Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-25-Speech-3-265"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001025.11.3-265"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, some people are attempting to get the nuclear debate put back on the agenda. I believe that European environment ministers have so far adopted the very wise approach of excluding it from the list of flexible mechanisms. Nuclear power is more expensive than other options, such as energy efficiency, for example, and every dollar that is invested in nuclear power is denied to other investments that are much more profitable.
Nuclear power does not really meet the needs of people, who also want to live in heated or air-conditioned homes, depending on the climatic zones in which they live. Nuclear power does not provide a single solution. But solutions can be found in cogeneration, based on biomass or gas. Nuclear power is still dangerous. The accident at Tokaimura clearly showed this. And fifty years after the start of civil nuclear power, there are still no solutions as to what do with nuclear waste. We have already invested billions in research and we still have not made any progress.
I fervently believe that we must appreciate the importance of energy efficiency. We can help the Chinese, the Indians, Indonesia and the Pakistanis much more by giving them the means to buy refrigerators that do not consume much energy, because there will be 800 million refrigerators over the next ten years. That is what will dictate the CO2 emissions of developing countries, rather than the two, three, four or five nuclear reactors that could be sold to them."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples