On Brussels, my love? this week, we break down why it is so important that world leaders meet once a year to discuss the climate, even in an oil-rich nation like the UAE.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00 Hi there and welcome to Brussels My Love, Euronews' weekly talk show, where we take
00:17 a look at some of the stories making news across Europe and break down what's at stake
00:22 for you and for the EU in the wider world. I'm Maeve McMahon. Thank you so much for tuning
00:27 in. Coming up this week, brought together by the UN, world leaders are having their
00:32 annual date with the climate, this year in the swanky city of Dubai. Ahead of the gathering,
00:39 protesters from all across the board were on the streets calling for adequate action
00:43 now. But although the science is clear, the answers are not and political will remains
00:49 weak. We take a look at Europe's position around the COP table. And overshadowing that
00:56 high stakes summit, a big cloud of smog. According to Human Rights Watch, the United Arab Emirates
01:02 is choking from quote, alarmingly high pollution levels triggered by their fossil fuel industry.
01:08 Meanwhile, here in Europe, new data says toxic air pollution is the biggest environmental
01:14 risk to our health. So we're asking what more can be done to address this silent killer?
01:19 With our guests this week, Chris Hocknell, director of 8Versa, a sustainability consultancy
01:25 advising companies on how to reach net zero. Susanna Karp, EU climate policy specialist
01:31 and deputy director of Clean Tech Europe. Welcome. And also Dharmendra Kanani, chief
01:36 operating officer and chief spokesperson at Friends of Europe, the Brussels-based think
01:40 tank. Great to see you all. Thank you so much for being with us. But as usual, before we
01:44 hear your views, let's just hear what's at stake over in Dubai at the UN's 28th conference
01:50 of the Parshis. Heat waves, droughts, fires and floods, some
01:56 of the drastic consequences climate change is having on planet Earth. As scientists scream
02:02 from the rooftops that there is no planet B, world leaders and business have descended
02:07 upon Dubai, the city normally known for luxury shopping and nightlife. Among them, a cross-party
02:14 delegation from the European Parliament and scores from the European Commission. They're
02:19 called triple global renewable energy capacity by 2030 and double energy efficiency and also
02:25 face out of fossil fuels. With so much at stake for the climate, we ask if politicians
02:32 are up to the task and if the EU is playing good cop or bad.
02:39 So that's the question we're posing here, whether or not the European Union is playing
02:43 good cop or bad. But before we get into the nuts and bolts here, let's just hear what
02:47 is at stake for the climate and for Europe. Tarmendu, shall we start with you?
02:51 I think we are at a crossroads in terms of what's happening. We keep on hearing from
02:56 scientists that this is, you know, the hottest year ever. It's been this clarion call all
03:01 the time, yet politicians are dithering. What we have an opportunity now, what we've seen
03:05 is at the beginning, the loss and damage fund has been agreed. You know, the thing that
03:09 the South or what we call the developing countries, the low income countries have been asking
03:12 for for a long time. So something happened really quick early on. But in reality, the
03:17 conversations that are happening right now, the fact that the president of the COP says
03:21 the science, there is no science behind this, is troubling, very troubling. But the EU has
03:26 been very clear about what is happening. I think we need to double down on renewables.
03:31 We have to triple it. We'll come to that later. Susanna, would you
03:35 agree with that, that politicians are dithering? Well, first of all, thank you very much for
03:41 having me on the show. What is at stake in this COP, from our perspective, is going into
03:46 the implementation of the Paris Agreement. So whereas before the narrative was all about
03:50 targets and the rulebook, now it's about deploying the solutions that we have available at the
03:56 scale required to actually avoid further climate disasters. And as we've seen in the evidence
04:02 you've shared with us, the world is already unfortunately dealing constantly with unfortunate
04:09 experiences with climate. And so what we need to do at this COP is put together human ingenuity,
04:16 innovation and investments so that we move quickly in the direction of scaling up the
04:21 technologies we need. Chris, is the urgency there? Because I feel
04:25 at COP, a lot of times they just spend their time speaking about the next year's COP. Should
04:29 they have more of a tight deadline here? I think it depends who you're speaking to.
04:32 I mean, I think one of the challenges is everyone's on different levels and different gears. You
04:36 know, I think in Europe we're quite advanced in our understanding and our ideas. And then
04:42 we saw from the statements by the COP president, other participants and actors, much less so.
04:49 And I think the problem is that we're talking to people on different levels and different
04:52 gears. And I think what Europe needs to really do is work out how it builds the bridges and
04:56 brings those people who are thinking about exploiting their fossil fuels until the very
04:59 last moment on board. Well, let's get more from Dubai and bring
05:03 in our science correspondent, Jeremy Wilkes. I checked in with him to see what the mood
05:08 there was on the ground. Take a listen. Yes, Maeve, I am indeed standing here on a
05:14 yellow brick road. And as you will remember, the moral of the tale of Alice in Wonderland
05:20 is that if you stay true to your ideas and keep on moving, then good things will happen.
05:24 And for some of the campaigners here, that has happened. For example, those who are campaigning
05:28 for health and climate change to be taken more seriously, they've moved from side events
05:33 to being centre stage. We also saw the loss and damage fund, which was decided last year,
05:38 now being put into action. As far as the EU is concerned, a lot of people are looking
05:42 to them for leadership. They say that the moves to reduce methane emissions that have
05:47 been taken in the EU are significant and will make a measurable difference. But the fairy
05:52 tale outcome that we're all waiting for is for this COP to end with a line saying, we
05:57 will phase out fossil fuels. At the moment, I think we're still in la-la land on that
06:02 one. Jeremy Wilkes there reporting for us with a clear message that if we are expecting
06:06 that statement on phasing out fossil fuels, we must forget it. I mean, that is, of course,
06:10 what happens when an oil rich nation, an oil producer hosts the COP, like what we discussed
06:15 earlier. Yeah, I mean, they have such an inversely invested interest in this in this agenda.
06:24 And ultimately, regardless of what the president said, and we have also seen communication
06:30 from other petro states as well kind of resisting. The only way out of this is a phase down and
06:35 phase out of eventually all fossil fuels. There's absolutely no way around that. It's
06:39 absolutely concrete. It's just how and what and what person who can we bring on and what
06:44 the solutions are and the alternatives. And just in case our viewers didn't see that controversial
06:48 statement that the president of COP Sultan Al-Jaber said, it went viral. I mean, on social
06:53 media a little bit earlier this week when he said phasing out coal, gas and oil would
06:57 take the world's quote back to caves and that there's no science to show that that phase
07:01 out would restrict global warming to 1.5 degrees. Susanna Carp, but what Jeremy Wilkes, our
07:06 correspondent there is saying as well, that the world is looking at the European Union
07:10 to lead. I mean, yes. Are they leading? In that regard, indeed, we're seeing very good
07:15 news from the European Union at the COP. And exactly the tension you were discussing earlier
07:20 is really a tension between the dirty technologies and the clean technologies. And so what we've
07:25 seen from the European Union side already on the second day of this COP was a big announcement
07:30 of 240 million euros invested with the help of the European Investment Bank, as well as
07:37 Breakthrough Energy Catalyst Project and the European Commission into two European companies
07:42 to scale up long duration energy storage. So Energy Dome, as well as Ørsted in Sweden
07:47 to develop green fuels. And so actually what we are seeing is that the European Union is
07:53 reclaiming its climate vanguard, its climate pioneer innovation role. And I said, and even
07:59 though many I speak to here myself when we're reporting, they're like, we don't just want
08:03 this pressure on us here in the EU. What about others? They need to do their part as well.
08:07 They feel under pressure. Absolutely what we need to say on the one hand, because I
08:10 was interviewing the EU Commissioner for Environment earlier this week. And what's clear is that
08:15 on the one hand, the Green Deal is probably one of the biggest things the EU has done
08:19 other than the resilience and recovery front, right, during COVID. And what they need to
08:24 be engaged in is whilst they're there is climate diplomacy. And you need to up the
08:29 game on that. And actually, if we don't do this properly, and if we just sit around like
08:34 we are here, and don't have measurable action taking place, what we'll see is a kind of
08:39 a backlash from people on the ground, because suddenly, as we are finding out now, poor
08:43 people are being asked to adapt their heaters, their boilers, their consumption habits. But
08:48 they're thinking, well, if politicians and others thought this was such an urgency, why
08:53 now? And why are we paying for it? And you're going to see that backlash. You saw that in
08:57 the UK, Boris Johnson's seat. Well, let's get the perspective from Chris, your base,
09:00 of course, in London. I mean, here, the European Green Deal was sold a couple of years ago
09:04 as Europe's man on the moon moment. We're seeing it's tricky to get across. What are
09:09 you seeing there with the UK's ambitions? How are they getting on? Well, there's been
09:12 a rolling back, as you may have seen with Rishi Sunak, he's kind of rolling back some
09:16 of the ambitions. I think from our perspective is that we're in this kind of rubber hitting
09:21 the road phase, where we've come up with these pledges and these aspirations. And now we're
09:24 trying to work out how to implement them. And there's pushback and there's political
09:27 fights going on. I think one of the things we need to remember is that we can't, there's
09:32 a tendency, I think, in the environmental movement to have a unilateral approach. And
09:36 I think we need to recognise that, you know, Europe itself is only one fifth of emissions.
09:39 It needs to bring the other states on board, needs to work out technology transfers, funding,
09:44 all of these things. We know just going it alone is not going to work because climate
09:49 change is not territorial. It's about CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. It's that
09:54 simple. It's not going anywhere. And as we've seen from the science, and you alluded to
09:57 it as well, this reminder that 2023 was the warmest year on record. But Susanna, is COP
10:05 the right place to have these conversations? I mean, or is it just turning into some sort
10:08 of a media circus, a climate festival? What's your take? Very interesting question, first
10:14 of all, and the world cannot actually afford a bad COP. So this is really to your initial
10:19 question. I think, as we've just discussed, there is no option for the world because we
10:23 are heading very rapidly towards increasingly warmer scenarios than we expected. As a result,
10:29 I think that the partnerships and the ecosystem focus of this COP are there to stay, because
10:35 what we need to do is actually win in the race against time, effectively. And so any
10:40 opportunity to bring together those who can move rapidly on solutions should really be
10:46 cherished and maximised. And there are certain things to learn from this COP. For example,
10:52 when we think of scale, traditional energy majors can actually, by divesting away from
10:58 their, let's say, traditional sources of energy, but they can actually, let's say, share lessons
11:03 learned for the newcomers, the next generation of industry. Now, it's true that they haven't
11:07 been present at this COP, so the innovators have not actually been able to take part in
11:11 this COP of the same level as the big oil majors, having said that.
11:16 Remember your reaction?
11:17 Absolutely. I mean, I think you're being really diplomatic, if I may. I think it's a jamboree,
11:21 it's a talking shop, and nothing happens as a result. We've not seen any practical, measurable
11:26 action coming out of a COP up to now. This time, yes, first day, first weekend, loss
11:31 and damage comes through. Great. But just think for a moment. We have more oil, fossil
11:35 fuel companies attending this COP than there's ever been in the history, double, triple the
11:40 amount from last year, right? Secondly, when you talk about the EU's role, we mustered
11:46 in Europe more money for COVID, right? A quadruple the amount that's being pulled together right
11:52 now. And you know what's worrying? It's only adversity that's going to make politicians
11:57 move. We've seen the weather conditions, you know, we've all been in places of extremity,
12:02 and it's the poorest in our communities that's going to suffer the most. And suddenly everyone
12:05 says, oh, my goodness, it's a pandemic type of experience. And this is an existential
12:09 crisis. We need to get a grip. It creeps into the room or creeps into their EU summits here
12:13 in Brussels. Chris, your perspective on that? Is COP just a talking shop? Should they start
12:17 wrapping them up anytime soon? I think they need to happen. But I mean, they are semi-pointless.
12:22 You know, it is a talking shop. There's some actually, I think a lot of interesting things
12:26 happen around some of the fringe events and the other supporting stuff. There's some interesting
12:29 conversations and I hear from my contacts and people, associates there that good things
12:35 are being talked about. But a lot of it is just, it's just chat. And what about your
12:40 companies that you're consulting? Like how are you holding their hands on their journeys
12:44 towards carbon neutral or net zero? Yeah. So the challenges that we have is, to be quite
12:50 frank, we still don't have the clear and cost effective solutions in hand. And it requires
12:55 an awful amount of infrastructure, investing and financial planning to get this running.
13:02 And many of the options that companies have are kind of out of their control, apart from
13:06 cutting their business operations. You know, things like the decarbonisation of electricity
13:10 grid from the implementation of renewables and things like that. Companies can't affect
13:15 that. That requires governments and big structure. Well, look, Susannah, you mentioned earlier
13:20 one of the big stories coming out of COP this week. One of the headlines, if you like, it
13:24 was about tripling the installed capacity of renewable energy by 2030. Something, of
13:28 course, that would only work if you double energy efficiency. And we wanted to get the
13:32 perspective of an engineering company working on cooling and heating systems. So we spoke
13:36 to Juergen Fischer. He's the president of Danfoss Climate Solutions. And he's just back,
13:40 in fact, from COP. If you do the math, three times is not enough. But there is a good option
13:47 to increase energy efficiency targets, to double them from two to four percent. And
13:53 that, of course, could help together with the renewables to make it happen. And thereby,
13:58 I think we have a clear plan between now and 2050. Energy efficiency is more important
14:05 and faster there than building renewables. There is a big issue in building renewables,
14:09 as you know, right? There is political money reasons not to do it. But saving energy, we
14:17 can do that today already by using technologies and technology, which is there today.
14:23 Juergen Fischer, they're saying that a clear plan has been put on the table. Do you think
14:27 this is a big deal, this pledge?
14:29 The pledge is it's a good pledge to have. But in reality, when I think about what you
14:34 do in your trade and your trade in clean tech, the solutions are there, right? Innovation
14:39 is in place. We know what to do. We just need to have the political will and the attitude.
14:45 And there's enough money. I mean, when you speak to private sector CEOs and others, they'll
14:49 say, you know, if we if we make a market of the green transition and actually create a
14:53 marketplace for clean tech, renovating buildings, etc, the money will come. But you need the
14:59 political leadership and you actually need to have the taxpayers' money going in as a
15:04 patient capital that will enable you to take risk. But actually, time is running out. Go
15:08 for it. What we do is get caught in nonsense.
15:12 We get caught in nonsense. And I find we end up reporting and discussing that nonsense
15:16 a lot here on the show. But we obviously want to find solutions as well. I mean, would you
15:20 agree with what your mentor said there?
15:22 To some extent, but not entirely. And so what I mean by that is that whereas previous COPs
15:26 were extremely focused on political statements, on high level declarations, what we're seeing
15:32 in this COP is a very practical focus on what can be done, what can be scaled. We do have
15:39 the required technologies for the majority of us for reaching the majority of emissions
15:44 reductions. And indeed, there's other next generation of technologies for carbon neutrality
15:49 that we still need to get to market. But right now, the solutions are there. And so it's
15:53 interesting to see that, you know, the political negotiations which have just started, but
15:59 they have taken secondary place in this COP, whereas the big focus has been indeed on the
16:03 financial agenda, which has been considered to be the most ambitious one, but also getting
16:08 agreements through, agreements through on concrete projects on concrete funds. And so
16:13 very interesting in that sense. And I'm wondering if this doesn't signal a change in the nature
16:18 of COP towards exactly sort of an amplification of deployment. And it's true, we need political
16:24 will, absolutely. But we also need the private sector to really step in and take on some
16:29 of the risk because the public...
16:31 Are they willing to take risks, though?
16:33 No. No. I mean, I think the problem is that we underestimate the scale of the challenge.
16:37 I think there's a, I see this a lot in the environmental movement, they play down the
16:41 scale of the challenge. But from from my estimation, the scale of the transition and the transformation
16:46 that's required, it's something akin to almost a World War Two level mobilisation for decades.
16:52 It's not something you can just install a few things here and there and a bit of energy
16:55 efficiency is enormous. And we need, you know, we're talking trillions and trillions of euros
16:59 of funding. It's not just off the shelf.
17:01 It is. But I mean, look what we did with COVID. What did the world do? Right? Because we knew
17:07 people were going to die. We knew it was a threat to generations. We mobilised, we built
17:13 hospitals in weeks. We mobilised cash on a level we never would imagine. And the world
17:17 worked together. OK, there was both the moral and economic imperative, but it happened.
17:23 What we don't get here is a grip on the fact that, imagine next year, right? Look what's
17:27 happened just this year in terms of extremities of weather, OK? For everyone across the world,
17:31 everyone. Imagine that doubling next year because it will be hotter next year. And what's
17:35 going to happen? We don't have seasons anymore, don't forget. We're going to have types of
17:39 weather in the UK or in here, in Brussels and elsewhere that we never imagined. And
17:43 then we'll say, oh, really? And the only point I'm making is I understand the scale of the
17:48 challenge. But what we need is, what we don't have, is a kind of Greta effect at political
17:53 level to say, mobilise the political will to say, enough, we need to get a grip and
17:58 move quickly.
17:59 And we don't even have a Greta effect really on the ground. I mean, we're not seeing the
18:01 Fridays for Future mobilise as they were. And we've seen earlier this week that scientists
18:06 are petrified. In fact, ahead of this meeting, hundreds of scientists took out their pen
18:11 and wrote a statement saying, we need you. We are terrified. A call to people to actually
18:18 become activists. But as you can see, people are tired. People are stressed. People are
18:23 thinking about the problems in their daily lives. And they don't want to have to take
18:26 on this themselves.
18:28 So if I may contribute, if at the last call before the pandemic, in discussions at the
18:34 European Union sort of stage, I mentioned that there will be a time for the private
18:42 sector to step forward. And so what I see working directly with innovators, with those
18:46 who are investing, risking their own money effectively to support development of technical
18:52 solutions, what I see there is that the cleantech ecosystem is becoming right now the activists
18:58 in the room. So they are actually the ones that are pushing the conversation forward
19:03 and saying, being uncomfortable in rooms, asking for money to be divested away from
19:10 fossil fuels towards the solutions that have net zero emissions or zero emissions. And
19:16 so that design out CO2 from production processes.
19:20 I think the renewables companies have a financial incentive, obviously, to do this. But I think
19:24 the challenge is that no government or politicians are willing to be honest with the public and
19:28 say net zero is going to cost you 5000 euros per head for the next 30 years. And no one's
19:33 willing to do that.
19:34 And that's not getting them the votes either. I'm going to have to stop there. I'm afraid
19:37 we have to take a short break. But do keep an eye on Euronews.com for all the latest
19:41 from the COP. We have a daily blog from the ground. But for now, stay with us, because
19:46 after the break, we'll be telling you about Europe's severe public health crisis of air
19:50 pollution. See you soon.
20:00 Welcome back to Brussels, my love. I'm Maeve McMahon. And along with my panel, we're talking
20:05 through some of the news stories of the week. And one image that struck us here was the
20:10 cloud of smog hanging over the COP28 in Dubai. The level of pollution was labelled unhealthy.
20:17 And here in Europe, although maybe it's not quite as bad, the European Environment Agency
20:21 did just warn that air pollution in Europe remains the largest environmental risk. It's
20:26 causing asthma, heart disease, strokes and lung cancer and thousands and thousands of
20:31 premature deaths. I mean, this report is new, but the data is not new. I feel like we've
20:37 been hearing this message for the last couple of years. What needs to be done, Susanna?
20:42 Is it better, better implementation of rules we already have, better governance? What's
20:46 going on?
20:47 So, you rightly pointed out that we've had these numbers for a while. And I remember
20:51 already the last GASP report that came out in 2018, looking at numbers from 2016, and
20:58 actually seeing that 137,000 children in the European Union were having asthma attacks
21:04 because of air pollution. And, you know, kind of the number of 50,000 premature deaths per
21:09 year has become sort of reported on frequently ever since. And then we've had the pandemic
21:14 as well, which showed that actually those in areas which had higher air pollution were
21:19 more prone to die from COVID. So all of these risks are sort of being exposed and yet nothing
21:27 is really being done. And so this is worrying. What needs to be done are very strong technology
21:31 mandates, for example, around diesel cars, but they have to be EU wide, right? So we
21:39 actually have to move faster on banning the internal combustion engine.
21:43 And that's what doctors and pharmacists are telling you. Like, I mean, the small kids
21:47 coming in constantly with issues related to this air pollution. Dermot, what's your take?
21:52 I think it's really important. You know, your facts and figures, your stating are really
21:55 important. But let's just say this, and this is really important for the audience that
21:59 are watching and listening. Air pollution is killing Europeans more than car accidents
22:05 at the moment. That reports, the summary is that, that we need to get a grip and realise
22:09 that it is killing more Europeans every day than car accidents. So once you factor that
22:14 and feature that in, we need to have a better sense of how do you de-pollute and make our
22:21 air consumption less toxic. And we know the clean tech industry can do this, you know,
22:25 in terms of, it's not just about cars. It's also about how our cities are managed. And
22:32 there's ways in which you work with communities about consumption and what you do about air
22:37 cleaning systems in local areas, which are available, but they need investment.
22:41 And Chris, this is obviously a big challenge and struggle as well for London, a city like
22:45 London. Any tips for us here?
22:47 Yeah, so London's been really successful in the last seven years. If you look at the data
22:50 in 2016, it wasn't great. It was pretty dire. In the last seven years, there's been some
22:54 quite substantial steps and that was a combination of increased pedestrianisation, quite aggressive
23:00 mandates on what was considered to be compliance. So the age of the transport stock that's driving
23:07 around London is much more new than many other cities and that helps a great deal. And yeah,
23:13 also other kind of limits on, actually demolition, you know, demolition of construction and buildings,
23:18 that creates a whole amount of pollution, burning gas in your boilers, that also puts
23:23 out quite a lot of pollution. So there's actually multiple areas that need regulation around
23:28 saying it creates clean air zones, for example. And it's not just transport, it's many things
23:32 you see.
23:33 It's many things. And we also spoke to the head of the European Environment Agency as
23:37 well for her take. Take a listen.
23:39 The European level legislation is only to an extent helping and solving the problems.
23:44 We need also national other measures, other policies. One example is indeed, I mean, how
23:48 can countries encourage homes, families to move from old-fashioned heating systems to
23:56 more modern, clean, like clean energy sources and district heating. And of course, cities
24:03 can do a lot, especially on the traffic infrastructure, allowing much better facilities for walking
24:11 and cycling and also, of course, public transport.
24:14 The director of the European Environment Agency there saying there's a lot more we can do
24:18 in our homes as well. And Armendra, you alluded to that as well earlier in the show.
24:22 Absolutely. There is, I mean, but it's what, you know, people have been saying here and
24:25 others that it's not just a one hit or one solution issue here. It's not simply about
24:32 let's phase out diesel cars, let's put in pumps in our homes, let's make sure that all
24:37 our public transport is electric. We need all of that to happen simultaneously. And
24:41 if we don't, then this horrible fact of Europeans dying every day more than our cases will just
24:46 increase. So there's multiple things you can do. But I think what's really important is
24:50 don't make it the burden of those who are poorest in our communities to shoulder that
24:55 burden. Others can do it. And we talk about cities, which are the biggest polluters.
24:58 And also in their homes. I mean, in our homes as well, there's things like such or the way
25:02 we cook that also could be impacting our health. And we have that knowledge. We don't have
25:05 that knowledge. I mean, Susanna. Absolutely. And if we're talking about cooking, there's
25:10 also actually a gender dimension to air pollution from cooking. And I think this is actually
25:15 a topic that's being discussed at COP right now. I hope there will be a good agreement
25:19 on that coming out. But of course, implementing it will be extremely difficult around the
25:23 world. I want to pick up on something that Chris has said, particularly construction
25:27 in cities. This is one of the biggest sources of air pollution in cities and one where we
25:32 have all the solutions and the solutions are just waiting there. So, for example, we have
25:37 electrified construction vehicles like for the whole construction cycle, effectively.
25:42 But what we don't have is, let's say, city administrations that necessarily are ready
25:46 to step forward and buy for the whole city those fleets and then effectively just move
25:50 them around from one side to the other. So actually, we need to start thinking differently
25:54 about models of ownership as well. And sort of how do we rent these materials? Because
25:59 OK, let's say equipment, in this case equipment, but let's say it may be more expensive. But
26:04 if public procurement steps in and acquires this more expensive but less polluting technologies,
26:11 then actually jobs become safer. The construction jobs become safer for workers and so for citizens
26:17 in cities as well. Does that make sense to you, Chris? I mean, you worked as well. Yeah,
26:20 I think broadly speaking, yeah, I think a lot of the JCBs and the mechanical plant on
26:27 site is pretty bad. It was also the demolition as well. The more you demolish, it throws
26:30 dust into the air and that needs to be tightly controlled. I think one of the key things
26:34 is that we need to remember is that there is an economic trade-off. And I'm not sure
26:36 if you followed what happened most recently in London with they expanded the ultra-low
26:40 emissions zone and there was a lot of public pushback. And I think the balance and the
26:45 approach that might have been a bit too heavy handed, you know, it hit some of the poorest
26:49 people hardest. And we need to kind of think about how we do this. We need to have long
26:53 kind of tapering costs and things like that. We need to have a lot of policy certainty
26:58 so people can start planning, buying new cars that are lower impact and things like that.
27:03 So it's a challenge, but it can be done. It can be done. Well, Chris, that is a very positive
27:08 take. Thank you for concluding this discussion on such a positive note. But I'm sure in reality,
27:14 we'll still be reading out those frightening figures for another couple of years until
27:19 standards are actually really implemented. But for now, thank you so much to our panellists
27:24 for being with us. And thank you so much for watching. Stay with us here on Euronews and
27:28 of course, over on Euronews.com.
27:39 Welcome back to Brussels, my love, Euronews weekend show. I'm Maeve McMahon and along
27:44 with Chris Hocknell, Susanna Karp and Darmendra Kanani, we're taking a look at some of the
27:49 news stories that got us talking this week. And one is that Christmas is coming and towns
27:54 and households across the continent are getting ready to decorate their Christmas trees. But
27:59 with all this talk of climate goals and sustainability, some cities like Strasbourg, Grenoble and
28:04 Lyon have actually ditched the traditional tree for a metallic one or some kind of an
28:09 elf. Some locals have cheered the move. Others are furious to see their customs impacted
28:14 because they were really looking forward to decorating their tree. I mean, Susanna, I
28:17 think this is a topic that's quite close to your heart. Tell us why.
28:21 Absolutely. So I actually started my environmental activism as a teen in Romania campaigning
28:28 against the cutting of Christmas trees because Romania is one of the countries in the European
28:33 Union with some of the largest virgin forests. And around Christmas time, I could see that
28:39 the news were always reporting tens of thousands of Christmas trees cut illegally and sold
28:44 on the black market. And so I thought, what is the point of having that in the first place
28:48 if two weeks later you just throw it out on the street? And of course, there's also a
28:51 climate impact to that. And so I started campaigning and for many years I was known for this campaign.
28:57 And what I noticed is that there's actually infinite creativity in communities for how
29:01 you can replace a Christmas tree. And actually, it started a really nice movement in, you
29:06 know, amongst my neighbours, my friends. So I think it can be done.
29:10 Chris, what are your thoughts? Will you be putting up a traditional Christmas tree?
29:12 I think so. Yeah. Yeah. I think one of the key things that, you know, that we can do
29:16 to lower the impact is bear in mind that how we dispose of the Christmas tree has a huge
29:21 impact. So if we put it in landfill, it can have an impact up to four times more than
29:24 if we say chipped it, mulched it and put it in the garden or dispose of it more appropriately.
29:29 If we buy an artificial tree, you need about 10 years of use before it's better than a
29:35 kind of natural one. And obviously, if you're buying a tree, you need to get it from a proper
29:39 regulated nursery. That's FSC. And yeah, you need to do your due diligence before you go
29:45 out and just get it. A few pointers there for our viewers who are
29:47 buying their Christmas tree. What are your thoughts, Armindra? And bear in mind as well
29:50 that there's a huge industry here in Europe. I think Belgium, for example, it's the second
29:54 exporter of Christmas trees. Absolutely. And the prices of Christmas trees
29:57 have gone up by threefold, if you note. So the alternatives, especially I keep on banging
30:03 out the poor in our community, are not money. I actually think this is nothing against you
30:07 at all. I think it's great that you created an activism, but it's a red herring. It really
30:12 is a red herring. And it's also creating cultural difference by mayors and others saying, let's
30:17 not do this. It's radicalising the anti-climate change movement to say, well, see, there you
30:22 go. You can't even have a Christmas tree because these people are talking nonsense. And I think
30:26 what would be better is on your Christmas tree or send you a Christmas card to your
30:30 politicians say, phase out fossil fuel and stop subsidising fossil companies. That's
30:36 the two Christmas wishes they should be, everybody in this world should be sending to companies
30:39 and to their lovely, you know, Christmas, Father Christmases or Christmas women who
30:45 are political leaders. That's an idea for your clients, perhaps,
30:47 this Christmas on their Christmas card. Susanna, a reaction to Dharmendra's point?
30:51 Well, first of all, I think citizens want to be part of the climate transition and I
30:55 think empowering them with choices over, you know, alternatives to the Christmas tree is
31:01 not a problem at all. And so in that sense, it's not that we're forcing these choices
31:05 upon anyone, but rather that we're enabling people to move away from the established system,
31:10 which effectively will have to do for nearly everything around us, whether that's fossil
31:14 fuel like the ICE, internal combustion engine on our cars, or the way we produce energy.
31:19 So during our lifetimes, we will be changing effectively everything that we sort of grew
31:24 into. So will the French be throwing away the foie
31:27 gras, for example, this Christmas? Will we stop using wrapping paper? Do we have to have
31:31 a radical rethink at home in our households, how we've been celebrating Christmas in certain
31:36 parts of Europe for many years? I think you need to be careful which path battles
31:39 you pick. And I think that's exactly your point. If you know, you've got to be careful
31:42 rubbing people up the wrong way with climate policies that achieve marginal kind of action
31:48 is not, you know, we got to recognise that climate change is an ongoing PR exercise.
31:53 We need people on our side and we don't want to rub them up the wrong way by infringing
31:57 on certain. I'm afraid we are out of time. But thank you
31:59 so much, Chris, for being with us here. Thank you also to Susanna and Armendra. And thank
32:03 you so much for watching. If you have any comments about Christmas trees or any other
32:07 topic that we've spoken about today, do reach out. Our email address is brusselsmylove@euronews.com
32:14 where you can also find us on social media. But for now, thanks for watching and see you
32:17 soon.
32:18 [Music]