Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-20-Speech-4-052"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000120.4.4-052"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would thank the rapporteur for the proposal, with which I completely agree. I am also grateful for the constructive cooperation between the Groups, in which we have reached compromises I find to be responsible, apposite and to the point. We therefore support these in our Group.
Why are we concerning ourselves with this issue? To put it very briefly, it is a question of limiting man-made carbon dioxide emissions. We know that, as Asia obtains a higher standard of living, 1.4 billion Chinese and 1 billion Indians will begin to use more and more energy, and this means that, when they begin to demand ordinary basic comforts such as warm water and perhaps air conditioning, means of transport and modern industry, their consumption of energy will rise dramatically from its present figure of 10% of the EU’s average energy consumption. In Rio, we undertook to protect the climate. The present document completely fulfils this purpose. We note that, of man-made carbon dioxide emissions, 30% come from electricity generation and 35% of all energy used in the EU is obtained from electricity.
In the EU, strip lights account for 53% of electricity used for lighting and, if we succeed in implementing what we have planned, we shall, by the year 2020, be preventing six million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions per year. We shall conserve 10% of the electricity consumed by strip lighting and, converted into cash, this will be a saving of EUR 250 million per year. The present proposal will therefore have quite a significant impact on the climate and on the economy and, by implementing it as suggested, we shall be giving our industry a long time in which to make the changeover. Mr Turmes was in favour of this, and I would remind you that industry has, in any case, known since 1992 that, by approximately the year 2009, magnetic ballasts would be more or less prohibited. There is therefore nothing new in what we are doing.
In the compromise we have prepared, we have been united on the issue of increasing energy efficiency. We wished to protect the climate. We wished to achieve economic advantages, and we wished to be sure that, in phasing out certain uses of energy, we did not unnecessarily burden ordinary consumers in ordinary homes with making investments on which there can be no return. At the same time, we have ensured that we in the northern part of the Union – in northern Finland, northern Sweden, northern Norway, Greenland and other places – where electronic ballasts are no use, may continue to use magnetic ballasts. This is, all in all, a splendid proposal, and I recommend that we all give it our backing and support in the form in which it was agreed in the Groups."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples