Health and environment

In meetings on Tuesday 6 October, the EU and Brazil found allies in each other for the upcoming Copenhagen Climate Change conference. Although no formal alliance has been announced, the two actors supported each other’s commitments and have agreed to meet again before December’s conference.

Image: www.flickr.com/ Andrew Maceira

The Commission has pledged this sum of money to fund six carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects. These projects will develop technology to trap carbon emission from power plants. The six projects, selected from among eleven applicants, are based in the UK, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Poland, and Italy. The commercialization of this low-carbon technology is another step towards the EU achieving its carbon reduction goals, ahead of the December Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen.

Image: www.flickr.com/ davipt

Climate change and energy concerns have been at the top of the agenda in 2008. The French presidency brought together the European Council for a summit on this topic on December 11th and 12th . After a long debate, France succeeded in reaching a compromise between the 27 heads of states on the combat against climate change. Three goals have been reiterated: The reduction of CO2 emissions by 20 percent, the reduction of energy use by 20 percent and the increase in the use of renewable energies by 20 percent by the year 2020. However, facing a severe economic crisis, most governments only agreed through diverging and opaque concessions regarding the technical details. One concern was to avoid further charges for the car industry. However if Europe wants to play its role as leader on climate change during the upcoming post-Kyoto conference in Copenhagen in 2009, it has to define its climate goals as narrowly as possible – especially in times of an economic downturn.

Photo: www.flickr.com/ Davipt

In 2007 European leaders agreed that 10 percent of all transport fuel should come form renewable sources such as biofuels by 2020. Recently the biofuels target has come under heavy criticism. Biofuels have been singled out as a main source of rising food prices with one World bank study claiming that biofules have contributed to 65% of of the price rise. Until now the Commission has refused to revise its policies over fears of making itself vulnerable to similar claims concerning the EU’s other targets. Now, the political atmosphere could be changing with French ecology minister Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet stating that the EU had proposed things the wrong way round: environmental and social criteria for the production of biofuels should have been developed and fixed first and then any target should have been drafted to match that.

From 3-6 June it is Green Week - again. During this yearly event the European Commission seeks to cast light on environmental problems. This year the Commission has looked beyond climate change and has chosen to focus on the challenges related to production, consumption and waste disposal. According to the Commission the point is that many people are unaware of the speed at which we are using up our natural resources, and that we are producing waste far faster than it can be turned back into a useful resource. During the Green Week NGO’s and business representatives will be involved in debates and conferences on how to make the world a greener place. You can find the full program here.

It is not only French President Nikolas Sarkozy who finds himself under popular pressure due to the high oil-prices. From Portugal to Scandinavia interest groups and consumers are calling for less taxes on oil. Tax deductions, subventions and alike are begin considered by Europe’s politicians to alleviate the upset voters. Measures which are totally contradictory to the low-carbon energy goal that most European governments have set for their country. We now seem to have the answer to how the Europeans would react when the going got tough and the price of combating climate change was to be paid. The result does not come as a big surprise. In the first big test the Europeans opted for security of supply at affordable prices rather than accepting that high oil prices is the push that is needed to accelerate the shift to a low carbon economy.

Michael Glos, the German Finance Minister is trying to make a case for his country to be compensated with CO2 emission permits in response to its efforts to phase out nuclear power. He believes that the European Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) should take into account the fact that Germany will emit an extra 150 million tonnes of CO2 as a result of the closing down of its 17 power plants. A similar system had been put into place for Sweden which also pulled out of nuclear power in the 1990s. However, should the 27 Member States all come up with good reasons to be granted exceptions to the ETS we can kiss our 2020 cuts good bye. (The EU is supposed to cut CO2 emissions by 20% compared to 1990 levels, by 2020)

Luckily Europe is much more than conflicts over names, territory and resources. Europe is much more than politics. Europe is also beautiful. The continent is doted with breathtaking and magnificent landscapes from north to south and from east to west. In several European countries natural parks have been defined as an attempt to save biological diversity. This German site on European nature parks invites you to explore the European nature in cyberspace and then – once caught up by the beauty of the landscapes in Europe – to go out there and get a first hand impression of what Europe also has to offer.

Only ten years ago trade in greenhouse gasses was an abstract thought in the mind of the policy-makers of the world. Today, greenhouse gas trading has become a commodity market in its own right. The value of the global carbon market increased by staggering 80 % in 2007 and CO2 credits worth the value of 40.4 billion euro changed hands. With the Commission set to tighten the EU Emissions Trading Scheme from 2012 by including more sectors in the scheme, CO2 trade seems set to boom over the next years. In addition, more than 13 climate change bills are being discussed at the moment in the US Congress. The introduction of some sort of market based mechanism in the US within the next couple of years seems inevitable. In short there is a growing enthusiasm for the carbon trading system among politicians, companies and investors. That is good news when contemplating the latest warnings from climate change scientists.

The recent controversy over the safety of cloned animals for human consumption has had at least one virtue. It has revealed the existence of a body that will have an increasing importance over the coming years, the European Group on Ethics for science and new technologies (EGE). This group was asked by the European Commission to issue an opinion after the United States Food and Drug administration cleared meat from cloned animals for human consumption. According to the European Food Safety Authority, there is little reason to believe that cloned animals are less fit for consumption then any other animal. This complicated debate, however, goes beyond scientific assessments hence the involvement of the EGE. EFSA recognizes “that the issue of animal cloning raises ethical, moral and other societal issues beyond its remit".

Click here to read the EGE opinion and find out more about its composition and role.

The Commission seems to be fond of launching large energy policy packages in January. Last January the ‘Energy for a Changing World’ package was published, pointing out the direction of EU energy policy. This year, 23 January will see the Commission publish its much debated draft directive on how to raise EU renewable energy consumption to 20% in 2020. Not surprisingly, the debate evolves around how the overall target should be divided between the member states. As if that was not enough the Commission is internally divided over a related topic: its draft directive for a post-Kyoto emissions trading scheme, due to be published the same day. In order to reduce EU greenhouse gas emissions by 20% in 2020 the most “green” members of the Commission wish to include new sectors in the trading scheme, such as the aluminium sector. More industry friendly Commissioners are afraid that this move would be the deathblow to a number of European energy intensive industries. Indeed, January 23 will be energy day.

Nuclear power is making a remarkable comeback in European energy policy. On Thursday 10 January the British government approved plans to set up new nuclear plants. French EDF has already made its plans to publish four nuclear plants in the UK by 2017. The government pointed out that the new nuclear plans aim to help the UK meet its climate change objectives along with “other low-carbon technologies”. The UK-decision is another sign of the comeback of an energy technology that only a few years ago was the black sheep of the energy technology family. Concerns over security of supply and climate change and the notion that wind power and other renewables at present cannot replace carbon, has led policy makers to reincarnate nuclear technology.

If you have not heard enough about climate change here is your chance. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is the dreadfully long and clumsy name of the international juridical framework within which climate change is addressed. The Kyoto-protocol is the most visible product of this framework. On the homepage of the UNFCCC you can find statements, news, background info and webcast from the 14 long days on Bali. Besides that you can find background information, several publications and information on the Kyoto-protocol.

Official homepage of The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

After 14 days of heated debate they got a result. Not on a post-Kyoto framework to combat climate change. Oh no. What the diplomats from 187 countries managed to hammer out was only the roadmap that eventually could lead to an agreement in 2009 in Copenhagen, Denmark. The two weeks gave examples of international UN diplomacy at its finest. Or most ugly depending on the interpretation you prefer. Expectations were high before the meeting. After only a couple of days one thing was clear: there was absolutely no agreement on anything. Everything was in the air, everybody was having meetings with everybody and it was absolutely impossible to make out what was going on through the regular news channels. When the US finally accepted the end declaration the whole conference had gone 20 hours over schedule, UN chief negotiator Yvo de Boer had broken down crying and the result was vague and exactly as nitty-gritty as expected. For the climate the result was bad and insufficient. Nevertheless the result was hailed as ambitious in recognition of what the UN system is capable of producing. The road to Copenhagen 2009 is now paved but the 14 days in Bali promises that it is going to be a very, very bumpy ride.

Now, let’s get down to business. This week will see 10,000 delegates from over 180 countries gathering on the beautiful Indonesian island of Bali to hammer out an agreement for the upcoming negotiations on what should replace the Kyoto-protocol after it expires in 2012. The event marks the launch of two years of intense negotiations. The EU hopes that an agreement will be completed in 2009 in Copenhagen, Denmark. For this to happen, numerous issues must find a common understanding. The most contentious issue is whether the developing countries, notably China and India, should commit to emission reductions in the post-Kyoto era. For many Europeans the question may be answered with a simple “of course” but in other parts of the world the situation is quite different. Many developing countries follow the logic “you break, you buy” referring to the many years of uncontrolled CO2 emissions by the Western world. Two years of difficult negotiations can be seen ahead.