Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-12-17-Speech-3-182"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081217.16.3-182"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The overhaul of emissions trading is a step forward compared with the current rules. Emissions allowances will gradually be auctioned off to industry instead of being handed out free of charge, as they are today.
The EU is therefore committed to adjusting the climate target from a 20% to a 30% reduction by 2020 in the event of a successful climate agreement in Copenhagen next year. It also calls on Member States to use their auctioning revenues for climate protection measures in Europe and elsewhere.
Unfortunately, the compromise falls way short of the level of ambition that the situation requires. Instead of full auctioning of emissions allowances from the beginning, auctioning is to be introduced in stages. This relaxation reduces the incentive to develop new low-carbon technologies. It also reduces the revenue that is essential if the EU is to be able to help developing countries to invest in ‘green technology’, adapt to climate change and protect tropical forests.
At the same time, if up to half of the emissions reductions can be made by means of reductions in third countries, the ETS will have limited effect even during the period leading up to 2020.
Despite its shortcomings, it would have been unthinkable to vote ‘no’. I do not want to risk jeopardising the whole directive, which contains many positive aspects compared with the current situation."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples