Teollisuusvaliokunta tenttaa Ranskan energiaministeriä. Tässä minun kysymykseni hänelle, johon nyt odotan vastausta katsotaan tuleeko. Aihe liittyy Nature Geosciencen tutkimukseen, josta olen kirjoittanut blogissani 23.6.
In the end of June the prominent Nature Geoscience Magazine published a very alarming study concerning the renewables target of the Climate Package.
According to the first comprehensive assessment of the carbon sink capacity of European forests, a significant part of carbon emissions in Europe has been accumulated in forests during the last 50 years. The carbon sink capacity of forests has increased especially in the last decades, but it is now threatened. The EU is trying to increase the production of bioenergy, and the target can be reached only if logging is considerably increased. As a consequence, according to scientists, the carbon sink may be reduced almost down to zero. Wouldnt it be a paradox indeed if in order to slow down the greenhouse effect we would accelerate the global warming?
My question is: are you aware of that dilemma, and what should we do to avoid this serious scenario
?
Therefore, I believe what it comes to the political ambition concerning the timetable of the climate package, wouldnt it be better to fail to deliver than to deliver a failure?
This may happen if we are not able to make distinction between means and goal. Low carbon is our goal, isnt it? Renewables are a mean, and we have to make sure that they remain an efficient mean, not just a symbolic one.
– No ei vastannut, aika loppui, sanoi vain että haluamme menestyksellisen talouden Eurooppaan. Tietenkin, mutta mitä sitten? Helpolla pääsevät ministerit – tosin ymmärrän kiireen. Jos kyseessä olisi ollut vaalea blondi, vastaukselle naureskeltaisiin että olipa typerä.
