By Amélie Laurent, CDR Policy Advisor, Bellona Europa

Published in REVOLVE

Today, EU countries approved Europe’s 2040 climate target: a 90% net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to 1990. Now, the European Commission must propose the new climate architecture covering the 2030-2040 period.  

The 90% target sends a strong signal that Europe remains committed to climate neutrality, but credibility must be built. A strong climate architecture must rest on domestic reductions, strengthened land sinks, and permanent removals, with international credits as a strategic reserve. 

What’s at stake  

The 90% target will only hold if the EU builds a structure strong enough to support it: load-bearing pillars of domestic emissions reductions, strong land sinks, a foundation of permanent carbon removals, and a limited, “emergency” role for international credits.  

The climate policy architecture shapes the industrial landscape: clean technologies, carbon storage, and renewable energy deployment all depend on predictable, credible climate rules. Weak policies with shaky foundations risk undermining these investments. 

Main load-bearing pillars: domestic emissions reductions 

Emissions reductions are the core pillars that must be designed to carry and deliver on the 90% target. Otherwise, any flexibility – including international credits – risks becoming a goal in itself, rather than a safety measure.  

Delaying emission cuts today only adds more CO₂ to the atmosphere. And legally, climate neutrality by 2050 can only be achieved domestically. To this extent, well-designed climate policies can and must strengthen European competitiveness and foster energy security to be successful. 

A crucial pillar: strong land sinks 

Healthy forests and soils are another integral part of the climate architecture. They absorb carbon while providing countless other benefits: biodiversity, cleaner air, flood protection… 

Under the 2040 target deal, the protection of land sinks is weakened: with no dedicated target after 2030 and underperformance not requiring more action in other sectors, this could even lower the 90% target. 

Land sinks are under pressure: their capacity to absorb carbon is declining due to both climate change impacts and increased harvesting. Overreliance is risky, but underinvestment is equally dangerous for the entire climate structure. Weak policies for natural sinks would reduce the EU’s ability to credibly meet its climate goals and undermine the goal of developing a European bioeconomy which can support the transition to a cleaner economy. The same applies to our ocean, our largest carbon sink, which must also be better protected. 

The foundation underneath the structure: permanent carbon removals 

Europe must scale up permanent carbon removals – technologies that remove CO₂ permanently from the atmosphere – to accelerate emissions reductions, address residual emissions and eventually achieve net-negative emissions. 

Currently, removals are mentioned yet treated as a flexibility. They should be a planned part of the architecture, with clear targets and science-based quality criteria. Developing credible market for high-quality removals could become a competitive advantage for European industries. 

Permanent removals are a foundation – critical and complementary, but they cannot carry the building on their own nor replace the pillars. 

The emergency exit: international credits  

Some buildings have an emergency exit. It’s for exceptional circumstances, not daily use. An emergency exit is a safety feature, not what holds the building up. Still, when you need it, it must work and be reliable. The same goes for credits: they must actually cut emissions or permanently remove CO₂, without harming the environment or human rights. 

Europe can set a gold standard. Credits should come from countries with strong climate plans to avoid perverse incentives to sell cheap, low-quality credits.  

The deal includes the possibility of up 5% of the 2040 target to be met through high-quality international carbon credits. 

But if Europe doesn’t design its domestic rules to achieve 90% of the reductions at home, that 5% could become a target in itself. By leaning too heavily on credits risks, Europe missing its climate goal while spending significant amounts of money on projects abroad. 

Relying on credits tells the world it’s acceptable to outsource emissions reductions. Europe is wealthy and influential – if we don’t do the hard work ourselves, who will? 

Building a framework that can survive the storm 

The number is set. But its credibility depends on the framework that underpins it.  

If these conditions are not met, the structure will weaken. Not overnight, but gradually -through small cracks that are easier to ignore than to fix. A climate framework designed around shortcuts rather than integrity risks creating the very conditions of its own failure. 

Weak design doesn’t lower costs – it postpones them. Yes, reaching 90% will require upfront investment, but these are investments in Europe’s future beyond 2030. 

None of this means the pillars will never shake. They will. Geopolitical tensions, inflation, economic crisis or future pandemics will test Europe’s resilience. But that is precisely why the structure must be strong. 

The responsibility now lies with policymakers from the 27 EU countries. They are not only shaping the future of 450 million people living in the EU. The rest of the world is watching how Europe builds its climate architecture. Will they see an EU committed to leading the way on climate policy, or one which depends on loopholes to keep the image of leadership alive? 

Read more in our recent policy brief: Translating the EU 2040 climate target into action: building the 2040 policy package  – Bellona EU