Sustainable Development and Energy Policy: Actual CO₂ Emissions in the European Union in the Years 1997–2017, Considering Trade with China and the USA

Abstract

One of the ways of implementing the concept of sustainable development by the European Union is their energy policy. Among the three main objectives in its energy policy is a reduction in greenhouse gases (mainly CO₂) emissions to at least 20% below 1990 levels by 2020. This study aims to assess the impact of international trade on actual CO₂ emission in the EU, China and the USA for the period 1997–2017. For this aim, the Actual-Open CO₂ emissions were calculated, taking into account the transfer of CO₂ in exported products and services from China and the USA to the EU and vice versa. It is concluded that the actual CO₂ emissions in China, the USA, and the EU differed from the traditionally calculated emissions. This has serious consequences for policy, as the factual level of implementation of the EU energy policy goals may be different from what is assumed. Without including the goals of energy policy into trade policy, the effectiveness of measures may be limited. This also has implications for the effectiveness of environmental management systems. When improvements rely on increasing trade with large CO₂ emitting countries, the final effect may be opposed to the assumed effect.

1. Introduction

We live in a global world, where the activities of particular countries have a direct or indirect impact on other countries. However, countries do not all function in the same way and follow the same rules. This creates challenges for the European Union’s (EU) sustainable development policy, including the energy policy. While directives and documents forming the EU’s energy policy, as well as their amendments, show a clear direction of changes in the European energy sector, environmental awareness and implementation differ between member states. The EU is consciously following a path of development of new “green technologies” in the field of energy. This is connected with its strategy aimed at becoming the world leader in terms of modern technologies. The development of innovative industries is supported to gain a competitive advantage in the global market in the future [1,2,3,4,5].

The principles of sustainable development are important for EU policy in general, as well as for its energy policy in particular. Probably the most well-known definition of sustainable development (SD) is the one proposed by Gro Harlem Brundtland, presented in the report ‘Our Common Future’: “a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” [6]. It is important to understand that SD does not prohibit the use of natural resources, but requires compliance with several rules in this matter. Generally speaking, it is a development that takes into account current economic, ecological and social aspects, balancing their significance while preventing a reduction in developmental opportunities for future generations. In the context of energy policy, energy safety is a goal—among other things—to be achieved by developing renewable energy resources and improving energy efficiency. This goal should be reconciled with climate goals. In this context, the European Union formulated three main objectives of their energy policy: to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 20% below 1990 levels by 2020, improve energy efficiency by 20% and increase the share of renewable energy to 20% of total energy supply. One of the main components of the GHG is CO₂ [5].

While some countries contribute significantly to the reduction of global CO₂ emissions, bearing high costs in comparison to other countries; this may not have a huge impact on the real reduction in CO₂ emissions [7,8,9]. One reason for this is related to international trade, which is discussed in the example of China, the USA, and the EU (Malta was omitted from analysis of EU data as its emission of CO₂ was insignificant). The policy to reduce CO₂ emissions in EU countries does not affect similar efforts in China and the USA. However, as shown in the study, China and the USA had between the years 1997–2017 a large impact on CO₂ emission in the EU. As a consequence environmental policy of the EU should be considered in a broader, international context. CO₂ emissions are a global problem where the policy of individual countries may have too little impact to deal seriously with the threat of climate change. The transfer of CO₂ emissions takes place through imports and exports of products and services. The import of bulk goods related to large CO₂ emissions from China by the EU and the USA is an example of this. In this article, the analysis is general, focusing on the share of imports and exports in GDP and the relation to CO₂ emissions. This should create a ground for deeper elaboration in the future, facilitating the development of CO₂ reduction policy in international trade in the future.

The EU, the USA, and China are the leaders in terms of the value of CO₂ emissions, as well as international trade. China is the largest exporting economy in the world and the 33rd most complex economy according to the Economic Complexity Index (ECI). ECI is a measure of the knowledge intensity of the products exported. The United States is the largest importer globally, the 3rd largest exporting economy and the 7th most complex economy [10]. When considering the EU as one economy, it has been the largest exporter and importer of goods and services globally since 1970 [11]. Germany—the biggest economy in the EU—was the 2nd largest exporting economy and the 3rd most complex economy in 2017 [10]. While the economic activity of the individual EU countries strongly depends on each other, they also strongly depend on China and the USA (according to the value of international trade). All actions planned and realized by the EU have international overtones.

The main purpose of this paper is to show the impact of foreign trade on Actual-Open CO₂ emissions in the USA, China, and the EU. This does not concern the value of official emissions of CO₂, but its real volume. The real volume differs as CO₂ transfer both in export and import products and services are included in the calculation. The analysis provided in this paper implies that isolated actions, such as changes in the EU energy industry, are unlikely to be effective and will not support sustainable development when not involving all its members as well as the largest non-EU trading partners. Efficiency improvements due to the use of environmental management systems may lead to the achievement of sustainable development goals on paper. But due to the globalization of supply chains, the effect may be limited in reality. The EU and its members may use their position in international exchange to support the implementation of the EU energy policy, encouraging their trade partners—in particular the USA and China—to achieve similar aims as the EU regarding energy policy. Useful instruments may be ecological and energy fees [7].

2. Materials and Methods

The research presented in this paper is based on using the basic circular flow model in economics, identifying the flow of money through the economy. The model distinguishes a closed economy, without international trade, and an open economy, including international trade (imports and exports). The current approach to the calculation of CO₂ emissions per country is analogous to the concept of a closed circular flow model. This approach may be insufficient, as the economy is globalized, with international trade playing an important role. As the CO₂ intensity of imports and exports may differ, the real impact of a country on CO₂ emissions also may differ.

To begin with, the Actual-Open emission of CO₂ was determined as the CO₂ emissions of a particular country. This number diminished by the emissions embraced in exported goods and services of the country, and then the emissions embedded in imported goods and services were added. The following formulas present a method used to calculate Actual-Open emissions of CO₂ for the EU (the emissions for China and USA are calculated similarly):

$${\mathrm{S}}_{\mathrm{B}}=\left(\frac{{\mathrm{E}}_{\mathrm{x}}}{\mathrm{GDP}}\right)\%\times {\mathrm{E}}_{\mathrm{OC}}-\left(\frac{{\mathrm{I}}_{\mathrm{m}}}{\mathrm{GDP}}\right)\%\times {\mathrm{E}}_{\mathrm{OCC}}$$

(1)

$${\mathrm{E}}_{\mathrm{AO}}={\mathrm{E}}_{\mathrm{OC}}-{\mathrm{S}}_{\mathrm{B}}$$

(2)

• S_B—the EU balance of CO₂ emissions;
• E_OC—the EU Official-Closed CO₂ emissions;
• E_OCC—Official-Closed CO₂ emission of the Country of origin of EU imports;
• E_x—the Value of EU exports;
• I_m—the Value of EU imports from a particular country;
• GDP—EU gross domestic product;
• (I_m/GDP)%—import as a share of the GDP of a particular country from with the EU imports;
• (E_x/GDP)%—export as share of EU GDP exported to a particular country;
• (I_m/GDP)%*E_OCC—quantity of imported CO₂ embedded in goods and services from a particular country into the EU;
• (E_x/GDP)%*E_OCb—Quantity of exported CO₂ from the EU to the particular country embedded in goods and services;
• E_AO—Actual-Open CO₂ emissions.

In order to calculate the Actual-Open emission of CO₂ of a certain country, data from all its trade partners are needed. This study focuses on the EU member countries, the USA and China. The impact of the USA and China on the Official-Closed emissions of CO₂ in the EU, and the EU on the USA and China (S_B), will be shown. In this article, the focus will be on the Actual-Open emission of CO₂, considering the trade between China, the USA and 27 EU member countries.

Data for the research were obtained from BP Statistical Review of World Energy, 2019; CO₂ Emissions from Fuel Combustion, IEA, 2019, and The Observatory of Economic Complexity [10]. Available data are always featured despite uncertainty about their reliability. The calculation of emissions embedded in imports and exports provides a rather rough picture. This picture shows a general challenge in the assessment of data in terms of assessing the effectiveness of policy for sustainable development. This analysis needs refinement, which is a task for future studies.

3. Results

3.1. Official-Closed Emission of the USA, China, and the EU

A reduction in CO₂ emissions is one of the priorities of the EU energy policy. It shows the environmental awareness of the EU. However, the reduction in CO₂ emissions concerns only the EU, and except for encouragement and international agreements, there are no direct instruments to convince other countries in the world to undertake similar actions.

The Official-Closed (OC) emission of CO₂ is the value of CO₂ emitted by a country.

Table 1. The USA, Chinese and the EU Official-Closed CO₂ emissions in MT in the years 1990, 1997–2017.

	1990	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
EU (27)	4351.1	4100.8	4114.2	4065.2	4065	4133.8	4116.6	4213.6	4235.6	4235.9	4270.2
China	2326.50	3166.69	3163.74	3294.66	3362.70	3525.03	3845.45	4534.39	5337.03	6099.48	6677.86
USA	4946.6	5490.3	5528.4	5577.1	5748.3	5636.8	5651.9	5717.5	5816	5851.3	5771
EU, USA, CHINA	11,624.2	12,757.79	12,806.34	12,936.96	13,176	13,295.63	13,613.95	14,465.49	15,388.63	16,186.68	16,719.06
WORLD	21,290.1	22,741.1	22,792.8	23,115.5	23,667.6	23,981.9	24,502.1	25,715.7	27,043.7	28,142.5	290,188
	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
EU (27)	4207	4127.7	3837.8	3921.7	3806.5	3753.4	3663.8	3465.2	3501.8	3512.1	3542.7
China	7240.33	7378.53	7708.83	8135.25	8805.84	8991.48	9237.72	9223.73	9174.62	9118.95	9229.78
USA	5861.1	5675.7	5263.9	5465.6	5355.7	5137	5260.5	5300.4	5153.7	5053.7	5014.4
EU, USA, CHINA	17,308.43	17,181.93	16,810.53	17,522.55	17,968.04	17,881.88	18,162.02	17,989.33	17,830.12	17,684.75	17,786.88
WORLD	30,047.6	30,336.7	29,719.4	31,057.9	31,978.3	32,316.7	32,799.9	32,844.8	32,804.4	32,913.5	33,242.5

Source: author’s calculation based on [12,13].

and

Table 2. The USA, China and the EU % of global Official-Closed CO₂ emission in the years 1997–2017.

	1990	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
EU (27)	20.44%	18.03%	18.05%	17.59%	17.18%	17.24%	16.80%	16.39%	15.66%	15.05%	14.72%
China	10.93%	13.92%	13.88%	14.25%	14.21%	14.70%	15.69%	17.63%	19.73%	21.67%	23.01%
USA	23.23%	24.14%	24.26%	24.13%	24.29%	23.50%	23.07%	22.23%	21.51%	20.79%	19.89%
EU, USA, CHINA	54.60%	56.10%	56.19%	55.97%	55.67%	55.44%	55.56%	56.25%	56.90%	57.52%	57.61%
	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
EU (27)	14.00%	13.61%	12.91%	12.63%	11.90%	11.61%	11.17%	10.55%	10.67%	10.67%	10.66%
China	24.10%	24.32%	25.94%	26.19%	27.54%	27.82%	28.16%	28.08%	27.97%	27.71%	27.76%
USA	19.51%	18.71%	17.71%	17.60%	16.75%	15.90%	16.04%	16.14%	15.71%	15.35%	15.08%
EU, USA, CHINA	57.60%	56.64%	56.56%	56.42%	56.19%	55.33%	55.37%	54.77%	54.35%	53.73%	53.51%

Source: author’s calculation based on [12,13].

present the OC emission of CO₂ for China, the United States, and 27 EU members. Globally, OC emissions of CO₂ increased between 1997 and 2017 (achieving the level of 33242.5 MT), except for in 2009 and 2015. In the period under consideration, global OC emissions of CO₂ increased by 46.17%. In the USA, downward changes can be related to economic downturns (e.g., 2001, 2008, 2009). The increase in OC CO₂ emission was observed in 1997–1999, 2002–2005, 2007, 2010, 2013, and 2014. While the total emission of the USA was in 2017 slightly above the 1990 level, its share in global emissions declined by about 8 percentage points, from 23% to 15%. Between 2007 and 2017, the emissions declined from 5861.1 MT to 5014.4 MT. China’s total CO_s emissions almost tripled (+191.46%) between 1997 and 2017, with a constant level of emissions between 2013 and 2017. The emissions in the EU were at a similar level between 1997 and 2008. After a decline in emissions until 2014, the emissions stabilized afterward. In 2006, the level of emissions was the highest (4227.2 MT), and in 2014 the lowest (3465.2 MT). In 2017, the emission level was 13.6% below the level of 1997. In 2003, the total emissions in China exceeded those of the EU, and in 2005, those of the USA. In 2012, China exceeded the emissions of the EU and the USA combined.

In 2017, China was responsible for 27.76% of global CO₂ emissions (Table 2). The global share of Official-Closed CO₂ emissions rose between 1997 and 2013 to 28.16%, stabilizing afterward. The global share of the EU-27 declined from 18.03% in 1997 to 10.55% in 2017, afterward slightly increasing. The share of the USA in global emissions declined from 24.14% in 1997 to 15.08% in 2017. Over the whole period, the share in global emissions for the EU, China, and the USA together circulated 55%.

One of the three main aims of the EU energy policy is a reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to at least 20% below 1990 levels by 2020. A main component of GHG is CO₂. In

Table 3. OC CO₂ emissions in EU countries compared to 1990 (1990 = 100%) for the years 1997–2006.

	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
Austria	110.6%	110.7%	110.0%	110.2%	118.8%	120.4%	131.1%	128.8%	132.4%	128.6%
Belgium and Luxebourg	105.4%	108.1%	103.6%	106.7%	107.3%	106.3%	111.8%	112.0%	109.4%	110.7%
Bulgaria	75.6%	72.5%	62.0%	58.4%	63.0%	61.1%	65.9%	63.5%	65.8%	67.4%
Croatia	78.6%	84.7%	87.4%	82.3%	86.0%	91.2%	97.7%	94.4%	96.7%	97.2%
Cyprus	138.0%	144.0%	152.0%	160.0%	162.0%	158.0%	170.0%	166.0%	186.0%	182.0%
Czech Republic	82.0%	78.3%	73.3%	79.8%	80.4%	77.9%	80.0%	80.5%	79.5%	80.7%
Denmark	124.0%	116.3%	110.2%	103.0%	103.4%	101.8%	111.1%	100.4%	95.5%	110.6%
Estonia	52.2%	48.3%	44.1%	45.4%	46.5%	46.5%	51.2%	52.7%	51.2%	49.9%
Finland	109.7%	105.2%	104.7%	103.8%	112.3%	117.9%	132.5%	121.7%	103.3%	121.0%
France	98.0%	104.1%	104.0%	103.3%	103.7%	102.8%	104.7%	105.2%	105.5%	102.9%
Germany	88.1%	87.1%	84.9%	84.7%	86.3%	85.0%	85.5%	84.1%	82.0%	83.8%
Greece	114.0%	120.6%	118.6%	125.4%	128.1%	127.2%	131.2%	131.5%	132.1%	133.3%
Hungary	79.4%	80.0%	81.7%	76.6%	79.0%	77.2%	80.7%	78.9%	79.2%	78.9%
Ireland	120.3%	129.0%	135.8%	140.0%	149.7%	147.4%	146.1%	146.8%	153.9%	153.2%
Italy	102.8%	106.1%	107.2%	108.3%	107.6%	108.1%	112.7%	117.2%	117.5%	117.0%
Latvia	45.1%	43.5%	40.2%	37.5%	41.8%	42.9%	42.4%	46.2%	47.3%	45.7%
Lithuania	39.1%	40.7%	35.2%	30.2%	33.5%	32.1%	32.7%	34.1%	36.3%	37.1%
Netherlands	111.7%	112.3%	110.6%	111.5%	116.6%	116.7%	116.7%	120.0%	121.3%	120.1%
Poland	93.5%	88.3%	86.4%	80.1%	79.6%	78.7%	81.1%	80.7%	82.1%	85.6%
Portugal	129.1%	143.9%	157.9%	155.4%	152.9%	161.2%	151.9%	156.1%	163.2%	151.1%
Romania	64.5%	57.0%	48.3%	49.7%	51.0%	52.7%	55.0%	55.5%	52.9%	55.7%
Slovakia	72.9%	72.5%	70.7%	67.3%	70.3%	69.6%	70.2%	68.4%	69.8%	67.3%
Slovenia	114.3%	110.5%	107.5%	105.3%	110.5%	112.0%	111.3%	112.8%	114.3%	118.0%
Spain	122.0%	126.9%	138.1%	143.2%	145.1%	153.7%	156.5%	166.3%	172.5%	169.7%
Sweden	91.0%	101.6%	96.9%	85.7%	87.9%	88.9%	95.6%	92.0%	89.8%	91.3%
United Kingdom	93.5%	93.8%	92.2%	94.9%	96.8%	93.4%	95.1%	96.0%	97.2%	97.8%

Source: author’s own calculation based on [12,13].

and

Table 4. OC CO₂ emissions in EU countries compared to 1990 (1990 = 100%) for the years 2007–2017.

	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Austria	122.0%	123.4%	112.5%	121.8%	111.6%	108.1%	106.6%	100.9%	106.3%	106.8%	111.8%
Belgium and Luxebourg	110.1%	111.1%	101.7%	108.4%	98.6%	95.3%	95.6%	89.8%	94.7%	96.0%	98.2%
Bulgaria	71.9%	68.1%	58.8%	61.6%	68.2%	62.0%	55.2%	58.3%	62.0%	58.1%	61.6%
Croatia	102.3%	98.1%	92.1%	88.4%	85.1%	77.2%	74.9%	73.5%	75.3%	77.7%	79.5%
Cyprus	186.0%	190.0%	184.0%	176.0%	174.0%	162.0%	146.0%	146.0%	150.0%	162.0%	166.0%
Czech Republic	80.4%	77.3%	73.0%	74.9%	72.6%	70.2%	67.5%	65.5%	66.3%	67.5%	66.3%
Denmark	101.8%	97.1%	90.7%	91.9%	83.2%	73.5%	77.8%	71.9%	65.9%	68.1%	63.6%
Estonia	57.7%	54.8%	49.1%	60.1%	62.4%	61.4%	64.2%	63.4%	58.5%	59.0%	63.7%
Finland	117.4%	104.3%	99.8%	113.9%	100.2%	89.6%	92.0%	84.3%	77.7%	83.8%	79.0%
France	100.4%	100.4%	96.4%	97.8%	90.6%	91.0%	90.9%	81.8%	84.0%	85.3%	86.9%
Germany	80.5%	80.4%	74.9%	77.8%	75.9%	76.8%	79.2%	74.6%	75.0%	76.4%	76.0%
Greece	138.7%	131.8%	126.2%	116.2%	115.5%	108.7%	98.4%	94.1%	90.9%	87.0%	93.3%
Hungary	76.7%	75.0%	66.5%	67.3%	69.4%	63.3%	59.7%	58.3%	62.2%	62.8%	66.1%
Ireland	156.1%	154.5%	138.7%	137.4%	124.5%	124.8%	121.0%	120.0%	125.8%	130.6%	127.1%
Italy	114.7%	111.2%	100.5%	102.0%	99.5%	96.2%	88.0%	82.2%	85.4%	85.5%	86.2%
Latvia	47.8%	46.7%	42.9%	50.0%	45.1%	43.5%	43.5%	41.8%	42.4%	44.6%	43.5%
Lithuania	36.6%	36.8%	33.5%	36.6%	34.3%	34.3%	32.4%	30.5%	31.3%	32.4%	33.8%
Netherlands	119.6%	118.1%	113.6%	118.6%	114.5%	110.9%	108.1%	102.5%	106.8%	108.6%	105.1%
Poland	84.8%	85.3%	81.6%	86.3%	86.3%	82.1%	82.8%	78.3%	78.3%	81.7%	84.3%
Portugal	147.1%	144.6%	142.6%	129.1%	128.8%	127.1%	123.6%	123.6%	134.6%	132.8%	144.9%
Romania	53.5%	52.4%	44.7%	43.5%	46.7%	44.9%	38.8%	39.1%	39.6%	38.9%	40.7%
Slovakia	63.5%	65.6%	60.6%	65.1%	60.6%	58.2%	59.5%	53.9%	54.4%	55.5%	59.3%
Slovenia	118.0%	126.3%	112.8%	114.3%	114.3%	110.5%	106.0%	94.7%	95.5%	102.3%	101.5%
Spain	175.2%	163.0%	145.4%	138.2%	142.8%	142.1%	127.6%	126.5%	133.8%	130.6%	138.7%
Sweden	87.6%	83.0%	79.0%	83.9%	76.9%	72.8%	71.0%	68.3%	68.6%	69.1%	67.9%
United Kingdom	96.2%	94.9%	87.0%	89.8%	83.5%	86.3%	84.0%	77.1%	73.9%	69.9%	68.0%

Source: author’s own calculation based on [12,13].

, the OC CO₂ emissions of 27 EU member countries for the period 1997–2017 are presented. In order to meet the aim of CO₂ emission reduction, the level of 80% should be obtained. The goal was not achieved by 13 members until 2017: Austria, Belgium and Luxembourg, Cyprus, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain. One of these countries, Poland, circulated around the 80% level since 2000, sometimes being below and sometimes above this level. Austria, Cyprus, Ireland, the Netherlands and Spain showed a higher level of emissions for the whole survey time than in 1990. The 14 EU member countries that achieved the CO₂ energy policy goal include Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Romania and Slovakia, having already reached the aim in 1997. This may be due to the economic transformation from a socialist economy, relying on heavy industry, to a market-based economy. In the transition period, there was a serious decline in economic activity and heavy industry, which contributed to the decline in emissions [14].

3.2. Actual-Open Emission of CO₂—Considering EU Trade with China and the USA

Both China and the USA had a positive balance of CO₂ with the EU, meaning that their exports of goods and services contained more CO₂ emissions than their imports. China for the 21 years under analysis had a total S_B value of 6264.83 MT of CO₂, and the USA 416.5 MT of CO₂. This means that the E_AO for the USA and Chinese is lower than their E_OC. China’s net export of CO₂ to the EU was more than 15 times higher than the for the USA in the period 1997–2017. Thus, trade with China had a much bigger impact on actual emission of CO₂ for the EU than the USA. It is worth mentioning that China S_B was positive during all the years considered for all individual EU member countries. The USA’s S_B with individual EU member countrues was different for different years.

As shown in

Table 5. E_AO and % change of E_AO compared to the E_OC of EU, Chinese and the USA, considering their trade for the years 1997–2017.

	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007
EU (27)	4190.34	4226.34	4169.72	4197.26	4261.63	4245.03	4387.04	4480.65	4550.64	4664.66	4698.85
%	102.00%	102.45%	102.45%	103.02%	102.84%	102.90%	103.71%	105.37%	107.10%	108.86%	111.32%
China	3119.57	3095.28	3223.65	3269.12	3430.40	3740.07	4388.96	5122.42	5808.00	6310.26	6786.04
%	98.51%	97.84%	97.84%	97.22%	97.32%	97.26%	96.79%	95.98%	95.22%	94.50%	93.73%
USA	5455.37	5495.92	5548.59	5718.92	5613.69	5637.64	5705.89	5802.26	5841.04	5758.93	5837.53
%	99.36%	99.41%	99.49%	99.49%	99.59%	99.75%	99.80%	99.76%	99.82%	99.79%	99.60%
	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
EU (27)	4698.85	4697.87	4259.51	4417.87	4315.04	4207.15	4099.11	3917.14	3905.40	3877.08	3915.59
%	111.32%	113.39%	110.92%	112.32%	113.42%	112.28%	112.07%	113.50%	111.76%	110.57%	110.60%
China	6786.04	6852.66	7313.54	7671.31	8319.05	8544.70	8812.35	8775.46	8776.37	8758.28	8869.73
%	93.73%	92.87%	94.87%	94.30%	94.47%	95.03%	95.40%	95.14%	95.66%	96.04%	96.10%
USA	5837.53	5646.81	5239.88	5444.97	5331.95	5123.52	5244.46	5282.63	5140.95	5043.78	4999.06
%	99.60%	99.49%	99.54%	99.62%	99.56%	99.74%	99.70%	99.66%	99.75%	99.80%	99.69%

Source: author’s calculation based on [12,13].

, the Actual-Open Emissions for China and the USA are lower than the Actual-Closed Emissions. The consideration of international trade had the consequence that the Actual-Open Emissions for the EU are higher than the Actual-Closed Emissions (Table 5). The EU showed a negative S_B for CO₂ emissions in all the 21 years considered in this survey (i.e., for the EU E_AO was higher than E_OC).

For the EU, E_AO exceeded E_OC in the years 1997–2017, ranging from 2% (1997) to 13.5% (2014). The opposite situation was observed regarding the Chinese and USA E_AO. China’s E_AO obtained a value ranging from 92.87% (2008) to 98.51% (1997) of E_OC. In the USA. E_AO obtained valued in the range between 99.36% (1997) and 99.82% (2005) of E_OC. Thus, trade with the EU had a very minor impact on the USA’s E_AO. However, the picture becomes different when considering the individual EU members (

Table 6. EU individual member-states % of E_AO in 1997–2006 (1990 = 100%).

	1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
Austria	114.47%	114.82%	114.08%	114.70%	122.82%	124.43%	135.94%	135.03%	141.09%	139.90%
Belgium& Luxembourg	109.91%	113.04%	108.75%	112.60%	112.72%	111.69%	118.90%	121.95%	122.16%	125.73%
Bulgaria	75.37%	72.35%	61.87%	58.23%	62.60%	60.85%	65.68%	63.66%	66.63%	68.88%
Croatia	79.44%	85.54%	88.27%	83.17%	87.35%	93.10%	100.57%	98.95%	102.97%	105.73%
Cyprus	146.48%	150.87%	158.28%	167.42%	170.72%	168.09%	181.55%	174.16%	196.64%	195.68%
Czech Republic	82.22%	78.79%	73.81%	80.32%	81.07%	79.24%	81.81%	83.17%	82.53%	85.47%
Denmark	126.76%	119.82%	113.78%	106.69%	106.58%	105.29%	115.55%	107.21%	104.64%	122.21%
Estonia	52.06%	48.17%	43.72%	44.65%	47.22%	46.96%	51.82%	53.26%	52.48%	51.17%
Finland	110.61%	106.41%	106.22%	105.65%	113.36%	119.13%	134.62%	125.23%	110.34%	131.45%
France	101.90%	108.90%	108.87%	108.69%	108.77%	107.89%	110.98%	114.17%	116.76%	116.00%
Germany	89.53%	89.07%	86.83%	86.96%	88.40%	86.97%	88.29%	88.62%	88.16%	91.65%
Greece	115.08%	122.26%	120.23%	127.12%	129.82%	129.24%	134.24%	135.47%	136.60%	137.80%
Hungary	79.67%	80.46%	82.11%	77.65%	80.80%	80.54%	86.30%	83.72%	85.65%	86.46%
Ireland	124.55%	133.20%	138.71%	141.53%	149.55%	145.90%	147.00%	153.33%	165.98%	170.53%
Italy	104.30%	107.95%	108.95%	110.47%	109.67%	110.44%	115.87%	121.62%	123.17%	124.37%
Latvia	45.03%	43.55%	40.31%	37.45%	42.02%	43.10%	42.44%	46.67%	48.27%	47.49%
Lithuania	39.08%	40.78%	35.21%	30.42%	33.94%	32.68%	33.75%	35.05%	37.80%	39.07%
Netherlands	116.75%	118.07%	116.42%	119.28%	124.62%	124.43%	126.98%	135.37%	141.40%	144.63%
Poland	93.81%	88.73%	86.85%	80.54%	80.10%	79.23%	81.93%	81.83%	83.84%	88.22%
Portugal	130.37%	145.38%	159.27%	156.98%	154.54%	162.03%	152.84%	157.85%	165.35%	153.72%
Romania	64.46%	57.02%	48.25%	49.65%	51.03%	52.60%	55.14%	56.13%	54.00%	57.51%
Slovakia	73.18%	73.17%	71.06%	67.60%	70.83%	70.30%	70.34%	68.97%	71.55%	69.98%
Slovenia	115.16%	112.01%	109.18%	106.86%	112.28%	114.21%	113.67%	117.38%	120.78%	126.12%
Spain	124.64%	130.19%	141.62%	146.87%	148.53%	157.35%	161.45%	173.46%	182.52%	182.35%
Sweden	92.59%	103.19%	98.88%	88.53%	89.95%	90.86%	98.14%	95.99%	95.46%	99.49%
United Kingdom	96.01%	96.82%	95.04%	99.34%	101.17%	97.66%	100.04%	102.55%	105.09%	107.56%

Source: author’s own calculation based on [12,13].

and

Table 7. EU individual memberstates % of E_AO in 2007–2017 (1990 = 100%).

	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Austria	134.88%	140.47%	126.13%	136.14%	128.65%	124.84%	123.53%	118.39%	120.74%	114.50%	125.36%
Belgium& Luxembourg	129.84%	133.53%	116.80%	124.06%	117.65%	112.07%	113.75%	107.51%	109.85%	109.54%	111.20%
Bulgaria	74.32%	71.49%	60.78%	62.10%	68.76%	62.13%	55.32%	58.61%	62.12%	58.53%	61.73%
Croatia	113.53%	111.72%	101.45%	97.28%	94.34%	85.77%	78.93%	76.93%	78.26%	80.46%	82.24%
Cyprus	210.44%	228.91%	196.31%	193.34%	201.60%	170.28%	154.08%	152.99%	159.89%	169.73%	171.23%
Czech Republic	88.18%	87.87%	81.27%	86.17%	85.89%	80.41%	77.37%	76.40%	77.35%	77.06%	76.71%
Denmark	115.87%	113.27%	101.90%	105.34%	96.79%	86.42%	89.88%	84.72%	76.82%	78.02%	72.42%
Estonia	60.35%	57.36%	50.49%	60.89%	63.03%	63.68%	66.94%	65.74%	60.10%	59.67%	65.13%
Finland	130.52%	118.39%	108.70%	122.25%	104.93%	100.44%	100.07%	92.47%	84.20%	89.64%	84.94%
France	116.38%	119.02%	112.26%	114.99%	109.66%	108.85%	108.35%	99.33%	99.05%	99.05%	100.93%
Germany	89.73%	91.14%	83.74%	88.32%	86.77%	86.09%	87.46%	83.33%	82.89%	83.78%	83.50%
Greece	145.98%	140.55%	133.41%	122.32%	120.78%	112.80%	101.81%	98.32%	94.29%	90.71%	96.48%
Hungary	85.99%	87.31%	75.73%	78.18%	79.62%	70.80%	67.83%	64.00%	67.49%	67.35%	70.92%
Ireland	176.80%	170.88%	146.04%	139.87%	128.20%	129.18%	128.85%	127.67%	137.38%	137.62%	139.48%
Italy	124.16%	122.52%	108.83%	112.92%	110.85%	104.90%	95.68%	90.41%	92.25%	91.45%	91.97%
Latvia	51.09%	50.15%	44.73%	52.20%	48.04%	46.98%	46.64%	44.94%	45.02%	46.84%	45.74%
Lithuania	39.75%	40.30%	35.22%	38.51%	36.32%	36.59%	34.63%	33.15%	33.28%	34.08%	35.43%
Netherlands	150.15%	149.95%	136.16%	147.75%	144.52%	139.59%	136.68%	133.68%	130.95%	129.61%	127.19%
Poland	88.87%	91.27%	85.95%	91.28%	91.27%	87.09%	87.96%	84.32%	83.69%	86.92%	89.85%
Portugal	151.72%	151.85%	147.91%	135.49%	135.34%	136.83%	133.22%	128.34%	138.20%	139.30%	147.96%
Romania	55.16%	55.03%	46.58%	45.66%	48.80%	46.44%	40.17%	40.67%	41.05%	40.22%	42.48%
Slovakia	69.37%	75.07%	67.03%	72.26%	68.27%	66.33%	69.27%	64.49%	64.05%	64.07%	66.41%
Slovenia	130.80%	143.35%	125.77%	129.33%	130.07%	124.68%	119.21%	109.07%	108.56%	112.07%	119.20%
Spain	192.13%	183.72%	158.38%	152.80%	157.51%	154.85%	140.22%	140.00%	146.49%	142.36%	150.59%
Sweden	98.79%	95.22%	88.27%	97.49%	89.28%	84.93%	82.42%	80.18%	79.12%	78.12%	76.63%
United Kingdom	107.79%	107.42%	97.03%	100.75%	95.22%	97.38%	94.71%	89.02%	84.99%	80.19%	77.56%

Source: author’s calculation based on [12,13].

). The differences need to be considered when creating policy, as a “one-fits-all” approach is unlikely to deal with the CO₂ emission transfer via trade.

Analysis of the changes in CO₂ emissions as a result of the CO₂ transfer through international trade change the picture for the individual member countries regarding the achievement of the goal to reduce emissions by 20% by 2020. Now 11 instead of 13 countries achieved this aim in 2017. Germany and Finland did not achieve the aim. The other countries that did not show a 20% or more emission reduction when using E_AO in any of the years under consideration were: Austria, Belgium and Luxembourg, Cyprus, Finland, France, Greece, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain. The difference is particularly visible for Germany, formally achieving the aim of emission reduction between 2009 and 2007 using E_OC. When using E_AO, Germany did not achieve the aim in any of the years analyzed.

When looking at the total number of years in which the aim of 20% CO₂ emission reduction was achieved, we see a decline of 22% when including the effects of international trade on the analysis. For each country, 21 years were analyzed. Assuming there are 26 countries (Belgium and Luxembourg are analyzed together), there are 546 years (26 × 21) where the emission reduction aim could be achieved. Considering E_OC, the aim was achieved in 200 years. Considering E_AO, this number declines to 156.

4. Discussion

The effectiveness of the EU energy policy may be lower when taking into consideration the Actual-Open emissions of CO₂. Due to the transfer of CO₂ emissions through imports and exports, the benefits from an isolated reduction in CO₂ emission may be smaller than the statistics show. For example, when EU policy may lead to a reduction in the emissions of its member states, the effect may be reduced or even be negative with an increase in CO₂-intensive imports. This is an issue for further research in terms of whether the EU energy policy supports sustainable development. When using the Actual-Open emission of CO₂, it may turn out that international agreements for reducing CO₂ emissions, such as the Kyoto Protocol, may be ineffective [14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23]. A well-known reason for the problem discussed the relocation of production to low-cost countries, with lenient environmental regulation, lack of environmental policy and weak enforcement mechanisms. As a consequence, countries with a strong environmental policy may also import more from the countries with higher intensities of CO₂ emissions. As a consequence, when aiming to achieve the goals of the EU energy policy, trade policy should be reconsidered.

5. Conclusions

The European Union is often regarded as the leader in policy for sustainable development and the prevention of global warming, by supporting clean energy and a reduction in CO₂ emissions. However, as the EU economy is interwoven with large producers such as China and the USA, there are also large CO₂ emitters affecting the Actual-Open emission through imports and exports; thus, climate policy should be included in international trade policy to achieve the goals of the energy policy. This is also important for analyzing, for example, the effectiveness of environmental management systems in the sector, as improvement may be leveled out via increased supplies from CO₂-intensive industries in other countries. Imports from China to the EU seem to embrace more CO₂ emissions than imports from the USA. This negatively affects the Actual-Open emission of CO₂ of all EU member countries. The level of CO₂ emission in 11 EU member countries declined by at least 20% compared to 1990, indicating the achievement of the energy policy goal. However, three of these countries did not achieve the goal when considering the emissions embedded in imports and exports. The impact of trade on the actual level of CO₂ emissions was the strongest for China and the weakest for the USA, with the EU in between. Four indicators were responsible for the strong difference between E_OC and E_AO in China and the EU: 1. Total GDP; 2. % share of GDP exported; 3. % share of GDP imported; 4. Official-Closed CO₂ emission.

An implication of the research may be that for achieving climate goals by the EU, including trade with China in policy measures may receive primacy over trade policy with the USA, For example, an eco-energy tax could be introduced for all trade partners concerning the total exports to the EU [7]. However, this is a crude measure, not considering the CO₂ emission intensity of different sectors. This issue requires elaboration, to allow for specific policy targeting.