Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-25-Speech-3-258"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001025.11.3-258"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, our climate is already changing. Over the past one thousand years, we have seen a drop in the temperature by one-fifth of a degree. But over the past fifty years, it has become one and a half degrees warmer. This warming process is accelerating all the time. Many citizens like the idea of a climate one or two degrees warmer, but the warm Gulf Stream which is giving us a pleasant climate at the moment could turn at any time. Europe would then acquire a climate like that in Canada, where, for many weeks during winter, the temperature is between –20 to –30.
We need radical measures to stop global warming. The Kyoto Protocol is too restricted. The increase in air traffic in the next fifteen years alone will cancel out the reductions achieved via the Kyoto Protocol. China is already emitting more greenhouse gases than is sustainable. We cannot turn a blind eye to this.
After 2020, developing countries too are supposed to fight greenhouse gases, but on an equal footing. Each world citizen has the same right to emit CO2. American citizens should not be entitled to emit two hundred times more CO2 than people in East Africa. On the basis of equity, the international trade in CO2 certificates is supposed to be going ahead after 2008. Only on this basis will developing countries, such as China and India, get involved.
Opting in The Hague for the American line of grandfathering will block this route. Energy efficiency and renewable energy sources are the way forward, both in the North and in the South, and not 25 cm high bushes, as the Australian government is proposing, or other forest projects which cannot be verified.
Subsidising nuclear energy with Clean Development Mechanism funding is not the answer either. That would be perverse at a time when America and Europe are doing nothing but closing down nuclear power stations. Fortunately, our ministers and the Commission are on the right side. I wish them tenacity on behalf of my group.
The swift ratification of the Kyoto Protocol is the right way forward. We should not rely on the American Senate. After ratification, CO2 emission will have a price tag. At present, it is still free to the large industries and the electricity producers in Europe, which are, together, responsible for 45% of CO2 emissions.
The Green Paper on greenhouse gas emissions trading within Europe is an excellent initiative. Europe must make every effort to achieve this 8% objective. I would call on the European Commission to come up with extra proposals to curtail emissions in the transport sector. Only if we achieve this 8% objective can we be credible. And only then are climatic breakthroughs at world level possible."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples