Beyond 2050: Decommissioning Frameworks and Environmental Liabilities of the Electricity Sector in the EU and Latin America

Paris Agreement. The energy sector, responsible for most global greenhouse gases, drives the shift to renewables amid rising demand from electrification, digitalization, and climate impacts.

In the EU and Chile, renewable growth contrasts with inadequate preparation for decommissioning, as solar panels last only 25-35 years. The paper poses core questions: Is a specific international legal framework for decommissioning needed? How can energy transition principles align with "polluter pays principle"? How should global value chains adapt to handle environmental liabilities by 2050? A comparative analysis of Europe and Latin America seeks scalable solutions for an issue currently handled ad hoc. The first chapter defines decommissioning as a planned process of removal and final disposal, distinct from demolition or abandonment. It reviews mature sectors: nuclear (technical actions to lift controls), offshore oil/gas (under directives like OSD), coal (German phase-out laws with EU-approved compensations), and offshore wind (safety standards tied to navigation). For onshore renewables, producer extended responsibility covers solar panels (Directives 2008/98/EC and 2021/19/EU), but gaps persist for full wind turbine structures and blades. The second chapter refers to the Latin American Context. Brazil, Colombia, and Argentina lack dedicated 1 renewable decommissioning rules, with environmental licensing often ending at operations without closure plans. In Chile, the Environmental Impact Assessment System (SEIA) generically addresses end-phases, while coal phase-out (Carbon Roundtable, retirements by 2040) offers reconversion incentives to batteries or green hydrogen, including asbestos protocols and judicial precedents. Regional policies overlook renewable decommissioning despite rapid deployment. The conclusion is that a dedicated international framework is essential to prevent "zombie projects" and environmental degradation that erode transition legitimacy. It advocates a "clean transition" reconciling polluter pays with full lifecycle management, urging regulatory harmonization to curb rising costs from decommissioning delays.