Poland faces a delicate balance as discussions about leaving the ETS system surface, given already strained ties among member states. Olga Semeniuk-Patkowska, Deputy Minister of Development and Technology, spoke with PAP Studio about how these differences could affect Poland’s stance on EU climate policy.
The European Parliament has approved key Fit for 55 directives and regulations at first reading. These measures aim to cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 (compared with 1990) and strive for climate neutrality by 2050. They encompass reforms to the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and the new Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). The Social Climate Fund (SCF) was also established. Some members of Solidarna Polska are urging a suspension of the ETS, while Semeniuk-Patkowska noted in the PAP Studio that Poland should consider her party’s proposals in light of Parliament’s directives. She stated that exiting the ETS would strain already fragile relationships among member states and warned that Solidarna Polska represents a radical wing of the United Right on climate policy.
EU pressure and economic balance
There is a need to assess both political motives and economic consequences. The Deputy Minister emphasized the importance of weighing the impact on the economy, including the flow of goods and services, as the bloc moves to implement tighter climate rules.
When asked about ongoing talks on the coalition partner’s proposals, she replied that no discussions had been heard. She warned that leaving the ETS could be used by Brussels to influence funding flows to Poland, describing such a move as leverage in Brussels’ hands.
She added that these conversations should include considerations of Poland’s ongoing EU membership and the willingness to engage with the EU on a regular basis.
In her view, Tuesday’s votes and the adoption of EU ETS directives indicate that Brussels has not learned from past economic challenges. She suggested that strong economies aim to push sweeping changes in the renewable energy and energy transition processes, which she argues are unrealistic to implement quickly. The EU has grappled with varied economic interests among member states for years, and she believes yesterday’s vote underscores ongoing tensions.
She expressed confidence that the decision to exit the ETS would be canceled and could not be realized.
Details of the Fit for 55 package
As part of the EP vote, the emissions trading system reform was approved. It requires sectors already covered by the system to cut greenhouse gas emissions by up to 62% by 2030, relative to 2005 levels. The reform also plans a phased withdrawal of free allowances from 2026–2034 and introduces a separate ETS II for fuels used in road transport and for heating buildings. The system could include levies on emissions from these sectors starting in 2027, or 2028 if energy prices surge sharply.
The EP also voted to include shipping emissions in the ETS and to review aviation emissions under the ETS. This paves the way for phasing out free allowances in aviation by 2026.
Another regulation concerns the new EU mechanism for adjusting prices at borders based on CO2 emissions (CBAM). CBAM will cover raw materials such as iron, steel, cement, aluminum, fertilizer, electricity, and hydrogen. Importers will need to pay the difference between the domestic emission tax and the price of EU ETS allowances. CBAM will be phased in from 2026 to 2034 as free ETS allowances are phased out.
The EP also supported creating an EU Social Climate Fund in 2026 to ensure a just and socially inclusive transition. The plan, as outlined in the EP communiqué, complements the CBAM framework by addressing the social dimensions of climate policy.
Additional commentary from the debates highlighted concerns about the ideological and economic implications of Fit for 55. Analysts pointed to potential effects on investment and competitiveness, while policymakers weighed the balance between environmental goals and economic resilience. The discussion continues as member states interpret how best to align national interests with EU-wide climate ambitions.
For energy and policy watchers, the message remains clear: the EU is pursuing a comprehensive framework that links emissions reductions to border-adjusted pricing and social equity considerations, with ongoing scrutiny of how these mechanisms will interact with national economies and industry sectors.
END NOTE:
The overarching debate reflects a wider question about Europe’s path to climate neutrality and how member states can cooperate while safeguarding economic stability and job security.
(Citation: wPolityce)