EUklimaatbeleid op de terugtocht
Maar lang niet voldoende om verder verval van de Europese industrie te voorkomen.
Onder de titel, 'Back from the brink?', publiceerde 'The Scientific Alliance' een zeer doordachte analyse van de nieuw voorstellen van de Europese Commissie.
This week, the European Commission made its latest proposals on energy and climate change policy, summarised in the news release 2030 climate and energy goals for a competitive, secure and low-carbon EU economy. This may not be the snappiest headline, but it is nonetheless very significant.
The first thing to note is the order of the words: competitive and secure come before low-carbon. This could be taken as a signal that priorities are changing, with the need for emissions reduction no longer trumping everything else. But, as with most things in the EU, its not as simple as that, and we have to look as much at what is not said as the words themselves.
One of the most important points is that binding national targets for renewable energy are dropped. Beyond 2020, for which goals are still in place, Member States would not risk large fines for missing targets. But although there are no national targets, a new figure of a 27% contribution of renewables across the EU as a whole is proposed (from 20% in 2020). As the policy statement (2030 framework for climate and energy policies) puts it, While binding on the EU, the target would not be translated into national targets through EU legislation. In what way such a target could be binding is not clear: would the Commission fine itself?
The renewables industry will wait with bated breath for the details to become clear, but the best interpretation of this for them is that enthusiasm and support for wind, solar and even less well-developed technologies is declining and will drop off substantially after 2020, unless costs of both generation and system integration come down substantially. This could mark the beginning of the end for heavily subsidised renewables, which have proved to be a very expensive way to make even modest reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. ...
On the other hand, the rhetoric does not suggest a weakening of the overall ambition on climate mitigation; the other key goal in the policy is a reduction in emissions of 40% by 2030. Although the green lobby is criticising the weakness of the target, this is actually a very big task, considering that the 20% target for 2020 will to a large extent only have been achieved (if indeed it is) by continued run-down of heavy industries during the 1990s, with considerable help from the extended economic crisis and period of recession in recent years. Energy efficiency has also surely had a role to play, but this has probably been driven as much by the natural desire to cut costs as utility bills mount as by government policy.
Commission President Barroso is quoted as saying "Climate action is central for the future of our planet, while a truly European energy policy is key for our competitiveness. Today's package proves that tackling the two issues simultaneously is not contradictory, but mutually reinforcing. It is in the EU's interest to build a job-rich economy that is less dependent on imported energy through increased efficiency and greater reliance on domestically produced clean energy. An ambitious 40% greenhouse reduction target for 2030 is the most cost-effective milestone in our path towards a low-carbon economy. And the renewables target of at least 27% is an important signal: to give stability to investors, boost green jobs and support our security of supply".
Well, he would say that, wouldnt he. But, whatever the fine words, the thrust of EU policy on emissions reduction has been weakened, possibly fatally, by the lack of binding targets for Member States. ...
Despite its criticism of current policies, the Economist still firmly believes climate change mitigation action must be taken now: The continent therefore has a responsibility to get the world to change its waysand to change its own. . . if Europeans could make their carbon market work, other countries might even take notice and follow suit.
This seems a naïve and forlorn hope. As mentioned in last weeks newsletter (Fuelling the future), the BP Energy Outlook 2035 paints a different picture, which does not seem to have been seriously questioned. By this reckoning, global energy demand will have risen by 41% from 2012 to 2035, with carbon dioxide emissions being 29% higher. Even if the EU had a coherent and workable emissions reduction policy, there seems no rational incentive for China, India, Brazil or the USA to follow suit unless it makes economic sense.
Perhaps the outgoing European Commission is beginning to bow to the inevitable, pulling us back from the brink of an unworkable near future based on unaffordable renewable energy.
Ik neem aan dat het volledige stuk t.z.t. hier verschijnt.
Ook Dolf van Wijk schonk op Climategate.nl aandacht aan de nieuwe Commissievoorstellen.
Een van de vaste respondenten, 'Turris', schreef:
Goede analyse Dolf! Echter ik onderstreep iets scherper de echte en realistische conclusies uit Barossos buraucratisch gezwam: Climate action (1) is central for the future of our planet, while a truly European energy policy (2) is key for our competitiveness (3). Todays package proves that tackling the two issues simultaneously (4) is not contradictory, but mutually reinforcing (5)
(1) = nonsens: Kyoto-protocol leidde tot 40% meer CO2 uitstoot sinds verdragsdatum.
(2) = nonsens: Windenergie en PV-energie kost 4x meer dan fossiel gedreven energie en CO2-loze kernenergie.
(3) = nonsens: Europees jarenlang concurrentie verlies aan opkomende economieën in Azië, Zuid Amerika is aanzienlijk, en sinds 2 jaar toenemend aan USA vanwege de schaliegas economische boom aldaar.
(4) en (5) = nonsens: werkt elkaar juist gelijktijdig tegen.
(2) = nonsens: Windenergie en PV-energie kost 4x meer dan fossiel gedreven energie en CO2-loze kernenergie.
(3) = nonsens: Europees jarenlang concurrentie verlies aan opkomende economieën in Azië, Zuid Amerika is aanzienlijk, en sinds 2 jaar toenemend aan USA vanwege de schaliegas economische boom aldaar.
(4) en (5) = nonsens: werkt elkaar juist gelijktijdig tegen.
Aldus Turris.
Hier past slechts een simpel 'amen'!
Gezien het hier aangetoonde hoge onbenulgehalte van de leiding, is het hoogst onwenselijk om nog meer soevereiniteit over te dragen aan de EU.
Commentaar van Benny Peiser (directeur van de GWPF) is altijd de moeite waard:
The European Commission has finally begun rolling back the EUs ruinous climate and green energy policies. But its modest climbdown does not signal the end of the climate hysteria that has dominated Brussels for nearly 20 years. The proposed targets have triggered protests from energy-intensive industries across Europe. Eurofer, an umbrella group for Europes steel producers, has called on leaders to weaken the targets much further. The roll-back is in part an acknowledgement that Europes green agenda has been an unmitigated fiasco, causing skyrocketing energy prices across Europe and harming competitiveness. But the old guard of commissioners are trying to salvage a green legacy before they are replaced in the autumn by a set of commissioners more concerned about Europes economic future. A more significant retreat from unilateral climate policies is likely to gather speed, and the proposed targets may not survive.
Bron hier.
Hoe zal het nu verder gaan?
Het meest waarschijnlijk scenario lijkt mij dat de opwarmings'pauze' (of afkoeling) de komende jaren doorzet. De wetenschap zal langzaam algemeen tot het inzicht komen dat de klimaatgevoeligheid voor CO2 veel lager is dan eerder werd aangenomen en dat de rol van de zon tijdenlang is onderschat. Hierdoor zal de druk om tot een decarbonisering van de economie te komen, afnemen. De Europese economie blijft kwakkelen. Energieintensieve bedrijven gaan failliet of vertrekken naar gunstiger vestigingsplaatsen met een navenant verlies aan arbeidsplaatsen en sociale ellende. De politiek druk vanuit de samenleving en in het bijzonder het bedrijfsleven zal de nieuwe Europese Commissie doen besluiten om ook de 20% CO2reductiedoelstelling om te zetten van een bindend percentage in een streefgetal. Als de lidstaten dit niet halen, zullen daaraan geen sancties zijn verbonden. Op die manier kan het Europese klimaatbeleid geruisloos worden geliquideerd en kan begonnen worden met het ruimen van het puin dat dit beleid heeft achtergelaten. Degenen die hiervoor verantwoordelijk zijn, zullen worden gestraft met een langdurige verbanning. Zij zullen hun oude dag in hun riante buitenhuizen in zonnige oorden in ledigheid moeten doorbrengen. Een beschaafde variant op de Goelag!
De toekomst zal leren of dit wensdenken is of niet.
Maar let op mijn woorden! DDS brengt de nieuwsfeiten voordat ze plaatsvinden (grapje!).
Voor mijn eerdere DDSbijdragen zie hier.
Ga verder met lezen
Dit vind je misschien ook leuk
Laat mensen jouw mening weten
Lees ook