Brexit Debate Shifts in Part to the Environment

Now that business has largely expounded is position, the debate over a possible UK exit from the EU seems to have shifted its focus to the environment. David Baldock, director of the Institute for European Environmental Policy, a research organization that analyzes and develops policies aimed at creating a more sustainable Europe, told the critical journal ThinkProgress that Britain’s leaving the EU could have serious impacts on the European approach to climate change.

In particular, he said, a UK exit could “provide more political latitude” for EU member states hesitant reluctant to comply with the EU’s 2030 climate and energy goals, such as Poland.

Also, Baldock, as the UK with its 2008 climate initiative was a pioneer in the drive to transition to a low carbon economy, its absence could “take key political muscle” away from the EU’s push for climate reform. It could also hurt the country’s own potential to reduce emissions if the economic impact of leaving is too great.

Tom Burke, chairman of the environmental advocacy group E3G, based in Belgium, said he thinks Brexit would freeze many UK investments as the government would have no money. Also, he commented, Britain would be even less apt to move away from oil and gas, which are revenue generators.

The Conservative government, he pointed out, already strongly supports exploration for shale gas, despite increased anti-fracking activism, and opposes subsidies for renewable energy and permits for wind power.  An unwillingness to move away from oil and gas could lead to the country being left behind in the transition toward low carbon energy, Burke believes.

By the same token, he said, Brexit could impact the EU Emissions Trading System. If the UK quits the EU, it would lose its seat in negotiations even if it stayed in the system. But beyond that a British departure would complicate matters for the emissions trading scheme in Europe as a whole.