Board will build on best available and most recent scientific evidence
The European Environment Agency (EEA) has appointed 15 independent senior scientific experts to a new European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change. The Advisory Board will provide independent scientific advice on European Union measures and climate targets and their coherence with the European Climate Law and the EU’s international commitments under the Paris Agreement.
The Advisory Board will build on the best available and most recent scientific evidence, including the latest reports of the IPCC and other national and international bodies. Members of the new Advisory Board include Maarten van Aalst, University of Twente, The Netherlands; Suraje Dessai, University of Leeds, UK; Laura Díaz Anadón, University of Cambridge, UK; Elena López-Gunn, ICATALIST, Spain; and Lars J.Nilsson, Lund University, Sweden.
The EEA said that the members of the Advisory Board are appointed in a personal capacity for a term of four years, renewable once. They give their positions completely independently of the EU Member States and the EU institutions. The appointed members were selected from the 79 applications received during the call for expressions of interest. The setting up of the Advisory Board comes under the European Climate Law, adopted in June 2021, which sets out the binding objective of climate neutrality in the EU by 2050.
In the meantime, the UK Parliament’s Environment Audit Committee has written a letter to the Government’s Business Secretary, Kwasi Kwarteng, setting out its concerns on current Government policy for technologies that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The Committee warns that the Government’s position ‘could see heavy emitters dodge their responsibilities to cut emissions.’
Chairman of the Environmental Audit Committee, Phillip Dunne, commented; ‘Through our work it is clear that Government thinking on negative emissions technologies needs to be developed…Presently there is little in terms of incentive, and very little in terms of any Government direction or clarity. The fact that removal and reduction targets are combined enables many sectors, averse or unable to cut emissions, to dodge their responsibilities.’