Érd

Veszprém

Pest

Fejér

Pécs

Győr-Moson-Sopron

Zala

Szeged

Győr

Zalaegerszeg

Székesfehérvár

Hajdú-Bihar

Baranya

Szombathely

Heves

Békéscsaba

Szolnok

Hódmezővásárhely

Békés

Sopron

Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok

Bács-Kiskun

Somogy

Komárom-Esztergom

Budapest

Szekszárd

Kecskemét

Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén

Salgótarján

Kaposvár

Csongrád-Csanád

Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg

Miskolc

Debrecen

Tatabánya

Nagykanizsa

Dunaújváros

Tolna

Nógrád

Eger

Nyíregyháza

Hungary

Hungary will achieve complete climate neutrality by 2050

1300 environmentally friendly local buses by 2029

8.2% share of biocomponents in fuels by 2020

60% share of electricity interconnections by 2030

Reduce share of gas imports to 70% by 2030 and below 70 % after 2040.

Increase the cross-border capacities of its electricity grid to 60 % by 2030.

331.23 PJ cumulative final energy consumption savings between 2021-2030

min. 21% share of renewable energy sources in gross final energy consumption by 2030

min. 40% reduction of GHG emissions by 2030 (over 1990 base year)

Reach 14.65% gross final energy consumption by 2020

52-85% GHG emission reduction by 2050 over 1990 base year

min. 60% of share of interconnected electricity systems by 2030

min. 120% of N-1 rule for the natural gas infrastructure by 2030

max. 20% of electricity of net import dependency by 2030

max. 85% of oil net import dependency by 2030

~70% of natural gas net import dependency by 2030

Min. 21% share of renewable energy within gross final energy consumption by 2030

7% reduction of non-ETS emissions compared to 2005 by 2030

40% reduction of GHG emissions compared 1990 by 2030

Increase share of electricity interconnection to ~60% by 2030

Reduce share of gas imported to ~70% by 2030

Final energy consumption doesn't exceed 785 PJ in 2030 (value of 2005)

30% share of renewable energy in heating and cooling sector by 2030

7% emission reduce between 2021-2030 relative to base year of 2005

40% GHG emissions reduction by 2030 (1990 levels)

10% use of petroleum products in transport by 2030

max 785 PJ of final energy consumption by 2030

Reduce share of electricity imports to under 20% by 2040

200,000 households with roof-mounted PV panels by 2030

20% electricity consumption is renewable resources by 2030

14% share of renewable energy in transport sector by 2030

Budget 36 billion HUF over 10 years (2020-2030) for Green Bus Porgramme

Only electric buses will be allowed from 2022 in municipalities with a population of over 25,000.

25% households have smart meter installed by 2030

At least 1 million smart meters will be installed in electricity grids by 2030

90% carbon neutral domestic electricity generation by 2030.

Increase solar capacity by 6000 MW by 2030

Increase solar capacity by 6-fold by 2030 (from 2020)

3000 MW by 2022 and at least 6000 MW by 2030 of solar energy generation capacity,

27% increase of country's forest cover by 2030

150 thousand hectares protected natural area by 2021

160 pieces per person per year by 2010, 80 pieces per person per year by 2016, 0 by 2021

50% bus fleet will be environmentally friendly in local areas of major cities by 2030

90% carbon free electricity production by 2030.

Only e-buses will be newly deployed from 2022

To increase the share of renewable resources within gross final electricity consumption to at least 20% by 2030.



To increase the share of renewable energy sources to at least 21% within gross final energy consumption.



To reduce GHG emissions by at least 40% compared to 1990.

The share of renewable energy sources in the country's gross final energy consumption will be at least 21 percent by 2030

90 % of electricity supply to be zero carbon by 2030

Increase the capacity of solar plants by six

Hungary will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by at least 40 percent by 2030 compared to 1990





Reduction by 16% to 25% of GHG emissions (in the case of a EU 20% plan) or reduction by 27% to 34% (in the case of EU 30% plan) by 2025 compared with a 1990 baseline

25 to 33 M tonnes of CO2 captured, or even 47 to 58 M in case of planting fast-growing tree species by 2025

18.9% of renewable energy for heating and cooling by 2020

10.9% of renewable energy for electricity by 2020

10% of renewable energy for transport by 2020

14.65% of overall renewable energy by 2020

At least 16% of alternative energy for overall energy consumption, and 18% of green energy for electricity by 2020

The constitutional review case of Hungary’s Climate Protection Act (Act XLIV of 2020) was initiated by fifty members of Parliament, who argued that several provisions of the Act violated the Hungarian Fundamental Law (Alaptörvény) and certain international treaties, including the Paris Agreement and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The petitioners submitted their application in 2021 (case no. II/3536/2021), challenging, among other things, the emission reduction targets laid out in Article 3(1) of the Act. They argued that the Act’s 2030 target—a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions compared to 1990 levels—was insufficient, fell short of both European Union commitments (which call for at least 55% reductions), and failed to align with the scientific consensus necessary to meet the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C temperature goal. They also claimed that the Act lacked concrete implementation measures and disregarded principles such as precaution and intergenerational equity.

The Constitutional Court found that Article 3(1) of the Climate Protection Act was unconstitutional. Specifically, the Court held that the provision violated Article P(1), Article XX(1), and Article XXI(1) of the Fundamental Law, which enshrine the principles of intergenerational justice, the right to physical and mental health, and the right to a healthy environment. The Court emphasized that the emission target failed to uphold the constitutional duty to preserve natural resources for future generations and to take adequate preventive and precautionary action against foreseeable climate risks.

The Court did not accept the argument that this provision conflicted with international treaties, including the Paris Agreement. However, it emphasized the state's duty to take climate measures that align with Hungary's constitutional obligations and broader international climate goals.

On June 12, 2025, the Court ruled that Article 3(1) of the Climate Protection Act is unconstitutional and annulled it, effective June 30, 2026. This delayed annulment gives the legislature time to revise the law.

Additionally, the Court determined—acting ex officio—that Parliament committed a constitutional omission by failing to adopt comprehensive, climate-specific measures tailored to Hungary’s and the Carpathian Basin’s needs. These include not only mitigation (beyond traditional emissions regulation) but also adaptation and resilience measures. The Court ordered Parliament to fulfill this legislative obligation by June 30, 2026.

The Court dismissed or rejected other parts of the petition, including challenges to Articles 1, 2, 3(2)-(3), and 4 of the Act, either for lack of legal merit or procedural insufficiency.

In sum, this decision is a landmark ruling in Hungarian climate law. It enforces constitutional obligations related to environmental protection and intergenerational equity and requires the legislature to adopt more ambitious and specific climate policies in line with constitutional principles.


In June 2021, the Municipality of the Village of Tihany (hereafter: the Municipality) submitted a request for a screening procedure regarding a planned tourist development near Lake Balaton, the largest freshwater lake in Central Europe. The project included a visitor center, an open-air visitor area, and a car parking lot. The screening documentation covered a number of issues, ranging from noise via air pollution to nature conservation. With regard to climate issues, the documentation briefly found that the implementation of the project would not be influenced by climate change. The Veszprém County Government Office (hereafter: the Defendant) issued a decision in July 2021, declaring that the planned project would have no significant impact on the environment and therefore there would be no need to perform an Environmental Impact Assessment.

Friends of the Earth Hungary (hereafter: the Plaintiff) filed a lawsuit against the Defendant in August 2021. In its file, the Plaintiff claimed that the climate chapter of the screening documentation is lacking actual content. It claimed that the planned project is obviously linked to water related tourism, and as such, will be heavily influenced by climate change. It also claimed that due to this, the decision of the Defendant to not require an Environmental Impact Assessment is unlawful and breaches the Government Decree on EIA that requires the detailed presentation of climate change related information in screening documentations before decision-making.

The Defendant in its counter-argument claimed that the project would be implemented further away from the waterfront and not directly at the lake shore; therefore, any climatic change in the lake would not have an effect on the project and the project would not be sensitive to climate change.The Municipality that intervened on behalf of the Defendant agreed with the arguments of the Defendant.

In November 2021, the court declared its judgment and annulled the decision of the Defendant, while ordering the defendant to restart the screening process and reassess the need for an Environmental Impact Assessment, putting more emphasis on the climate change aspects of the project.The court spelled out the following in its judgment:

“The court found from the content of the documentation that climate protection analyses or climate risk assessments other than a brief table are not included, and the data of the latter table contradicts to known facts.”

“Detailed sensitivity analysis, the exposure of the site and impact area of the project, the evaluation of certain impacts, the evaluation of risks and the adaptation of the planned project to climate change are not included. Presentation of how the planned project will have an effect on the area’s adaptation potential is also missing.”

“The Defendant’s decision is therefore heavily unlawful with regard to clarifying the facts of the case and providing a reasoning to the decision.”

Hungary

Recent cases