Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-09-29-Speech-4-064-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110929.4.4-064-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I am grateful to the many Members who have signed this oral question.
The EU’s objectives in terms of the fight against climate change have resulted in the implementation of what are very demanding EU policies and measures for European industry. The target of reducing CO
emissions is, at present, a unilateral commitment that is exposing a large proportion of Europe’s industrial system and, in particular, its energy-intensive industries to a high risk of carbon leakage.
The emission reduction targets, while worthy in their aims, should be pursued in a realistic and practical way. We are calling on the Commission to adjust the tools for applying the Emissions Trading System (ETS) and the financial compensation measures envisaged as carefully and as accurately as possible, in order to prevent any imbalances in the EU internal market.
Under Directive 2003/87/EC, as amended in 2009, thermal power companies will be obliged, from 2013, to purchase allowances for all of their CO
emissions, which means that the increased costs will be passed on in electricity prices and hence, that production costs will rise significantly.
According to Eurostat data, the ETS will cost European industry an estimated EUR 8.5 billion more each year in increased electricity prices. Indirect emissions, as opposed to direct emissions, do not benefit from a compensation system to prevent differences in treatment between industries in the same sector that have different production processes and which face obvious distortions of competition within the European Union.
If an equivalent compensation system is not established for indirect emissions, there is a very great risk that companies will relocate. Choosing sectors exposed to carbon leakage on the basis of the NACE code classification system is simplistic and restrictive, since it does not allow for the specific type of energy-intensive production to be identified, with the result that compensation cannot be granted to subsectors.
In the case of steel production, there are two production processes: the electric furnace and the full cycle, which uses fossil fuels and a small amount of electricity; it will receive almost all of the free allocation of allowances for direct emissions.
The electric furnace process, on the other hand, will receive only 30% of the free allowances due to the lack of a compensation system for the electricity portion, even though it emits a fifth of the CO
produced by the full cycle. Therefore, because of the type of production process used, the same product will see its price increase in Europe.
Fears of such a market imbalance have been voiced by many parties, by many industrial sectors, as can be seen from the responses to the public consultation launched by the Directorate General for Competition. How does the Commission intend to proceed with regard to State aid for energy-intensive industries, in order to ensure the continuation of European industry and to guarantee jobs and prosperity? Could the revenues from the sale of allowances not be used to offset the imbalances that will be created from 2013? Are we certain that the sale of allowances will not lead to speculation? How does the Commission intend to rectify competitive disadvantages?"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"2"1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples