As Europe continues to focus on energy security, especially in light of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, renewable energy has become a key component in diversifying energy sources. The share of renewables in Europe’s overall energy use has been steadily rising, but progress in the heating and cooling sector varies significantly across the continent.

In 2023, renewables accounted for 26.2% of the EU’s heating and cooling energy, closely mirroring the overall share of renewables in total energy consumption. However, this figure masks wide disparities between countries. While Iceland leads the way with an impressive 84% of its heating and cooling needs met by renewables, countries like Ireland report just 8%. Sweden and Estonia are also among the top performers with renewable heating shares of 67%.

Several factors explain these differences, according to Professor Pawel Oclon from Cracow University of Technology. Climate conditions, resource availability, and the state of energy infrastructure all play a role. Additionally, countries with established district heating systems, such as those in the Nordic and Baltic regions, have a smoother transition to decarbonized heating solutions. These systems allow for the easier replacement of large, centralized boilers with renewable alternatives like heat pumps or biomass boilers, rather than needing to replace individual boilers across many households.

The Nordic countries, excluding Norway, dominate Europe in renewable heating. Nations such as Sweden, Finland, and Denmark boast renewable heating shares well above the EU average. Norway, however, lags at 34%, though experts suggest that this figure underrepresents the country’s reliance on renewable electricity for heating, given its vast hydropower and wind resources.

In contrast, many Western European nations have made slower progress. Among the EU’s four largest economies, only France (30%) exceeded the EU average in renewable heating, while countries like Germany (17%), Spain (21%), and Italy (22%) fell behind. These nations have traditionally relied on individual gas boilers, which complicates the transition to renewable heating systems.

Austria stands out in Central Europe, with 39.4% of its heating needs met by renewables, largely due to its longstanding use of biomass in both individual and district heating systems.

Despite some progress, experts warn that the pace is insufficient to meet the EU’s 2030 target of 49% renewable energy in buildings. “The growth is notable, but it’s far too slow to reach the EU’s climate and energy goals,” said Rana Adib, executive director of REN21, a global network promoting renewable energy.

To accelerate progress, experts call for increased investment in research and development to improve technologies like heat pumps, solar thermal collectors, and energy storage systems. Additionally, stronger policy focus, including support for electric heat pumps, decarbonized district heating, and solar thermal systems, is critical.

As Europe continues to reduce its dependence on Russian gas, the transition to renewable heating remains an essential part of the EU’s energy strategy, helping to ensure a more secure and sustainable future.

The popular Netflix series Adolescence has ignited fresh discussions on the dangers of social media and smartphones for children, with some calling for a ban. However, experts caution that prohibiting social media use may not effectively address the root of the problem.

A recent survey by Amnesty International revealed that 73% of Gen Z social media users in the UK (aged 13-28) have encountered misogynistic content online, with half witnessing such material weekly. The findings coincide with heightened scrutiny on social media following Adolescence, which depicts the fictional murder of a schoolgirl by a 13-year-old boy influenced by social media.

The show’s co-creator, Jack Thorne, has urged the UK government to ban smartphones for children under 16, mirroring Australia’s recent move to restrict social media access for minors. Despite these calls, experts argue that banning social media is not a viable solution.

A study published in Lancet Regional Health Europe—the first of its kind—analyzed the impact of school-based smartphone bans across England. The research found no significant improvement in students’ mental well-being, sleep, or educational outcomes. While the study only covered school-time restrictions, it casts doubt on the effectiveness of outright prohibitions.

Drew Benvie, founder of the social media campaign group Raise, warns that delaying social media exposure until age 16 may be counterproductive. “What happens when a child is 15 years and 364 days old? They suddenly gain unrestricted access without prior education on its dangers,” Benvie told Euronews Next. He also noted that children often bypass bans using VPNs, as seen with attempts to block TikTok in the United States.

Misogynistic content remains a significant concern. According to the Amnesty International report, 57% of Gen Z men in the UK have consumed content from controversial figures like Elon Musk, former U.S. President Donald Trump, and Andrew Tate. Tate, a prominent online figure, has been criticized for spreading misogynistic views, yet his content continues to circulate on major platforms.

Social media companies have implemented measures to protect children. TikTok introduced a mindfulness tool for users under 16 that activates after 10 p.m., while Meta and other platforms have strengthened parental controls. However, experts argue these steps are insufficient, as algorithms continue to amplify harmful content. A study by University College London and the University of Kent found a fourfold increase in misogynistic content suggested by TikTok’s algorithm within five days of monitoring.

Experts suggest that rather than bans, comprehensive education on digital literacy, misogyny, and misinformation is crucial. Benvie stresses that parental involvement is also key. “Parents should use these apps themselves to understand them and engage in open discussions with their children about harmful content,” he said.

While education plays a critical role, Benvie insists that tech companies and regulators must take stronger action. “Banning social media outright is not a practical solution,” he said. “Instead, we need regulation, education, and enforcement to ensure a safer digital environment for children.”

The administration of U.S. President Donald Trump is considering implementing a sweeping travel ban that would prohibit entry from 11 countries, according to a report by The New York Times on Friday. The proposed restrictions are part of a broader classification system that also includes an “orange list” of nations facing severe visa restrictions.

The “Red List” Ban

According to The New York Times, a draft list of recommendations developed by diplomatic and security officials suggests that travelers from the following 11 countries would be completely barred from entering the United States:

• Afghanistan
• Bhutan
• Cuba
• Iran
• Libya
• North Korea
• Somalia
• Sudan
• Syria
• Venezuela
• Yemen

The proposed ban, if enacted, would dramatically expand existing travel restrictions, which have already targeted several Muslim-majority nations under previous executive orders issued by Trump.

Expanded Restrictions on the “Orange List”

In addition to the outright ban on “red list” countries, the administration is also weighing sharp visa restrictions for another set of nations categorized under an “orange list.” The countries facing tighter visa regulations include:

• Belarus
• Eritrea
• Haiti
• Laos
• Myanmar
• Pakistan
• Russia
• Sierra Leone
• South Sudan
• Turkmenistan

These restrictions could mean fewer work, student, and tourist visas issued to citizens of these countries, potentially impacting thousands of travelers.

Final Decision Still Uncertain

While the draft proposal originated from the U.S. State Department several weeks ago, The New York Times noted that it is still subject to revision before reaching the White House for a final decision. Officials who spoke anonymously to the publication cautioned that modifications to the list are possible as the administration assesses potential diplomatic and security consequences.

The report has already drawn sharp reactions, with critics arguing that the travel bans could exacerbate diplomatic tensions and disrupt families and businesses. Supporters, however, claim the measures are necessary to protect national security and control immigration flows.

With the 2024 election cycle approaching, any move to expand travel bans could become a highly polarizing issue, potentially shaping Trump’s policy agenda if he returns to office.