Council of Ministers: Environment 

I would like to welcome you to the Polish Cabinet, The Council on Environment, and YMGE 2017 with great excitement! We hope that the discussions and debates you engage in through the course of these committee sessions will enhance your understanding of the European Union and its continuing importance in the international stage.

I am a senior in Silliman College originally from the beautiful island of Guam and South Korea. I am double majoring in East Asian Studies and Political Science with a focus on Japan Korea relations. Within YIRA, I have served on the secretariats of YMGE as its President for the 2016 iteration of the conference, YMUN XLI as ASG and USG of Business and Conference, YMUN Korea as Director General of Administration, YMUN China as a chair, YMUN Taiwan as chair, and Security Council Simulation at Yale as a chair. In my free time outside of YIRA, I enjoy studying at one of many different cafes on campus, catching up with friends, and eating at one of the many restaurants here in New Haven. I am honored to be able to serve as your committee chair and can’t wait to meet you all for YMGE this year!

This Cabinet will take us through the problem that is the bleak Polish economic forecast. This is currently a huge problem in Poland, so it is going to take everyone’s effort to come up with some great solutions. As the previous President of the conference I want to let you all know that the resolutions you come up with at YMGE has huge implications. Last year we sent every resolution from the conference for review of the European Union, so what you do at the conference has real implications.

If you have any questions regarding the topic or preparation feel free to email me at mike.yoon@yale.edu! I am excited to meet all of you in November!

All my best,

Mike Yoon

Pursuant to Article 13 of the Treaty of the European Union, the Council of the Environment Ministers is one of the ten subsidiary bodies of the Council of the European Union, one of the European Union’s two coordinating legislative bodies. The Council of European Union is distinct in body and function from the “European Council,” which in turn is itself an executive body of the European Union. In conjunction with the European Parliament, the lower house of European Union deliberations of legislation, the Council of the European Union (referred to as “The Council”) conducts numerous semi-annual summits, symposia, conferences, discussions, and other similar forums that congregate representatives from each of the European Union’s 28 Member States. The Council of Environment Ministers itself calls up each and every one of these Member States’ environmental representatives four times in a given year, with exceptions in the event of certain compelling, excruciating circumstances or crises. With the exception of the General Affairs Council (GAC), Foreign Affairs Council (FAC), and the Economic and Financial Affairs Council (ECOFIN), which each convene once a month, nearly all of the Councils of the European Union congregate once per quarter of the year.

In an international community verging on a nexus of great, global and total change, the Council of Environmental Ministers (ENVI) negotiates with topics of grave importance, topics whose consequences continually shape and break our world. Climates are changing; lush and green are receding, melting, burning, or used for industry; the end of fossil fuels is in the horizon, and just beyond the horizon, the atmosphere — and its ozone — are decaying. The key players in a game full of severe imperatives, the Ministers are in control of coordinating the European Union’s forefronts of revolution and change with environmental issues that plague both people and planet. Questions regarding such matters—including the questions of sustainable and renewable energy, the carbon economy and its management, and greenhouse gas emissions — leave the Ministers in a seat of great responsibility, responsibility which must be handled rationally, deliberately and pragmatically.

Monetarily speaking, the responsibility of such actions is worth nearly £200 billion, a fifth of the European Union’s entire 2015-2020 budget. The responsibilities the Ministers must carefully consider are beyond compare. And the repercussions of deliberating without purpose, acting without plan, or moving without tactic may indeed be costly to our world, and to us all.

Mandate and Duties of the Council of Environment Ministers

Mandate and Role in European Union Government

Charged with the task of “fostering the harmonious, balanced and sustainable development of economic activities which respects the need, in particular, to ensure a level of environmental quality” the Council of Environment ministers consciously aims to preserve the quality of environment, human health, as well as the “prudent and rational utilization of natural resources and to promote measures at international levels to deal with regional or worldwide environmental problems.” Deliberately acting with the intention of preventative action, the Council uses its powers and discretion to compel (usually by way of binding law) Member States to allocate funds and actions toward environmental growth, development, and innovation with the overlying aims of cost-efficiency, job creation, and poverty reduction.

Fundamental to this Council’s mission is that effective environmental policy is “precautionary” and “preventative,” rather than reactive. As such, “environmental damage should as a priority should be rectified at the source and … the polluter should pay.”

Duties of this Council include (1) analyzing national and multinational patterns of pollution and fossil-fuel consumption, and devising specific methods or systems with the goals of gradually suppressing such usage and inspiring individual environmental innovation; (2) research in environmental innovation; (3) reducing the amount of greenhouse (carbon-specifically) emissions into the environment; and (4) lower all costs associated with environmental pollution and wastes. Through these duties, the Council is empowered to design and implement legislation that targets the entire European Union, individual nations or sectors within those nations (by sometimes delegating responsibilities to an individual nation to take control on a certain environmental issue within its borders) to curb levels of pollution, eliminate unnecessary, pollution-heavy practices and incentivize smarter spending and innovation.

A primary example of this, discussed in detail in one of the following section below, is the Council’s duty to manage the amount of carbon units that is managed in the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS), a cap-and-trade system that manages all of the carbon emissions produced across the European Union and each of its 28 members. The specific focuses and projects of the Council are discussed below.

Present-Day Reform: The Kyoto Protocol and the European Union Climate and Energy Package

The European Climate and Energy Package is an ongoing series of environmental measures enacted in late 2009 to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, the treaty which resulted from the 1997 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), hosted in Japan. The protocol, signed by 83 of the 192 parties that attended the convention, became effective on 16 February 2005

The successor to the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC; 1997) — a 198-party Convention on the topic of global carbon dioxide emissions — the European Climate and Energy Package is series of environmental measures enacted in late 2009 to succeed the UNFCCC's treaty, which would expire in 2012. Prompted by data that show that, to prevent dangerous climate change, rising average global temperatures may not pass a threshold of 2˚C greater than that of pre-industrial times, the package seeks to curb greenhouse gas emissions within the European Union, while also stimulating its own economy. To stay within the 2˚C ceiling, the European Union has come to an evidence-driven consensus that growth in global greenhouse gas emissions must come to a halt by 2020. Furthermore, such levels of emissions (using the level of greenhouse gas emissions in 1990 as a standard), must be halved by the middle of the century, and further reduced thereafter.

With the dual goals of strengthening Europe’s resilience to global climate change and additionally strengthening its competitive economy through the innovative developments of robust industries that work with green technology, and thus leading to the ultimate goal of a competitive, highly energy-efficient and low-carbon economy, the European Union Climate and Energy Package establishes the "20-20-20" plan, with objectives as follows, using values from the year 1990 as a base: to raise the amount of energy the European Union utilizes from renewable sources to 20%; to improve the European Union’s energy efficiency by 20%; and to reduce the European Union’s amount of greenhouse gas emissions by 20%. These collective goals are legally binding for all members of the European Union, are set to be achieved no later than the year 2020. Reaching such targets is estimated to produce awesome increases in jobs — the 20% renewable energy reduction and the 20% energy efficiency targets to produce 417,000 and 400,000 jobs, respectively.

The Climate and Energy Package is one of the five core targets of the “Europe 2020” strategy, an integration of five objectives the European Union has established as central and key to its ten-year growth strategy. These targets for reform overhaul are employment; education; research and development; social inclusion and poverty reduction; and climate change and energy sustainability. Such a package was created with the purpose of evolving the European Union into a collective of nations that is technologically robust, supremely sustainable and especially efficient. Its overall mission is to develop the European Union through growth that is “smart, sustainable, and inclusive.” Because of the ways in which environmental reform will cultivate a greater resource efficiency in the European Union, create hundreds of thousands of jobs as a result of innovative industries, and develop a new emphasis on entrepreneurship and innovation as the EU begins to focus on alternative and sustainable resources for both nations and their businesses, the objectives this Council considers is a core focus of the “Europe 2020” strategy. And fittingly, as mentioned previously, £200 billion of the European Union’s budget for 2015-20 has been allocated toward environmental spending and innovation.

Targeted Measures For the 20-20-20 Targets

The Council of Environment Ministers cites the need for sustainable growth in four different key issues of consideration:

1) Over-dependence on fossil fuels (oil, gas and coal) that leaves businesses and their consumers vulnerable to price shocks that damage the economy, the European Union itself vulnerable to threats to economic security, and also produces negative climate change;

2) The growing scarcity and competition for natural resources, and the consequences it will have on both policy and the environment itself;

3) The need to counter negative climate change and climate risk, as well as disaster prevention and response, through reducing emissions efficiency and immediately through the harnessing of forms of alternative energy and pollution-reduction methods such as carbon capturing and sequestration devices; and

4) The European Union’s need to heighten its productivity and competitiveness, especially against both China and North America in green technologies and solutions, and furthermore the general need for economic growth and job availability.

Taking these four issues into consideration, the legislation of the Climate and Energy Package concentrates its actions into four complementary measures, each of which is intended to further progress made toward the 20-20-20 targets. The measures are as follows:

1) Completely reforming the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), a cap-and-trade scheme that manages EU fossil fuel-usage (further elaborated in the section below);

2) Mandating an EU-wide series of binding annual targets for all Member States — an “Effort Sharing Decision” — to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in area of society not managed by the EU ETS, which contribute around 60% of the European Union’s total greenhouse gas emissions. These areas include emissions from housing, agriculture, waste and transportation;

3) Additionally mandating a series of binding multinational targets, under the “Renewable Energy Directive,” for increasing the share of renewable energy each Member State is consuming compared to their total energy consumption; and

4) Creating a legal framework that will develop a system of carbon capture and storage technologies that would safely house carbon dioxide by-products from industrial processes and store it in certain natural, underground, geological formations that will prevent leakage.

The European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)

Launched in 2005, the EU ETS (also known as the “European Union Emissions Trading Scheme”) is the world’s largest cap-and-trade system of emissions in the world to date. The system oversees many industries, factories, power stations and other installations across 31 nations, including all 28 of the Member States to the EU. Accounting for 40% of the European Union’s annual gas emissions, the system places a cap on the sum total of greenhouse gas emissions that are permitted from all participating industries and installations. This cap is meant to be reduced over time, thus constraining the amount of emissions companies are allowed to emit.

Essentially, the EU ETS is a “cap-and-trade” system in which the European Union places a fixed and definite ceiling or “cap” on all of the units of carbon that are allowed to be polluted into the atmosphere per year. Carbon emissions are regulated to the extent that for every tonne of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere, the responsible firm must own corresponding “carbon unit,” a permit to emit one tonne. The cap-and-trade scheme limits the amounts of carbon units that are available in a given country, thus creating a “carbon market” in which different players buy, sell and action the “right to emit” among companies by auctioning their permits to one another. As such, major polluters face the burden of purchasing many carbon units, whereas innovators who reduce their reliance on carbon-based fuels benefit not only from their reduced reliance on carbon, but also from becoming suppliers to their carbon-dependant counterparts. The EU ETS is meant to create two different incentives: first, to pollute less (and thus save more revenue); and second, to invest more in alternative, non-carbon-based energy technologies. The cap for total pollution decreases over time, thus making carbon-dependency more and more costly as the amount of permits in the market decreases. As such, the EU ETS challenges the carbon-dependant to innovate more and pollute less.

However, the EU ETS has its share of issues, created in part by the economic shocks in 2008 that substantially depressed the prices of carbon and carbon-based fuels. These shocks left the market with a surplus of carbon allowances, which in turn reduced the price of carbon-based emissions by the tonne. This has created a “structural surplus” in the carbon market — there are too many carbon units that are available and for cheap, leaving plenty of pollution to go around. To counter this surplus (of nearly 2 billion allowances), the European Commission voted to “back-load” (remove and postpone) the auctioning of 900 million carbon allowances until the 2019–2020 period. Initially implemented in December 2013, these 900 million units will be integrated back into the carbon market over the time, reintroducing a hundred million units or so of carbon per year.

The Role of the Council of Environment Ministers in the Crisis

A Crisis with Energy Supply

In the event of a crisis concerning energy supply, the immediate goal of the Council of Ministers as a whole will be to stabilize the population’s energy supply in the short-term. The obvious priority is safety and the welfare of all citizens. This Council of Environment Ministers, however, would have two key roles to play in the face of a crisis concerning energy supplies: first is that it would serve as an adviser (along with the Council of Energy) to the Council of Ministers on the most efficient and effective means by which to implement an ad hoc system of energy that is both achievable in the short-run and safe; second is that it would have a principal say on the strategy of implementing this system in a way that is not destructive to the environment, should the ad hoc system last beyond the long-term.

While the goal of the Council of Ministers would be to stabilize the many populations across the European Union, the Council of Environmental Ministers would have the essential role of analyzing the different options of stabilization: just as there is more than one way to skin the cat, there equally is more than one way to re-stabilize an energy system in crisis. In such a situation, Environment Ministers would have the duty of approaching the question of energy supply with long-term rationale, implementation strategies, and feasibility. The goal is to restore energy supplies to a level of homeostasis without provoking destructive and perhaps irreversible consequences to the environment that would jeopardize populations even after the energy crisis has passed.

A Crisis with Food Supply

A crisis of food supply would not involve this Council of Environment Ministers to the degree that a crisis with energy would have. Regardless, this Council would once again serve as providing a stable rationale to the many different (and sometimes environmentally-destructive) propositions and solutions that other Councils suggest. In a crisis with food supply, it would be reasonable for this Council of Ministers to attempt to develop environmentally-reasonable (or even environmentally-possible) methods of both producing and allocating massive amounts of food in a short period of time. Such actions would require a great deal of coordination with and counsel among the Councils of Transportation and Telecommunications, the Council of Health, as well as the Council of Energy. To redistribute food in a matter of crisis would require both great care and deliberate strategy — funding is not unlimited, the environment is not indestructible, and most importantly, time is not just standing still; the clock will be ticking, and quickly.

A Crisis with Natural Disasters, Man-Made Disasters, or Similar Threats

In the perilous case of a natural or man-made disaster, this Council’s role — adjusted accordingly to the priority of maintaining life — would be to assess damages with the goals of designing a system of short-term shelter for crisis-victims, or announcements to the populous on techniques for both shelter and survival. Coordinating with the Councils of Transportation and Telecommunications, the Council of Energy, the Council of Health, and the Council of Economic and Financial Ministers, this Council would be charged with the designing of short- and long-term relief initiatives to sustain the lives of victims of the crisis in the area. Furthermore, the aforementioned Councils would coordinate with the Council of Immigration and Refugees to develop plans of evacuation for the victim or targeted nations that are both feasible and sustainable.

With man-made disasters and threats involving nuclear warfare, the duty of this Council would be to conduct immediate research on the feasibility of certain threats and strategies of producing ad-hoc shelter systems that would maintain the population despite environmental damage. This Council, furthermore, would need to assess and predict the forthcoming damages and consequences of such fallout, and design — if possible — means of avoiding the environmental consequences of this warfare if at all possible. Should crisis become inevitable, this Council ought to plan the best reactive course to the damages to rebuild what had once been broken.

Other General Measures

Regardless of the crisis at hand, while other Councils may rush to immediately stabilize the situation and victims involved, this Council of Environment Ministers must take a stance on long-term strategies for recovery. It aims for sustainability and longevity. As such, this Council will serve as an effective source of counsel to other Councils of Ministers and an impartial evaluator of their proposed actions, since its goal is to preserve human life and flourishing in the long-run by maintaining the environment on which people live. A destructive short-term solution to a destructive crisis will only harm citizens in the long run. It is the goal of this Council of Environment Ministers to ensure environmentally — just as the Council of Economic and Financial Ministers does financially, or the Council of Energy Ministers does energy-wise — that whatever short-term solution this Council decides to produce, it is sustainable in the long-run for all people, it will last, and it will not ultimately produce more harm than good.

Cooperation with Other Councils of Ministers

The crisis module at YMGE 2014 involved extensive threats to European energy infrastructure. This Council’s response to that crisis undoubtedly illustrated just how integrated the Council of Environment Ministers is to EU-wide developments. The Council functioned as an octopus, coordinating with other councils to regulate short- and long-term response plans made by the Energy Council; negotiate budgeting concerns with the Economics and Financial Council; work with the Food & Agriculture Council to make sure citizens are fed and sustainably so; coordinate with the Health Council to make sure measures that protect the environment are in tandem with those protecting the people; and temper the Foreign Affairs Council to propose and to regulate transnational environmental protection measures. These actions in turn integrated the Councils of Transportation & Telecommunications, who in turn were responding to immigration influxes via the Council of Immigration & Refugees. The list, clearly, went on.

At YMGE 2017, the Council of Environment Ministers will once again find itself in the middle of things.  Nearly every endeavor this Council takes will influence other Councils, demand their cooperation, or both.

This Council is unique. Other Councils by nature must be quick and reactionary: energy is threatened, food supply is cut short, transportation is in flux, what must we do now? This Council is challenged even further, for it must not only contribute to these short-term measures, but carefully evaluate their long-term consequences, and upon doing so must influence how other Councils respond. As the Council of Environment Ministers, you will be challenged to respond not only promptly but prudently, to think fast and slow under pressing time-constraints.

Political crisis

In terms of implications for the Council of Environment Ministers, political crises can pressure or even damage the environment. Political crises often lead to shutdowns, whether of essential transportation infrastructures, energy supplies, or the production and distribution of food. The short- and long-term responses to such complications will pose extensive environmental concerns. A prudent minister of this Council must always carefully consider the tension between short-term response plans and long-term environmental damage.

And strategy is particularly essential, here. For in every passing hour there may be protests in the Parliaments, riots in the streets, and unrest throughout the continent. For citizens and the environment alike, the stakes are high.

Natural Disasters

Especially in light of the recent trends of climate change and global warming, there have been severe natural disasters that have occurred all over the world. Some relatively recent examples are the intense hurricanes hitting North America, flooding in southern China, and landslides in Sierra Leone. These natural disasters significantly affected almost every facet of daily life for the victims living in these areas. They have also made severe impacts on the energy systems in the countries affected.

In the context of the EU, where so many countries are interconnected, what can the Environment ministers do to prepare for and respond to natural disasters? What systemic precautions can be made as a safety net? What should be prioritized?

Crisis within Existing Policies

According to the EU Observer, the 2008 Global Financial Crisis “has left ETS thoroughly obsolete.”[3] The recession has produced such a reduction in CO2 that “companies across Europe have managed to pocket a slew of unused emissions permits which had been handed out based on economic forecasts produced before the crisis that predicted strong growth that never happened.” This complicates the smooth running of the ETS and hinders its goals, as “like an employee rolling over unused holiday allowances to the next year, companies are going to be able to roll over these unused pollution permits to the next phase of the ETS, and use them when business turns around, meaning that only a very tiny amount of reductions will happen until as late as 2016, according to a report by Sandbag,” a UK-based research group specialising in emissions-trading analysis.

What can the Environment ministers do to rectify this loophole in the EU ETS? What are implications for future financial crises that will undoubtedly affect EU energy structures? What does this mean for investment in alternative forms of energy?

Terrorism

Environment Ministers must be especially wary of terror attacks, especially because terrorists can often target energy installations in order to achieve their goals. Thus, coordinating with the Council of Energy on the security of critical energy infrastructures is an essential important step that all Environment Ministers take in times of a crisis.

Interaction with Other Councils

As the Environment Ministers are so integral in these crises, they are highly encouraged to interact with other councils. Please consider the following questions as a guideline:

Economic and Financial Affairs: When handling the burden of austerity, how can the Environment Ministers help affect a new, long-term solution for environmental challenges that’s beneficial for all of Europe? How can these Councils work together to balance environmental budgetary needs with short-term demands, especially those of the Food and Agriculture, Energy, and Transportation and Telecommunications Councils?

Education, Youth, and Culture: How can you best raise awareness about environment-related issues during times of crises?

Energy: What energy complications could a crisis provoke, how would the Energy council respond, and how should this Council work with the Council of Energy to create response plans that are both prompt and prudent?

Food and Agriculture: How would a crisis affect food supplies? Which demographic groups would be most affected? Could agricultural processes be refined to become more environmentally-sustainable in case of a crisis?

Foreign Affairs: The energy infrastructure in the EU is highly interconnected. In light of the crises, how will foreign relations be affected – both within and outside the EU?

Health: How does the crisis at hand jeopardize the physical well being of the population? The environmental well-being? How are the two related?

Immigration and Refugees: In light of a crisis, how can you aid the Immigration and Refugees ministers when people are displaced?

Justice and Home Affairs: Which is the legal go-to institution in times of a crisis? Are there laws that may be superseded in the face of greater problems? What security be provided by those at the command of Home Affairs ministers?

Labor and Social Affairs: What are the impacts of the crisis on labor, especially in the energy and environmental sectors?

Tourism: If environmental breakdowns take place, they will without doubt affect tourism negatively. How can these effects be reduced?

Transportation and Telecommunications: If a crisis causes mass displacement of people, do we need to regulate transportation to, from, and within countries? How can we keep communication channels open if infrastructure networks collapse? How can response plans be environmentally sustainable?

Keep in mind that these are only guidelines, and as the crisis is released, the links with other councils are likely to keep changing.