In light of the severity and the short timeframe that remains to take action to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees, it is important that the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) leaves no legal ambiguity concerning corporate obligations regarding climate change.
In light of the severity and the short timeframe that remains to take action to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees, it is important that the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) leaves no legal ambiguity concerning corporate obligations regarding climate change. The aim of this paper is to provide recommendations on Article 15 "Combating climate change" of the Commission’s proposal which lacks precision regarding the targets and content of the transition plans it refers to. The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) already provides a baseline for coherence. CSDDD should not fall behind that baseline, in order for both legislations to support the effectiveness of one another.
These recommendations on Article 15 need to be accompanied by changes to Article 3 of the proposed CSDDD, that would ensure a comprehensive approach to the definition of environmental adverse impacts. The definition should not only capture the effect that companies have on all three - the environment, climate and human rights - but also how these are interdependent and what damage prevention entails.
What would happen to Czech power grid in 2030 if all coal power plants were shut down? On 24 May we have publicly presented a study which simulates this scenario. The result is that even without coal-fired generation it is possible to ensure stable electricity supply in the Czech Republic. The scenario includes an increase in renewables to which the current state of the power grid is no obstacle.
Czech Supreme Administrative Court ruled today in favour better protection of human health from air pollution in Brno, a Czech city with 370 thousand inhabitants. The Court revoked the city's Air Quality Management Plan, issued in 2016 by the Czech Ministry of Environment. The reasoning of the ruling has not been made public yet, but the main argument against the plan was that it was not effective enough and would not lead to a swift achievement of the binding air quality standards. A similar ruling was issued in December 2017 with respect to Ostrava and in February 2018 regarding Prague and Usti region.
Czech Supreme Administrative Court ruled yesterday in favour better protection of human health from air pollution in Usti region on the northern border of the Czech Republic. The Court partially revoked the region's Air Quality Management Plan, issued in 2016 by the Czech Ministry of Environment.
