Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-11-20-Speech-2-469-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-11-20"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Environmental impacts of shale gas and shale oil extraction activities - Industrial, energy and other aspects of shale gas and oil (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"cs"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20121120.31.2-469-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-11-20-Speech-2-470-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Jan Březina2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Křesťanská a demokratická unie - Československá strana lidová (2009-07-14--2013-06-01)3 member; ITRE (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 substitute; REGI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	". Madam President, I wish to mention the forecasts made 10 years ago, according to which today, in 2012, the United States would be an importer of natural gas and the Russian Gazprom would already have started planning LNG terminals on the Pacific coast of the Russian Federation in preparation for lucrative contacts with the United States. Today, 10 years later, the reality is completely different. Yes, terminals are being planned, but on the west coast of the United States to supply the Pacific region, which has a gas deficit. What happened? Technological advances in drilling and in hydraulic fracturing have today enabled the United States to be a net exporter and, furthermore, CO emissions produced in the United States have decreased. In Europe we are responding to this success in two ways. The first is a moratorium, which is proposed by our great green inquisition. The second is an overly optimistic response, which expects some European countries to be self-sufficient in natural gas. Neither of these approaches is correct. As shadow rapporteur for the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats), I have endeavoured to champion the approach that guarantees a high degree of environmental protection using the best technology and with the objective of obtaining basic data regarding the options for the use of shale gas. In my opinion, at the present stage all this may be ensured under current legislation whilst respecting the principle of subsidiarity, that is at Member State level. It will only be possible to initiate a serious debate in each country as to how best to exploit shale gas after geological and technological verification. In any event, it is good to leave this opportunity open and not block the possibility to exploit this potentially interesting energy source. I therefore ask for your support when voting."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph