Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-04-23-Speech-4-487"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-04-23"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Ecodesign requirements for energy-related products (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20090423.69.4-487"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-04-23-Speech-4-4882
lpv:speaker	lp:Satu Hassi2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Vihreä liitto (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ITRE (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 vice-chair; ENVI (2007-02-01--2009-07-13)3 member; G/EFA (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, my sincere thanks go to the rapporteur, Mr Csibi, for his excellent work. The Ecodesign Directive is not one of those matters the media or the general public would get worked up about, but actually it is about something that is very important, although I also share Mr Wijkman’s view that the perspective should be widened to cover resource efficiency in general. All the surveys that have analysed the cost of climate protection show that it is by saving energy that we will cut emissions fastest and more cheaply. If we impose energy efficiency requirements on equipment and products we will save significantly on energy significantly, without the public needing to go to a lot of extra trouble. Buildings are estimated to cause 36% of greenhouse gas emissions in the EU. According to reports we have all seen, improving the energy efficiency of buildings is one of the most economical ways of protecting the climate. Now we are to broaden the scope of the Ecodesign Directive, imposing energy requirements, for example, for windows and wall and insulation elements in buildings. That is only right, and I think it is excellent that we have not allowed the chemical industry lobbyists to block this very necessary decision. This directive will do much to help us reach the 20% energy saving target. Another important means at our disposal is the energy labelling of equipment. It is pathologically stupid that the Commission should try to do away with the A to G scale, which has worked so well, which consumers have become familiar with, and which has provided a model elsewhere in the world. I am pleased that the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy this week adopted a firm position in favour of keeping the A to G scale and updating its criteria as technology develops. I hope that the Commission will at last pay heed to the very strong and clear view of this Parliament."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph