Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-03-24-Speech-3-047"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100324.12.3-047"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, the Spring Summit is supposed to be the energy summit.
Had the Copenhagen conference ended with a global agreement, we would already be discussing the technical details of moving to a 30% emissions reduction, and we must still do so.
Firstly, because the level of ambition agreed at the 2007 Spring Summit translates to a much higher than 20% reduction in today’s economic circumstances. Just last week, Nobuo Tanaka, the executive director of the deeply cautious International Energy Agency (IEA), told MEPs that the IEA’s 2009 World Energy Outlook predicts a 23% reduction in EU emissions and that 30% would represent a good target.
Secondly, if we are serious about achieving up to a 95% target by 2050, then the roadmap requires a cut of at least 30% by 2020.
And, last but not least, it is only the transformation of the EU into a sustainable low carbon and resource efficient economy which will ensure European economic recovery and job creation.
Green jobs lie at the heart of the EU 2020 strategy. Therefore, the Council should back Commissioner Hedegaard and recognise that the conditions are now right to move to a 30% target, and the Council should recognise that the cheapest and easiest way to make that further cut is through energy efficiency and, specifically, a binding energy efficiency target.
EU leaders need to deliver as clear a message at this 2010 Spring Summit as they did in spring 2007."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples