The European Union considers itself as a leader on the environment and not without cause: policymaking in Brussels moved ahead of the international consensus in the 2000s.

But the soaring rhetoric has not always been matched by the necessary structural changes in the way European economies work and citizens live their lives.

Progress has been made in stops and starts. The failure up to now of the 28 member states to commit to a goal of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, let alone anything more ambitious, highlights the danger of history repeating itself.

It is still to be seen whether there is sufficient buy-in among all the member states for the new green deal outlined by the new European commission president, Ursula von der Leyen.

Back in June 1990, amid discussions about the unification of Germany, the flowering of democracy in eastern Europe and need to support the Russian president, Mikhail Gorbachev, in his perestroika, leaders gathering in Dublin turned for the first time to the emerging climate disaster.

An annex to the summit communique agreed by the then 12 leaders of the European economic community warned that “the earth’s atmosphere is seriously threatened” and that a “business as usual approach will lead to additional global warming in the decades to come”.

They went on to agree to stabilise greenhouse gas emissions at 1990 levels by 2000 – but attempts to agree a carbon tax were blocked by the UK, among others.

Less radical initiatives, including common standards on boilers, electric refrigerators and freezers, along with targets for the use of renewable energy supplies were the order of the day.

The fall in greenhouse emissions in the decade that followed should be seen in the context of Margaret Thatcher’s assault on the coal industry in the UK and a decline of the East German industrial and power sectors post-unification.

It was only at the turn of the millennium, and the launch of the first European climate change programme, that real dynamism entered the EU’s approach to the environment.

Policy leaps included the European Emissions Trading Scheme, with national caps for the power and industrial sectors, indicative targets on the share of renewable electricity in each of the member states and further drives to make energy use more efficient.

Brussels can justifiably claim to have helped lead the rest of the world towards the Paris agreement to limit global warming to well below 2C above pre-industrial levels and agreement to pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5C.

But look behind the ambitious targets, and there is evidence of inertia. The European Environment Agency has said the EU is likely to miss its 2030 target for reducing greenhouse gases by 30% compared with 1990 levels. Emissions from airlines increased by 4% in 2018 due to growing demand. Fears are being expressed in some quarters about the EU becoming uncompetitive. The French solution of a carbon border tax is seen by some as protectionist and would be fiendishly complex to enforce. Meanwhile, Poland, which sources 80% of its energy from fossil fuels, says the next big leap required to achieve EU emission neutrality by the middle of the century is an unaffordable “fantasy”.

Von der Leyen will be judged by action, not words.