Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-11-13-Speech-1-124"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20061113.18.1-124"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
". Mr President, since Mr Reul, two or three days after the electricity blackout, went on German radio to attack wind energy in much the same way that Mr Glos and E.ON had done, I am glad to hear him, ten days on from the event, declaring that he has nothing against it. It has since become clear that German wind energy did absolutely nothing to help bring this calamity to pass, since the wind on that day was quite normal. ‘Day ahead’ was delivered, and it did indeed turn out that the wind farms in Germany had made a vital contribution to getting the grid up and running again, in other words, in those situations in which it is possible to define a good interface between the grid operators, the regulators and the providers of wind energy, wind energy did in fact, have positive effects on the grid. In Spain, by contrast, many wind farms were taken out of the grid during a moment of low frequency, which makes no sense whatever, as wind farms are less vulnerable to low frequency than other generation facilities, and they could have helped to stabilise the Spanish network. What can this breakdown teach us? The first thing it can teach us is that we have to prepare the networks for long-term investments in energy; electricity generation will migrate to the coasts, and I am talking here not just about wind energy, but also about condensing power plants, which will find it impossible to cool themselves down further inland by reason of the warmer climate and warmer rivers. We will also have to invest much more in decentralised energy provision, in the shape of biomass, biogas, combined heat and power, as well as gas power stations, which can be sited close to the centres of consumption in industry or in towns, which will, to some degree, compensate for this migration and enable us, by means of these decentralised investments, to make more room on the networks for business. Secondly, what is needed is an EU regulator – not one who will abolish the national regulatory authorities, but an EU regulator with quite specific functions in the sphere of trans-European electricity trading, improving not only transparency but also the interfaces between the national networks. We need this authority right now, but with a clearly defined and narrower spectrum. Thirdly, the networks are in need of long-term investment, and that cannot be maintained on the basis of high yields in the short term. It is precisely because E.ON and RWE want returns of 30% that we need ownership unbundling, for such high yields are not necessary in a monopoly sector, where no more than a return of between 6% and 8% on the investment to be made is needed. A clear separation of the grid’s interests and the production and trading interests will improve security of supply and also the European network’s capacity to act."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph