Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-06-22-Speech-3-322-000"
|Predicate||Value (sorted: default)|
|dcterms:Is Part Of|
|lpv:document identification number||
substitute; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
"In its original form, the report shows an enormous amount of amateurish enthusiasm and a somewhat unrealistic attempt to ignore the reality of electricity supplies today, as well as presenting a catalogue of wishful thinking. It is likely that all EU citizens will applaud the bold plans for emissions reductions of 80-95% by 2050. Yet when we get down to details, the plan as it currently stands ought to be based on the fully realistic opportunities offered by current energy resources. It is impossible to eliminate the use of coal and natural gas from one day to the next, and incidentally there has been a marked increase in the use of natural gas in recent years in EU Member States. In connection with the hysteria which broke out after the earthquake in Japan and the problems concerning the reactor at the Fukushima power plant, the citizens of certain EU Member States decided to move away from nuclear energy within a relatively short space of time, although there are still no signs of any generalised problem. In concrete terms, we can see that the EU does not have any transmission lines that could transmit a sufficient quantity of electricity from north to south or east to west. It is widely known that the wind does not blow all the time, even in North Germany, and solar cells, which currently have an efficiency of around 11%, can only convert the solar energy which falls on them into electrical current. The output of solar power stations thus fluctuates considerably over the course of a day and during the year. I support the conclusions of the report by the Confederal Group of the European United Left – Nordic Green Left, but they must necessarily be followed up a detailed analysis of the plans."@en1
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples