l'Actualité du Solaire

A green wave is rising in Europe in favour of ecology

Statements byUrsula von der Leyen

Beautiful intentions, but what will really come of it?

Other parts of the world are following a different objective, which weakens the European Green Plan.

the text

A green wave is rising in Europe in favour of ecology

A politician's first speech is usually a profession of faith, a message to announce where his or her action would like to go, that person's ambition for his or her country. The speech ofUrsula von der Leyen is no exception to this model. It reflects its desire to mark the European Union in a certain direction. Such a discourse creates doubt as always with a new personality: is it a concession to demagogy or is it a real conviction?

A green wave is rising in Europe in favour of ecology, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to condemn fossil fuels, to "save the climate". Therefore, as this wave seems to be growing and the responses of the political authorities seem very dull, the ecological discourse of the new president of the European Commission corresponds well to the expectations of these climate activists. The new President of the European Commission's ecological discourse corresponds well to the expectations of these climate activists, both to defuse their demonstrations, to show them that they are understood, and to launch a course of action. At the same time, the new president's intentions can be translated into action if she is well supported, if the heads of government of the Union agree to her decisions, and transcribe them into their area of authority. Indeed, the European Commission must be attentive to the wishes of the States and cannot act too much in opposition to the decisions of the Heads of Government. This is its weakness because it cannot decide alone and could always say later that it wanted to but could not. At the same time, its strength is that it can coordinate 28 states (27 soon) and a population of 500 million people to adopt the same direction, the same policy, a common philosophy.

.

The declarations ofUrsula von der Leyen

Eleven days after taking office, his speech launched a set of 50 wide-ranging policy ideas in a 24-page document. They are primarily aimed at climate action, but very soon the economy, energy and European politics are involved, which the president translates as "our goal is to reconcile our economy with our planet and make it work for our people".I am convinced that the old growth model based on fossil fuels and pollution is obsolete and disconnected from our planet, and the European Green Pact or Green Deal is our new growth strategy.

To this end, a strong measure is proposed: to increase the continent's emission reduction targets by 2030. Until now, the objective for 2030 has been a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. The President proposes raising them to 50% and possibly even 55%, with the aim of achieving 100% climate neutrality by 2050. This is the objective. This will involve voting on a new law in the next hundred days to make Europe's commitment to zero net emissions a reality by 2050.

Among its many provisions, the Green Deal will include:
- A "Just Transition Fund" to ensure that vulnerable sectors and regions are not negatively affected by change.
- A financing plan to be presented in 2020 aims to release the additional €260 billion ($288 billion) needed for the transition. (Editor's note: Germany has envisaged a €114 billion plan for the period 2020-2030. EuPD had put the figure at €400bn. What will we do with €260bn?).
- A dedicated offshore wind power plan, also coming up in 2020. The European Commission has already started to study the viability of deploying 450 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity by 2050.
- Carbon capture, use and sequestration; hydrogen infrastructure; energy storage which will also be supported to achieve commercialisation.

That's where the economy comes in, because the ecological objective requires an in-depth reorganisation of economic structures: this concerns energy supply, industry, transport, agriculture and housing. Renewable energies play a key role. Wind energy is the only one mentioned by the President.

Petrol and diesel must be taxed more heavily. The_CO2 limits for light commercial vehicles must be tightened. Maritime traffic should be included in CO2 emissions trading, while fewer free CO2 certificates are to be issued for air traffic, which should lead to higher ticket prices. Alternative fuels will also be promoted and the recharging infrastructure for electric vehicles extended.

As there is no question of different industries relocating to pollute as they wish, the European Union will develop a carbon frontier, which will be equivalent to a levy to ensure that companies that outsource their emissions to production centres in China and elsewhere cannot escape carbon taxes. In this way, the European Union wants to build a climate-friendly package and launch a new economy based on new paradigms. It aims to create a growth area based on new bases, on clean energy, on new habits of the inhabitants.

.

Fine intentions, but what will really come out of it?

Europe has efficient industries, but in the field of renewable energies many things need to be built (green hydrogen, storage facilities, recycling habits), rebuilt (the panel industry), or simply stimulated (e.g. installing 450 GW of wind power at sea, whereas the installed capacity is currently marginal). European companies are rarely leaders in their field, which makes the realisation of installations from abroad dependent.

Europe wants to protect itself from relocation for environmental reasons. But how will it be able to set up a carbon frontier? How can it assess whether a product has been manufactured abroad using electricity from coal or renewable energy? And in what proportion? As if the Chinese are all going to play the transparency game! As if we could control European factories in Africa or Asia!

How will we manage to change transport, agriculture, housing, energy supply? Only by taxing the use of fossil fuels? but clean vehicles are still far too expensive compared to "dirty" ones! How will we deal with buildings with only a small roof area and many residents? with large solar or wind power plants far away from areas of consumption? More seriously, how will producers of petroleum products accept an import tax without reprisals from foreign states!

How will the population make its choice? Will they choose between cheap products made abroad, despite the cost of transport and customs duties or carbon taxes, and products made in Europe but more expensive? As if foreign countries would accept taxes on their products without retaliating against European exports! Is it in a spirit of withdrawal and economic warfare of the regions that this programme is designed?

How will we encourage the population to buy green products that are more expensive than traditional products made from plastics (i.e. hydrocarbons)? By taxing the latter? Is it to be perceived that the suggested economy is one of taxation, control and vexation, leading to the rejection of measures that are attractive to the climate on the part of the population?

The result of all this is that the programme to revive Europe's economy through the use of renewable energies is a fine idea. More than that! It is an idea that needs to be dug up and that can galvanise the population, which is already well heated by European climate advocates. It can be a European cement between different nationalities and different regions. It can give motivation and pride to the outside world. It can reinvigorate often self-centred mentalities and their individual and selfish satisfactions.

.

Other parts of the world follow a different objective, which weakens the European Green Plan.

However, it should not be assumed that other regions will follow Europe's example. The cost of using clean energy will be considerable. The extra costs will be money wasted or badly invested. Other countries such as China or India are looking for the lowest costs to increase their economic power, making fun of European principles or concerns. Their motivation is elsewhere, to achieve their world rank. We do not share the same climate logic. We saw this clearly at COP25, where the main polluters (China, India, the United States, etc.), which account for 90% of global greenhouse gas emissions, opposed binding resolutions. It was only Europe that wanted to organise a clean, virtuous, idyllic climate against all! What a utopia! What naivety! What pretension! This does not mean that the climate does not need to be defended and protected! Environmentalists will say that a region must take the future of humanity into its own hands! Ah well!

We will notice that the new president's horizon is ten years (2030) and even thirty years (2050) away. It is likely that she will no longer be in office within a decade. So, making a nice speech, that arouses approvals, applause, congratulations. As for changing life, that's another matter! What remains of Michel Rocard's speech advocating "the NewSociety"? Fresh air, nostalgia, memories!