Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-04-01-Speech-4-204"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040401.5.4-204"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, you may well be surprised to hear me say that, in 25 years’ time, we will be able to derive every bit as much energy from a cubic centimetre of silicon as from a cubic centimetre of uranium, but that is the case – it surprised me, too – and it highlights the enormous potential latent in renewable energies.
My second comment has to do with the Bonn conference; I would like to suggest that we in this House should also send a delegation to represent us at it, as a whole array of legislatures from around the world will be doing. It would be a disgrace for the European Parliament not to have a visible presence there in the shape of a group of MEPs with an official mandate.
Thirdly, let me say that, in the resolution – to which Mrs Rothe very rightly referred – the term ‘poverty reduction’ occurs twice. I see it as extremely important that we should make the connection between climate policy, energy policy and poverty reduction. For example, the instrument for doing this – or at least one of those that are suitable – is decentralised energy supply systems using renewable energies and another instrument that we are at present discussing in this House, that is, emissions trading, what is termed the Linking Directive. We can be grateful to the Commission for having, some time ago, brought out a very interesting brochure in which it set out the means that could be employed in this way to benefit the renewable energy sector in the Mediterranean region alone. The figures quoted in it are extraordinarily high. I think this is an instrument of which we could make much more use. After all, we have to finance renewable energies, and we all know that they do not come cheap.
My final observation must be that what rather worries me about renewable energies is that they are currently going through an upward phase. They are on everyone’s lips, renewable energies get good write-ups in the press, and rightly so too. Who knows, though, what will happen in a couple of years’ time, when the costs go up? Will they be just as acceptable, or will we perhaps come to the conclusion that you can have too much of a good thing, and decide cut back a bit? To do so would be extraordinarily dangerous, for it would inhibit continuity in a sector that forms part of our industrial policy. What this boils down to is that we need continuity, and the small- and medium-sized enterprises that have invested in renewable energy sources need security.
Yes, costs are falling, but they are, nonetheless, relatively high. I am perfectly familiar with the debates in my own country about the costs of renewable energies. In Germany alone, it is estimated that they will cost us between EUR 4 billion and EUR 5 billion in a couple of years’ time. It may well indeed be that many will see this as a pain barrier through which they do not want to go. I just want to warn that continuity should be maintained rather than broken if those who invest in them today are to have security."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples