Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-11-20-Speech-2-479-000"

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	"pl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20121120.31.2-479-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-11-20-Speech-2-480-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Konrad Szymański2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Prawo i Sprawiedliwość (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; INTA (2012-05-09--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; AFET (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; ITRE (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; PECH (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	". Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, releasing the potential of unconventional gas in Europe means a more competitive energy market, lower prices for the ordinary citizen and for businesses, and thus greater competitiveness for our economy. Ultimately it means a capacity to reduce CO emissions more effectively and support for renewable energy sources, which sometimes need such support for the simple reason that the sun does not always shine and the wind does not always blow. I do not understand why fans of renewable energy have such a problem with gas, even though it is their only way out, as American experience demonstrates. This potential is very well dealt with in the report by Ms Tzavela from the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. May I thank her very much for it and congratulate her. The report by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety looks by comparison as if it has been written on some quite different subject. It offers us a black, even catastrophic image of this industry. Of its 74 points, precisely 3 offer us a non-critical, non-admonitory and balanced way of talking about gas. The hard-line left only sees gas as a hazardous substance, as destruction of the landscape, pollution of water and air, toxic waste, leaking methane – in the end, and this is the real cherry on the cake, inflated land prices in Africa are linked to the use of unconventional gas in Europe. It is just as if we did not have the highest and best standards of environmental protection in Europe, which Member States are glad to introduce, along with industry. As a result of breaching the compromise provisions, the report is a total mess: in one place there is talk of a potential for reduction, and then in another place it says that CO emissions may actually be higher; in one place it says that the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive is applicable, and in literally three other places it says that this Directive should be applied. By accepting these documents, we are categorically turning our backs on a major and feasible change to power generation in Europe. We are coming out against security of supply, and ultimately against competitive prices. These are the reasons why conservatives and reformers are unable to support this report in this form."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))"1 "2"1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph