Delivering power without the pollution

Two MEPs look at the prospects for developing clean energy sources

Dan Jørgensen

The recent report of the United Nations Climate Panel seems to have been a wake-up call - a very loud one which penetrated even the thick walls of the offices of the European leaders.

In Brussels, EU leaders reached an historic agreement to reduce CO2 emissions by 20% (30% if the US joins a post-Kyoto agreement) in 2020 and introduce legally binding targets of 20% renewable energy.

It was, however, not a day too soon. Global warming is caused by human activity (a fact that has until recently been disputed by prominent political leaders like the US President George W.?Bush) and costs of inaction would be devastating in terms of rising temperatures, more frequent hurricanes, rising sea level and lack of water.

Consequently, we run the risk that water becomes a resource over which civilisations will fight - just as in the industrial ages there were wars fought over oil.

To me there is absolutely no question that the future of Europe’s energy policy should be shaped by renewable energy like wind, solar, biomass and hydro power.

Wind power is a relatively simple and yet effective choice. Technology is moving fast. Over the last 15 years, production costs have dropped dramatically, leaving wind power in a position to compete economically with the polluting choice of coal-fired plants. And wind power leaves virtually no carbon footprint. CO2 emissions related to manufacture, installation and service of a wind turbine are saved again within the first half-year - leaving the average mill with another 19 years of CO2 free energy production.

In my home country, Denmark, research and development of wind energy have proven not only to be a win-win but a triple-win situation. While reducing environmental impacts, the technology of wind energy has also become an export asset (as opposed to paying for imported oil) and created more jobs.

Luckily, these perspectives are applying not only to Denmark. European studies have estimated that current measures to promote renewable energy policies would result in net job growth of 1 million jobs in the EU15 until 2010 and potentially another million by 2020.

By 2004 the wind power installed in the world provided the energy needed in 19 million average European households. But wind is accessible virtually all over the world and it is entirely within our own hands to secure a much higher rate.

The transport sector is almost exclusively fired by oil, so presenting an enormous challenge for an attempted shift to renewables. Hence it is - also with regards to employment growth - tempting to focus on first generation biofuels. This is, however, not unproblematic. If food crops are fed to cars, we will create a competition between basic food necessities and fuels for our cars. That competition is likely to be won by the well-off people in Europe and the US at the expense of the developing world.

In other words the goals set out for biofuels should be followed by massive research on how to use waste biomass to create fuel. We can feed the peel of a banana to the car while serving the citizen the banana.

While we could create jobs and secure Europe a leading position in exporting technology, success is not a given. Wind-power needs to be taken off-shore, power grids need to be more efficiently connected and technology to transform excess electricity into fuel for cars should be further developed. All these solutions exist. Let us decide to employ them in practice.

• Danish Socialist MEP Dan Jørgensen is a member of the Parliament’s environment, public health and food safety committee.

Daniel Caspary

The question of clean energy is gaining in importance for the European Union and its member states. Despite the fact that compared to other parts of the world, the use and the development of clear energy sources in Europe is more advanced, decisions have to be taken about what energy sources we want to invest in for the future. The debate on clean energy is often misled and influenced by ideology. What Europe really needs is an objective and pragmatic approach. First of all, the efficient use of energy promises big savings. Possible areas are the isolation of buildings, intelligent solutions for traffic and transport, efficient electronic devices and efficient motors. Better information for consumers and more incentives for investments in new technologies are two necessary measures to contribute to higher energy efficiency in the EU. The policy of pre-defined targets has proven to be inefficient given the great diversity of climatic, economic, regional and social circumstances in the member states. Instead, possible alternatives as benchmarks should be considered as more appropriate to Europe’s diversity. They would also enable greater competition for the best solutions.

Diversity in Europe should be taken into account when choices concerning the right sources of clean energy are made. The ideological debates on nuclear energy might help to create common identity among the ecological movements in Europe, but they do not address the real problems. The EU has to decide what energy sources provide clean and secure energy supply for the citizens and firms. It is indispensable to opt for an energy mix of different clean energy sources. In many EU member states nuclear energy is used as one of the main energy sources. In others, other sources are seen as more appropriate. It would be counter-productive to impose a one-size-fits-all-approach on all member states. Furthermore, the debate on nuclear energy has to be more objective and transparent. Advantages and disadvantages have to be debated with a view to the objective of reducing CO2 emissions. Despite some progress, many of the renewable energy sources are not advanced enough to replace all other energy sources in the medium term. So the hasty abandoning of nuclear energy should be re-considered. Questions like security standards of nuclear plants and the storage of nuclear fuels have to be discussed. But nuclear energy should be considered as a complement and not a threat for renewable energies. In a sensible and sustainable energy mix, renewable energies will have a prominent place.

In order to ensure that renewable energy sources gain market share, it is necessary to scrutinise their price, availability and efficiency. Wind and solar energy depend heavily on weather situations. Thus, stability of supply cannot be guaranteed. Moreover, their use depends generally on the climate conditions. The relatively advanced position of wind energy in northern member states shows that local solutions are preferable to a uniform European approach. Hydrogen technology has made a lot of progress in the last years. Today, it offers promising chances for widespread use in the industrial sector. Its offers the advantages of potentially storing energy and being independent of weather situations. Produced with the help of renewable energy sources, hydrogen will play an important role in the energy mix of the future. Biomass is another promising source of renewable energy, which also offers new perspectives for the European agricultural sector.

In general, the promotion of renewable energies should be organised by incentives instead of repressive measures against traditional energy sources. Short-term subsidies could be targeted at the creation of sustainable economic operators which are able to meet the challenges of the energy markets of tomorrow.

The future of European policy will depend on an objective approach on clean energies. Since there is no silver bullet so far, we will have to rely on a sensible energy mix for Europe.

• German Christian Democrat MEP Daniel Caspary is a member of the European Parliament’s international trade committee and a substitute member of the industry, research and energy committee.

Two MEPs look at the prospects for developing clean energy sources