Climate change proposals for sweeping emissions targets/ cuts by the EU announced today indicate first this issue is being taken seriously and that the EU wishes to be a world leader in this [not just the UK]. Yet, the taxes proposed are on many basic items - such as electricity, heating, etc - products that the poor [and elderly] consume as a higher proportion of their disposable income. When the focus was on the illogical food miles issue, the proposed taxes on air freight would have disproportionately hit higher-value/ luxury products such as fresh produce. While illogical, inefficient and socially costly to developing countries, equity issues in consumer countries were not a consideration. Furthermore, what of small and medium enterprises in the EU - scraping by currently, facing higher energy costs anyway. Selling out and becoming a shelf-stacker in Lidl becomes a more viable option than struggling on with the family business. Are we continuing to pursue those easier targets at the expense of economic equity [nationally and internationally] and ignoring the potential win-wins from appropriate taxing of industry, incentives for innovation? Furthermore, what if predictions about climate change's sequencing/ timing and ferocity are overstated; what cost to our economies from such "eyes wide shut" knee-jerk reactions from Brussels? Source: Deutsche Welle
The European Commission will on Wednesday, Jan. 23, unveil sweeping plans to fight global warming, under heavy fire from industry and many EU member countries over the possible costs of the scheme.
Consumers too will not escape the costs, which Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso said would amount to a total of around 60 billion euros ($86.6 billion) a year -- 0.5 percent of gross domestic product. Commission officials, however, have said the bill might be double that.
The package is an attempt by the EU executive to translate into action the aim of EU leaders, announced last March, to cut emissions of the gases that cause climate change by 20 percent by 2020, compared to 1990 levels.
The measures, including a new look at state aid for environment projects, will set the 27 nations specific targets for renewable energy use, to ensure that 20 percent of the bloc's energy in 2020 comes from these forms.
he commission has come under attack from virtually all sides, including in-house, even before the plans are examined by EU countries and the European Parliament, a process Brussels hopes to conclude by the end of the year.
"These proposals are going to raise electricity prices for households and enterprises," said EU Commission Vice-President Günter Verheugen from Germany. "This has to be openly said to citizens."
Carbon dioxide emissions from industry totaled more than two billion tons in 2005, around half of the greenhouse gases produced in the EU. Much of the other half comes from transport and agriculture.
Under the EU's emissions trading scheme, set to expire in 2012, nearly 12,000 energy-intensive plants can buy or sell permits to emit carbon dioxide.
In future such permits, currently provided free, would be managed by member states and gradually increase in price. The system would also be extended to other sectors like aviation, petrochemicals, ammonia and aluminum.
Some companies have complained they could be forced to move abroad, taking jobs with them, and according to Green MEP Claude Termes, major steelmakers were knocking on the Commission's door on Monday.
The threat to employment is a powerful argument, but Barroso has warned that the energy and climate status quo is unacceptable.
"Taking action is not cost free," he said Monday. The price of inaction "could even approach 20 percent of GDP. The longer we delay, the higher the costs."
EU countries are concerned about the burden they will have to assume on renewable energy.
Around 8.5 percent of the bloc's energy comes from renewable forms, like biomass, wind and solar power, but future load sharing will be based on GDP; simply put, on a nation's wealth.
This has particularly angered Sweden, which already derives around 40 percent of its energy from renewable sources, but could, according to Green party calculations be asked to raise that to 52.7 percent.
Stockholm argues that it is being punished, rather than rewarded, for the eco-friendly efforts it has already made.
In Germany, 18 percent of energy would have to come from renewable resources, according to the proposal, doubling the current percentage.
Consumers too will not escape the costs, which Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso said would amount to a total of around 60 billion euros ($86.6 billion) a year -- 0.5 percent of gross domestic product. Commission officials, however, have said the bill might be double that.
The package is an attempt by the EU executive to translate into action the aim of EU leaders, announced last March, to cut emissions of the gases that cause climate change by 20 percent by 2020, compared to 1990 levels.
The measures, including a new look at state aid for environment projects, will set the 27 nations specific targets for renewable energy use, to ensure that 20 percent of the bloc's energy in 2020 comes from these forms.
he commission has come under attack from virtually all sides, including in-house, even before the plans are examined by EU countries and the European Parliament, a process Brussels hopes to conclude by the end of the year.
"These proposals are going to raise electricity prices for households and enterprises," said EU Commission Vice-President Günter Verheugen from Germany. "This has to be openly said to citizens."
Carbon dioxide emissions from industry totaled more than two billion tons in 2005, around half of the greenhouse gases produced in the EU. Much of the other half comes from transport and agriculture.
Under the EU's emissions trading scheme, set to expire in 2012, nearly 12,000 energy-intensive plants can buy or sell permits to emit carbon dioxide.
In future such permits, currently provided free, would be managed by member states and gradually increase in price. The system would also be extended to other sectors like aviation, petrochemicals, ammonia and aluminum.
Some companies have complained they could be forced to move abroad, taking jobs with them, and according to Green MEP Claude Termes, major steelmakers were knocking on the Commission's door on Monday.
The threat to employment is a powerful argument, but Barroso has warned that the energy and climate status quo is unacceptable.
"Taking action is not cost free," he said Monday. The price of inaction "could even approach 20 percent of GDP. The longer we delay, the higher the costs."
EU countries are concerned about the burden they will have to assume on renewable energy.
Around 8.5 percent of the bloc's energy comes from renewable forms, like biomass, wind and solar power, but future load sharing will be based on GDP; simply put, on a nation's wealth.
This has particularly angered Sweden, which already derives around 40 percent of its energy from renewable sources, but could, according to Green party calculations be asked to raise that to 52.7 percent.
Stockholm argues that it is being punished, rather than rewarded, for the eco-friendly efforts it has already made.
In Germany, 18 percent of energy would have to come from renewable resources, according to the proposal, doubling the current percentage.
No comments:
Post a Comment