Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-01-16-Speech-2-247"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010116.11.2-247"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Commissioner, the reason I ask this question is simply because my fellow Members in the European Parliament have been working for 15 years for renewable energy to be taken into account. The Commission is beginning to incorporate it, but renewable energy is apparently continuing to be viewed as a back-up supply rather than as the energy of the future. The facts are clear, and the view is expressed that funding is not sufficient, especially compared with levels of investment made in the past for other forms of energy.
On the other hand, nuclear energy and nuclear-based electricity, which does not produce any greenhouse gas, were widely promoted as part of the fight against the greenhouse effect, and it was basically asserted that nuclear energy could be seen as an alternative to combat the greenhouse effect. Therefore, this is why we asked the question, to see if the Commission is still on the same wavelength, in wishing to continue to develop renewable energy in both the European Union, and elsewhere in the world, and not just as a backup energy source."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples