Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-24-Speech-1-159"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051024.19.1-159"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, I would like to start by thanking my colleague Mrs Doyle for doing such an outstanding job. I am in complete agreement with the line she has taken.
That the Kyoto Protocol was able to enter into force was primarily a result of the efforts of the European Union. Three of the six gases listed in it are f-gases, the use of which has been prohibited outright by both Austria and Denmark. It is abundantly clear, not only from experience in these countries, but also from innovations in other Member States, that technically and economically workable alternatives to fluorinated gases are available, and that they do less damage to the environment. Alternatives to a wide range of products and installations are available, and are capable of bringing about a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions; some of them even reduce energy consumption at the same time.
A large number of European manufacturers are capable of putting alternatives on the market. Consumers are already able to shop in supermarkets in which the refrigerators use alternatives to f-gases. The German Federal Office for the Environment has produced a comprehensive study of the availability and efficiency of the alternatives showing that alternatives are indeed available for many important applications.
Something else that needs to be mentioned is the lack of ambition apparent from the Common Position. The proposal for a regulation on certain f-gases takes insufficient account of tried, tested and already available developments. The imposition of bans and restrictions that can simply be neglected not only stifles ecological innovation in this area, but also robs the Community of any credibility where the development of eco-efficient solutions is concerned.
Moreover, the Council’s Common Position on the Regulation does not allow the Member States to do anything ambitious and of their own free will and accord about seeking technical alternatives. The EU’s burden-sharing agreement commits different Member States to very diverse targets for the reduction of greenhouse gases, and so individual Member States need to take different measures to achieve them. That is why it is absolutely crucial that Article 175 should be the legal basis for the whole Regulation."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples