Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-09-24-Speech-1-121"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070924.16.1-121"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, if we are to promote renewable energy sources we have to be precise about what need we are aiming to meet by using them. It is one thing to be a trailblazer, whatever the price, achieving one’s targets and percentages, and quite another to find multi-sectorally sustainable energy solutions that have far-reaching consequences. It is already clear that the target percentages set and the EU’s environmental and climate targets are, unfortunately, incompatible in terms of their achievement. Despite that, we have decided to try to meet the targets, with the result that we have an energy market which is artificially manipulated at the consumers’ expense and energy solutions which are unsustainable in terms of climate balance and which need to be revised. Compliance with a minimum binding target of 10% for biofuels used in transport would be an unfortunate example of this.
If this is about the fight against climate change, then switching to biofuels will not be the answer. It can hardly be the right way to go in a world where a food shortage is a likely scenario, given the greenhouse gas phenomenon. The concern expressed in a study published by the OECD that state subsidies for biofuels could lead to a rise in the price of food and damage to forests is a genuine one, considering that their contribution to the prevention of climate change may be smaller than predicted. The same concern is raised in an article in the journal ‘Science’, where the benefit of biofuels to climate is compared with afforestation over a 30-year period. The findings vary depending on the raw material and production technology, but in all cases afforestation in a given area of cultivation would absorb two to nine times more carbon than the reduction in emissions achieved by using biofuels.
What we need now is common sense when it comes to meeting targets. Otherwise we will soon realise that the decision sharply to raise the share of renewable energy sources to one fifth of energy production was a hasty one and one that will one day be a threat to the environment through the overfelling of forests."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples