2022/0394(COD) | [ParlTrack]

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) A certified carbon removal activity should result in a net carbon removal benefit showing that it delivers a positive climate impact. The net carbon removal benefit should be computed following two steps. First, operators should quantify the amount of additional carbon removals that a carbon removal activity has generated in comparison to a baseline. A ~~standardised~~first-mover baseline reflecting the ~~standard~~best-in-class performance of comparable activities in similar social, economic, environmental and technological circumstances and geographical locations should be preferred because it ensures ~~objectiv~~high quality, minimises compliance and other administrative costs, and positively recognises the action of first movers who have already engaged in carbon removal activities. In the context of carbon farming, the use of available digital technologies, including electronic databases and geographic information systems, remote sensing, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and of electronic maps should be promoted to decrease the costs of establishing baselines and of monitoring carbon removal activitiesorder to reflect the social, economic, environmental and technological developments and to encourage ambition over time in line with the Paris Agreement, baselines should be reviewed every five years and updated accordingly in case of new robust scientific evidence, always in a conservative manner. However, where it is not possible to set such a standardised baseline, a project- specific baseline based on the operator’s individual performance may be used. ~~In order to reflect the social, economic, environme~~For carbon farming activities, it is necessary to plan a 10 year period during which the certification will be based on activities that have been proved to lead to substantial ~~and technological developments and to encourage ambition over time in line with the Paris Agreement, baselines should be periodically updated~~carbon storage in soil based on a solid body of peer reviewed scientific studies, while the data necessary to establish solid baselines is being gathered and processed. In the context of carbon farming, the use of available digital technologies, including electronic databases and geographic information systems, remote sensing, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and of electronic maps should be promoted to decrease the costs of establishing baselines and of monitoring carbon removal activities.

Amendment 101 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) A carbon removal activity should result in a net carbon removal benefit showing that it delivers a positive climate impact. The net carbon removal benefit should be computed following two steps. First, operators should quantify the amount of additional carbon removals that a carbon removal activity has generated in comparison to a baseline. A standardised baseline reflecting the standard performance of comparable activities in similar social, economic, environmental and technological circumstances and geographical locations should be preferred because it ensures objectivity, minimises compliance and other administrative costs, and positively recognises the action of first movers who have already engaged in carbon removal activities. In the context of carbon farming, the use of available digital technologies, including electronic databases and geographic information systems, remote sensing, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and of electronic maps should be promoted and financially stimulated, through resolute EU action, to decrease the costs of establishing baselines and of monitoring carbon removal activities. However, where it is not possible to set such a standardised baseline, and where financial support measures should be identified and applied by the Commission, a project-specific baseline based on the operator’s individual performance may be used. In order to reflect the social, economic, environmental and technological developments and to encourage ambition over time in line with the Paris Agreement, baselines should be periodically updated.

Amendment 102 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) A carbon removal and carbon farming activity should result in a net carbon removal benefit showing that it delivers a positive climate impact. The net carbon removal benefit should be computed following two steps. First, operators should quantify the amount of additional carbon removals that a carbon removal activity has generated in comparison to a baseline. In the case of carbon farming, furthermore, operators should also quantify the biogenic emissions reductions set against the baseline. A standardised baseline reflecting the standard performance of comparable activities in similar social, economic, environmental and technological circumstances and geographical locations should be preferred because it ensures objectivity, minimises compliance and other administrative costs, and positively recognises the action of first movers who have already engaged in carbon removal activities. In the context of carbon farming, the use of available digital technologies, including electronic databases and geographic information systems, remote sensing, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and of electronic maps should be promoted to decrease the costs of establishing baselines and of monitoring carbon removal activities. However, where it is not possible to set such a standardised baseline, a project-specific baseline based on the operator’s individual performance may be used. In order to reflect the social, economic, environmental and technological developments and to encourage ambition over time in line with the Paris Agreement, baselines should be periodically updated.

Amendment 103 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) A carbon removal activity should result in a net carbon removal benefit showing that it delivers a positive climate impact. The net carbon removal benefit should be computed following two steps. First, operators should quantify the amount of additional carbon removals that a carbon removal activity has generated in comparison to a baseline. A standardised baseline reflecting the standard performance of comparable activities in similar social, economic, environmental and technological circumstances and geographical locations should be preferred because it ensures objectivity, minimises compliance and other administrative costs, and positively recognises the action of first movers who have already engaged in carbon removal activities. In the context of carbon farming, the use of available digital technologies, including electronic databases and geographic information systems, remote sensing, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and of electronic maps should be promoted to decrease the costs of establishing baselines and of monitoring carbon removal activities. However, where it is not possible to set such a standardised baseline, a project-specific baseline based on the operator’s individual performance may be used. Data protection demands are high, since much of the data collected may be personal data. In order to reflect the social, economic, environmental and technological developments and to encourage ambition over time in line with the Paris Agreement, baselines should be periodically updated.

Amendment 104 #

Carmen AVRAM

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) A carbon removal activity should result in a net carbon removal benefit showing that it delivers a positive climate impact. The net carbon removal benefit should be computed following two steps. First, operators should quantify the amount of additional carbon removals that a carbon removal activity has generated in comparison to a baseline. A standardised baseline reflecting the standard performance of comparable activities in similar social, economic, environmental and technological circumstances and geographical locations should be preferred because it ensures objectivity, minimises compliance and other administrative costs, and positively recognises the action of first movers who have already engaged in carbon removal activities. In the context of carbon farming, the use of available digital technologies, including electronic databases and geographic information systems, remote sensing, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and of electronic maps should be promoted to decrease the costs of establishing baselines and of monitoring carbon removal activities. However, where it is not possible to set such a standardised baseline, a project-specific baseline based on the operator’s individual performance may be used. In order to reflect the social, economic, environmental and technological developments and to encourage ambition over time in line with the Paris Agreement, baselines should be periodically updated, while keeping the administrative burden manageable, in particular for individual operators.

Amendment 105 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) A carbon removal activity should result in a net carbon removal benefit showing that it delivers a positive climate impact. The net carbon removal benefit should be computed following two steps. First, operators should quantify the amount of additional carbon removals that a carbon removal activity has generated in comparison to a baseline. A standardised baseline reflecting the standard performance of comparable activities in similar social, economic, environmental and technological circumstances and geographical locations should be preferred because it ensures objectivity, minimises compliance and other administrative costs, and positively recognises the action of first movers who have already engaged in carbon removal activities. In the context of carbon farming, the use of available digital technologies, including electronic databases and geographic information systems, remote sensing, new quantification systems for carbon on the ground, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and of electronic maps should be promoted to decrease the costs of establishing baselines and of monitoring carbon removal activities. However, where it is not possible to set such a standardised baseline, a project-specific baseline based on the operator’s individual performance may be used. In order to reflect the social, economic, environmental and technological developments and to encourage ambition over time in line with the Paris Agreement, baselines should be periodically updated.

Amendment 106 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) A carbon removal activity should result in a net carbon removal benefit showing that it delivers a positive climate impact. The net carbon removal benefit should be computed following two steps. First, operators should quantify the amount of additional carbon removals that a carbon removal activity has generated in comparison to a baseline. A standardised baseline reflecting the standard performance of comparable activities in similar social, economic, environmental and technological circumstances and geographical locations should be preferred because it ensures objectivity, minimises compliance and other administrative costs, and positively recognises the action of first movers who have already engaged in carbon removal activities. In the context of carbon farming, the use of available digital technologies, including electronic databases and geographic information systems, remote sensing, novel in-field carbon quantification systems, artificial intelligence and machine learning, and of electronic maps should be promoted to decrease the costs of establishing baselines and of monitoring carbon removal activities. However, where it is not possible to set such a standardised baseline, a project-specific baseline based on the operator’s individual performance may be used. In order to reflect the social, economic, environmental and technological developments and to encourage ambition over time in line with the Paris Agreement, baselines should be periodically updated.

Amendment 107 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The second step for quantifying the net carbon removal benefit should consist of subtracting any increase in greenhouse gas emissions related to the implementation of the carbon removal activity. Relevant greenhouse gas emissions that should be taken into consideration include direct emissions, such as those resulting from the use of more fertilisers, fuel or energy, or indirect emissions, such as those resulting from land use change, with consequent risks for food security due to displacement of agricultural production. A reduction in greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the implementation of the carbon removal activity should not be taken into account to quantify the net carbon removal benefit, but should be considered as a co- benefit towards the sustainability objective of climate change mitigation; by being reported on the certificates, decreases in greenhouse gas emissions (like the other sustainability co-benefits)Reporting co- benefits on certificates can increase the value of the certified carbon removals.

Amendment 108 #

Martin HLAVÁČEK, Ulrike MÜLLER, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The second step for quantifying the net carbon removal benefit should consist of subtracting any increase in greenhouse gas emissions related to the implementation of the carbon removal activity. Relevant greenhouse gas emissions that should be taken into consideration include direct emissions, such as those resulting from the use of more fertilisers, fuel or energy, or indirect emissions, such as those resulting from land use change, with consequent risks for food security due to displacement of agricultural production. A reduction in greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the implementation of the carbon removal activity should not be taken into account to quantify the net carbon removal benefit, but should be considered as a co-benefit towards the sustainability objective of climate change mitigation; by being reported on the certificates, decreases in greenhouse gas emissions (like the other sustainability co-benefits) can increase the value of the certified carbon removals. However, in the case of indirect emissions, account must be taken of the need to ensure a minimum impact of land use change on farmers’ activities, on the proper functioning of supply chains, and on the guaranteeing of local and regional food security.

Amendment 109 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The second step for quantifying the net carbon removal benefit should consist of subtracting any increase in greenhouse gas emissions related to the implementation of the carbon removal activity. Relevant greenhouse gas emissions that should be taken into consideration include direct emissions, such as those resulting from the use of more fertilisers, fuel or energy, or indirect emissions, such as those resulting from land use change, with consequent risks for food security due to displacement of agricultural production. A reduction in greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the implementation of the carbon removal activity should not be taken into account to quantify the net carbon removal benefit, but should be considered as a co-benefit towards the sustainability objective of climate change mitigation; by being reported on the certificates, decreases in greenhouse gas emissions (like the other sustainability co-benefits) can increase the value of the certified carbon removals. However, for carbon farming activities, the reduction of biogenic emissions shall be counted towards the net benefit of the activity, especially due to the interconnected nature of carbon and nitrogen cycles.

Amendment 110 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The second step for quantifying the net carbon removal benefit should consist of subtracting any increase in greenhouse gas emissions related to the implementation of the carbon removal activity. Relevant greenhouse gas emissions that should be taken into consideration include direct emissions, such as those resulting from the use of more fertilisers, chemicals, materials fuel or energy, or indirect emissions, such as those resulting from direct or indirect land use change, with consequent risks for food security due to displacement of agricultural production. A reduction in greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the implementation of the carbon removal activity should not be taken into account to quantify the net carbon removal benefit, but should be considered as a co-benefit towards the sustainability objective of climate change mitigation; ~~by being reported on the certificates, decreases in greenhouse gas emissions (like the other sustainability co-benefits) can increase the value of the certified carbon removals.~~

Amendment 111 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) A carbon removal activity delivers a net carbon removal benefit when the carbon removals above the baseline outweigh any increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to the implementation of the carbon removal activity. For instance, in the case of activities that deliver permanent carbon storage by injecting carbon underground, the amount of permanently stored carbon should outweigh the energy- related greenhouse gas emissions from the industrial process. In the case of carbon farming, the carbon captured by an afforestation activity or the carbon kept in the ground by a peatland re-wetting activity should outweigh the emissions from the machinery used to carry out the carbon removal activity or the indirect land use change emissions that can be caused by carbon leakage. Farmers, forest owners and managers should strive to achieve biogenic emission reductions rather, which shall be quantified and accounted for as part of the net removal benefit.

Amendment 112 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) A carbon removal activity delivers a net carbon removal benefit when the carbon removals above the baseline outweigh any increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to the implementation of the carbon removal activity. For instance, in the case of activities that deliver permanent carbon storage by injecting carbon underground, the amount of permanently stored carbon should outweigh the energy- related greenhouse gas emissions from the industrial process. In the case of carbon farming, the ~~carbon captured by~~balance of carbon from an afforestation activity or ~~the~~ carbon kept in the ground by a peatland re-wetting activity should ~~outweigh the emissions from the machinery used to carry out the carbon removal activity or the indirect land use change emissions that can be caused by carbon leakag~~be positive.

Amendment 113 #

Paola GHIDONI, Angelo CIOCCA, Elena LIZZI, Rosanna CONTE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) A carbon removal activity delivers a net carbon removal benefit when the carbon removals above the baseline outweigh any increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to the implementation of the carbon removal activity. For instance, in the case of activities that deliver permanent carbon storage by injecting carbon underground, the amount of permanently stored carbon should outweigh the energy- related greenhouse gas emissions from the industrial process. In the case of carbon farming, the carbon captured by an afforestation activity or the carbon kept in the ground by a peatland re-wetting activity should outweigh the emissions from the machinery used to carry out the carbon removal activity or the indirect land use change emissions that can be caused by carbon leakage. The same ecosystem- based approach, with a net benefit in terms of carbon sequestration, can be found in mussel and mollusc farming practices.

Amendment 114 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) Carbon removals should be quantified in a relevant, accurate, complete, consistent and comparable and well-defined manner. Uncertainties in the quantification should be duly reported and accounted in order to limit the risk of overestimating the quantity of carbon dioxide removed from the atmosphere. Carbon removals generated by carbon farming should be quantified with a high level of accuracy to assure the highest quality and minimise uncertainties. Moreover, in order to incentivise synergies between Union climate and biodiversity objectives, ~~enhanced~~ monitoring of land is need~~s to be requir~~ed, thereby helping to protect and enhance the resilience of nature-based carbon removals throughout the Union. The satellite and on- site monitoring and reporting of emissions and removals need to closely reflect those approaches, and make the best use of advanced technologies available under Union programmes, such as Copernicus, making full use of already existing tools, and ensure consistency with the national greenhouse gas inventories. The use of available advanced technologies should come into play, along with the means of appropriate assistance and funding, to ensure compliant use of these tools and avert any risk of overestimating the amount of carbon removed from the atmosphere or of discouraging agricultural activities or supply chain activities, in particular as regards small farms and SMEs, respectively.

Amendment 115 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) Carbon removals should be quantified in a relevant, accurate, complete, consistent and comparable manner. Uncertainties in the quantification should be duly reported and accounted in order to limit the risk of overestimating the quantity of carbon dioxide removed from the atmosphere. Carbon removals generated by carbon farming should be quantified with a high level of accuracy to assure the highest quality and minimise uncertainties. Moreover, in order to incentivise synergies between Union climate and biodiversity objectives, enhanced monitoring of land needs to be required, thereby helping to protect and enhance the resilience of nature-based carbon removals throughout the Union. The satellite and on-site monitoring and reporting of emissions and removals ~~need to~~should closely reflect those approaches, and make the best use of advanced technologies available under Union programmes, such as Copernicus, making full use of already existing tools, and ensure consistency with the national greenhouse gas inventories.

Amendment 116 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) Carbon removals should be quantified in a relevant, accurate, complete, consistent and comparable manner. Uncertainties in the quantification should be duly reported and accounted in order to limit the risk of overestimating the quantity of carbon dioxide removed from the atmosphere and should be publicly available through an Union register in order to ensure transparency and traceability to carbon removal unit certificates. Carbon removals generated by carbon farming should be quantified with a high level of accuracy to assure the highest quality and minimise uncertainties. Moreover, in order to incentivise synergies between Union climate and biodiversity objectives, enhanced monitoring of land needs to be required, thereby helping to protect and enhance the resilience of nature-based carbon removals throughout the Union. The satellite and on-site monitoring and reporting of emissions and removals need to closely reflect those approaches, and make the best use of advanced technologies available under Union programmes, such as Copernicus, making full use of already existing tools, and ensure consistency with the national greenhouse gas inventories.

Amendment 117 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) Carbon removals should be quantified in a relevant, accurate, complete, consistent and comparable manner. Uncertainties in the quantification should be duly reported and accounted in order to limit the risk of overestimating the quantity of carbon dioxide removed from the atmosphere. Carbon removals generated by carbon farming should be quantified with a high level of accuracy and transparency, in line with validated and consistent criteria, to assure the highest quality and minimise uncertainties. Moreover, in order to incentivise synergies between Union climate and biodiversity objectives, enhanced monitoring of land needs to be required, thereby helping to protect and enhance the resilience of nature-based carbon removals throughout the Union. The satellite and on-site monitoring and reporting of emissions and removals need to closely reflect those approaches, and make the best use of advanced technologies available under Union programmes, such as Copernicus, making full use of already existing tools, and ensure consistency with the national greenhouse gas inventories.

Amendment 118 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) Carbon removals should be quantified in a relevant, accurate, complete, consistent and comparable manner. Uncertainties in the quantification should be duly reported and accounted in order to limit the risk of overestimating the quantity of carbon dioxide removed from the atmosphere. Carbon removals and biogenic emissions reductions generated by carbon farming should be quantified with a high level of accuracy to assure the highest quality and minimise uncertainties. Moreover, in order to incentivise synergies between Union climate and biodiversity objectives, enhanced monitoring of land needs to be required, thereby helping to protect and enhance the resilience of nature-based carbon removals throughout the Union. The satellite and on-site monitoring and reporting of emissions and removals need to closely reflect those approaches, and make the best use of advanced technologies available under Union programmes, such as Copernicus, making full use of already existing tools, and ensure consistency with the national greenhouse gas inventories.

Amendment 119 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11

(11) In order to ensure that the Union certification framework channels incentives toward carbon removals that go beyond the standard practice~~, carbon removal~~ or toward undertaking carbon farming practices, carbon removal and carbon farming activities should be additional. Therefore, these activities should go beyond statutory requirements, that is, operators should carry out activities that are not already imposed upon them by the applicable law. Moreover, carbon removal activities should take place due to the incentive effect provided by the certification. Such effect is present when the incentive created by the potential revenues, resulting from the certification, changes the behaviour of operators in such a way that they engage in the additional carbon removal activity to achieve additional carbon removals. The level of administrative burden resulting from participation in certification schemes is therefore an important aspect. The administrative burden should be such as to allow even the smallest entities to be included in certification schemes. Thus, the cost, understood as the sum of financial, time and organisational effort, of participating in certification schemes must not outweigh the perceived benefits of joining the scheme.

Amendment 120 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11

(11) In order to ensure that the Union certification framework channels incentives toward carbon removals that go beyond the standard practice, carbon removal activities should be additional. Therefore, these activities should go beyond statutory requirements, that is, operators should carry out activities that are not already imposed upon them by the applicable law. Moreover, carbon removal activities should take place due to the incentive effect provided by the certification. Such effect is present when the incentive created by the potential revenues, resulting from the certification, changes the behaviour of operators in such a way that they engage in the additional carbon removal activity to achieve additional carbon removals.

Amendment 121 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11

(11) In order to ensure that the Union certification framework channels incentives toward carbon removals and biogenic emissions reductions that go beyond the standard practice, carbon removal and carbon farming activities should be additional. Therefore, these activities should go beyond statutory requirements, that is, operators should carry out activities that are not already imposed upon them by the applicable law. Moreover, carbon removal and carbon farming activities should take place due to the incentive effect provided by the certification. Such effect is present when the incentive created by the potential revenues, resulting from the certification, changes the behaviour of operators in such a way that they engage in the additional carbon removal activity to achieve additional carbon removals.

Amendment 122 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) A standardised baseline should reflect the statutory and market conditions in which the carbon removal activity takes place. If a carbon removal activity is imposed upon operators by the applicable law, or it does not need any incentives to take place, its performance will be reflected in the baseline. In the case of carbon farming in arable mineral soils, the standardised baseline can be considered as fixed, given that the current carbon removal rates in mineral soils in the EU are on average close to zero. For this reason, a carbon removal activity that generates carbon removals in excess of such a baseline should be presumed to be additional. Hence, the use of a standardised baseline should simplify the demonstration of additionality for operators. Therefore, it should reduce the administrative burden of the certification process, which is particularly important in the case of small- scale land managers.

Amendment 123 #

Martin HLAVÁČEK, Ulrike MÜLLER, Jérémy DECERLE, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) A standardised baseline should reflect the statutory and market conditions in which the carbon removal activity takes place. If a carbon removal activity is imposed upon operators by the applicable law, or it does not need any incentives to take place, its performance will be reflected in the baseline. In the case of carbon farming on arable mineral soils the standardised baseline can be considered to be flat taking into account that current carbon removal rates on mineral soils in the EU are on average close to zero. For this reason, a carbon removal activity that generates carbon removals in excess of such a baseline should be presumed to be additional. Hence, the use of a standardised baseline should simplify the demonstration of additionality for operators. Therefore, it should reduce the administrative burden of the certification process, which is particularly important in the case of small- scale land managers.

Amendment 124 #

Bert-Jan RUISSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) A standardised baseline should reflect the statutory and market conditions in which the carbon removal ~~activity~~performance takes place. If a carbon removal ~~activity~~ is imposed upon operators by the applicable Union law, or it does not need any incentives to take place, its performance will be reflected in the baseline. For this reason, a carbon removal activity that generates carbon removals in excess of such a baseline should be presumed to be additional. Hence, the use of a standardised baseline should simplify the demonstration of additionality for operators. In the case of carbon farming on arable mineral soils the standardised baseline should be considered flat equalling zero removals. Therefore, it should reduce the administrative burden of the certification process, which is particularly important in the case of small- scale land managers.

Amendment 125 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) A standardised baseline should reflect the statutory and market conditions in which the carbon removal or carbon farming activity takes place. If a carbon removal activity is imposed upon operators by the applicable law, or it does not need any incentives to take place, its performance will be reflected in the baseline. For this reason, a carbon removal activity that generates carbon removals in excess of such a baseline should be presumed to be additional. Hence, the use of a standardised baseline should simplify the demonstration of additionality for operators. Therefore, it should reduce the administrative burden of the certification process, which is particularly important in the case of small- scale land managers.

Amendment 126 #

Martin HLAVÁČEK, Ulrike MÜLLER, Jérémy DECERLE, Asger CHRISTENSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) Atmospheric and biogenic carbon that is captured and stored through a carbon removal activity risks being released back into the atmosphere (e.g. reversal) due to natural or anthropogenic causes. Therefore, operators should take all relevant preventive measures to mitigate those risks and duly monitor that carbon continues to be stored over the monitoring period laid down for the relevant carbon removal activity. The validity of the certified carbon removals should depend on the expected duration of the storage and the different risks of reversal associated with the given carbon removal activity. Among other possibilities, activities that store carbon in geological formations provide enough certainties on the very long-term duration of several centuries for the stored carbon and can be considered as providing permanent storage of carbon. Carbon farming or carbon storage in products are more exposed to the risk of voluntary or involuntary release of carbon into the atmosphere. To account for this risk, the validity of the certified carbon removals generated by carbon farming and carbon storage in products should not be subject to an expiry date ~~matching with the end of the relevant monitoring period. Thereafter, the~~but should be further defined per carbon farming activity in the certification methodology. The risk of reversibility of carbon storage should be a~~ssumed to be released into the atmosphere, unless the economic operator proves the maintenance of the carbon sto~~ccounted for in the discount rate set for the carbon farming activity. Moreover, in order not to discourage sequestration actions, which in the short term can account for significant amounts of carbon, short- term storage should be encouraged to stimulate farmers' transition and investments in sequestration practices. Various mechanisms exist to integragte ~~through uninterrupted monitoring activitie~~short-term storage into the carbon market and the associated risk which should be deployed such as reserve funds, insurance, rebate systems.

Amendment 127 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) Atmospheric and biogenic carbon that is captured and stored through a carbon removal activity risks being released back into the atmosphere (e.g. reversal) due to natural or anthropogenic causes. Therefore, operators should take all relevant preventive measures to mitigate those risks and duly monitor that carbon continues to be stored over the monitoring period laid down for the relevant carbon removal activity. The validity of the certified carbon removals should depend on the expected duration of the storage and the different risks of reversal associated with the given carbon removal activity. Activities that store carbon in geological formations provide enough certainties on the very long-term duration of several centuries for the stored carbon and can be considered as providing permanent storage of carbon. Carbon farming or carbon storage in products are more exposed to the risk of voluntary or involuntary release of carbon into the atmosphere. To account for this risk, the validity of the certified carbon removals generated by carbon farming and carbon storage in products should be subject to an expiry date matching with the end of the relevant monitoring period or the end of post-implementation monitoring across a carbon removal portfolio. Thereafter, the carbon should be assumed to be released into the atmosphere, unless the economic operator proves the maintenance of the carbon storage through uninterrupted monitoring activities or a carbon removal portfolio manager operates a proportioned liability mechanism that monitors portfolio-wide longevity performance for instance through a combination of remote-sensing and in-situ sampling technologies.

Amendment 128 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) Atmospheric and biogenic carbon that is captured and stored through a carbon removal activity risks being released back into the atmosphere (e.g. reversal) due to natural or anthropogenic causes. Therefore, operators should take all relevant preventive measures to mitigate those risks and duly monitor that carbon continues to be stored over the monitoring period laid down for the relevant carbon removal activity. The validity of the certified carbon removals should depend on the expected duration of the storage and the different risks of reversal associated with the given carbon removal activity. Activities that store carbon in geological formations provide enough certainties on the very long-term duration of several centuries for the stored carbon and can be considered as providing permanent storage of carbon. Carbon farming or carbon storage in products are more exposed to the risk of voluntary or involuntary release of carbon into the atmosphere. To account for this risk, the validity of the certified carbon removals generated by carbon farming and carbon storage in products should be subject to an expiry date matching with the end of the relevant monitoring period or the end of the monitoring subsequent to the full implementation of a carbon removal portfolio. Thereafter, the carbon should be assumed to be released into the atmosphere, unless the economic operator proves the maintenance of the carbon storage through uninterrupted monitoring activities or a carbon removal portfolio manager operates a proportional liability mechanism which monitors longevity performance.

Amendment 129 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

~~(13)~~ Atmospheric and biogenic carbon that is captured and stored through a carbon removal activity risks being released back into the atmosphere (e.g. reversal) due to natural or anthropogenic causes. Therefore, operators should be encouraged to take all relevant preventive measures to mitigate those risks and duly monitor that carbon continues to be stored over the monitoring period laid down for the relevant carbon removal activity. The validity of the certified carbon removals should depend on the expected duration of the storage and the different risks of reversal associated with the given carbon removal activity. Activities that store carbon in geological formations provide enough certainties on the very long-term duration of several centuries for the stored carbon and can be considered as providing permanent storage of carbon. Carbon farming or carbon storage in products are more exposed to the risk of voluntary or involuntary release of carbon into the atmosphere. To account for this risk, the validity of the certified carbon removals generated by carbon farming and carbon storage in products should be subject to an expiry date matching with the end of the relevant monitoring period. Thereafter, the carbon should be assumed to be released into the atmosphere, unless the economic operator proves the maintenance of the carbon storage through uninterrupted monitoring activities.

Amendment 130 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) Atmospheric and biogenic carbon that is captured and stored through a carbon removal activity risks being released back into the atmosphere (e.g. reversal or leakage) due to natural or anthropogenic causes. Therefore, operators should take all relevant preventive measures to mitigate those risks and duly monitor that carbon continues to be stored over the monitoring period laid down for the relevant carbon removal activity. The validity of the certifi~~ed carbon removal~~cates should depend on the expected duration of the storage and the different risks of reversal associated with the given carbon removal activity. Activities that store carbon in geological formations provide enough certainties on the very long-term duration of several centuries for the stored carbon and can be considered as providing permanent storage of carbon. Carbon farming ~~or carbon storage in product~~activities are more exposed to the risk of voluntary or involuntary release of carbon into the atmosphere. To account for this risk, the validity of the certified carbon removals generated by carbon farming and carbon storage in products should be subject to an expiry date matching with the end of the relevant monitoring period. Thereafter, the carbon should be assumed to be released into the atmosphere, unless the economic operator proves the maintenance of the carbon ~~storage~~farming activities through uninterrupted monitoring activities.

Amendment 131 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

Amendment 132 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

Amendment 133 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) In addition to measures taken to minimise the risk of carbon release into the atmosphere during the monitoring period, appropriate liability mechanisms and corrective measures should be introduced to address cases of reversal or leakage, in a way that there should be a liable party at any moment of time, taking into account extreme weather events and force majeure events that might impact land-based carbon storage. Such mechanisms could include e.g. discounting of carbon removal units, collective buffers or accounts of carbon removal units, and up-front insurance mechanisms. Since liability mechanisms in respect of geological storage and CO2 leakage, and relevant corrective measures have already been laid down by Directive 2003/87/EC and Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council27 , those liability mechanisms and corrective measures should apply to avoid double regulation. __________________ 27 Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the geological storage of carbon dioxide and amending Council Directive 85/337/EEC, European Parliament and Council Directives 2000/60/EC, 2001/80/EC, 2004/35/EC, 2006/12/EC, 2008/1/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 (OJ L 140, 5.6.2009, p. 114).

Amendment 134 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) In addition to measures taken to minimise the risk of carbon release into the atmosphere during the monitoring period, appropriate liability mechanisms should be introduced to address cases of reversal. Such mechanisms could include e.g. discounting of carbon removal units, mutual funds, collective buffers or accounts of carbon removal units, and up- front insurance mechanisms. Since liability mechanisms in respect of geological storage and CO2 leakage, and relevant corrective measures have already been laid down by Directive 2003/87/EC and Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council27 , those liability mechanisms and corrective measures should apply to avoid double regulation. __________________ 27 Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the geological storage of carbon dioxide and amending Council Directive 85/337/EEC, European Parliament and Council Directives 2000/60/EC, 2001/80/EC, 2004/35/EC, 2006/12/EC, 2008/1/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 (OJ L 140, 5.6.2009, p. 114).

Amendment 135 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Carbon removal activities and carbon farming have a strong potential to deliver win-win solutions for sustainability, even if trade- offs cannot be excluded. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish minimum environmental, economic and social sustainability requirements to ensure that carbon removal activities have at least a neutral impact or generate co-benefits for the sustainability objectives of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the ~~transition to a circular economy, and pollution prevention and control~~protection of soil quality and prevention of erosion, the fair remuneration of operators, the protection of employment, the transition to a circular economy, and pollution prevention and control. Furthermore, carbon farming should not have a negative impact on food production and food supply in the Union or in the third countries. Those sustainability requirements should, as appropriate, and taking into consideration local conditions, build on the technical screening criteria for Do Not Significant Harm concerning forestry activities and underground permanent geological storage of CO2, laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/213928 , and on the sustainability criteria for forest and agriculture biomass raw material laid down in Article 29 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 . Practices, such as forest monocultures, that produce harmful effects for biodiversity should not be eligible for certification. __________________ 28 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

Amendment 136 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Carbon ~~removal~~farming activities have a strong potential to deliver win-win solutions for sustainability, even if trade- offs cannot be excluded. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish minimum sustainability requirements to ensure that carbon ~~removal~~farming activities have a neutral impact or generate co-benefits for the sustainability objectives of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the transition to a circular biobased economy, and pollution prevention and control. Those sustainability requirements should, as appropriate, and taking into consideration local conditions, build on the technical screening criteria for Do Not Significant Harm concerning forestry activities and underground permanent geological storage of CO2, laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/213928 , and on the sustainability criteria for forest and agriculture biomass raw material laid down in Article 29 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 . Practices, ~~such as forest monocultures, that produce harmful effects for biodiversity~~that are not in line with sustainable forest management should not be eligible for certification. __________________ 28 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

Amendment 137 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Carbon removal activities have a strong potential to deliver win-win solutions for social, environmental and economic sustainability, even if trade- offs cannot be excluded. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish minimum sustainability requirements to ensure that carbon removal activities ~~have a neutral impact~~do no significant harm or generate co-benefits for the sustainability objectives of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the transition to a circular economy, ~~and~~ pollution prevention and control, agricultural productivity, product quality and improving farmers’ revenues. Those sustainability requirements should, as appropriate, and taking into consideration local conditions, build on the technical screening criteria for Do Not Significant Harm concerning forestry activities and underground permanent geological storage of CO2, laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/213928, and on the sustainability criteria for forest and agriculture biomass raw material laid down in Article 29 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council29. Practices, such as forest monocultures, that produce harmful effects for biodiversity should not be eligible for certification. __________________ 28 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

Amendment 138 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Carbon removal activities have a strong potential to deliver win-win solutions for sustainability, even if trade- offs cannot be excluded. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish minimum sustainability requirements to ensure that carbon removal activities have a neutral impact or generate co-benefits for the sustainability objectives of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the transition to a circular economy, and pollution prevention and control. Those sustainability requirements should, as appropriate, and taking into consideration local conditions, build on the technical screening criteria for Do Not Significant Harm concerning ~~forestry activities and~~ underground permanent geological storage of CO2, laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/213928, and on the sustainability criteria for forest and agriculture biomass raw material laid down in Article 29 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council29. ~~Practices, such as forest monocultures, that produce harmful effects for biodiversity should not be eligible for certification.~~ __________________ 28 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

Amendment 139 #

Martin HLAVÁČEK, Ulrike MÜLLER, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Carbon ~~removal~~farming activities have a strong potential to deliver win-win solutions for sustainability, even if trade- offs cannot be excluded. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish minimum sustainability requirements to ensure that ~~carbon removal activities have a neutral impact or~~, in order to obtain a certification under this framework, carbon farming activities generate co-benefits for the sustainability objectives of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the transition to a circular economy, and pollution prevention and control~~. Those sustainability requirements should, as appropriate, and taking into consideration local conditions, build on the technical screening criteria for Do N~~, while proving they do not Ssignificant Harm concerning forestry activities and underground permanent geological storage of CO2, laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/213928 , and on the sustainability criteria for forest and agriculture biomass raw material laid down in Article 29 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 ly harm any of those objectives in the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2020/852. Those sustainability requirements should be based on the latest available scientific evidence and, as appropriate existing minimum sustainability criteria established under EU law, or in Guidelines adopted by the Commission. Practices, such as forest monocultures, that produce harmful effects for biodiversity should not be eligible for certification. __________________ 28 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

Amendment 140 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Carbon removal activities have a strong potential to deliver win-win solutions for sustainability, even if trade- offs cannot be excluded. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish minimum sustainability requirements to ensure that carbon removal activities have a neutral impact or generate co-benefits for the sustainability objectives of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the transition to a circular economy, and pollution prevention and control. Those sustainability requirements should, as appropriate, and taking into consideration local conditions, build on the technical screening criteria for Do Not Significant Harm concerning ~~forestry activities and~~ underground permanent geological storage of CO2, laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/213928 , and on the sustainability criteria for forest and agriculture biomass raw material laid down in Article 29 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 . Practices, such as forest monocultures, that produce harmful effects for. Carbon farming activities should contribute to at least one additional practice set out, such as prevention and improvement of water quality, protection of biodiversity ~~shoul~~and not ~~be eligible for certification~~hers. __________________ 28 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

Amendment 141 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Carbon removal activities have a strong potential to deliver win-win solutions for social, environmental, and economic sustainability, even if trade- offs cannot be excluded. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish minimum sustainability requirements to ensure that carbon removal activities ~~have a neutral impact or~~do no significant harm or that they generate co-benefits for the sustainability objectives of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the transition to a circular economy, and pollution prevention and control, agricultural productivity, product quality, and farmers income. Those sustainability requirements should, as appropriate, and taking into consideration local conditions, build on the technical screening criteria for Do Not Significant Harm concerning forestry activities and underground permanent geological storage of CO2, laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/213928 , and on the sustainability criteria for forest and agriculture biomass raw material laid down in Article 29 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 . Practices, such as forest monocultures, that produce harmful effects for biodiversity should not be eligible for certification. __________________ 28 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

Amendment 142 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Carbon removal activities have a strong potential to deliver win-win solutions for sustainability, even if trade- offs cannot be excluded. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish minimum sustainability requirements to ensure that carbon removal activities have a neutral impact or generate co-benefits for the sustainability objectives of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the transition to a circular economy, ~~and~~ pollution prevention and control and the prevention of adverse social and economic consequences for local communities. Those sustainability requirements should, as appropriate, and taking into consideration local conditions, build on the technical screening criteria for Do Not Significant Harm concerning forestry activities and underground permanent geological storage of CO2, laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/213928, and on the sustainability criteria for forest and agriculture biomass raw material laid down in Article 29 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council29. Practices, such as forest monocultures, that produce harmful effects for biodiversity should not be eligible for certification. __________________ 28 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

Amendment 143 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Carbon removal activities have a strong potential to deliver win-win solutions for sustainability, even if trade- offs cannot be excluded. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish minimum sustainability requirements to ensure that carbon removal activities ~~have a neutral impact~~do minimal harm to or generate co-benefits for the sustainability objectives of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the transition to a circular economy, and pollution prevention and control. Those sustainability requirements should, as appropriate, and taking into consideration local conditions, build on the technical screening criteria for Do Not Significant Harm concerning forestry activities and underground permanent geological storage of CO2, laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/213928 , and on the sustainability criteria for forest and agriculture biomass raw material laid down in Article 29 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 . Practices, such as forest monocultures, that produce harmful effects for biodiversity should not be eligible for certification. __________________ 28 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

Amendment 144 #

Peter JAHR, Colm MARKEY, Daniel BUDA, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Carbon removal activities have a strong potential to deliver win-win solutions for sustainability, even if trade- offs cannot be excluded. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish minimum sustainability requirements to ensure that carbon removal activities have a neutral impact or generate co-benefits for the sustainability objectives of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the transition to a circular economy, and pollution prevention and control. Those sustainability requirements should, as appropriate, and taking into consideration local conditions, b~~uild on~~e consistent with the technical screening criteria for Do Not Significant Harm concerning forestry activities and underground permanent geological storage of CO2, laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/213928 , and on the sustainability criteria for forest and agriculture biomass raw material laid down in Article 29 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 . Practices, such as forest monocultures, that produce harmful effects for biodiversity should not be eligible for certification. __________________ 28 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

Amendment 145 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Carbon removal activities have a strong potential to deliver win-win solutions for sustainability, even if trade- offs cannot be excluded. Therefore, it is appropriate to establish minimum sustainability requirements to ensure that carbon removal activities have a neutral impact or generate co-benefits for the sustainability objectives of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems, the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, the transition to a circular economy, and pollution prevention and control. Those sustainability requirements should, as appropriate, and taking into consideration local conditions, b~~uild on~~e consistent with the technical screening criteria for Do Not Significant Harm concerning forestry activities and underground permanent geological storage of CO2, laid down in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/213928 , and on the sustainability criteria for forest and agriculture biomass raw material laid down in Article 29 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council29 . Practices, such as forest monocultures, that produce harmful effects for biodiversity should not be eligible for certification. __________________ 28 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1). 29 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82).

Amendment 146 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Farming practices that remove CO2 from the atmosphere contribute to the climate neutrality objective and should be rewarded, either via the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) or other public or private initiatives. Specifically, this Regulation should take into account farming practices as referenced in the Communication on Sustainable Carbon Cycles30. More specifically, those practices are highly site-dependent land- use practices that contribute to increased carbon sequestration and ideally also lead to co-benefits for ecosystems and biodiversity. These include, in particular, afforestation and reforestation, agroforestry, the use of catch crops, cover crops, expansion of landscape features to prevent erosion, and restoration of peatlands. __________________ 30 Communication from the Commission, Sustainable Carbon Cycles, COM (20221) 800.

Amendment 147 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Farming practices that remove CO2 from the atmosphere contribute to the climate neutrality objective and should be rewarded, either via the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) or other public or private initiatives. Specifically, this Regulation should, at least, take into account farming practices as referenced in the Communication on Sustainable Carbon Cycles~~30 .~~ , as well as other practices which reduce greenhouse gas emissions. When developing certification methodologies in the context of carbon farming, the Commission should take into account the need to minimize negative impacts on food security and to avoid that land is acquired for speculative purposes resulting in negative effects on rural communities. It should also promote those activities that have the largest potential to provide positive co-benefits for biodiversity and climate change adaptation. __________________ 30 Communication from the Commission, Sustainable Carbon Cycles, COM (20221) 800.

Amendment 148 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Farming practices that remove CO2 from the atmosphere contribute to the climate neutrality objective and should be rewarded~~, either via~~. The Commission shall identify and apply financial support mechanisms to reward farmers, either by supplementing the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), or by developing other financial support measures, or by other public or private initiatives. Specifically, this Regulation should take into account farming practices as referenced in the Communication on Sustainable Carbon Cycles30, as well as guaranteeing food security and the proper functioning of agricultural production and the supply chain. __________________ 30 Communication from the Commission, Sustainable Carbon Cycles, COM (20221) 800.

Amendment 149 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Farming practices that remove CO2 from the atmosphere can contribute to the climate neutrality objective and should be rewarded, either via the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) or other public or private initiatives~~. Specifically, this Regulation should take into~~, such as sustainable private finance, contractual arrangements along supply chains, voluntary carbon markets and product claims, if measuring and monitoring methodologies show ac co~~unt farming practices as referenced in the Communication on Sustainable Carbon Cycles30~~ ntribution to carbon removal and co- benefits or, in the absence of measuring and monitoring methodologies, a scientific ex ante assessment has proven a robust contribution of the carbon farming activity to carbon removal or co-benefits. __________________ 30 Communication from the Commission, Sustainable Carbon Cycles, COM (20221) 800.

Amendment 150 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Farming practices that remove CO2 from the atmosphere can contribute to the climate neutrality objective and should be rewarded~~, either via the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) or other public or~~ through multiple funding sources such as sustainable private fin~~itiatives. Specifically, this Regulation should take into~~ance, contractual arrangements along supply chains, voluntary carbon markets and product claims, if the measurement and monitoring methodologies show ac co~~unt farming practices as referenced in the Communication on Sustainable Carbon Cycle~~ntribution to carbon removal. In the absence of measurement and monitoring methodologies, a previous scientific assessment may establish the contribution of carbon farming activities to carbon removals. __________________ 30 Communication from the Commission, Sustainable Carbon Cycles, COM (20221) 800.

Amendment 151 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

Amendment 152 #

Bert-Jan RUISSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Farming practices that remove CO2 from the atmosphere contribute to the climate neutrality objective and should be rewarded, either via the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) or other public or private initiatives. In order to ensure that carbon farming credits provide an additional income stream for farmers, the value of the credits should be funded outside the CAP. Specifically, this Regulation should take into account farming practices as referenced in the Communication on Sustainable Carbon Cycles30 . __________________ 30 Communication from the Commission, Sustainable Carbon Cycles, COM (20221) 800.

Amendment 153 #

Martin HLAVÁČEK, Ulrike MÜLLER, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Farming practices that remove CO2 from the atmosphere contribute to the climate neutrality objective and should be rewarded, either via the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) or other public or private initiatives such as sustainable private finance, contractual arrangements along supply chain, voluntary carbon markets and product claims.. Specifically, this Regulation should take into account farming practices as referenced in the Communication on Sustainable Carbon Cycles30 . __________________ 30 Communication from the Commission, Sustainable Carbon Cycles, COM (20221) 800.

Amendment 154 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

Amendment 155 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Farming practices that remove CO2 from the atmosphere ~~contribute to the climate neutrality~~while generating co- benefits for other sustainability objectives contribute to the Union's environmental objectives and should be rewarded, either via the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) or other public or private initiatives. Specifically, this Regulation should take into account farming practices as referenced in the Communication on Sustainable Carbon Cycles30 . __________________ 30 Communication from the Commission, Sustainable Carbon Cycles, COM (20221) 800.

Amendment 156 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Farming practices that remove CO2 from the atmosphere contribute to the climate neutrality objective and should be rewarded, either via the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) under the provisions currently relating to it or other public or private initiatives. Specifically, this Regulation should take into account farming practices as referenced in the Communication on Sustainable Carbon Cycles30. __________________ 30 Communication from the Commission, Sustainable Carbon Cycles, COM (20221) 800.

Amendment 157 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) Operators or groups of operators may report co-benefits that contribute to the sustainability objectives beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. To this end, their reporting should comply with the certification methodologies tailored to the different carbon removal activities, developed by the Commission. Certification methodologies should, as much as possible, incentivise the generation of co-benefits for biodiversity going beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. These additional co- benefits will give more economic value to the certified carbon removals and will result in higher revenues for the operators. In the light of these considerations, it is appropriate for the Commission to prioritise the development of tailored certification methodologies on carbon farming activities that provide significant co-benefits for biodiversity.

Amendment 158 #

Paola GHIDONI, Angelo CIOCCA, Elena LIZZI, Rosanna CONTE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

Amendment 159 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) Operators or groups of operators may report ~~co-~~social, environmental and economic benefits that contribute to the sustainability objectives going beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. To this end, their reporting should comply with the certification methodologies tailored to the different carbon removal activities, developed by the Commission. Certification methodologies should, as much as possible, incentivise the generation of co-benefits for biodiversity going beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. These additional co-benefits ~~will~~may give more economic value to the certified carbon removals and ~~will result in~~lead to higher revenues for the operators. In the light of these considerations, it is appropriate for the Commission to prioritise the development of measurement and monitoring methodologies for biodiversity development and other co- benefits of carbon farming, as well as a tailored certification ~~methodologies~~ on carbon farming activities that provide significant co- benefits for biodiversity or other social, environmental and economic goals. Certification methodologies will include a prior scientific assessment demonstrating a contribution by the carbon farming activity to the generation of co-benefits.

Amendment 160 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) Operators or groups of operators may report social, environmental and economic co-benefits that contribute to the sustainability objectives beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. To this end, their reporting should comply with the certification methodologies tailored to the different carbon removal activities, developed by the Commission. Certification methodologies should, as much as possible, incentivise the generation of co-benefits for biodiversity going beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. These additional co-benefits ~~will~~may give more economic value to the certified carbon removals and ~~will~~may result in higher revenues for the operators. In the light of these considerations, it is appropriate for the Commission to prioritise the development of measuring and monitoring methodologies for biodiversity and other co-benefits of carbon farming and of tailored certification methodologies on carbon farming activities that provide significant co-benefits for biodiversity or other social, environmental and economic objectives. The tailored certification methodologies will include a scientific ex ante assessment proofing a robust contribution of the carbon farming activity to the co- benefit.

Amendment 161 #

Martin HLAVÁČEK, Ulrike MÜLLER, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) Operators or groups of operators may report co-benefits that contribute to the sustainability objectives beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. To this end, their reporting should comply with the certification methodologies tailored to the different carbon removal activities, developed by the Commission. Certification methodologies should, as much as possible, incentivise the generation of co-benefits ~~for biodiversity going beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. These additional co- benefits will give mor~~that increase economic value to the certified carbon removals and ~~will result in higher~~ revenues for the operators. In the light of these considerations, it is appropriate for the Commission to prioritise the development of tailored certification methodologies on carbon farming activities that provide significant co-benefits for biodiversity.

Amendment 162 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) Operators or groups of operators may report co-benefits that contribute to the sustainability objectives beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. To this end, their reporting should comply with the certification methodologies tailored to the different carbon removal activities, developed by the Commission. Certification methodologies should, as much as possible, incentivise the generation of co-benefits for biodiversity going beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. These additional co-benefits will give more economic value to the certified carbon removals and will result in higher revenues for the operators. In the light of these considerations, it is appropriate for the Commission to prioritise the development of tailored certification methodologies on carbon farming activities that provide significant co-benefits for biodiversity.

Amendment 163 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) Operators or groups of operators may report co-benefits that contribute to the sustainability objectives beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. To this end, their reporting should comply with the certification methodologies tailored to the different carbon removal activities, developed by the Commission. Certification methodologies should, as much as possible, incentivise the generation of co-benefits for biodiversity going beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. These additional co-benefits will give more economic value to the certified carbon removals and will result in higher revenues for the operators. In the light of these considerations, it is appropriate for the Commission to prioritise the development of tailored certification methodologies on carbon farming activities that provide similarly significant co-benefits for biodiversity, and for farmers’ activities and supply chain activities.

Amendment 164 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) Operators or groups of operators may report co-benefits that contribute to the sustainability objectives beyond the minimum environmental, economic and social sustainability requirements. To this end, their reporting should comply with the certification methodologies tailored to the different carbon removal activities, developed by the Commission. Certification methodologies should, as much as possible, incentivise the generation of co-benefits for biodiversity going beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. These additional co-benefits will give more economic value to the certified carbon removals and will result in higher revenues for the operators. In the light of these considerations, it is appropriate for the Commission to prioritise the development of tailored certification methodologies on carbon farming activities that provide significant co-benefits for biodiversity.

Amendment 165 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) Operators or groups of operators may report additional co-benefits that contribute to the sustainability objectives beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. To this end, their reporting should comply with the certification methodologies tailored to the different carbon removal activities, developed by the Commission. Certification methodologies should, as much as possible, incentivise the generation of co-benefits for biodiversity going beyond the minimum sustainability requirements. These additional co-benefits will give more economic value to the certified carbon removals and will result in higher revenues for the operators. In the light of these considerations, it is appropriate for the Commission to prioritise the development of tailored certification methodologies on carbon farming activities that provide significant co-benefits for biodiversity.

Amendment 166 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) It is appropriate to develop detailed certification methodologies for the different carbon removal activities in order to apply, in a standardised, verifiable and comparable way, the quality criteria laid down in this Regulation. Those methodologies should ensure the robust and transparent certification of the net carbon removal benefit generated by the carbon removal activity, while avoiding disproportionate administrative burden for operators or group of operators, in particular for small farmers and forest holders. To this end, the Commission should be empowered to supplement this Regulation by adopting delegated acts establishing detailed certification methodologies for the different carbon removal activities. Those methodologies should be developed in close consultation with the Expert Group on Carbon Removals and all other interested actors. The development of these methodologies should be supported by clear evidence and should include a call for feedback on the draft methodologies, providing all interested stakeholders with the possibility to contribute. They need to be based on the best available scientific evidence, build upon existing public and private schemes and methodologies for carbon removal certification, and take into account any relevant standard and rules adopted at national and Union level. The setting of core regulatory elements such as long- term storage, liability, additionality, and criteria for social, environmental and economic co-benefits of carbon farming, spelling out clear design features for the underlying methodologies, will follow the ordinary legislative procedure since these standards can fundamentally affect agricultural and carbon farming.

Amendment 167 #

Martin HLAVÁČEK, Ulrike MÜLLER, Jérémy DECERLE, Asger CHRISTENSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) It is appropriate to develop detailed certification methodologies for the different carbon removal activities in order to apply, in a standardised, verifiable and comparable way, the quality criteria laid down in this Regulation. Those methodologies should ensure the robust and transparent certification of the net carbon removal benefit generated by the carbon removal activity, while avoiding disproportionate administrative burden for operators or group of operators, in particular for small farmers and forest holders. To this end, the Commission should be empowered to supplement this Regulation by adopting delegated acts establishing detailed certification methodologies for the different carbon removal activities. Those methodologies should be developed in close consultation with the Expert Group on Carbon Removals and all other interested actors. The development of these methodologies should include precise elements supporting the methods used in drawing them up, while offering all stakeholders the opportunity to contribute to their development. They need to be based on the best available scientific evidence, build upon existing public and private schemes and methodologies for carbon removal certification, and take into account any relevant standard and rules adopted at national and Union level. The establishment of key elements relating to carbon farming such as long-term storage, liability mechanisms, additionality and social, environmental and economic co-benefits of practices should follow the ordinary legislative procedure.

Amendment 168 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) It is appropriate to develop detailed certification methodologies for the different carbon removal and carbon farming activities in order to apply, in a standardised, verifiable and comparable way, the quality criteria laid down in this Regulation. Those methodologies should ensure the robust and transparent certification of the net carbon removal benefit generated by the carbon removal activity, while avoiding disproportionate administrative burden for operators or group of operators, in particular for small farmers and forest holders. To this end, the Commission should be empowered to supplement this Regulation by adopting delegated acts establishing detailed certification methodologies for the different carbon removal activities. Those methodologies should be developed in close consultation with the Expert Group on Carbon Removals and all other interested actors. They need to be based on the best available scientific evidence, build upon existing public and private schemes and methodologies for carbon removal certification, and take into account any relevant standard and rules adopted at national and Union level. The development of these methodologies should include a call for evidence supporting the drafting of the methodologies and a call for feedback on the draft methodologies, providing all interested stakeholders the possibility to contribute.

Amendment 169 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) It is appropriate to develop detailed certification methodologies for the different carbon removal activities in order to apply, in a standardised, verifiable and comparable way, the quality criteria laid down in this Regulation. Those methodologies should ensure the robust and transparent certification of the net carbon removal benefit generated by the carbon removal activity, while avoiding disproportionate administrative and financial burden for operators or group of operators, in particular for small farmers, short-supply-chain actors and forest holders. To this end, the Commission should be empowered to supplement this Regulation by adopting delegated acts establishing detailed certification methodologies for the different carbon removal activities. Those methodologies should be developed in close consultation with the Expert Group on Carbon Removals and all other interested actors. They need to be based on the best available and most recent scientific evidence, and on the situation on the ground, build upon existing public and private schemes and methodologies for carbon removal certification, and take into account any relevant standard and rules adopted at national and Union level.

Amendment 170 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

Amendment 171 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) It is appropriate to develop detailed certification methodologies for the different carbon removal and carbon farming activities in order to apply, in a standardised, verifiable and comparable way, the quality criteria laid down in this Regulation. Those methodologies should ensure the robust and transparent certification of the ~~net~~ carbon removal ~~benefit generated by the~~or carbon ~~removal~~farming activity, while avoiding disproportionate administrative burden for operators or group of operators, in particular for small farmers and forest holders. To this end, the Commission should be empowered to supplement this Regulation by adopting delegated acts establishing detailed certification methodologies for the different carbon removal activities. Those methodologies should be developed in close consultation with the ~~Expert Group~~Platform on Carbon Rremoval and carbon farming activities and all other interested actors. They need to be based on the best available scientific evidence, build upon existing public and private schemes and methodologies for carbon removal certification, and take into account any relevant standard and rules adopted at national ~~and Un~~, Union and international level.

Amendment 172 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) In order to ensure a credible and reliable certification process, carbon removal and carbon farming activities should be subject to independent third- party auditing. In particular, carbon removal and carbon farming activities should be subject to an initial certification audit before their implementation, verifying their compliance with the quality criteria set out in this Regulation, including the correct quantification of the expected net carbon removal benefit. Carbon removal and carbon farming activities should also be subject to periodic re- certification audits to verify the compliance of the generated carbon removals. To this end, the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing acts to set out the structure, technical details, maximum price for certification audit, and the minimum information to be contained in the description of the carbon removal activity, and in the certification and re- certification audit reports.

Amendment 173 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) In order to ensure a credible and reliable certification process, carbon removal and carbon farming activities should be subject to independent third- party auditing. In particular, carbon removal and carbon farming activities should be subject to an initial certification audit before their implementation, verifying their compliance with the quality criteria set out in this Regulation, including the correct quantification of the expected net carbon removal benefit. Carbon removal and carbon farming activities should also be subject to periodic re- certification audits to verify the compliance ~~of the generated carbon removals~~. To this end, the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing acts to set out the structure, technical details, and the minimum information to be contained in the description of the carbon removal or carbon farming activity, and in the certification and re- certification audit reports.

