24 Amendments of Karl-Heinz FLORENZ related to 2011/2012(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 b (new)
Citation 5 b (new)
- having regard to the Commission Communication on Energy Efficiency Plan 2011(COM(2011)0109),
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to Council Conclusions of June 2010 agreeing that the Commission should “conduct more detailed analysis on the policy options and costs and benefits, including at Member State level, as appropriate."
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, due to the economic crisis, emissions from sectors in the EU emissions trading system (ETS) have been considerably lower than projected, and below the level of initial allocation,; whereas the actual price of allowances in the third trading period is subject to many uncertainties caused, for example, by the economic recovery, the effects of the benchmarks that have just been established and the possibility that some Member States may speed up plans to phase out nuclear power;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the temporary lower carbon price will have a significantn impact on investment decisions and will reduce the revenues from auctioning allowances for financing climate action in the EU and in developing countries,
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F c (new)
Recital F c (new)
Fc. whereas even if the European Union were to move to -30% the obligations under the Copenhagen Agreement would in no way suffice to meet the 2°C objective, so an intermediate step is justified, but every effort needs to be made to improve the situation at international level, which would then facilitate moving to -30% at a later stage;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F d (new)
Recital F d (new)
Fd. whereas the European Union’s credibility would be enhanced if an intermediate step was first taken and, at the same time, legislation was adopted that mapped out the specific path to be followed if the international situation further improved;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for the CommissReiterates that the European Union tohas come forwarmitted with proposals to move to a 30% greenhouse gas reduction target for 2020 as soon as possible, and at the latest by the end of 2011self to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20%, or 30% if other industrialised and emerging countries follow suit;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Points out that the EU’s main priority should be to convince other partners in the world of the merits of making their own commitments on reductions that may even exceed those set out in the Copenhagen Agreement;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that the EU needs to step up its efforts from 2020 onwards and in this respect it could make sense to identify an intermediate target for 2030, for example; calls on the Commission to develop specific instruments to achieve these goals in the most cost-effective way;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Recalls that the EU with little more than 10% of global emissions will not be able to tackle climate change on its own.
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that delaying global and European climate action would result in higher costs for achieving the 2050 target due to stranded investment in high-carbon capital stock and slower technological learning;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points out that, according to the 2010 Commission analysis, the surplus of allowances in the ETS will correspond to aroundcould be up to 2.4 billion banked allowances and unused international credits in 2020;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recognises that investment in green technologies depends heavily on the price signal delivered by the carbon market and concludes therefore that, under the current 20% target, the ETS will have a very limited rolerole which the ETS will play in driving emission reductions and deployment of low-emission technologies in the sectors it covers cannot currently be predicted with any certainty, as the forecast range for the carbon price is quite wide;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that, due to the surplus and low carbon price, the auction of allowances will alsomight not mobilise resources for climate investments as expected;
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Deplores the lack of measures to capture thStresses again that, in particular, improvements in energy efficiency offer considerable negative-cost greenhouse gasemission reduction potential in energy and resource efficiency, and that a substantial number of climate protection measures consequently exist which pay for themselves simply thanks to the lower energy costs associated with them; calls for strict application of the least lifecycle cost principle in implementing measures under the Eco- design Directive and for the Commission to review the methodology to consider alignment to a ‘top-runner’ approach;
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Is deeply concerned that the EU is not on track to meet the target of reducing energy consumption by 20% as compared with the forecast level in 2020 by improving energy efficiency; calls on the Commission to take all necessary measures to ensure that the Member States exploit this potential, whether by adopting a provision requiring national energy efficiency action plans to be approved by the Commission or by means of other measures, such as the introduction of binding energy efficiency targets;
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Recognises that achieving the energy efficiency target would enable the EU to reduce emissions by more than 20% by 2020;
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Takes into account the need to carry out an in-depth analysis of the cumulative costs of climate objectives in terms of carbon prices, energy prices and expenditure for innovation and research.
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Considers that a move to a 30% climate target for 2020 would restore the incentives for innovation lost by the easing of the 20% target;
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Observes that more and more countries worldwide have already recognised the opportunity afforded by climate technologies and environmental technologies and are converting their economies accordingly, more than is the case in Europe; notes in this connection promising developments, for example China’s new Five Year Plan, which provides for accelerated expansion of markets for environmental technologies, or the Meseberg decisions adopted in Germany;
Amendment 295 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Draws attention to the fact that, in addition to developing new climate technologies, disseminating them is decisive; calls on the Commission to take action in this field too, for example by creating new financing arrangements;
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Emphasises that the co-benefits of emissions reductions onparticularly occur for emissions reductions achieved inside the EU and where there is a strong emphasis on increased energy efficiency investment;
Amendment 341 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Remains concerned about the large potential for windfall profits and the ongoing uncertainty and discussion on the ETS undermining public acceptance of the EU's climate policy and points to lack of evidence of any delocalisation;