How good is it really for the climate, when EU posts millions of kroner in new cycle paths, footbridges and train tracks around Europe?
Can it be read at all in the CO2 accounts when a port in Greece, Sweden or Ireland receives money from Brussels?
And can one just automatically expect that a large part of the billions that European farmers get in EU-support every single year, is spent on improving the climate?
These are questions that European Commission must become far better at answering, the criticism now sounds from several sides.
In these hours dealer EU‘s Heads of State and Government on the large corona recovery package, which is currently worth more than DKK 13.6 trillion.
Charles Michel, President of the European Council, has proposed that 30% of the money – about 4,100 billion kroner – should be spent on fighting it. global warm up. But according to critics, it is far from certain that money also has the positive effect on the climate, as one would otherwise assume.
This method (as EU Commission uses to assess climate spending, ed.) has the advantage that it is simple and pragmatic, but it can lead to overestimations, it was stated at the beginning of the month in a critical analysis by the European Court of Auditors, which has the task of examining EU‘s accounts.