That risks locking in fossil fuel use for decades, directing green finance towards high-emitting activities and creating risks of greenwashing and stranded assets.

However, the Court did not reject the aviation criteria and other elements of the shipping criteria, meaning fossil-fuelled planes and ships can still be labelled as sustainable investments under the EU Taxonomy.

It also sends a strong signal beyond the shipping sector: gas is not a clean transition fuel. Its climate impacts, including highly damaging methane emissions, cannot simply be ignored.

The ruling finds that the European Commission had failed to set a quantifiable limit for methane slippage from ships. This is particularly significant for fossil LNG-powered vessels, where unburned methane can escape into the atmosphere. The Commission must now address this gap.

⏰ The EU has a chance to change course. As proposals to extend aviation ETS coverage move through the European Parliament and Council, we’re calling for: 💶 No free allowances for airlines. 🌍 ETS coverage for all flights departing Europe. 💨 A fee for airlines that fail to address contrail impacts.

A narrative we’re likely to hear emerge from airlines, as the likelihood of a scope extension grows. The evidence suggests free allowances have contributed to profits and shareholder payouts rather than driving the lower ticket prices and sustainable investment the policy was intended to deliver.

And their operations were associated with an estimated €320bn in accumulated climate costs. The numbers raise a fundamental question: What were free allowances actually achieving? Our analysis challenges an old industry narrative that airlines need free allowances to remain competitive.

Yet they spent just €1bn on decarbonisation, including sustainable aviation fuel and ground-equipment electrification. At the same time, these six airline groups generated €21bn in profits.

New analysis from Opportunity Green and CE Delft finds that between 2013 and 2025, European airlines received €10.9bn in free allowances. Six of the continent’s largest airline groups – Lufthansa Group, Ryanair, easyJet, IAG, Air France-KLM and Wizz Air – received €6bn of that total.

For more than a decade, airlines have received billions in free carbon allowances under the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). The argument: protect competitiveness while giving airlines an incentive to invest in greener operations. But did it actually work?

✈️ €10.9bn in free carbon allowances went to European airlines between 2013 and 2025. How much did they spend on decarbonisation? Just €1bn. So where did the rest go? 🧵

The window for action is now. ⏰ The Council wants a position by mid-December, while Parliament's draft report lands this autumn. The coming months will decide whether this measure gets fixed, or hollowed out. We unpack the proposal and what a real fix looks like 👇 🧵 5/5

Introduce an avoidable fee from 2028: airlines pay UNLESS they act. Requirements would tighten over time: ➡️ Forecasting: 2028 ➡️ Proven avoidance on the most warming routes: 2030 ➡️ Fuel-based measures: 2032 🧵 4/5

And nobody pays for the climate impact of the contrails they create – even though the Commission's own memorandum admits they're at least as significant as CO₂. Meaningful action is deferred beyond 2033. Our alternative? 💡 🧵 3/5

Under the proposal, airlines receive free ETS allowances for forecasting contrails and asking flight planners to “consider” them. ➡️ But forecasting isn’t avoidance. An airline can claim the full reward without changing a single flight path. 🧵 2/5