Tuesday
Jan212014
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Europe's energy emergency
Jan 21, 2014 EU Energy: grid The FT is reporting a forthcoming EU paper on energy policy, which apparently notes, with almost preposterous understatement, that Europe's disadvantage in energy prices has increased somewhat in recent years.
Industrialists are not so sanguine.
Paolo Scaroni, chief executive of the Italian oil and gas company, Eni, said in a speech at the weekend that lower American energy costs had created a “massive competitive advantage for the US” that was driving investors and businesses to that country at a rapid pace. “This is a real emergency for Europe,” he said.
Reader Comments (29)
Could US fracking have something to do with it? Let's get on with it here - quickly!
Great news for Greens! It shows that Europe's energy policies are really beginning to work. Just keep on pushing up prices and eventually power generation from renewable resources will look competitive.
The European push for more expensive and less used energy is, in fact, the ONLY European policy which is working. Congratulations to them!
Scaroni, whom you quote above, received a 16 month prison sentence for corruption in the nineties, and a four month sentence (overturned on appeal) for pollution. He’s currently being investigated on a massive bribery charge involving the Algerian government.
He’s ex-director of Pilkington’s and Boots, and is currently a non-executive vice-president of the London Stock Exchange and an independent administrator of Veolia Environment (Deben’s outfit). At ENEL he started a windpower section. And he’s got a Legion d’Honneur.
Just the sort of person European governments respect and listen to.
Things are getting serious. The rats have started leaving the ship.
He sounds like perfect material for an Italian politician. Does he shag around too?
We now apparently have Scaroni to add to the GLOBEs list of Deben and Oxburgh's shady friends- Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Stephen Byers. What a distinguished bunch.
According to the GWPF the EU will decide within a month that they are going all out for shale and also that emission targets will no longer be binding ^.^
If that's true Dung, it's excellent news for the economy.
Don't hold your breath. The EU is 95% communist. They want lower economic activity. The french cannot drill for oil and gas because hollande needs the greens.
The EU could not give a toss for our economy they will always be taking their millions out of the till. They have shown no willingness to move away from their green agenda even when the european economies were crashing. There is still a Czecq cyclist in the commision that has ordered a ban on all fossil fueled transport in EU cities by 2020.
These people are nut jobs of the first order, of premier ligue status. Hegeland, or whatever he name is, from the socialist republic of danemark, wants to ban all fossil fueled power stations by 2020.
These people are grade one nutters marshalled by a grade one nutty moaist called barrosa. Do not hold your breath.
Economic Concern Curtails EU’s Climate Policy
Date: 20/01/14
Barbara Lewis and Charlie Dunmore, Reuters
Seven years after it set some of the world’s most stringent environmental targets, the European Union is about to revise its long-term goals to take more account of industry and changed economic circumstances.
Following years of economic turmoil, low growth and rising energy costs, the EU is looking to strike a balance between tackling climate change and giving industry room to manoeuvre as it prepares to unveil new targets on Wednesday.
Instead of the “Holy Trinity” of goals laid down in 2007 – a 20 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from 1990 levels by 2020, 20 percent use of renewable energy sources and 20 percent gains in energy efficiency – the new targets for 2030 are likely to be simpler.
As the United States enjoys an energy boon because of the exploitation of vast shale gas reserves – its natural gas prices are roughly a third of EU levels – Europe will also avoid putting obstacles in the way of its own shale exploration.
But while the targets are less ambitious and the atmosphere more realist, the expected headline goal would demand effort.
EU officials say they expect the European Commission, the executive arm of the 28-nation bloc, to suggest cutting CO2 emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2030 – still a higher benchmark than any other industrialised region.
“We still have a responsibility of leadership, but we should not believe we can do this alone,” one of the officials involved in drafting the policy paper said, acknowledging that the EU cannot afford to be as ambitious as it was in 2007.
While the shift reflects realism at a time when the EU’s biggest trading partners, including the United States, Japan and Canada, have scaled back their climate commitments, it is also a nod to the lobbying influence of European industry.
Major companies and utilities have said that overly stringent targets will drive business out of Europe, making it harder for the continent to compete. With growth negligible and unemployment at record highs, that is an argument that has found traction in Brussels.
“The high cost of non-competitive technologies to decarbonise the power sector cannot be borne by our companies in addition to already uncompetitive energy prices,” heads of industry said in a letter to the Commission this month.
The 14 signatories, who asked for “one single, realistic target” plus a goal on industrial growth, included top executives from chemical companies BASF and Dow , and steelmaker Arcelor Mittal.
Full story
EU: Re-Industrialization More Important Than Climate Change
Date: 20/01/14
Florian Eder, Die Welt
The European Commission is beginning to shift away from its current climate policy: “For an industrial renaissance”, the needs of the economy should play a key role in setting environmental objectives in the future.
The EU Commission has re-discovered the importance of industry for economic development. On Wednesday, it will adopt a message that is entitled:”For an industrial renaissance” and states: “Without a strong industrial base, Europe will not be able to prosper.” Industry is “at the core of European economic revival and competitiveness”, says the text.
The commitment to the industrial base is a reaction to its weakening in recent years. Only in five EU member states, the industry’s share of GDP has increased since 2007 according to the Commission. Besides Germany, the countries include the Netherlands, Austria, Lithuania and Slovakia. Everywhere else, and especially in the large countries France, Italy, Spain, UK, there has been a trend towards de-industrialization.
The importance of industry has been falling incessantly
3.8 million industrial jobs have been lost in the same period in the EU. The industry’s share of GDP last year fell to a mere 15 percent. The EU target of 20 percent by 2020, which the Commission will renew in its decision, seems far away.
Against this background, the EU Commission uses lofty words, and yet they suggest a cautious change.
In those areas where the EU can actually do something to strengthen industry, it now wants to do so. It intends to “improve the regulatory environment and to make it more stable and predictable”, according to the proposed declaration for the meeting on Wednesday. In particular, it wants to make EU laws “easier and reduce bureaucratic burdens.” The Commissioners request comparable actions by the Member States and announced to monitor the progress.
“The Commission is on the right track if it rediscovers the importance of industrial production for Europe’s economies,” said the FDP politician Holger Krahmer. He called for the application of this knowledge: “The European industry is exposed to an unprecedented level of regulation. If, in fact, the European Commission considers a renaissance of the faltering industry as important, then some legal frameworks must be fundamentally revised,” said the MEP.
Internal market is the key to more growth
Further trade agreements should do their bit to promote growth. In addition, the internal market, the magic formula for growth in the EU, should give way to further breakthroughs in areas where today 28 different national regimes make it difficult for businesses to expand and to export in other EU countries. This is especially true for the energy and telecom markets, which the Commission wants to open further. Suggestions on how to do that are in the process of legislation.
“After the crisis, the single market can again play its role to revive the economy and to create jobs and growth,” it says.
Therefore, the Commission urges the European Parliament and the Member States to speed up the legislative process. At the EU summit in March, the heads of government will consult on the proposals and impose pressure to act on themselves in this way. The announcement is part of a package of projects and specific legislative proposals by the Commission on industrial and climate policy, which the Commission – coordinated and interlocking – will decide upon on Wednesday.
It amounts to an identifiable shift in emphasis. The policy paper says: “The Commission will take into account industrial competitiveness and technological feasibility in the design of the climate and energy policy framework for the year 2030.” This was to be done “in order to avoid that the difference in energy costs between the EU and its major international competitors expands even further”.
Brussels reaches out to industry
This is an important step, if the EU’s power centre is serious about it: an outreach to industry which has always complained that the EU’s climate policy ignored both feasibility and economic considerations – and has only showed the desire to be the world leader in climate protection. It would appear that this is about to change.
In fact, the evidence is still pending, but the Commission has the opportunity to follow through on Wednesday. In addition to the industrial policy communication, it will then decide about the European climate targets for 2030. Among EU Commissioners CO2 targets are still being discussed. The European Parliament has called for a reduction of 40 percent, which corresponds to the maximum demand in the circle of Commissioners.
[b]However, it is already clear that the new targets are set in a less binding way than the climate targets for 2020. Commission President José Manuel Barroso does no longer want to impose binding goals on the Member States regarding the development of wind and solar energy.
No binding expansion targets
Instead, according EU diplomats, there should be a binding overall EU target for the development of renewable energy sources. The Commission will then assess the corresponding efforts by the Member States relating to reporting requirements, rather than impose any fixed targets.[/b]
Another piece of the puzzle makes the signal of a more pragmatic EU climate policy even more evident. Fracking, the extraction of natural gas from shale rock, is largely responsible for the huge benefits the United States enjoys in energy costs for businesses. In Europe, the extraction is more difficult, also technically, perhaps because one would have to drill deeper.
However, the EU does not want to turn down this opportunity. A paper by Environment Commissioner Janez Potočnik, which is also on the Wednesday agenda, provides minimum standards for the protection of the environment and health – but fracking will not be prohibited or restricted.
Translation Philipp Mueller
Die Welt, 20 January 2014
Not to worry, the American Left is hard at work to make sure there will be "energy equality" along with their "income equality". They all ignore:
Energy is life.
Cheap energy is properity.
The US is also poised to cut carbon emissions by 17% by 2020, entirely due to shale gas. Another problem for the windy generators.
Le Danemark est le champion de la pression fiscale. Les dernières statistiques de l’OCDE publiées en décembre 2013 montrent que le ratio entre les impôts et le PIB du Danemark est le plus élevé des pays de l’OCDE. Alors qu’en 1965, le pays n’imposait "que" 30% d’impôts à ses citoyens et 38,4% en 1975, le Danemark n’a eu de cesse d’augmenter la pression fiscale pour atteindre 46,1% en 1985, 49,4% en 2000 et le diminuer aujourd’hui à 48% !
This is the core thinking in the EU. Danemark, Hegeland. It says :
Denmark is the champion of the fiscal pressure. The last statistics of the OECD published in December 2013 show that the ratio between the taxes and the GDP of Denmark is the most elevated of the countries of the OECD. whereas in 1965, the country only imposed 30% of taxes to his/her/its citizens and 38,4% in 1975, Denmarkhas not stopped raising the fiscal pressure to reach 46,1% in 1985, 49,4% in 2000 and to decrease it today to 48%.
Hooray for socialism. Screw the people. = EU
Please let that be true...
"We face a systemic industrial massacre," said Antonio Tajani, the European industry commissioner.
Mr Tajani warned that Europe's quixotic dash for renewables was pushing electricity costs to untenable levels, leaving Europe struggling to compete as America's shale revolution cuts US natural gas prices by 80pc.
"I am in favour of a green agenda, but we can't be religious about this. We need a new energy policy. We have to stop pretending, because we can't sacrifice Europe's industry for climate goals that are not realistic, and are not being enforced worldwide," he told The Daily Telegraph during the Ambrosetti forum of global policy-makers at Lake Como.
"The loss of competitiveness is frightening," said Paulo Savona, head of Italy's Fondo Interbancario. "When people choose whether to invest in Europe or the US, what they think about most is the cost of energy."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/10295045/Brussels-fears-European-industrial-massacre-sparked-by-energy-costs.html
The EU is 95% communist.
Not to mention that 97% of climate scientists lie and that 99% of statistics are made on the spot. Additionally, 99.99% of right-wing cranks believe in the quality of stuff they pull out of their backsides.
Meanwhile, Your Grace, this is nothing to be alarmed about perhaps but have you noticed all those Astrology ads that has been peppering around the Bishop Hill banner for the last week or so.
In my view, the true percentage of climate scientists who lie is 99.97%, and I am not even a right-wing crank.
Reality Bites.
The U.S.has environmental groups working overtime to curtail the supply of natural gas. This is an international issue now.
Curtail the supply of natural gas so that renewable energy sources must to used to supply energy.
The U.S.has environmental groups working overtime to curtail the supply of natural gas. This is an international issue now.
Curtail the supply of natural gas so that renewable energy sources must to used to supply energy.
NO ! Europe MUST hold the line in opposition to the hideous Fracking that will destroy the Environment ! Wind and solar can supply 100% of Europe's energy requirements, including transportation.
( spoken as a Yank who finds the current European energy situation a great boost to the US job market )
Jan 21, 2014 at 1:42 PM | Unregistered CommentersHx
The only centre right party in the EU (relative to the UK and US, is UKIP. So you may be right that 99;9% are sociocommunists.
Barrosa is a portugais maoist and was involve in demonstrations designed to bring down the Portugese government in favour of the Moaists. The rest are from socialist countries or ex-communist countries. Ex-communist countries did not move to the right after leaving the USSR they merely sought freedom which the EU now wants to remove.
Dung wrote: "According to the GWPF the EU will decide within a month that they are going all out for shale and also that emission targets will no longer be binding ^.^"
Four legs good, two legs better. And voters won't punish them.
How much money wasted, how many people dead from fuel poverty, how many young adults trained to live on the dole? How many lives ruined, futures wasted, how much of our industry blighted?
Bastards.
JF
quote
Barrosa is a portugais maoist and was involve in demonstrations designed to bring down the Portugese government in favour of the Moaists.
unquote.
Moaists? Is that like the alien lizards (whose rule we welcome) only huge flightless birds?
JF
sHx
I’ve mentioned you in the discussion at
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/discussion/post/2271205
Stephen Richards
Barroso called himself a Maoist when he was busy risking his life overthrowing a fascist dictatorship. The current President of Italy was a Stalinist when he was a partisan fighting Mussolini and Hitler. People who risk their lives fighting for freedom tend not to belong to the cosy parties of the political centre. It’s one of the awkward facts of history which tends to get overlooked in peaceful times.
The Danes spend a lot of their wealth on a socialist welfare state because that’s what they voted for. It’s their right. The fact that the European Union is a monster doomed to die has little to do with socialism, and much to do with the undemocratic nature of beaureaucratic societies, as described by Gogol in 19th century Tsarist Russia and Hasek (in the Good Soldier Schweik) in Austro-Hungary, neither of which were particularly socialist.
Comrade geoffchambers,
it isn't the case that I get redbaited. Rather, I grab the occasional opportunity to demonstrate to my right-wing friends just what kind of way-out-on-the-moon cranks they are rubbing shoulders with ... politically speaking, of course.
The current climate doomsday hysteria has hit the working classes and the poor masses the hardest. No rich people has to wear an extra layer of clothing because they can't afford heating anymore. If there is a political conspiracy here, then that conspiracy is operating in favour of the haves against the interests of the have-nots. I am not holding my breath for the day that Cucumber-in-Chief, James Delingpole, to chain himself to the doors of Greenpeace in protest against fuel poverty, even though he bangs away about this being some commie conspiracy.
sHx: Some of us have seen the commie conspiracy as being against the poor first and foremost. At least I have since age 18. Remember that first syllable: con.