European Union climate legislation: A brief history
Back in December 2019, the European Union (EU) set its sights on a climate-neutral future by 2050. With the unveiling of the European Green Deal, it seemed as though a new era of climate action was beginning—one where ambitious reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, net-zero targets, green technologies, and sustainable job creation were all interconnected. The EU's promise to balance environmental stewardship with economic opportunities was met with widespread support, as it appeared to align with the public’s call for urgent climate action and legislative efforts to tackle climate change were gaining momentum.
This week, the EU turns a page towards a new phase of climate legislation with the introduction of the Clean Industrial Deal, which promises to transform the industrial sector to support decarbonization and a circular economy. Yet, the very way it was launched speaks volumes about its priorities. Presented on 26 February 2025 in Antwerp—Europe’s biggest petrochemical hub and the second-largest in the world—the plan was unveiled in a closed-door event with more than 300 industry CEOs, including the President of the European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC), a powerful industrial lobby, without any participation from civil society. This choice not only highlights the privileged access industry enjoys in shaping policy but also underscores how little attention is given to communities impacted by plastic and chemical pollution.
The CID misses the mark when it comes to genuinely addressing the deeper, more systemic environmental issues—particularly the role of plastic production and pollution in our climate crisis. What was framed as a bold leap toward sustainability risks becoming just another policy framework that overlooks critical aspects of ecological harm in favor of economic gain.
The EU needs to do more than just decarbonize
The EU has promoted a transition to renewable energy for the decarbonization of many sectors, but plastic production remains a significant blind spot in these efforts. Notably, plastic production is now the largest industrial consumer of oil, gas, and electricity in the EU—surpassing even energy-intensive industries like steel manufacturing, automobile production, and food processing. In 2020, the plastic industry alone was responsible for almost 9% of the EU's fossil gas consumption and 8% of its oil consumption. These figures are staggering, given the pressing need to reduce fossil fuel reliance in every sector to meet climate targets.
Rotterdam petrochemical plant. Photo credit: Hansenn
Reducing fossil fuel use and transitioning toward cleaner energy alone will not be enough to meet the scale of the climate challenge of petrochemical production, particularly if the production of chemicals and plastic polymers continues unabated. In fact, the plastic industry's expansion is exacerbating the demand for oil and gas, and if left unchecked, it could consume up to one-third of the remaining global carbon budget by 2050—even in a decarbonized scenario.
The plastic industry's growing carbon footprint is primarily driven by the fossil fuels used as feedstocks for plastic production. While the industry is exploring plans to decarbonize its energy supply through technologies like renewable power and energy efficiency measures, these efforts will only scratch the surface. Even if the energy used to process plastic were to be fully decarbonized, it would have little impact on the overall emissions of the sector.
This is because 70% of the fossil fuels consumed by the plastic industry are used as raw materials in the creation of plastic polymers, not just for energy during production. The reliance on oil and gas as feedstocks for plastic means that, without addressing the production side of the equation, energy decarbonization will not result in significant reductions in emissions.
From a non-toxicity and zero pollution perspective, the challenges only deepen. Plastics are made from chemicals derived from fossil fuels, and these chemicals can be harmful to human health and the environment. There are concerns over the harmful substances released during the lifecycle of plastics, from their creation to their disposal. These substances, including persistent pollutants like phthalates, bisphenol A (BPA), and styrene, have been linked to a range of environmental and health risks, including hormone disruption, cancer, and impacts on reproductive health.
The plastic industry also contributes to widespread pollution that affects ecosystems, wildlife, and human communities. Every year, millions of tons of plastic waste enter the oceans, degrading marine ecosystems and entering the food chain, or are incinerated. The toxicity associated with plastics, from microplastics to hazardous chemicals leaching from products, is becoming an increasingly urgent issue that calls for comprehensive action.
Addressing the plastic industry's role requires a fundamental shift away from fossil fuels as feedstocks and the adoption of a circular economy model that minimizes waste, strives for zero pollution and promotes reuse systems. Until the EU and other global actors acknowledge and address these gaps in the current approach to industrial decarbonization, the Clean Industrial Deal and similar policies will fall short of their climate goals, leaving an important piece of the puzzle unresolved.
Impacts beyond EU borders
Increasingly, the building blocks of plastic are sourced from fracked gas in the United States, particularly from regions like the Permian Basin in Texas. The environmental and social devastation linked to fracking is well-documented: water supply depletion, drinking water contamination, air pollution, habitat destruction, and increased greenhouse gas emissions.
Communities living near fracking sites suffer from higher rates of respiratory diseases, contaminated drinking water, and degraded land. Despite these well-known consequences, European petrochemical companies continue to rely on fracked gas from the U.S. as a feedstock for plastic production.
Beyond the emissions and pollution from extraction, plastic production itself is riddled with toxic chemicals that harm workers, consumers, and ecosystems. Certain types of plastic, such as PVC (polyvinyl chloride), are particularly problematic due to their reliance on hazardous chemicals, including chlorine, heavy metals, and plasticizers. These materials pose long-term risks to human and environmental health, both during production and throughout their lifespan.
One of the most insidious forms of plastic pollution comes from PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), also known as "forever chemicals." These substances, used to make plastics resistant to heat, water, and grease, have been found across Europe, contaminating soil, water sources, and even human bloodstreams. The societal costs of PFAS pollution are staggering, from increased healthcare burdens to the financial cost of cleaning up contaminated environments. Meanwhile, microplastics are now found everywhere—air, water, soil, even in the human placenta and bloodstream—with growing evidence pointing to their harmful effects on both environmental and human health.
Despite all of this evidence, the majority of plastic produced today serves short-lived purposes, primarily for packaging and disposable products. Despite the availability of durable and reusable alternatives, single-use plastics continue to dominate, perpetuating a cycle of waste, pollution, and emissions. At the end of their brief but harmful lifecycle, these plastics contribute further to climate change and pollution, particularly through incineration (which releases CO₂ and toxic pollutants into the air) and landfilling (which can lead to long-term environmental contamination). The so-called "lifecycle" of plastics is neither circular nor clean—it is a linear system of extraction, production, pollution, and waste.
Photo Credit: Ecoton, 2024
Compounding this crisis is the global waste trade, which allows higher income nations, including those in the EU, to export their plastic waste to lower income countries, often with less environmental regulations. Instead of taking responsibility for their plastic pollution, EU countries continue to ship vast quantities of plastic scrap to Southeast Asia, Turkey, and other regions, where waste often ends up in informal dumps, burned in open air, or leaks into rivers and oceans.
This practice disproportionately impacts vulnerable communities, exposing them to toxic fumes, contaminated water, and severe health risks. The EU’s continued reliance on exporting its plastic waste problem not only shifts the burden onto the Global South but also undermines the very principles of a circular economy by perpetuating an unjust and exploitative system of waste disposal.
A toxic-free future is not guaranteed under the Clean Industrial Deal
For any industrial transformation to be truly clean it must detoxify production processes, eliminate harmful chemicals from products (including plastics), and transition toward a non-toxic, sustainable economy. This is not just a question of energy decarbonization—it is a question of eliminating pollution at the source. Yet, the Clean Industrial Deal presented by the European Commission fails to take on this challenge with the urgency it requires.
Crucially, the petrochemical sector—the very foundation of plastic production—is largely overlooked in the Clean Industrial Deal. Without addressing the root causes of plastic pollution, including the industry's deep ties to fossil fuel extraction, the EU will not meet its climate targets. The failure to confront the role of petrochemicals in driving both fossil fuel dependence and chemical pollution exposes a glaring gap in the EU’s approach to industrial decarbonization. If Europe is serious about a cleaner future, tackling plastic production head-on—through reduction, regulation, and a shift toward safe, non-toxic materials—must be at the core of any climate and industrial strategy.
Reducing plastic production and consumption towards a fossil-free, toxic-free and resilient Europe
Europe can drastically reduce plastic production and consumption, as viable alternatives already exist and are increasingly being implemented.
Currently, close to 40% of plastic produced in the EU is used for packaging, the majority of which is single-use. However, with the growing adoption of packaging-free practices and reuse systems, the EU is already proving that a different path is possible. The recently adopted Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) mandates reductions in packaging waste, creating a critical opportunity to curb plastic production and consumption associated with this sector. By scaling up reuse and refill systems and eliminating unnecessary packaging, Europe can significantly cut its reliance on single-use plastics.
Beyond packaging, other high-consumption sectors also have clear pathways to reducing plastic use. The construction sector, which accounts for 20% of plastic production in the EU, can shift toward alternative materials and circular practices that minimize plastic use—particularly for toxic plastics like PVC, which poses serious environmental and health risks. The textile sector, another major source of plastic consumption and microplastic pollution, also presents significant opportunities for reduction through fast fashion regulation, fiber innovation, material durability and reuse, and a move away from synthetic fabrics.
There Is No Business Case for More Plastic
The EU imports the majority of the feedstock used for plastic production, including oil and fracked gas from the U.S. and, at least until recently, gas from Russia. This heavy reliance on fossil fuel imports not only deepens Europe's dependence on volatile and often harmful trade flows but also undermines its climate and pollution objectives. By reducing plastic production and consumption, strengthening reuse systems, and ensuring toxic-free recycling (through the phase-out of hazardous chemicals), the EU can simultaneously advance its decarbonization and zero-pollution agenda while enhancing economic and resource resilience.
In a world where we must drastically cut resource consumption to stay within planetary boundaries and keep our planet liveable, strategic decisions about resource allocation are critical. We must ask ourselves: should we prioritize using energy to heat homes and schools, or continue diverting resources into energy-intensive industrial processes that produce unnecessary, short-lived plastics? The answer should be clear.
Beyond its environmental and social costs, plastic overproduction is also an economic liability. The petrochemical sector— including plastic production—is already experiencing a global oversupply problem, both in Europe and worldwide. This means there is no credible business justification for further expansion. Consumer preferences are shifting away from single-use disposable plastics, regulatory frameworks are tightening, and the market is becoming increasingly risky for investors. As demand weakens and overproduction worsens, profits in the sector are becoming less dependable—further challenging the industry's long-term viability.
The EU has an opportunity to proactively lead the transformation of the petrochemical and plastic sectors before economic realities force abrupt and disruptive change, with the EU plastic production industry already declining. The plastic industry is a poster child of an outdated industrial model—one based on high resource consumption, high energy use, and intensive chemical dependency. It sits at the intersection of the climate, waste, and pollution crises, propped up by harmful subsidies and carrying severe human rights impacts.
But just as it exemplifies what is wrong with the current system, it can also become a model for a planned and just industrial transition. By engaging workers and communities, supporting reskilling programs, and providing social protections, the EU can ensure that this transformation is fair, sustainable, and economically viable.
This shift would allow the EU to take an active, rather than reactive, role in reshaping the industry. It would also reinforce its commitment to plastic production reduction, a stance it has already taken at the international level. As part of a coalition of over 100 countries negotiating the Global Plastics Treaty, the EU has supported a legally binding commitment to control and ultimately reduce plastic production. The EU now has a chance to not just regulate plastic pollution—but to pave the way for phasing out plastic overproduction altogether.
Read the reactions from #BreakFreeFromPlastic members
Health and Environment Alliance: The Clean Industrial Deal needs to be a zero pollution deal
Seas At Risk: Commission’s Clean Industrial Deal overlooks true circularity, missing key opportunity for effective decarbonisation
European Environmental Bureau: The Clean Industrial Deal hides dirty concessions
Zero Waste Europe: Zero Waste Europe calls for stronger circularity measures in the Clean Industrial Deal
ECOS: EU Clean Industrial Deal: Some opportunities with few guarantees
