Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-01-31-Speech-3-083"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070131.19.3-083"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we have a four-fold challenge in front of us: firstly, there is climate change itself and the public desire to tackle it; secondly, international involvement in the fight against climate change; thirdly, the innovation required for a change in production methods and the use of energy; and lastly, our countries’ adaptation to the inevitable effects of climate change.
It is tempting to ask: what is Europe actually waiting for before properly opening up the debate on nuclear power, by which I mean serious, dispassionate debate? I would call on you to hold this debate without any further delay. The option of renewable energy is admittedly a very appealing one, but we have no choice but to look at these things realistically.
Let us take two examples: wind energy and biofuels. The former accounts for 0.05% of the world’s energy consumption. How fast would we have to develop wind energy in order to achieve 2% annual growth in global consumption of such energy over a period of 30 years? It is impossible even to contemplate. Biofuels, on the other hand, are an interesting, media-friendly way of dealing with a problem of agricultural policy, but the possibilities offered by biofuels are limited by available agricultural space.
Mr Dimas, you will have to convince your fellow Commissioner, Mr Verheugen, not to hinder our ambitions. Mr Gabriel, there are some battles in which we will have to support certain industries that, faced with this global threat, are leading rearguard actions. I trust that German car makers will be able to come up with the kind of positive responses that are sorely needed.
What, then, are we to say to third countries? Do we tell China, for example, that it has no right to develop its economy? Not to mention the hypocrisy of Europe patting itself on the back about emissions trading.
To conclude, those who indulge in alarmism will only end up destabilising public opinion. We must raise awareness and inform the public, but making people afraid serves no purpose. It is not constructive. We should try to propose workable solutions. This requires everyone to make an effort, and time is our only priority."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples