Eu Sets Toughest Targets To Fight Global Warming

[OnlyMe]

******ing madness.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7136639.ece

From The Times

May 26, 2010

EU sets toughest targets to fight global warming

Smoke billows out of industrial chimneys

Ben Webster, Environment Editor

*

Europe will introduce a surprise new plan today to combat global warming, committing Britain and the rest of the EU to the most ambitious targets in the world. The plan proposes a massive increase in the target for cutting greenhouse gas emissions in this decade.

The European Commission is determined to press ahead with the cuts despite the financial turmoil gripping the bloc, even though it would require Britain and other EU member states to impose far tougher financial penalties on their industries than are being considered by other large economies.

The plan, to cut emissions by 30 per cent on 1990 levels by 2020, would cost the EU an extra £33 billion a year by 2020, according to a draft of the Commission’s communication leaked to The Times.

The existing target of a 20 per cent cut is already due to cost £48 billion. The Commission will argue that the lower target has become much easier to meet because of the recession, which resulted in the EU’s emissions falling more than 10 per cent last year as thousands of factories closed or cut production. Emissions last year were already 14 per cent below 1990 levels.

Related Links

[ken_ichikawa]

I can just imagine the BRICs countries gearing up for a wholesale gang rape of European businesses.

[Little Professor]

I thought the Times had gone paywall as of today?

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/

[aa3]

Europe commits to turn its economy back to the stone age.

European leaders shocked at downturn in investor confidence.

[bogbrush]

Europe commits to turn its economy back to the stone age.

European leaders shocked at downturn in investor confidence.

That's about the size of it. Can you imagine if you had competitors who keep on handicapping themselves? Life would be such a bed of roses.

And anyway I thought we were going to run out of all this stuff soon, so what's the panic to conserve it if we're going to get massive default cuts in CO2 emissions anyway?

[aa3]

That's about the size of it. Can you imagine if you had competitors who keep on handicapping themselves? Life would be such a bed of roses.

And anyway I thought we were going to run out of all this stuff soon, so what's the panic to conserve it if we're going to get massive default cuts in CO2 emissions anyway?

Imo energy is the basis of so much of costs in the modern industry. In almost every industry I have read of energy is a bigger cost than wages! Even future economic areas like data centers.. I read once the biggest cost is electricity. Number two is the servers. Number three is wages.

I dont' believe in any of this peak bs stuff.. but you are right how can someone believe in both peak energy supplies and the need for caps?

[fluffy666]

That's about the size of it. Can you imagine if you had competitors who keep on handicapping themselves? Life would be such a bed of roses.

And anyway I thought we were going to run out of all this stuff soon, so what's the panic to conserve it if we're going to get massive default cuts in CO2 emissions anyway?

Look, if you ask me, then as you know I'd say the correct way to go about this is to build out large amounts of zero-CO2 electricity capacity - backed by the government, since CO2 reductions cannot be done through market forces - so that homes and industry have a large supply of very low cost, zero-CO2 electricity. Get that done and the rest will fall into place; people will stop using carbon emitting fuels if electricity is cheaper.

This top-down imposition of targets will just drive industry abroard (so total CO2 emissions don't drop anyway) and generally annoy people. Those involved in environmental politics really need their heads banging together..

[fluffy666]

I dont' believe in any of this peak bs stuff.. but you are right how can someone believe in both peak energy supplies and the need for caps?

Peak [conventional] oil is pretty well established. Peak energy is a different matter; there isn't sufficient data to be certain either way but I'd be very surprised to see a near-term peak.

[Pick It Down]

Look, if you ask me, then as you know I'd say the correct way to go about this is to build out large amounts of zero-CO2 electricity capacity - backed by the government, since CO2 reductions cannot be done through market forces - so that homes and industry have a large supply of very low cost, zero-CO2 electricity. Get that done and the rest will fall into place; people will stop using carbon emitting fuels if electricity is cheaper.

This top-down imposition of targets will just drive industry abroard (so total CO2 emissions don't drop anyway) and generally annoy people. Those involved in environmental politics really need their heads banging together..

They are attempting this zero-CO2 electricity capacity with wind power and it isn't working out very well.

When we had an extreme system shortage over the weekend due to the high temperatures and associated aircon demand, guess how little wind there was?

It does not make sense to build a power system that is anti-correlated with demand, unless of course you like to see energy poverty and widespread de-industrialisation. Well that would suit the eco weenies just fine I presume.

[Laura]

Leaked Document Shows Spain’s ‘Green’ Policies Are An Economic Disaster

Unsurprisingly for a governmental take on a flagship program, the report takes pains to minimize the extent of the economic harm. Yet despite the soft-pedaling, the document reveals exactly why electricity rates “necessarily skyrocketed” in Spain, as did the public debt needed to underwrite the disaster. This internal assessment preceded the Zapatero administration’s recent acknowledgement that the “green economy” stunt must be abandoned, lest the experiment risk Spain becoming Greece.

The government report does not expressly confirm the highest-profile finding of the non-governmental report: that Spain’s “green economy” program cost the country 2.2 jobs for every job “created” by the state. However, the figures published in the government document indicate they arrived at a job-loss number even worse than the 2.2 figure from the independent study.

http://www.thegwpf.org/international-news/974-leaked-document-shows-spains-green-policies-are-an-economic-disaster.html

[Ruffneck]

they cannot expect an economic recovery in the EU when they keep imposing new taxes such as these 'green' taxes

more jobs will move to india and china where they don't have and never will have any of this claptrap

[Ruffneck]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/10159631.stm

Even more new taxes from the Eurocrats , no wonder their economies are so fecked.

[CHF]

it seems like theyre desperately trying to create another economy/liquidity pool to stimulate some sort of growth into very strong headwinds. It all depends on how much money they can chuck at it as to how much it might help the ordinary man on the dole.

A few years ago i looked at jumping on the green bandwagon and becoming an epc/hip inspector. That would have been a bad move.

[Executive Sadman]

Presumably our shops will continue to be able to stock imports produced from factories in China and India which are free to pollute as much and as cheaply as they want without the green gestapo paying them a visit and putting them out of business.

Madness.

[efdemin]

They are attempting this zero-CO2 electricity capacity with wind power and it isn't working out very well.

When we had an extreme system shortage over the weekend due to the high temperatures and associated aircon demand, guess how little wind there was?

It does not make sense to build a power system that is anti-correlated with demand, unless of course you like to see energy poverty and widespread de-industrialisation. Well that would suit the eco weenies just fine I presume.

I don't know, have you got any figures to back up what you're claiming? Serious question - I mean, are there any available figures for e.g. what % of electricity was generated by wind over the last week, or month, etc.? Just raw wind figures isn't really good enough since it might be windless on land, but still have a useful breeze out at sea.

FWIW, I wish the government would hurry up and build the Severn Barrage at least that would be predictable and large enough to make some useful contribution. It doesn't necessarily have to be one long barrage either - some proposed designs are more like a group of 'pools' that hold a few generators each, so the water & silt etc. can still move in and out around them.