Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-09-24-Speech-1-083"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070924.16.1-083"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs |
substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3
|
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to thank my colleague Britta Thomsen for this report. It once again raises the energy debate at European level.
Our energy industry is affected not only by outsiders, but also by our own mistakes. These should not be forgotten. We have, for example, allowed our spare capacity to fall by around 1% every year, and that is creating insecurity.
I want to draw your attention first of all to the position regarding electricity produced from renewable forms of energy. Mrs Thomsen and I have drafted an amendment to her report on this very subject. It is important that there is proper support for electricity produced from renewable sources of energy. Renewable energy should also be a means of relieving fuel poverty. The industrialised countries must develop techniques and methods to help ensure that poor nations can rely on a supply of energy. Now economic poverty, information poverty and energy poverty are all hitting the same people.
Meanwhile, in Europe, there cannot be a viable single energy market as long as most of the Member States fail to adhere to jointly-made agreements. It has therefore turned out that solidarity in the EU looks likely to lack solidarity.
It is always awkward setting targets for energy production and use, and it has to be based on reliable science. Sector-specific targets for renewable energy at national level therefore need to be established with careful consideration. The circumstances relating to energy vary enormously. We should, for example, discuss with the Member States monitoring schemes, classifications of biofuels for transport and the status of nuclear energy, when calculating targets for renewable energy. Nuclear power, as an emission-free form of energy, should not raise the target for renewable energy.
The Commission has classified peat as a fossil fuel, although the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has moved it into a category of its own, somewhere between fossil fuels and biofuels. Now we have obtained new and positive results from research into peat’s effect on climate, with reference to the lifecycle model. When a bog is exploited first for peat production and then either for afforestation or the cultivation of reed canary grass, it has less of an effect on climate. At present in the Emissions Trading Scheme peat has an emission factor of 106, whilst with coal it is only 94.6, because the calculations have not taken account of the entire lifecycle of peat use. This should be put right quickly, Commissioner."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples