my Junior spring semester studying the intricacies of the European Union. The program is headquartered in Germany’s “greenest” city—Freiburg—set in a valley of the Black Forest surrounded by mountains perched with wind turbines. The city is frequently recognized for its dedication to the environment, such as its extensive tram and bus system, large swaths of solar panels, and a hydro-plant in the Dreisam River that provides its 200,000 residents with clean and accessible energy. Unlike other German cities with similar sizes that prioritize coal due to their proximity to coal mines, Freiburg has prioritized clean energy in the city’s development since World War II. 

Unlike Freiburg, most of Eastern Europe was not decimated by bombs in WWII, and instead, most of its current infrastructure was built by the Soviet Union and has been poorly maintained due to under-funding. This is one factor that led to the large “Eastern Expansion” in 2004, when many former Soviet-Bloc countries like Poland, Lithuania, and Slovenia tried to enter the EU. The EU sponsors billions of dollars to all countries within the EU, and many countries, like those in Eastern Europe, receive a disproportionate amount to what they give to the entire EU. According to the EU website, Poland receives €11.921 billion in EU funding while only contributing €3.048 billion, which accounts for only 0.68% of total EU funding. As the Green Deal requires countries to spend more and more in updating infrastructure and changing supply chains, more and more countries will struggle to meet said requirements by the 2050 deadline of carbon neutrality. 

Although the EU establishing environmental goals for its member states may be good for publicity, in reality, many former Eastern-Bloc countries will struggle to meet different markers showing progress due to lack of funding, interest, and relevant infrastructure.

I find Poland to be a great example of a country that, even with investments from the EU, will not have the money, nor the desire, to make needed changes. Especially with its current party in power, Law and Justice, which calls itself an “illiberal democracy,” Poland will be unable to make needed changes to its economy within the near future. Many illiberal democracies deny the effects of climate change, thus making it difficult to establish national policies that help stop excessive emissions. Without national recognition of poor climate policies, there would thus be less money allocated to help those issues.  The Polish budget is spread thinner and thinner by lawmakers, who recently started a new initiative giving Polish families the equivalent of $100 a month for child support—hoping to boost the economy by allowing more parents to work. There is only so much money in their budget to allow for costly investments that may not be as beneficial in the future as initially thought. Poland will not have the ability to grow its economy, which already struggles to grow and innovate. Unlike a city trying to reach carbon neutrality, an entire continent attempting to achieve carbon-neutrality may be a stretch. 

The goal of 2050 is laughable without proper guidelines accounting for intergovernmental accountability, as Ursula von der Leyen will only be President of the Commission for the next eight years. Other intergovernmental agreements, like the Paris Climate Accord, have lacked any profound impacts on emissions counts of different countries around the world—for example, China’s emissions have begun to grow again after years of stagnation, according to the Climate Action Tracker. I hope that more countries will prioritize clean energy, as the more clean energy providers enter the market, the more the price will be driven down, allowing it to become more accessible than other forms of non-renewable energy.