Amendment 174 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) Providing land managers with improved knowledge, additional financing tools and methods for a better assessment and optimisation of the carbon removals is key for cost- efficient implementation of mitigation actions and for securing their engagement in carbon farming. This is particularly relevant for Union small farmers or forest holders that often lack the financial resources, know-how and the expertise required to implement carbon removal activities and to comply with the required quality criteria and related certification methodologies. Therefore, it is appropriate to require that producer organisations facilitate the provision of free relevant advisory services through technical advice to their members. The Common Agricultural Policy, the financial support mechanisms identified by the Commission and national State aid can support financially the provision of advisory services, the purchase of audit services required under this regulation, knowledge exchange, training, information actions or interactive innovation projects with farmers and foresters.

Amendment 175 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) Providing land managers with improved knowledge, tools and methods for a better assessment and optimisation of the carbon removals is key for cost- efficient implementation of mitigation actions and for securing their engagement in carbon farming. This is particularly relevant for Union small farmers or forest holders that often lack the know-how and the expertise required to implement carbon removal activities and to comply with the required quality criteria and related certification methodologies. Therefore, it is ~~appropriate to require that~~important to provide the necessary guidelines and financial incentives to enable producer organisations and cooperatives to facilitate the provision of relevant advisory services through technical advice to their members. The Common Agricultural Policy and national State aid can support financially the provision of advisory services, knowledge exchange, training, information actions or interactive innovation projects with farmers and foresters.

Amendment 176 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) Providing land managers with improved knowledge, tools and methods for a better assessment and optimisation of the carbon ~~removal~~farming activities is key for cost- efficient implementation of mitigation actions and for securing their engagement in carbon farming. This is particularly relevant for Union small farmers or forest holders that often lack the know-how and the expertise required to implement carbon ~~removal~~farming activities and to comply with the required quality criteria and related certification methodologies. Therefore, it is appropriate to require that producer organisations facilitate the provision of relevant advisory services through technical advice to their members. The Common Agricultural Policy and national State aid can support financially the provision of advisory services, knowledge exchange, training, information actions or interactive innovation projects with farmers and foresters.

Amendment 177 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20 a (new)

(20 a) Carbon removal activities should not primarily take the focus of emission reductions, and therefore carbon removal and carbon farming certificates or units should not be used to offset continued emissions either in compliance or voluntary mechanisms - including the ESR, ETS, CORSIA, Article 6.2 and Article 6.4 mechanisms under the Paris Agreement or voluntary carbon markets. Certificates and units should be incentivized in a manner that makes them complementary to emission reductions, rather than substitutes.

Amendment 178 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) It is appropriate that carbon removal certificates underpin different end- uses, such as the compilation of national and corporate greenhouse gas inventories, including with regard to Regulation (EU) 2018/841 of the European Parliament and of the Council31, the proof of climate- related and other environmental corporate claims (including on biodiversity), or the exchange of verified carbon removal units through voluntary carbon offsetting markets. To this end, the certificate should contain accurate and transparent information on the carbon removal activity, including the total removals and net carbon removal benefit that comply with the quality criteria set out in this Regulation. ~~The Commission should be also empowered to adopt delegated acts to further specify or amend Annex II which lists the minimum information to be contained in the certificates.~~ __________________ 31 Regulation (EU) 2018/841 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions and removals from land use, land use change and forestry in the 2030 climate and energy framework, and amending Regulation (EU) No 525/2013 and Decision No 529/2013/EU (OJ L 156, 19.6.2018, p. 1).

Amendment 179 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) It is appropriate that carbon removal and carbon farming certificates underpin different end- uses, such as the compilation of national and corporate greenhouse gas inventories, including with regard to Regulation (EU) 2018/841 of the European Parliament and of the Council31 , the proof of climate- related and other environmental corporate claims (including on biodiversity), or the exchange of verified carbon removal units through voluntary carbon offsetting markets. To this end, the certificate should contain accurate and transparent information on the carbon removal activity, including the total removals and net carbon removal benefit and, in the case of carbon farming, biogenic emission reduction, that comply with the quality criteria set out in this Regulation. The Commission should be also empowered to adopt delegated acts to further specify or amend Annex II which lists the minimum information to be contained in the certificates. __________________ 31 Regulation (EU) 2018/841 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions and removals from land use, land use change and forestry in the 2030 climate and energy framework, and amending Regulation (EU) No 525/2013 and Decision No 529/2013/EU (OJ L 156, 19.6.2018, p. 1).

Amendment 180 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) ~~It is appropriate that carbon removal certificates underpin different end-uses, such as the compilation of national and corporate~~The Union and its Member States should continue to develop, regularly update and report to the UNFCC their greenhouse gas inventories~~, inclu~~ according wito the r~~egard to~~ules set out in Regulation (EU) 2018/~~841 of the European Parliament and of the Council31 , the proof of climate-rel~~1999. Certificates generated aund other environmental corporate claims (including on biodiversity), or the exchange of verified carbon removal units through voluntary carbon offsetting markets. To this end, the certificate should contain accurate and transparent information on the carbon removal activity, including the total removals and net carbon removal benefit that comply with the quality criteria set out in this Regulation. The Commission should be also empowered to adopt delegated acts to further specify or amend Annex II which lists the minimum information to be contained in the certificateer this framework should not be used for the purpose of developing greenhouse gas inventories. Moreover, this framework should not undermine the need for immediate, deep and sustained emissions reduction by sources across all sectors needed to limit global warming to 1.5°C. Therefore carbon removal and carbon farming activities certified under this Union framework should not be used for, or claimed to, offset, compensate or replace the reduction of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions by sources, neither in regulatory nor in voluntary frameworks. __________________ 31 Regulation (EU) 2018/841 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions and removals from land use, land use change and forestry in the 2030 climate and energy framework, and amending Regulation (EU) No 525/2013 and Decision No 529/2013/EU (OJ L 156, 19.6.2018, p. 1).

Amendment 181 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 a (new)

(21 a) Certificates may be monetised, thereby giving a financial incentive to operators or groups of operators to carry on the carbon removal or carbon farming activities. Such financial incentives may include funding from legal or physical persons wishing to contribute to the achievement of environmental objectives (‘contribution claims’), funding from the CAP, public procurements or other sources of public finance.

Amendment 182 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 b (new)

(21 b) In the event of leakage or reversal, the relevant ‘contribution claims’ should be amended so as to reflect the reality of the situation, taking into account extreme weather events and force majeure events that can affect land-based carbon storage.

Amendment 183 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 c (new)

(21 c) Certificates should contain accurate and transparent information on the carbon removal or carbon farming activity, including the total removals and net carbon removal benefit that comply with the quality criteria set out in this Regulation, as well as provide information whether the certificate has been monetised, for which purpose and by whom. The Commission should be also empowered to adopt delegated acts to further specify or amend Annex II which lists the minimum information to be contained in the certificates.

Amendment 184 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) To ensure an accurate, robust and transparent verification, certification bodies responsible for performing the certification of carbon removal activities should have the required competences and skills and should be accredited by ~~national accreditation authorities pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council32~~the European Commission. To avoid possible conflicts of interest, the certification bodies should also be completely independent from the operator carrying out the carbon removal activity that is subject to the certification. In addition, Member States should contribute towards ensuring the correct implementation of the certification process by ~~supervising the operation of certification bodies that are accredited by national accreditation authorities, and by~~ informing the certification schemes about relevant non-conformity findings. __________________ 32 Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 setting out the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 30).

Amendment 185 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) To ensure an accurate, robust and transparent verification, certification bodies responsible for performing the certification of carbon removal activities should have the required competences and skills and should be accredited by ~~national accreditation authorities pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council32~~ the European Commission. To avoid possible conflicts of interest, the certification bodies should also be completely independent from the operator carrying out the carbon removal activity that is subject to the certification. In addition, Member States should contribute towards ensuring the correct implementation of the certification process by ~~supervising the operation of certification bodies that are accredited by national accreditation authorities, and by~~ informing the certification schemes about relevant non-conformity findings. __________________ 32 Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 setting out the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 30).

Amendment 186 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) To ensure an accurate, robust and transparent verification, certification bodies responsible for performing the certification of carbon removal activities should have the required competences and skills and should be accredited by national accreditation authorities pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 . For the purposes of the carbon farming, these national accreditation authorities should be national paying agencies. To avoid possible conflicts of interest, the certification bodies should also be completely independent from the operator carrying out the carbon removal activity that is subject to the certification. In addition, Member States should contribute towards ensuring the correct implementation of the certification process by supervising the operation of certification bodies that are accredited by national accreditation authorities, and by informing the certification schemes about relevant non-conformity findings. __________________ 32 Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 setting out the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 30).

Amendment 187 #

Martin HLAVÁČEK, Ulrike MÜLLER, Jérémy DECERLE, Asger CHRISTENSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) To ensure an accurate, robust and transparent verification, certification bodies responsible for performing the certification of carbon removal and carbon farming activities should have the required competences and skills and should be accredited by national accreditation authorities pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 . To avoid possible conflicts of interest, the certification bodies should also be completely independent from the operator carrying out the carbon removal or carbon farming activity that is subject to the certification. In addition, Member States should contribute towards ensuring the correct implementation of the certification process by supervising the operation of certification bodies that are accredited by national accreditation authorities, and by informing the certification schemes about relevant non- conformity findings. __________________ 32 Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 setting out the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 30).

Amendment 188 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) Certification schemes should be used by operators to demonstrate compliance with this Regulation. Therefore, certification schemes should operate on the basis of reliable and transparent rules and procedures and should ensure accuracy, reliability, integrity and non-repudiation of origin, and protection against fraud of information and of data submitted by operators. They should also ensure the correct accounting of the verified carbon removal units, notably by avoiding double counting. To this end, the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing acts, including adequate standards of reliability, transparency, accounting and of independent auditing to be applied by certification schemes, so as to ensure the necessary legal certainty as regards the rules applicable to operators and to certification schemes. When it comes to carbon farming, for the purposes of preventing double counting, all necessary information on the carbon farming certificates should be available in the LPIS system, linked to the specific parcels benefitting from the scheme. To ensure a cost- effective certification process, those technical harmonised rules on certification should also have the objective of reducing unnecessary administrative burden for operators, or group of operators, in particular for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), including small farmers and foresters.

Amendment 189 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) Certification schemes should be used by operators availing of the voluntary certification framework to demonstrate compliance with this Regulation. Therefore, certification schemes should operate on the basis of reliable, flexible and transparent rules and procedures and should ensure accuracy, reliability, integrity and non-repudiation of origin, and protection against fraud of information and of data submitted by operators. They should also ensure the correct accounting of the verified carbon removal units, notably by avoiding double counting. To this end, the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing acts, including adequate standards of reliability, transparency, accounting and of independent auditing to be applied by certification schemes, so as to ensure the necessary legal certainty as regards the rules applicable to operators and to certification schemes. To ensure a cost- effective certification process, those technical harmonised rules on certification should also have the objective of reducing unnecessary administrative and financial burden for operators, or group of operators, in particular for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), ~~including~~especially small farmers and foresters.

Amendment 190 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) Certification schemes should be used by operators to demonstrate compliance with this Regulation. Therefore, certification schemes should operate on the basis of reliable and transparent rules and procedures and should ensure accuracy, reliability, integrity and non-repudiation of origin, and protection against fraud of information and of data submitted by operators. They should also ensure, where relevant, the correct accounting of the verified carbon removal ~~units~~generated by a certified activity , notably by avoiding double counting. To this end, the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing acts, including adequate standards of reliability, transparency, accounting and of independent auditing to be applied by certification schemes, so as to ensure the necessary legal certainty as regards the rules applicable to operators and to certification schemes. To ensure a cost- effective certification process, those technical harmonised rules on certification should also have the objective of reducing unnecessary administrative burden for operators, or group of operators, in particular for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), including small farmers and foresters.

Amendment 191 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) The provisions of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters33 (‘the Aarhus Convention’) regarding access to information, public participation in decision-making, and access to justice in environmental matters, in particular the provisions relating to public participation and to access to justice remain applicable, where relevant. __________________ 33 Council Decision 2005/370/EC of 17 February 2005 on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community, of the Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters (OJ L 124, 17.5.2005, p. 1).deleted

Amendment 192 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26

(26) ~~Certification schemes~~By ... [insert the date 6 months after the date of entry into force of this Regulation], the Commission should establish and maintain ~~interoperable~~a public registr~~ies~~y in order to ensure transparency, trust and full traceability of carbon removal and carbon farming certificates, and to avoid the risk of fraud and double counting. Fraud may occur if more than one certificate is issued for the same carbon removal activity because the activity has been registered under two different certification schemes or has been registered twice under the same scheme. Fraud may also occur when the same certificate is used several times to make the same claim based on a carbon removal activity or a carbon ~~removal unit. The registries should store~~farming activity. All information in the Union registry should be easy to navigate and search. Certification schemes should provide to the Commission all information required to be stored and made publicly available in electronic form in the Union registry. Such information includes the documents resulting from the certification process of carbon removals and carbon farming, including summaries of certification audits and re-certification audit reports, the certificates and updated certificates, and ~~make them publicly available in electronic form~~the information included therein, as well as the current status of a certificate, for example whether active, retired or expired, log of transactions. The registries should also, where relevant, record the certified carbon removal units that meet the Union quality criteria Prior to the establishment of the Union public registry, certification schemes recognised by the Commission should maintain and store all the information required to be stored and made publicly available later on in the Union registry. In order to ensure a level playing field within the single market, the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing rules setting out ~~standards and technical rules on the functioning and the inter-operability of those~~the minimum information to be made available by recognised certification schemes to the Union registr~~ies~~y.

Amendment 193 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26

(26) Certification schemes should establish and maintain interoperable public registries in order to ensure transparency and full traceability of carbon removal certificates, and to avoid the risk of fraud and double counting. Fraud may occur if more than one certificate is issued for the same carbon removal activity because the activity has been registered under two different certification schemes or has been registered twice under the same scheme. For the purposes of preventing fraud when it comes to carbon farming, parcels in the LPIS system already linked to an existing carbon farming scheme not compliant with this Regulation should not be deemed eligible for certification under this Regulation. Fraud may also occur when the same certificate is used several times to make the same claim based on a carbon removal activity or a carbon removal unit. The registries should store the documents resulting from the certification process of carbon removals, including summaries of certification audits and re-certification audit reports, the certificates and updated certificates, and make them publicly available in electronic form. The registries should also record the certified carbon removal units that meet the Union quality criteria. In order to ensure a level playing field within the single market, the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing rules setting out standards and technical rules on the functioning and the inter-operability of those registries.

Amendment 194 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26

(26) Certification schemes should establish and maintain interoperable public registries in order to ensure transparency and full traceability of carbon removal certificates, and to avoid the risk of fraud and double counting. Fraud may occur if more than one certificate is issued for the same carbon removal activity because the activity has been registered under two different certification schemes or has been registered twice under the same scheme. Fraud may also occur when the same certificate is used several times to make the same claim based on a carbon removal activity or a carbon removal unit. The registries should store the documents resulting from the certification process of carbon removals, including summaries of certification audits and re-certification audit reports, the certificates and updated certificates, and make them publicly available in electronic form. The registries should also record the certified carbon removal units that meet the Union quality criteria. The Commission should set up a centralised Union registry that contains in a fully publicly accessible manner all the information held in the registries referred to above. All information in this central registry shall be easy to navigate and search. In order to ensure a level playing field within the single market, the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing rules setting out standards and technical rules on the functioning and the inter-operability of those registries.

Amendment 195 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26

(26) ~~Certification schemes~~The Commission should establish and maintain ~~interoperable public~~a Union registr~~ies~~y in order to ensure transparency and full traceability of carbon removal certificates, and to avoid the risk of fraud and double counting. Fraud may occur if more than one certificate is issued for the same carbon removal activity because the activity has been registered under two different certification schemes or has been registered twice under the same scheme. Fraud may also occur when the same certificate is used several times to make the same claim based on a carbon removal activity or a carbon removal unit. The Union registr~~ies~~y should store the documents resulting from the certification process of carbon removals, including summaries of certification audits and re-certification audit reports, the certificates and updated certificates~~, and make them publicly available in electronic form. The~~. The Union registr~~ies~~y should also record the certified carbon removal units that meet the Union quality criteria. In order to ensure a level playing field within the single market, the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing rules setting out standards and technical rules on the functioning and the inter-operability of th~~ose~~e Union registr~~ies~~y.

Amendment 196 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) Certification schemes play an important role in providing evidence of compliance with the quality criteria for carbon removals. It is therefore appropriate for the Commission to require certification schemes to report regularly on their activity. ~~Such reports should be made public, in full or where appropriate in an aggregated format, in order to increase transparency and to improve supervision by the Commission.~~ Furthermore, such reporting would provide the necessary information for the Commission to report on the operation of the certification schemes with a view to identifying best practices and submitting, if appropriate, a proposal to further promote such best practices. In order to ensure comparable and consistent reporting, the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing acts setting out the technical details on the content and format of the reports drawn up by the certification schemes.

Amendment 197 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) Certification schemes play an important role in providing evidence of compliance with the quality criteria for carbon removals. It is therefore appropriate for the Commission to require certification schemes to report regularly on their activity. Such reports should be made public, in full or where appropriate in an aggregated format, in order to increase transparency and scrutiny by citizens and independent third parties, and to improve supervision by the Commission. Furthermore, such reporting would provide the necessary information for the Commission to report on the operation of the certification schemes with a view to identifying best practices and submitting, if appropriate, a proposal to further promote such best practices. In order to ensure comparable and consistent reporting, the Commission should be empowered to adopt implementing acts setting out the technical details on the content and format of the reports drawn up by the certification schemes.

Amendment 198 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) To enable operators to apply the quality criteria set out in this Regulation in a standardised and cost-effective way, while taking into account the specific characteristics of different carbon removal activities, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by establishing detailed certification methodologies for different types of carbon removal activities. The Commission should also be able to amend Annex II listing the minimum information to be contained in the certificates. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate public consultations, including calls for contributions and requests for feedback on future legislation, during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making34. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. __________________ 34 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.

Amendment 199 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) To enable operators to apply the quality criteria set out in this Regulation in a standardised and cost-effective way, while taking into account the specific characteristics of different carbon removal activities, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by establishing detailed certification methodologies for different types of carbon removal activities. ~~The Commission should also be able to amend Annex II listing the minimum information to be contained in the certificates.~~ It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. __________________ 34 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.

Amendment 200 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) To enable operators to apply the quality criteria set out in this Regulation in a standardised and cost-effective way, while taking into account the specific characteristics of different carbon removal activities, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by establishing detailed certification methodologies for different types of carbon removal activities. The Commission should also be able to amend Annex II listing the minimum information to be contained in the certificates. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making34 . In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. Each draft delegated act should also be open for public consultation for a period of minimum four weeks. __________________ 34 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1

Amendment 201 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) To enable operators to apply the quality criteria set out in this Regulation in a standardised and cost-effective way, while taking into account the specific characteristics of different carbon removal activities, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by establishing detailed certification methodologies for different types of carbon removal activities. The Commission should also be able to amend Annex II listing the minimum information to be contained in the certificates. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate public consultations, including calls for evidence and calls for feedback, on draft proposals during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making34 . In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. __________________ 34 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1

Amendment 202 #

Martin HLAVÁČEK, Ulrike MÜLLER, Asger CHRISTENSEN, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) To enable operators to apply the quality criteria set out in this Regulation in a standardised and cost-effective way, while taking into account the specific characteristics of different carbon removal activities, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by establishing detailed certification methodologies for different types of carbon removal activities. The Commission should also be able to amend Annex II listing the minimum information to be contained in the certificates. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate public consultations, including calls for evidence and calls for feedback on draft proposals, during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making34 . In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. __________________ 34 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1

Amendment 203 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) To enable operators to apply the quality criteria set out in this Regulation in a standardised and cost-effective way, while taking into account the specific characteristics of different carbon removal activities, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by establishing detailed certification methodologies for different types of carbon removal activities. The Commission should also be able to amend Annex II listing the minimum information to be contained in the certificates. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate public consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and including a call for evidence and feedback, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making34 . In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. __________________ 34 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1

Amendment 204 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) To enable operators to apply the quality criteria set out in this Regulation in a standardised and cost-effective way, while taking into account the specific characteristics of different carbon removal activities, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by establishing detailed certification methodologies for different types of carbon removal activities. The Commission should also be able to amend Annex II listing the minimum information to be contained in the certificates. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to, and at least a consultative role in, meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. __________________ 34 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.

Amendment 205 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30

(30) The Commission should review the implementation of this Regulation 3 years following the entry into force of this Regulation, and subsequently not later than six months after the global stocktake agreed under Article 14 of the Paris Agreement. Those reviews should take into account the relevant developments concerning the Union legislation, technological and scientific progress, the economic situation in the EU’s regions, energy price developments, market developments in the field of carbon removals and food security ~~including~~, and especially food availability and affordability, including from a price perspective and that of the proper functioning of regional agri-food chains, and should be informed by the results of the global stocktake of the Paris Agreement.

Amendment 206 #

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30

(30) The Commission should review the implementation of this Regulation 3 years following the entry into force of this Regulation, and subsequently not later than six months after the global stocktake agreed under Article 14 of the Paris Agreement.. Those reviews should take into account the relevant developments concerning the Union legislation, technological and scientific progress, market developments in the field of carbon removals and food security including food availability and affordability~~, and should be informed by the results of the global stocktake of the Paris Agreement~~.

Amendment 207 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. The objective of this Regulation is to facilitate the deployment of ~~carbon removals by operators or groups of operators~~environmentally sustainable, safe and secure permanent geological carbon storage on the one hand, and increased carbon sequestration in biogenic carbon pools through land-use activities in full respect of the biodiversity and zero- pollution objectives on the other hand, as a complement to the necessary immediate, deep and irreversible emissions reduction by sources across all sectors needed to limit global warming to 1.5°C. To that end, this Regulation establishes a voluntary Union framework for the certification of carbon removals and carbon farming activities by laying down:

Amendment 208 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. The objective of this Regulation is to facilitate the deployment of carbon removals and carbon farming by operators or groups of operators while ensuring the commitment with the greenhouse gas emissions reductions required pursuant to Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2021/1119. To that end, this Regulation establishes a voluntary Union framework for the certification of carbon removals and carbon farming by laying down:

Amendment 209 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

(1) The objective of this Regulation is to facilitate the deployment of carbon removals by operators or groups of operators, while ensuring that those removals do not undermine the objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. To that end, this Regulation establishes a voluntary Union framework for the certification of carbon removals by laying down:

Amendment 210 #

Daniela RONDINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. The objective of this Regulation is to facilitate the deployment of carbon removals and emission reductions by operators or groups of operators. To that end, this Regulation establishes a voluntary Union framework for the certification of carbon removals and for emission reductions by laying down:

Amendment 211 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. The objective of this Regulation is to promote, facilitate ~~the~~and stimulate the voluntary deployment of carbon removals by operators or groups of operators. To that end, this Regulation establishes a voluntary Union framework for the certification of carbon removals by laying down:

Amendment 212 #

Daniela RONDINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) quality criteria for carbon removal activities that take place in the Union and for emission reduction activities;

Amendment 213 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) quality criteria for carbon removal and carbon farming activities that take place in the Union;

Amendment 214 #

Peter JAHR, Colm MARKEY, Daniel BUDA, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) quality criteria for carbon removal and carbon farming activities that take place in the Union;

Amendment 215 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) quality criteria for carbon removal activities ~~that take place in the Union~~;

Amendment 216 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) quality criteria for carbon removal activities ~~that take place in the Union~~;

Amendment 217 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(aa) certificate end-use rules;

Amendment 218 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) rules for the verification and certification of carbon removals and carbon farming activities;

Amendment 219 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) rules for the verification and certification of carbon removals and carbon farming;

Amendment 220 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(Does not affect the English version.)

Amendment 221 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(b a) rules on the monitoring, validity, expiry and liability of carbon removals and carbon farming activities;

Amendment 222 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)

(bb) criteria for the issuance and use of certificates;

Amendment 223 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(c a) rules for the use of the carbon removals certificates and carbon farming certificates.

Amendment 224 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2

2. This voluntary Union framework for the certification of carbon removals and carbon farming activities does not apply to emissions falling within the scope of Directive 2003/87/EC~~, with the exception of the storage of carbon dioxide emissions from sustainable biomass that are zero-rated in accordance with Annex IV thereto~~ and Regulation (EU) 2018/842, as recently amended.

Amendment 225 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. For the purpose of Article 1(2), carbon removal units or carbon farming removal unit certified under this framework cannot be used for offsetting, compensating or replacing emissions reductions throughout compliance or voluntary mechanisms, including the ESR, ETS, CORSIA, Article 6.2 and Article 6.4 mechanisms under the Paris Agreement or voluntary carbon markets

Amendment 226 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Carbon removal and carbon farming activities certified under this Union framework shall not be used for, or claimed to, offset, compensate or replace the reduction of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions by sources, neither in regulatory nor in voluntary frameworks.

Amendment 227 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 c (new)

2 c. The purpose of carbon removals is to supplement deep emissions reduction, by prioritising swift and predictable emission reduction and balancing the very last, unavoidable emissions and help the Union achieve the goal of climate neutrality by 2050, and net-negative emissions immediately after 2050 as enshrined in Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality1a. __________________ 1a Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 2021 establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulations (EC) No 401/2009 and (EU) 2018/1999 (‘European Climate Law’) (OJ L 243/1, 9.7.2021)

Amendment 228 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) ‘carbon removal’ means either the storage of atmospheric or biogenic carbon within geological carbon pools, biogenic carbon pools, long-lasting products and materials, and the marine environment, or the reduction of carbon release from a biogenic carbon pool to the atmosphere;deleted

Amendment 229 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) ‘carbon removal’ means either the storage of atmospheric or biogenic carbon within geological carbon pools, biogenic carbon pools, ~~long-lasting products and materials~~and carbon storage products and materials, including harvested wood products, that have a carbon sequestration effect, based on IPCC Guidelines as adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC or the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement, and ensuring environmental integrity, and the marine environment, or the reduction of carbon release from a biogenic carbon pool to the atmosphere;

Amendment 230 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) ‘carbon removal’ means ~~either~~ the storage of atmospheric or biogenic carbon within geological carbon pools, biogenic carbon pools, long-lasting products and materials, and the marine environment~~, or the reduction of carbon release from a biogenic carbon pool to the atmosphere~~;

Amendment 231 #

Paola GHIDONI, Angelo CIOCCA, Elena LIZZI, Rosanna CONTE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

Amendment 232 #

Martin HLAVÁČEK, Ulrike MÜLLER, Jérémy DECERLE, Asger CHRISTENSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

Amendment 233 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) ‘carbon removal’ means either the storage of atmospheric or biogenic carbon within ~~geological~~litospheric carbon pools, biogenic carbon pools, long-lasting products and materials, and the marine environment~~, or the reduction of carbon release from a biogenic carbon pool to the atmosphere;~~

Amendment 234 #

Peter JAHR

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) ‘carbon removal’ means either the storage of atmospheric or biogenic carbon within ~~geological~~lithospheric carbon pools, biogenic carbon pools, long-lasting products and materials, and the marine environment~~, or the reduction of carbon release from a biogenic carbon pool to the atmosphere;~~

Amendment 235 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) ‘carbon removal activity’ means one or more practices or processes carried out by an operator resulting in permanent carbon storage, enhancing carbon capture in a biogenic carbon pool, reducing the release of carbon from a biogenic carbon ~~pool to the atmosphere, or storing atmospheric or biogenic carbon in long- lasting products or materials~~in carbon storage products and materials, including harvested wood products, that have a carbon sequestration effect, established in IPCC Guidelines as adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC or the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement, and ensuring securing environmental integrity;

Amendment 236 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) ‘carbon removal activity’ means one or more practices or processes carried out by an operator resulting in permanent carbon storage, ~~enhanc~~or ing carbon ~~capture in a biogenic carbon pool, reducing the release~~storage in products, ofr carbon f~~rom a biogenic carbon pool to the atmosphere, or storing atmospheric or biogenic carbon in long- lasting products or material~~arming activities;

Amendment 237 #

Peter JAHR

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

Amendment 238 #

Paola GHIDONI, Angelo CIOCCA, Elena LIZZI, Rosanna CONTE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

Amendment 239 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) ‘carbon removal activity’ means one or more practices or processes, with a net negative emissions balance, carried out by an operator resulting in permanent carbon storage, enhancing carbon capture in a biogenic carbon pool, reducing the release of carbon from a biogenic carbon pool to the atmosphere, or storing atmospheric or biogenic carbon in long- lasting products or materials;

Amendment 240 #

Paola GHIDONI, Angelo CIOCCA, Elena LIZZI, Rosanna CONTE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

Amendment 241 #

Paola GHIDONI, Angelo CIOCCA, Elena LIZZI, Rosanna CONTE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) ‘biogenic ~~carbon pool~~source’ means above- ground biomass, below-ground biomass, litter, dead wood and soil organic carbon as set out in points (a) to (e) of Part B of Annex I to Regulation 2018/841, meaning GHG from land use and land management practices, including the fertilization practices, enteric fermentation or manure fermentation;

Amendment 242 #

Colm MARKEY, Daniel BUDA, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(ca) ‘biogenic source’ means above- ground biomass, below-ground biomass, litter, dead wood and soil organic carbon, as defined in Annex I, Part B(a) to (e) of Regulation 2018/841, which means greenhouse gases from land use and land management practices and enteric fermentation or manure fermentation from livestock operations;

Amendment 243 #

Paola GHIDONI, Angelo CIOCCA, Elena LIZZI, Rosanna CONTE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(c a) GHG emission reductions means the reduction of GHG emissions release from a biogenic carbon pool to the atmosphere or the reduction of GHG emissions in agricultural practices;

Amendment 244 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) ‘operator’ means any legal or physical person who operates or controls a carbon removal activity, or to whom decisive economic power over the technical functioning of the activity has been delegated. In order to receive a carbon farming payment an operator is a farmer as defined under Article 3(1) of Reg 22215/2021 or a forest owner or manager as defined by national legislation, who can demonstrate a long term control of the land for the duration of the scheme and is located in proximity to the land to enable appropriate management;

Amendment 245 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) ‘operator’ means any legal or physical person who operates or controls a carbon removal ~~activity~~or carbon farming activity, including collectivities and cooperatives, or to whom decisive economic power over the technical functioning of the activity has been delegated; In cases of tenancy, the manager of the land doing the work shall receive the financial benefits or reward arising from the scheme, not the land owner;

Amendment 246 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i (new)

i) Each carbon farming scheme should be linked to the specific parcels of land benefitting from the scheme on the Land Parcel Identification System (LPIS).

Amendment 247 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e

(e) ‘group of operators’ means a legal entity that represents more than one operator and is responsible for ensuring that those operators comply with this Regulation; In the case of carbon farming, ‘operators’ means a legal entity that represents more than one operator. The latter are owners and tenants producing agricultural and forestry products;

Amendment 248 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e

(e) ‘group of operators’ means a legal entity that represents more than one operator and is responsible for ensuring that those operators comply with this Regulation. For carbon farming, operators means a legal entity that represents more than one operators. The latter being landlords and tenants producing agricultural and forestry products;

Amendment 249 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f

(f) ‘monitoring period’ means a period, the duration of which is determined in accordance to the type of carbon removal activity, over which the storage of carbon is monitored by the operator or group of operators;

Amendment 250 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f

(f) ‘monitoring period’ means a period, the duration of which is determined in accordance ~~to the type of carbon removal activity,~~with Article 9a over which the storage of carbon is monitored by the operator or public entity;

Amendment 251 #

Colm MARKEY, Daniel BUDA, Simone SCHMIEDTBAUER, Annie SCHREIJER-PIERIK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g

(g) ‘permanent carbon storage’ means a carbon removal activity that, under normal circumstances and using appropriate management practices, stores atmospheric or biogenic carbon for several centuries~~, including bioenergy with carbon capture and storage and direct air carbon capture and storage~~;

Amendment 252 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g

(g) ‘permanent carbon storage’ means a carbon removal activity that, under normal circumstances and using appropriate management practices, stores atmospheric or biogenic carbon for ~~several centuries~~a significant period of time, including bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, biochar carbon removal and direct air carbon capture and storage;

Amendment 253 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g

(g) ‘permanent carbon storage’ means a carbon removal activity that, under normal circumstances and using appropriate management practices, stores atmospheric or biogenic carbon for several centuries, including bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, biochar carbon removal and direct air carbon capture and storage;

Amendment 254 #

Peter JAHR, Norbert LINS

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g

(g) ‘permanent carbon storage’ means a carbon removal activity that, under normal circumstances and using appropriate management practices, stores atmospheric or biogenic carbon for several centuries, including bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, biochar carbon removal and direct air carbon capture and storage;

Amendment 255 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g

(g) ‘permanent carbon storage’ means a carbon removal activity that, under normal circumstances and using appropriate management practices, stores atmospheric or biogenic carbon for ~~several centuries~~a significant period of time, including bioenergy with carbon capture and storage and direct air carbon capture and storage;

Amendment 256 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g

(g) ~~‘permanent~~'industrial carbon storage’ means a carbon removal activity that, under normal circumstances and using appropriate management practices, stores atmospheric or biogenic carbon for several centuries, including bioenergy with carbon capture and storage and direct air carbon capture and storage;

Amendment 257 #

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g

(g) ‘~~permanent~~industrial carbon storage’ means a carbon removal activity that, under normal circumstances and using appropriate management practices, stores atmospheric or biogenic carbon for several centuries, including bioenergy with carbon capture and storage and direct air carbon capture and storage;

Amendment 258 #