Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-05-12-Speech-1-079"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030512.7.1-079"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the drawing up of this Directive and Parliament’s report on this legislative instrument has been very laborious, but I would not say that there has been confrontation, but rather a progressive and patient convergence towards rigour and the service of the European general interest by bringing together arguments and points of view.
The three central points we have achieved, Mr President, by means of this long discussion, have been, firstly, to place primary energy saving at the heart of the Directive as an essential defining parameter; secondly, to calculate the percentage energy saving in relation to the electricity produced and not in relation to the total of heat plus electricity, in order to emphasise where the energy saving is achieved; and finally we have distinguished clearly between two situations: that of those installations which work permanently producing heat and electricity simultaneously and that of those which, because of the way they operate and the purposes they serve, produce electricity and heat simultaneously only for part of the year, and the rest of the year work exclusively in condensation mode.
Mr President, these three points were essential to achieving the aim of this Directive, which was a good definition of cogeneration, and which will allow us to define a good system for stimulating this form of energy production, leading to what we are all seeking: savings of primary energy, reduction of CO2 emissions and increasing the Union’s independence with regard to the external supply of energy sources.
Unfortunately, this discussion, which we have all participated in with great enthusiasm, dedication and goodwill, has not been enough for the whole of the House – Mr Turmes for example – but neither can we expect everybody to understand everything straightaway. I am sure that Mr Turmes, who is very knowledgeable in this field, will continue considering it, and that what he cannot see today he will soon see clearly. I am happy to continue explaining the same things both to him and his collaborators, as I have done up till now – although having heard his speech I see that I have not been successful – because talking to him is always a pleasure, in political and human terms.
Mr Glante, please allow me to address an observation expressly to you, and I would like to thank you warmly for your receptiveness and cooperation throughout the work we have done together: when a sculpture is finished and is almost perfect, there are always certain final touches which make it absolutely perfect. I would draw your attention to Amendments Nos 75 and 81, which correspond to the agreement we reached after the meeting in committee and which our group considers to be essential: Amendment No 75, which removes the threshold of 80%, which no longer makes sense, and Amendment No 81, which clearly distinguishes between each type of installation.
Commissioner, General de Gaulle said that policy is action at the service of a strong, simple and clear idea. If this is the case, Commissioner, you have a European energy policy in mind and, as long as you continue to develop it, this Parliament will support you, because it fulfils objectives which we all wish to achieve: increasing our competitiveness, guaranteeing the well-being of all Europeans and greater economic growth."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples