The leaders of the EU agreed on targets for protecting the climate change despite deep divisions among member states. What you think about the impact of the compromise on the economy of the CEE countries? Citing counclusions: "in this context, Member States with a GDP per capita below 60% of the EU average may opt to continue to give free allowances to the energy sector up to 2030. The maximum amount handed out for free after 2020 should be no more than 40% of the allowances allocated under 2.9 for auctioning to the Member States using this option.The current modalities, including transparency, should be improved to ensure that the funds are used to promote real investments modernising the energy sector, while
avoiding distortions of the internal energy market". There are also other provisions regarding the situation of the CEE countries...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/24/world/europe/european-leaders-agree-on-targets-to-fight-climate-change-.html?_r=0
http://www.european-council.europa.eu/council-meetings?meeting=f02588fd-757c-4697-a2cc-8af00f65ff7c&lang=en&type=EuropeanCouncil
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/145356.pdf
Who is the winner?.....as usual, it is not the climate anyway!!
Why? The goals seems to be very ambitious esp. when you make a comparison with other countries?
Q. What are your feelings about the outcome of the summit?
I am surprised that there are some governments taking an effort to reduce global warming.
Q. Is the EU more effective than the U.S. in it's climate efforts?
I cannot tell. I think that it is too early to say.
Q What if rest of the world won't follow the EU?
If the rest of the world will not follow then unfortunately all of us will suffer the consequences. We will fall asleep and never wake up.
Q. Please take into account that prices of the energy in the U.S., China, Russia and India are lower than in the EU.
U.S. has its own reserve and lots of other sources like Canada and Saudi. China and India has resources from Russia. Russia is a huge country with vast of resources. There was not much of capitalism in that country for thousand to years except of dictatorship, anarchy and then communism (DAC). With capitalism you have a rapid growth and innovation at the price of rapid, wasteful and inefficient consumption of resources. In (DAC) system, you have a slow growth and innovation with a slow consumption of resources. It is like a car, if I want to go further and faster then I have to burn more gas. Thus why European empires are non-existent today. Russia is still as it was years ago. China and India resources are in people not oil.
[optional] Feel also free to answer whether it's wise to take such a young kid to such a big event (picture in NY Times)?
Yes, it was wise. Because that decision about climate change agreement was made for him. The winner is the boy's generation and the looser is old generation who refuse to let go and make a room for younger generation.
The answer above made me thinking about my questions (Thank you for this voice). My initial mistake is that I posed too many questions thinking of too many things connected with the Council's conclusions. All those Q&As cannot be closed in one discussion. I decided then to modify the question and concentrate on the economic consequences and your prognosis regarding the impact of the climate compromise on the economies of the CEE countries. There's one thing though I cannot leave without an answer. Using kids by politicians for PR purposes is disgusting. Answering the CEE problem, please concentrate on the the text of Council's conclusions and your prognosis regarding the impact on the industry and energy sector in your countries. If there is a need to discuss other things I'll be glad to go back to other questions and open another discussion(s).
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Atmospheric Sciences
- Climate Science
- Climate Change