The European Parliament's Transport and Tourism (TRAN) committee on 15 July 2026 debated aviation fuel supply resilience and CO2 standards for light-duty vehicles, exposing sharp divergences on flexibility and climate ambition. On aviation, experts warned of structural vulnerability due to import dependence and declining refining capacity, with David Chiaramonti (Politecnico di Torino) citing risks from the Middle East crisis.
Aisling Reynolds-Feighan (University College Dublin) highlighted fuel spikes and airspace closures squeezing airline profitability, while ETS and SAF costs risk EU carriers' competitiveness. Ştefan Muşoiu (S&D) called for stronger strategic stocks, and Volker Schnurrbusch (ESN) criticised slow EU reaction. Jens Gieseke (EPP) argued ReFuelEU discriminates against EU long-haul airlines, but Jutta Paulus (Greens/EFA) countered that ETS and ReFuelEU apply to all flights from EU airports. On vehicles, Gieseke pushed for flexibility, sustainable fuels, and green-steel credits, calling the 2035 combustion-engine ban unrealistic. Dennis Radtke (EPP) backed averaging and OEM flexibility with full CO2 compensation. Vivien Costanzo (S&D) stressed jobs and urgency, accepting flexibilisation but retaining the 100% zero-emission target. Paulus defended the 2035 ban and proposed tight value-chain conditions for super credits.
Edoardo Turano (European Commission, DG CLIMA) presented the proposal as balancing flexibility, technology neutrality, and climate goals. Consensus emerged on the need for aviation resilience and automotive file urgency, but sharp divergences persisted on flexibility scope and conditions. Next steps: Gieseke aims to finish the file by Christmas.