Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-03-Speech-2-232"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-07-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Electricity from renewable energy sources2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010703.12.2-232"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-07-03-Speech-2-2332
lpv:speaker	lp:Ward Beysen2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Vlaamse liberalen en democraten (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; ELDR (1999-07-20--2003-02-10)3 vice-chair; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Malta Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should first of all like to thank Mrs Rothe for the sterling work she has done and by means of which she has laid the keystone for the first component: legislation in the field of renewable energy sources. Where should we focus our attention? First of all, upon the target figure of 12%, to be obtained by 2010. It is, of course, very tempting to underline that it would have had a greater impact if it had been a binding target percentage, rather than an indicative target figure, as it is now. I personally am in favour of imposing binding target figures, as long as the prescribed target figures are realistic and obtainable. Also taking into consideration the many unknown factors in the development of renewable energy, it appears to me particularly sensible to determine indicative target figures on the one hand, but at the same time to give the Commission some scope to submit proposals containing binding target figures to the Council and Parliament if it were to transpire that results were inadequate. The second area of attention concerns the clear delineation of waste originating from separate waste collection and waste originating from combined waste collection. Needless to say, I can only consider the incineration of separate waste and, more specifically, the biologically degradable component of industrial and household waste, as a renewable energy source. Opponents wrongly claim that the incineration of household waste would curb the use of so-called real renewables, such as wind and solar energy, increase CO2 emissions and undermine recycling policy and restrictions on waste production. It is therefore proof of sound judgment that, in its definition of what are, and are not, to be regarded as renewable energy sources, the common position leaves room for different types of renewable energy sources and, more specifically, for the incineration of separate waste. I can fully identify with this position."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph