博客

The European Union has recently unveiled significant proposals intended to slow down the mandatory cuts to greenhouse gas emissions for businesses. This major policy overhaul is designed to provide industries with more time to transition to cleaner energy sources than originally scheduled. At the center of this legislative shift is the Emissions Trading System (ETS), which has been the EU’s primary tool for limiting pollution since its introduction in 2005. Under the current ETS framework, power plants and large factories must purchase permits for every tonne of carbon dioxide they release. This creates a financial incentive for companies to reduce their pollution levels. However, the proposed reforms suggest that certain industries could continue to receive free emission allowances until 2038, four years later than the previous target of 2034. These benefits are not granted without conditions; to access these free permits, businesses must commit to investing in ‘decarbonisation’—the technical process of operating without producing carbon. The proposed system would grant eighty percent of the permits immediately, while the remaining twenty percent would be released only after green investments are officially confirmed. EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra described the strategy as a ‘business-friendly and savvy’ approach. He maintains that these changes will not prevent the EU from achieving its ambitious target of reducing emissions by ninety percent by 2040. Nevertheless, the proposal has ignited intense debate across the continent. In Italy, critics argue that the ETS has kept energy prices unnecessarily high, while Polish officials have welcomed the softening of the rules, though they intend to advocate for even more flexibility. Conversely, environmental organizations and Green politicians have expressed deep concern, warning that lowering the rate of emission cuts will lead to avoidable climate pollution. They argue that future generations will ultimately bear the consequences of these delays. These proposals now face a review process by EU lawmakers, which is expected to take at least one year before becoming law.

1. What is the primary objective of the EU’s new proposal regarding greenhouse gases?

• A.To abolish the Emissions Trading System entirely.
• B.To allow businesses more time to adapt to cleaner energy.
• C.To increase the cost of carbon permits for all factories.
• D.undefined

2. According to the article, how does a company qualify for the proposed free emission allowances?

• A.By paying a higher fee for the first eighty percent of their permits.
• B.By reducing their energy prices for local consumers.
• C.By promising to invest in technologies that eliminate carbon production.
• D.By moving their factories to countries with fewer regulations.

3. What can be inferred about the reaction of Polish officials to the new plans?

• A.They are satisfied with the changes and will support them immediately.
• B.They believe the rules should be even less strict than what is proposed.
• C.They are worried that the changes will lead to higher energy prices.
• D.They plan to reject the proposal because it ignores environmental concerns.

4. Which of the following best describes the attitude of environmental groups toward the policy shift?

• A.Appreciative of the business-friendly approach.
• B.Indifferent as long as the 2040 goal is met.
• C.Skeptical about the financial benefits for industries.
• D.Apprehensive about the long-term impact on the planet.

5. In the third paragraph, what is the closest meaning of the word ‘savvy’?

• A.Traditional and conservative.
• B.Practical and well-informed.
• C.Aggressive and demanding.
• D.Expensive and luxury.