In signing the Paris Climate Agreement, the EU promised to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 40% by 2030. In order to fulfill this commitment, the EU recently announced a 1,000-page new energy development report, proposed phased energy-saving emission reduction targets and a series of recommendations, and revised the existing new energy policy.
This report is a draft version. Once it has been published, it has caused extensive discussion and attention. Many people have questioned some of them. The European Commission will revise the results of discussions between member states and the European Parliament. Once the vote is passed, it will form the EU's legal documents for energy development for the next 14 years.
Two key elements - reducing energy consumption and phasing out coal burning
Among the many recommendations made in the report, reducing energy consumption and phasing out coal combustion have become the most important focus. The report proposes that by 2030, the EU's total energy use will be reduced by 30%, including reducing energy waste and making better use of renewable energy. The key measure to reduce energy waste is to renovate old buildings and improve energy efficiency. For this reason, the “smart finance, intelligent building†plan will be implemented. By the end of 2020, 10 billion euros will be raised for building renovation. The total investment of this project will be about 120 billion euros by 2030. The report also stated that by 2030, the proportion of renewable energy accounted for 27% of total energy, of which 50% of the electricity supply will come from renewable energy.
Another key element is the subsidy policy called the “capacity mechanismâ€. For those factories that use coal or natural gas, set a carbon dioxide emission limit of 550 grams per kWh. Only below this emission standard can subsidies be obtained, the more subsidies are added, the more subsidies are eliminated; the old coal-fired plants are gradually phased out, reserved or New energy efficient plants.
Environmentalists questioned that the target setting is too low and the policy is biased
EU climate commissioner Miguel Arias Carnett said that the new energy efficiency target is the core of the report. Achieving this goal will reduce the EU's dependence on energy imports and create new jobs while reducing emission. “Europe is beginning a clean energy revolution.†He said, “Under the new policy, 187 billion euros will be mobilized every year for public and private investment in the next 10 years. These investments will create 900,000 green technology jobs and stimulate GDP growth. One percentage point."
While welcoming the energy efficiency initiatives in the report, environmentalists believe that the EU's target setting is too conservative. Brock Relais from the Friends of the Earth Environmental Organization said: "I am very pleased that the EU can fulfill its climate commitments. The new policy can help millions of people achieve 'energy out of poverty', but the existing market has accounted for 15% of new energy. %, why only set the target at 30%? Why not tap the true potential of the EU and set a higher target?"
Tara Connally from Greenpeace believes that although the EU encourages individuals and community groups to “produce and sell†new energy in the plan, it limits the installation scale of related equipment, otherwise it will not allow access to the grid. . “This kind of restriction is too immoral. Compared with the giants who treat fossil fuel power plants, this is simply policy discrimination. As long as all citizens use 100% of new energy, there is no need for other policies to achieve the Paris climate goal.â€
In response to the coal-burning subsidy policy, the European Environment Agency, Kristian Shayb, questioned: “The restriction on carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired enterprises sounds like a joke. It will not have any impact on existing coal-fired enterprises, nor can it solve coal. Health and other environmental issues."
Increase biomass energy – subsidies are not in place or counterproductive
The report also stipulates that the proposal to increase the share of biomass fuels obtained from the burning of agricultural or forest waste in power plants and heating plants has also caused strong opposition from environmental organizations.
The environmental protection organization believes that the existing biomass fuel is mainly obtained by burning waste wood, accounting for up to 65%, but its source is not sustainable, and the carbon emission reduction effect is no more advantageous than fossil fuel. Such policies are leading to various negative consequences such as forest degradation, loss of biodiversity and more carbon emissions.
Biomass fuel is considered a clean energy source based on a “carbon neutralization†hypothesis: the carbon dioxide it emits and the carbon dioxide absorbed during its growth can cancel each other out, so carbon emissions during combustion can be ignored. but it is not the truth. Obtaining tree waste requires cutting down the entire tree, and environmental organizations have found that many EU countries are unable to deliver on forest protection commitments. For example, Italy and Slovakia have cut their related subsidies, resulting in serious forest degradation. The Birds Alliance Organization Policy Officer believes that biomass energy is an important clean energy source, but the proportion should be reduced rather than increased.