Global IssuesEUROPE: Cutting Emissions, and Costs
Deeper cuts to the European Union's greenhouse gas emissions than those approved by its governments would be less expensive than previously thought, according to a new analysis.
Since 2007, the EU has been officially committed to lowering the amount of carbon dioxide and other climate changing pollutants released into the atmosphere by 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. But a paper published by its executive branch, the European Commission, May 26 indicates that meeting a more ambitious target of a 30 percent reduction within that timeframe should not prove too burdensome for the Union's economies.
Decreases in the use of energy caused by both a recession and by higher fuel prices have led to the projected cost of hitting the 20 percent goal being revised from 70 billion euros (85.5 billion dollars) to 48 billion euros per year between now and 2020. Stepping up the effort to reach a 30 percent target would cost 88 billion euros per year -- 11 billion euros more than the EU had originally earmarked for the 20 percent reduction blueprint.
Despite a prognosis by scientists on the United Nations intergovernmental panel on climate chance (IPCC) that the 20 percent target will not be sufficient to prevent a catastrophic increase in the earth's temperatures, the Union has so far balked at accepting a target for higher emission cuts. One of the main reasons for its refusal has been that lobbyists for energy-intensive industries such as cement, aluminium, steel and chemicals have warned they would leave the EU and relocate to countries with laxer environmental standards.
The warnings have been at odds with the findings of academic studies. In 2008, the research institute Climate Strategies stated that factors such as currency exchange rates, access to raw materials, workforce education and transport infrastructure are more likely to determine where a company will locate than climate policies.
Asked if she regarded the fears expressed by some industries as exaggerated, Connie Hedegaard, the European commissioner for climate action, told IPS: 'I understand that the CEO (chief executive officer) of an industry has one thing on his mind right now: where does money come from? I think Europe should also consider the risk of losing jobs if we are too ambitious. But there is also a price to pay if we stand still.'
Hedegaard, a Danish politician who chaired many of the international climate change talks in Copenhagen last year, lamented how Europe is falling behind in promoting technologies designed to reduce its reliance on coal, oil and gas.
While more than 60 percent of the new electricity generating capacity in the EU last year derived from renewable sources, she argued that Europe's 'lead is challenged', particularly by Asia. Firms from China and India are now among the top ten producers of wind turbines. And most of the photovoltaic panels used for solar energy are now made in China and Taiwan.
Christian Kjaer from the European Wind Energy Association said that renewables present huge employment opportunities. Over 190,000 people already work in wind energy generation in Europe. He argued that the unwillingness of world leaders to thrash out a robust agreement in Copenhagen last December should not deter the EU from intensifying its emission reduction efforts. 'Europe is a world leader in wind energy but faces serious competition from China, the U.S., Japan, South Korea and India,' he said.
'I would hate to see Europe losing out because it was lulled into a false sense of security due to the failure of the climate negotiations.'
Friends of the Earth urged the EU to set a higher reduction goal of 40 percent by 2020, suggesting that this would be a minimum acceptable goal if the Union is to help prevent the earth's temperature rising by two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The campaign group is calling for that target to be legally binding and for penalties to be introduced against states that do not honour their obligations.
'A 40 percent reduction target is not only possible but affordable and necessary,' said the group's climate specialist David Heller. 'The EU's governments must stand up to vested interests and make a clear call for an increase in EU targets.'
Anti-poverty advocates cited predictions that a two degrees Celsius rise in global temperatures would drive 250 million people in poor countries from their homes, cause an additional 30 million to go hungry, and deprive up to 3 billion of adequate access to water. 'For every year we continue to rely on fossil fuels, we reduce the ability of poor countries to develop,' said Rob van Drimmelen from Aprodev, a Brussels-based group linked to Protestant churches. 'Early action to decarbonise Europe's economy is not only the smart thing to do, it is also a moral imperative.'
© Inter Press Service (2010) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service