Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-03-10-Speech-2-050"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090310.6.2-050"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, if there are any weaknesses in the Nitrates and Water Framework Directives, I think issues in relation to pig, poultry and dairy activities must be addressed there. I do think the compliance costs would outweigh the benefits of their inclusion in this particular piece of legislation. But there are other legislative vehicles for tackling these particular sectors and they must be looked at on that basis.
On the issue of large combustion plants, the EU ETS operation today does not safeguard against design lock-in of unnecessary pollution in many new high-cost and high-emitting installations, particularly in new coal-fired plants which, when built, would expect to operate for over 40 years, thus making it difficult and more expensive to meet overall climate goals.
CO
emission performance standards would help ensure the electricity sector is decarbonised to a timetable consistent both with limiting increases in global average temperatures to less than 2 °C and with bringing new, cleaner technologies on-stream. Industry needs, above all, legislative certainty to make investment decisions on these large, expensive, capital projects. A 350 g limit would ensure that only the most efficient state of the art gas-fired plants, for example, are built. CO
standards that apply from, say, 2020 would mean that new coal-fired plant stations could only be built after entry into force of this proposal, providing they use CO
capture equipment from 2020 onwards, by when we expect CCS to be commercially available. Existing installations would have a longer period to comply with the standard, either by adding CO
capture technology or, indeed, by closing down. Installations could also comply with the standard in other ways, for example, by co-firing biomass or by using the heat from cogen techniques.
As rapporteur on the recent EU ETS review, I am concerned with the overall level of ambition across all our policies. The latest science shows us that we need to have stricter emission limits over a shorter timetable if we are to achieve the 2 °C target which, by our vote on the climate and energy package in December, we as a Parliament accept as necessary for the environmental, social and economic future of society. The ETS alone will not be enough to cut electricity sector emissions on the scale required.
To conclude, there is comfort in an ESN, but I am still worried that this may be an incentive to the lowest possible common denominator and minimal emission reductions – in other words, a race to the bottom. Please convince me otherwise."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"2"1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples