Global Warming Policy Forum | 17 Oct 2014
New Unilateral CO2 Targets Would ‘Destroy European Industry’ Poland Warns
If the EU summit next week maintains the European Commission’s proposal on reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent by 2030, Poland will have to veto it, Deputy Prime Minister and Economy Minister Janusz Piechociński told Polish Radio on Thursday. “If this initial proposal will look as it does now, then Poland will have no choice but to veto it,” Piechociński said. “For the Polish economy minister and the majority of EU economy ministers the 40-percent option, which destroys half of Europe’s industry, is unacceptable,” he added. —Warsaw Business Journal, 16 October 2014
Poland’s largest opposition party Law and Justice (PiS) says it would support a veto by Prime Minister Kopacz on climate change in Brussels next week if the move harmed the Polish economy. Law and Justice’s unusual solidarity with the government comes after Poland’s deputy prime minister and economy minister Janusz Piechociński confirmed on Thursday that if there is no movement on the EC’s proposal at the summit then “Poland will have no choice but to veto it”. —Radio Poland, 17 October 2014
A week before the start of a Brussels summit on climate goals, member states disagree on various points of the so-called climate and energy policy framework for 2030. In the comments on the draft conclusions member states wrote this week – of which EUobserver has seen 22 – the disagreement appears largest on targets for energy efficiency and on which share of energy consumed in the EU should be from a renewable source in 2030. –Peter Teffer, EUobserver, 17 October 2014
Owen Paterson’s GWPF speech is worth noting by the capital markets as it indicates that the current political consensus on energy policy maybe be challenged going forward. In our view the public and political debate is only likely to grow as the inherent contradictions and unforeseen negative consequences of the current policy become more apparent as time goes on. We have long argued that current EU/UK energy policy is deeply flawed and that utility companies and public market investors should be wary of committing further capital to support and deliver it. Advice which has been increasingly accepted in recent times. After all, an energy policy that has the Hinkley Point C contract and off-shore wind as its two flagship achievements must eventually collapse under the weight of its own idiocy. –Peter Atherton, Liberum, 16 October 2014
1) Poland To Veto EU’s 40% CO2 Reduction Proposal – Warsaw Business Journal, 16 October 2014
2) Poland’s National Consensus: Opposition Would Support EU Veto Over CO2 Target – Radio Poland, 17 October 2014
3) New Unilateral CO2 Targets Would ‘Destroy European Industry’ Poland Warns – Polish Radio, 16 October 2014
4) Leaked Documents Show EU Disagreement On Climate Targets – EUobserver, 17 October 2014
5) Is Owen Paterson’s GWPF Lecture Important For Capital Markets? – Liberum, 16 October 2014
6) Bill Carmichael: A Welcome Voice Of Sense On The ‘Green Blob’
Yorkshire Post, 17 October 2014
7 ) Video Of 2014 Annual GWPF Lecture – Owen Paterson, Keeping The Lights On
GWPF TV, 15 October 2014
1) Poland To Veto EU’s 40% CO2 Reduction Proposal
Warsaw Business Journal, 16 October 2014
If the EU summit next week maintains the European Commission’s proposal on reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent by 2030, Poland will have to veto it, Deputy Prime Minister and Economy Minister Janusz Piechociński told Polish Radio on Thursday.
“If this initial proposal will look as it does now, then Poland will have no choice but to veto it,” Piechociński said.
“For the Polish economy minister and the majority of EU economy ministers the 40-percent option, which destroys half of Europe’s industry, is unacceptable,” he added.
EU leaders will meet in Brussels on October 23-24 for a climate summit that is supposed to set a new goal for reducing CO2 emission. The European Commission has proposed a 40-percent reduction by 2020 and a simultaneous growth of the share of renewable energy to 27 percent.
2) Poland’s National Consensus: Opposition Would Support EU Veto Over CO2 Target
Radio Poland, 17 October 2014
Poland’s largest opposition party Law and Justice (PiS) says it would support a veto by Prime Minister Kopacz on climate change in Brussels next week if the move harmed the Polish economy.
“Polish business must come first,” PiS spokesman Adam Hofman told Polish Radio on Friday morning ahead of the EU summit on 23 October, where the European Commission has proposed reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent, on 1990 levels, by 2030
Law and Justice’s unusual solidarity with the government comes after Poland’s deputy prime minister and economy minister Janusz Piechociński confirmed on Thursday that if there is no movement on the EC’s proposal at the summit then “Poland will have no choice but to veto it”.
Prime Minister Ewa Kopacz said at the ASEM EU – Asia Summit in Milan yesterday that negotiations with EU partners will be “difficult because of a divergence of interests.”
Previously PM Kopacz has said that she would block any move that would increase energy bills for Polish consumers.
3) New Unilateral CO2 Targets Would ‘Destroy European Industry’ Poland Warns
Polish Radio, 16 October 2014
Poland’s Economy Minister and Deputy PM Janusz Piechocinski has said that the EU’s proposal on CO2 emissions reduction would “destroy European industry”.
The comment comes ahead of an ambitious EU climate change deal to be discussed at a summit in Brussels next week, which aims to reduce CO2 emissions by 40 percent of the 1990 level by 2030.
Not only is this unrealistic, say Polish politicians, but such a move could also harm the economy, reports John Beauchamp.
According to Poland’s Economy Minister and deputy prime minister Janusz Piechocinski, the current proposal would destroy European industry.
“Europe shouldn’t be naïve, and it shouldn’t decide on anything which would be harmful for European industry,” Piechocinski told Polish Radio, Thursday morning.
Poland’s stance has been slammed by environmental organisations, including Client Earth, a group of environmental activist lawyers.
4) Leaked Documents Show EU Disagreement On Climate Targets
EUobserver, 17 October 2014
Peter Teffer
A week before the start of a Brussels summit on climate goals, member states disagree on various points of the so-called climate and energy policy framework for 2030.
During the summit, government leaders will try to agree how the bloc’s 28 countries will counter climate change.
On Monday (13 October) the general secretariat of the European Council sent its draft conclusions to the member states.
In the comments on the draft conclusions member states wrote this week – of which EUobserver has seen 22 – the disagreement appears largest on targets for energy efficiency and on which share of energy consumed in the EU should be from a renewable source in 2030.
Cyprus and the United Kingdom commented that they do not want any target for energy efficiency improvement.
At least seven mostly central and eastern European countries want 25 percent, while at least 12 agree with the draft conclusion’s 30 percent. Denmark wants the final text to say “at least 30 percent”.
There is also disagreement on whether this efficiency target should be binding or “indicative”. Only six of the 22 leaked member states’ positions stated they wanted a binding target, but only at EU-level.
A similar spectrum of opinions on the binding issue exists for the renewables target. The European Commission has proposed a 27 percent increase in efficiency and most member states seem to agree.
But whether the target should be indicative, binding on a European level or binding on a member state level, is not yet agreed.
A handful of member states wants the aim to be “at least 27 percent”, while Germany and Denmark want a 30 percent target.
The draft conclusions say that a “reformed Emissions Trading System (ETS) will be the main European instrument to achieve” an EU target of 40 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
But the ETS is not seen as effective due to a high number of permits available on the market.
Earlier on Thursday (16 October) German chancellor Angela Merkel said that although government leaders will try to reach an agreement next week, “it is unclear” if they will be able to.
5) Is Owen Paterson’s GWPF Lecture Important For Capital Markets?
Liberum, 16 October 2014
Peter Atherton
Last night the former Secretary of State for the Environment, Owen Paterson MP, delivered the Annual Lecture to the Global Warming Policy Foundation. The speech has generated considerable press coverage and the full text can be seen here.
In his speech Mr Paterson challenges the direction and basis of UK/EU energy policy.
He states that current energy policy is failing to deliver the key goal of emission reduction whilst proving to be both un-affordable and a significant threat to security of supply. Mr Paterson recommended a change of course with a return to a more market based energy policy that would encourage technological innovation that in turn would reduce carbon emissions in a more affordable manner.
In practical terms Mr Paterson calls for the suspension/abolition of the Climate Change Act 2008 which provides the legal framework for current energy policy and puts into UK law various climate change targets, most notably the 2050 target to reduce greenhouse gases by 80% versus 1990. In order to secure affordable energy whilst reducing emissions Mr Paterson recommended that the UK focus R&D and investment in four areas; local shale gas, modular small scale nuclear, demand side management, and local combined heat and power.
Is the Speech Important for the Capital Markets?
The speech is the first time to our knowledge that a senior Conservative politician (recently in government) has called for a fundamental change of course on energy policy and explicitly for the abolition of the Climate Change Act. As the 2013 Energy Act is in effect an instrument to implement the Climate Change Act then the abolition of the latter would naturally lead to the abolition / revision of the former.
Mr Paterson’s speech is an indication that the monolithic political consensus in favour of the UK’s climate change driven energy policy is fraying somewhat. We are now seeing some recognition from politicians that current policy is struggling (to say the least) to satisfy the conflicting goals of reduced emissions, security of supply and affordability. For the public capital markets perhaps the only surprise is that it has taken so long for the political debate to begin.
However, Mr Paterson’s speech is so far just an isolated event. As yet the political support for both the Climate Change Act and the Energy Act remains strong with all three of the main parties in favour.
The Coming General Election
Energy policy is likely to be an important issue in the forthcoming general election. It is likely in our view that all three main political parties will maintain their support for the current policy direction. Indeed, the Labour Party has stated that it intends to legislate, should it form the next government, to impose a 50g CO2 per KWh maximum carbon intensity for the power generation industry (compared to c.500g now) by 2030. Such a policy would re-enforce the existing targets. The Liberal Democrats have of course held the energy brief in the current coalition government so are highly unlikely to signal a change of course. The Conservative party voted overwhelmingly in favour of both the Climate Change Act and the Energy Act and whilst Mr Paterson’s speech indicates some growing dissent from within the party the chance of a radical shift in policy direction appear slim for now.
The Conservatives have indicated that, should they win a majority, that support for on-shore wind would be curtailed but have not suggested that they would move away from either the 2020 renewable target or the 2030 emission reduction target. However the rise of UKIP, who propose to abolish ‘green levies’ may force the Conservatives to a more sceptical stance on current policy, especially support for renewables.
Liberum Comment
Mr Paterson’s speech is worth noting by the capital markets as it indicates that the current political consensus on energy policy maybe be challenged going forward. In our view the public and political debate is only likely to grow as the inherent contradictions and unforeseen negative consequences of the current policy become more apparent as time goes on. We have long argued that current EU/UK energy policy is deeply flawed and that utility companies and public market investors should be wary of committing further capital to support and deliver it. Advice which has been increasingly accepted in recent times. After all, an energy policy that has the Hinkley Point C contract and off-shore wind as its two flagship achievements must eventually collapse under the weight of its own idiocy.
6) Bill Carmichael: A Welcome Voice Of Sense On The ‘Green Blob’
Yorkshire Post, 17 October 2014
HURRAH! At last a senior politician has finally plucked up the courage to tell the truth about the Government’s climate change policies – they are ruinously expensive, they won’t keep the lights on and they are deliberately designed to punish the poor and further enrich the wealthy.
In a speech this week, former Environment Secretary Owen Paterson criticised what he called the “green blob” of Ministers and civil servants who are blindly pushing forward the climate change agenda in the face of mounting evidence that it isn’t working and is driving millions more into fuel poverty.
Some of us, this columnist included, have been banging this drum for a number of years now. The only pity is that Mr Paterson waited until after he was sacked from government in the summer before joining the band.
Government policy, driven by well-funded environmental lobby groups, is to take money from the very poorest in society by way of “green taxes” on fuel bills, and give it to the rich in the form of subsidies for so-called renewable energy.
As a direct result of this, more than 31,000 mainly elderly people die every winter because they cannot afford to heat their homes properly.
So let’s be clear – poverty-stricken pensioners shivering over a single-bar of an electric fire are forking out so that fabulously rich people – including Jude Law, Mick Jagger and Gary Neville – can receive public money to cover their multi-million pound mansions in solar panels.
As Mr Paterson said, this is the “single most regressive policy we have seen in this country since the Sheriff of Nottingham: the coerced increase in electricity bills for people on low incomes to pay huge subsidies to wealthy land owners and rich investors”.
That is bad enough, but I am afraid it gets worse. The policy is not only regressive it is also failing in terms of improving energy security and reducing carbon emissions.
As Mr Paterson pointed out, onshore wind produces “paltry” amounts of energy and offshore wind power “is proving a failure” despite the enormous amounts of public cash.
Solar power “is a non-starter as a significant supplier to the UK grid and will remain so as long as our skies are cloudy and our winter nights long”.
Tidal and wave power is “too expensive and impractical” and burning biomass does little to reduce carbon emissions.
Using any criteria you care to mention the current policy is proving to be a miserable failure.
What we need is an urgent and radical re-think of our energy needs. The useless Climate Change Act and its entirely arbitrary and damaging targets should be scrapped. The punishment of the poor and subsides for the rich should stop.
We need massively to increase fracking to reduce our reliance on foreign gas from unpleasant regimes, such as Russia.
A combination of gas, coal and new nuclear plants should form the basis of our energy supplies for the foreseeable future with renewables making a minor contribution. The current policy is not just failing and plain wrong, it is also positively wicked because of the devastating impact it has on the most vulnerable in our society.
7 ) Video Of 2014 Annual GWPF Lecture – Owen Paterson, Keeping The Lights On
GWPF TV, 15 October 2014
