By increasing the reduction obligation in 2025, Sweden would meet the EU target on emissions from traffic. The government said so and referred to a “main scenario” from the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, which presented two different ones.
But the government had completely opted out of the worse scenario and referred to its own calculations of what was most likely.
– These are calculations made by the best we have, said Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson to SVT at the time.
Now SVT can show that the government’s calculations appear to have gone wrong, and that Sweden is approaching the scenario where Sweden misses the mark.
Increased traffic emissions
According to statistics from Statistics Norway, which SVT processed, emissions from fossil fuels have increased by 23 percent during January-October this year, compared to 2023. Thus, emissions from traffic have increased by just over 3 million tons in 10 months. The figures are preliminary, but point towards an increase for the whole year of 3.6 million tonnes, which is around 0.4 million tonnes more than what the government had expected.
– It is of course nothing that is good, but everyone makes forecasts based on their best ability, no one has a fortune teller, not the government, not the authorities. And if we notice that it does not correspond to reality, we have to adapt our work accordingly, says climate minister Romina Pourmokhtari (L).
The increase is mainly due to the fact that the proportion of biofuel in the tank has decreased, and that fewer than expected drive electric cars.
– The calculation to change to an electric car has gotten worse, so the government has turned the wrong way both on the electrification button and on the biofuel button, says Jessica Alenius, CEO of the industry organization Drivkraft Sweden.
“Too little biofuel”
Higher emissions from traffic than expected could cause the government’s calculation to crack and Sweden risks missing the ESR target. It could result in billions in fines for the EU.
That the government’s “golden solution” – a somewhat increased reduction obligation to 10 percent together with tax cuts – would not be enough was established by more than ten heavy referral bodies even before traffic emissions proved to be higher.
– We have calculated and see that that level is too low for us to be able to reach the climate goals by 2030, says Jessica Alenius.
The Climate Minister still flatly says no to increasing the interference more.
– No, I mean that further twisting the reduction obligation is not solving the problem, the real solution is much more complex, says Pourmokhtari.