Thursday, May 14, 2015

If even Europe, the champion of the


Climate News Now in the news: Earthquake Nepal Yemen Jesse Klaver Blogs Blogs: Editor Law & Administration Bureau London Career Longreads serv pro Tech Cooking Climate NRC Lab Ombudsman Opinion Columns Columns: Youp Bas Heijne Simone Marcel van Roosmalen Wilfried de Jong Carolien Roelants René Moerland Marc Chavannes Culture Culture: Books Wide Fashion Music Career Highlights Search
The high word is out: it is 40 percent less in 2030. In a ménage à trois, as he called serv pro it, with Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger and Climate Commissioner serv pro Connie Hedegaard defended Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, in his great ambitions of the future European climate policy. A message must be clear: in this triangular relationship the climate was the winner.
Twitter reported Connie Hedegaard (in the role of the climate) its victory by saying, "We got it: 40% GHG and AT LEAST 27% RES as a EU TARGET BINDING :-). Oettinger acknowledged that he had lost the battle. serv pro He admitted he would have preferred that the reduction only 35 percent had been.
Critics of the Brussels plans aroused serv pro by Hedegaard annoyance. She could not make a firm swipe to divide the environmental movement (I myself, who knows, soon also will be working, she said there soon to) when you stand on the sidelines, it is easy to call Europe should opt for a reduction of greenhouse gases by 55 percent by 2030 (compared to base year 1990).
But perhaps those critics do have a point. By itself, a reduction serv pro of 40 percent is not so bad, but only if another problem (namely the huge surplus of allowances, making the price for the CO 2 emissions remains too low) would finally be solved structurally. But there they are in Brussels not sure yet.
But the strangest part of the new climate on the second part of Hedegaards tweet, about 27 percent renewable energy. A binding EU target Hedegaard calls it. That is, at European level, 27 percent of the energy (at least, "Hedegaard said there is still emphatically at) must be sustainable in 2030. That is not an optional number, or so we may not see that from the European Commission. But because the individual Member States is not a legally binding target, the question is who is accountable as 27 percent is not achieved (the Commission itself found previously at least 30 percent).
The goal is at least 27% of energy consumption. It is a function of the 40% target, Because we can not reach the greenhouse gas targets without a collective effort on renewables. Having Such a European Union renewables objective is ook a very important signal to investors who need long-term certainty to make investments, and ook a clear signal in terms of our security serv pro of supply. However, we propose not to set binding national serv pro targets for renewables anymore, individually from Member State to Member State as we do now; Because one lesson we have drawn from experience is thatthey risk the fragmentation of the internal market and do not allow us to reach the targets in the most cost effective way. Here we will lead a bottom-up approach, leaving more flexibility to member states. They will work with us to make sure the national efforts add up to the European Union target.
Oettinger argued that the Commission had also to take into account serv pro countries get 90 percent of their energy from coal-fired power plants (he meant Poland) or about three-quarters of nuclear energy (France).
"If these binding target is not converted to binding targets and measures for Member States, this will lead to an uncertain (political) decision-making process can take years. The result is that not only creates uncertainty for business investment towards 2030, but it can also be a negative impact on investment and employment related serv pro to the 2020 target of 14% renewable energy in the Netherlands. "
It should thereby be said that those 14 percent, serv pro if we get all, what is not a binding agreement was set out in the EU (ie 20 per cent in 2020). serv pro That would be difficult, we knew that already.
Yet, mark my words, this trend will continue. Increasingly, it is said that climate can only count on support if the measures are no longer imposed from above and sufficiently flexible.
If even Europe, the champion of the "legally binding climate agreements', now choose" bottom-up "when they fail to make firm commitments, the question is what will the climate be in the end result in 2015 Paris. That a climate or a term that is nowadays increasingly, a climate package?
"Professor Kevin Anderson, Deputy Director of the Tynda

No comments:

Post a Comment