I appreciate that the EPP took a clear stance and decided to reject the Commission’s backloading proposal. On the eve of the upcoming elections our message to the citizens is that we want to create jobs for Europe, as well as a world that is, particularly in terms of environmental values, sustainable. We do not give our support to a climate policy that is made at the expense of clean European production and industries. A policy that punishes exactly the cleanest of all cannot be right. Thus, the structures of climate policy have to be corrected instead of inflating the prices again. The correction should be made when designing the 2030 goals.
We do not want to kill emissions trading. On the contrary, we hope that this market mechanism will be let to operate in peace, in order for its best sides to show. By means of the ETS the most cost-effective means to reduce emissions can be found, but this requires the clarification of the carbon markets. The Commission threatened that if we do not lift the price of emission allowances, emissions trading will be destroyed and we will be left with merely the confusing patchwork of national policies. This will not have to – nor will be – the case, and it is exactly the Commission itself that can influence this. The prerequisite for fair and functioning carbon markets is that emissions trading is not disturbed by overlapping legislation. If the Commission wants to save emissions trading, it will have to trust it as a market mechanism. Emissions trading will do its job and will also guide us towards increasing the share of renewables without having to set separate renewable energy and energy efficiency targets. Exactly these abundant national subsidy measures have distorted energy markets. It is not good for the European economy that we develop energy forms that are not self-sustaining.
Read more: An energy form in breast feeding
2 kommenttia artikkeliin “My statement on Backloading”
Congratulations Eija-Riitta! A brave stance, and absolutely right. You have the enduring gratitude of all of those energy users and taxpayers who have been forced to pay absurd subsidies to uneconomical and absurd ”renewable” energy schemes, and huge amounts of money to the charlatans who push them.