Pełny tekst 
Środa, 28 września 2005 r. - Strasburg Wersja poprawiona

23. Benzyna

  Przewodniczący. Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego są oświadczenia Rady i Komisji na temat zwyżki cen benzyny i zależności paliwowej.


  Douglas Alexander, President-in-Office of the Council. Mr President, thank you for this opportunity to address Parliament today on this important and timely issue.

The developments we have seen in the oil market over the past few years raise both important issues and, at present, a number of key issues for the European Union.

Sustained high oil prices represent a significant risk to global economic growth and are a particularly damaging aspect for poorer countries. Access to reliable and affordable supplies of oil is vital for the European Union and the wider global economy. In 2003, oil products comprised 43% of total energy consumption in the European Union.

The importance of this issue was highlighted by the recent informal Ecofin meeting in Manchester, in the United Kingdom, which, when discussing the current economic situation, focused in particular on the impact of oil prices.

However, as has been well documented elsewhere, the current situation is different from previous periods of high oil prices. In real terms, current price levels are lower than the peaks seen in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and the pace of the rise in prices has been slower. This reflects the fact that very strong, and unexpected, global oil demand growth, rather than supply shock, has been the driving force behind higher prices. Because of this increased demand, global production and refining capacity has become very tight.

So what can be done to help improve present market conditions? Oil is a global issue and can only be solved by global action. Both oil producing and oil consuming nations have shared interests and responsibilities in delivering more stable oil prices that enable sustainable economic growth.

Consumer and producer countries and international organisations need to work together to help make international oil markets function more effectively, both on the demand and on the supply side. Open, transparent and competitive oil prices and oil markets are the most effective mechanism for delivering reliable oil supplies at those more stable prices.

The reserves are there to meet future demand. The world is not yet running out of oil or gas any time soon. However, action is needed to ensure that reserves are turned into actual supplies. Greater investment is needed in both production and refining capability. A climate more conducive to investment, with open markets, transparent business practices and stable regulatory frameworks, is required throughout the international oil sector.

Energy conservation and efficiency, and technology and innovation are also important and have a role to play. At Gleneagles, G8 Heads of Government published a plan of action on these issues in addressing climate change, but progress in these areas can also do much to enhance energy security.

Ultimately, market mechanisms will ration the remaining supplies of oil and provide an incentive for a shift to alternative sources of energy, but appropriate action can be taken in support of that and to promote energy efficiency.

Energy efficiency is rightly at the top of the European Union energy policy agenda at present. Improving energy efficiency within the European Union is the most cost-effective means of simultaneously reducing energy demand – to promote security of supply and improve the competitiveness of European business – and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Much has already been achieved by the European Union, it is right to acknowledge that in this sphere, with a range of regulatory and voluntary measures now in place, but it is clear that whilst significant potential for further improvements in energy efficiency remains, there are also barriers to now realising that potential.

That is why Member States have welcomed the high priority that Commissioner Piebalgs has attached to making further progress and the recent publication of the Green Paper on energy efficiency, entitled 'Doing More with Less'. That Green Paper is currently stimulating considerable and – I would suggest – welcome discussion and debate as to how barriers can be overcome in order to deliver significant energy savings by 2020. It is also why the United Kingdom Presidency will strive to secure a second reading agreement between Council and Parliament on the Energy End-Use Efficiency Directive, which will set a framework and targets for energy efficiency savings in the European Union over the coming years.

The European Union has introduced the Biofuels Directive to encourage the development of alternative renewable fuels for transport. Member States have agreed to set indicative targets for biofuels sales in 2005 and for 2010 to help reduce European Union dependence on fossil fuels. Member States across the Union have introduced policies such as reductions in fuel duty and these have stimulated rapidly growing biofuels sales.

Fuel cells and hydrogen offer significant potential in the longer term, with many considering hydrogen fuel cells to be the ultimate replacement for oil and the internal combustion engine. The European Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology Platform has carried out sterling and important work in preparing a strategic research agenda and a deployment strategy for fuel cells and hydrogen. This work will, in turn, influence the Commission in determining priorities for funding under the Seventh Framework Programme. The Commission is currently soliciting industry support for a joint technology initiative in this area to allow major hydrogen demonstration projects to be undertaken here within the European Union.

Greater market transparency is also needed. Improved data on global oil demand, supply and stocks is essential for better informed market decisions. To this end, European Union members are contributing data to the Joint Oil Data Initiative, due to be launched in Riyadh later this year. The European Commission is also currently working on the improvement of data, notably for oil stocks for Europe.

Lack of transparency over the world’s oil reserves and plans for their development also undermine stability and cause uncertainty. Greater clarity and consistency is needed in worldwide reporting of reserves.

Increased dialogue and understanding between consumers and producers is, frankly, also important. The European Union now has a formal dialogue with OPEC, enabling an exchange of views on energy issues of common interest. The first meeting in June agreed four themes for enhancing cooperation between the European Union and OPEC. These were: oil market developments, in both the short and medium-to-long terms; energy policies; energy technologies; and energy-related multilateral issues.

Discussions on these themes will be developed through workshops and other meetings, helping to inform future dialogue meetings. In the first instance, a round table on oil market developments will take place on 21 November, concentrating on investment needs along the oil supply chain.

The European Union is also currently engaged in dialogues with Norway, Russia, China and India. The energy dialogue with Russia is a good example of effective cooperation between the European Union and the Russian Federation on an issue of great importance to their overall relationship. The basic idea behind the dialogue is a simple balancing of interests: Russia requires European investment to develop its energy resources, whilst Europe needs secure, long-term access to Russian oil and gas.

Whilst given their rapidly growing need for oil and gas supplies to fuel growth, it is crucial for the European Union, in achieving both its energy security and climate change objectives, that we engage in constructive dialogue and practical cooperation with the emerging economies of both China and India.

Finally, I should also say something today about the response to the impact of Hurricane Katrina on the oil market, and the part played in this by the European Union.

The International Energy Agency called on its member states to release 2 million barrels of oil a day over 30 days. Although it is many years since the International Energy Agency’s response measures have been tested, the organisation was able very quickly to reach a view that the disruption to the world markets was large enough to justify releasing stocks, and to reach agreement with its member states that stocks should be released.

The IEA proceeds by unanimity. This agreement was a remarkable achievement and a tribute to all those concerned. It demonstrates the merits of the IEA’s multilateral approach and the need for such an approach when dealing with the global oil market of today.

Not all European Union Member States are members of the IEA. However, the EU Oil Supply Group met to allow all Member States to review their intended response and give those who are not members of the IEA an opportunity to contribute to that broader discussion.

The IEA Governing Board, at its meeting on 15 September, reviewed the contributions of its member states to the release of stocks. It also decided that no further action was immediately necessary and that the position could be reviewed again at the end of this month or in early October to see if any further action is needed.

The release of stocks has improved the supply situation and had a calming effect on the market and on prices. It was clearly the right thing to do, and done to the right timetable. EU Member States, as well as taking part in the release of stocks, were able to increase gasoline exports to the United States, while ensuring that European Union markets remained supplied without any domestic shortages.

Given the current climate, this debate is extremely timely. The European Union is already making an important contribution to improving conditions in the oil market, both in the short and medium-to-long terms, but there is a range of challenges ahead. I would now take the opportunity to invite others to contribute their thoughts to that future work.



  Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission. Mr President, the European Commission is highly concerned about the current situation in the oil market, characterised by a strong rise in prices. The underlying cause for these high prices is the increasingly tight balance between supply and demand, mainly due to a strong growth in the demand for oil over the last years, particularly in the United States and China, and, as a result, the current significant lack of spare crude production and refining capacities. In fact, in 2004, there was the largest worldwide increase in oil demand ever. In such circumstances – where there is limited spare capacity – specific events, such as the war in Iraq and Hurricane Katrina, fuel speculation, pushing prices ever higher.

Because these high prices are beginning to have a significant negative impact on the wellbeing of our citizens, particularly the most vulnerable, and upon our economy, the Commission as well as the Member States must focus its efforts on this challenge. Whilst, of course, the Commission alone cannot solve this problem, I believe that it can make a significant contribution towards bringing prices to more reasonable levels. This is essential for EU citizens, but also for the vulnerable populations in developing countries for whom the impact is ever more devastating.

Following in-depth debates within the College and with the full support of my colleagues, and in particular President Barroso, I have recently presented a five-point plan of measures that the Commission is already taking, and which will now be accelerated to deal with this challenge.

Our first action must be to save energy and to reduce demand. Since I took office I have made this my first priority. The Commission has already adopted a Green Paper on Energy Efficiency in June 2005, which identifies the potential for Europe to save as much as 20% of its existing energy use in a cost-effective manner. Existing legislation, when fully implemented, could achieve some 10% energy savings. The Commission is therefore taking measures to accelerate a European Action Plan on energy efficiency which will follow up the Green Paper with a series of concrete measures to achieve the 20% potential; increasing pressure for the full and rapid implementation of the new Buildings Directive, and pushing strongly for an agreement on the proposal for an Energy Services Directive.

However, for Europe alone to save energy will not provide an answer. The real challenge is to use the good example developed in Europe to push for energy policies abroad that also focus on constraining demand rather than simply increasing the supply of oil and gas. In this context, the European example can illustrate how increased energy efficiency can reduce production costs. I am making this my priority in my bilateral contacts with other major energy-consuming nations and through the International Energy Agency. At the same time, we are sensitive to the specific situation of the heavily oil-dependent and vulnerable developing countries.

Our second action must be to increase Europe's use of alternative forms of energy. The most logical response to high oil prices is to switch to using alternative, competitive and, wherever possible, more environmentally friendly energy sources. For instance, the energy potential of biomass in the EU needs to be developed. A Biomass Action Plan will be tabled before the end of the year. We should also boost research on wind, wave and solar energy, hydrogen – in particular with respect to transport – and on clean coal and carbon sequestration, and I shall be arguing for proper funding of this in the Seventh Framework Programme. The proper implementation of the Biofuels Directive can also be fruitful in this sense. Finally, before the end of 2005, the Commission will present a communication on financial support schemes for renewable energy sources. Furthermore, we should work actively to build global alliances to explore more viable use of renewable energy sources, especially in the developing world.

Thirdly, we must increase the transparency and predictability of the oil markets. The lack of transparency on world oil markets facilitates speculation and inhibits investment in the oil sector. The Commission will pursue several actions to address this situation, such as accelerating the creation of a European Energy Market Observation System within the Commission. The aim of this observation system would be to provide reliable information to facilitate investments of private operators in the energy sector, as well as to improve decision-taking by policy makers. The Commission will also speed up measures to make its services able to publish data on the level of European oil stocks on a more regular basis.

Fourthly, we must increase the supply of oil and gas. Whilst priority must be given to reducing demand and switching from oil, it would be wrong not to recognise the fact that the world will need more oil and more refining capacity. To this end, the Commission will strengthen producer-consumer dialogue with oil-producing countries, including OPEC. This dialogue was already initiated this spring and on Sunday, 18 September, I met the President of the OPEC Conference, Mr Sheikh Fahad al Sabah, in Vienna. I conveyed to him our concerns about the current oil situation, as well as the expected cooperation from OPEC.

In this respect, let me inform you that OPEC has committed to help to stabilise the international oil market and to contribute to bringing oil prices back to sustainable levels. In that meeting OPEC emphasised the need for investment along the entire oil-supply chain and, in particular, it pointed out the insufficient refining capacity in the oil market. OPEC also declared that it is looking forward to getting more opportunities to invest in the European oil downstream sector. On the Commission side, we conveyed to OPEC our concerns about the fact that current insufficient spare capacity contributes to facilitating speculative movements on the international level and creates additional pressure on the oil market.

Other dialogues with important oil-producing countries – like Russia, Norway and the Persian Gulf countries – with the oil and gas industry and with the main oil-consuming countries in the world – like China, India and the United States – will also be continued. A 'China-EU Action Plan on energy efficiency and renewable energies' has recently been set up.

Finally, I will be meeting shortly with executives from the major oil companies, as I consider it very important that oil companies behave in the most responsible manner given this situation. In particular, I will insist on the need for more investment by them, and to determine which additional measures can be taken to remove bottlenecks preventing further investment, particularly in refining capacity.

Fifthly, we must react effectively to emergency situations with respect to oil stocks. In this context, the Commission has supported the proposal of the International Energy Agency on 2 September for increasing oil supply by 2 million barrels per day over a period of 30 days. While most of this international collective effort will initially consist of releasing security oil stocks in the international market, the Commission strongly advocates encouraging energy-saving behaviour, which may lead, if needed, to the use of demand restriction measures by Member States if further actions are required. This is particularly true if the loss in supply is finally expected to persist for several months.

As you may know, under EU law, all Member States must keep emergency oil stocks equivalent to 90 days of normal consumption, to be used in the event of short-term physical supply disruptions. While the EU has security oil stocks, it has never used them since it has no legal means to do so. Europe needs to play its own role, as not all EU Member States are members of the International Energy Agency.

In this respect, the Commission has already started convening the Community's Oil Supply Group on a regular basis in order to discuss oil prices, the emergency measures taken by Member States and more efficient ways of coordinating emergency measures at Community level.

Recent events show the clear need for a mechanism that assists in coordinating the use of oil stocks in the European Union. The Commission is now considering how best this can be done, and will discuss this with all stakeholders at a new Fossil Fuel Forum I have established, that will meet for the first time in Berlin in October. I should note that in developing such a proposal I shall pay careful attention to the view taken by the European Parliament on the previous Commission proposal on this matter.

As a final comment, I should note that the Commission does not believe that the best reaction to high oil prices is lowering taxes to compensate. This only encourages consumers to continue to consume. The Ministers at the last informal Ecofin meeting have clearly agreed that distortionary fiscal and other policy interventions that prevent the necessary adjustment should be avoided. It is a fact that uncoordinated fiscal reductions can have a distorting effect on competition in the internal market.

In conclusion, the Commission has been very active in proposing measures for remedying the situation. It will be a success only if all concerned – European institutions, industry, third countries and international organisations – work together. I am determined, therefore, to use the balanced energy policy model developed in Europe as a model for more international change, and to demonstrate our commitment to helping vulnerable populations both in the EU and in developing countries.



  Giles Chichester, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. Mr President, Minister, Commissioner, I would like to start by commending the Commissioner for his measured approach to this situation and to express in general terms support for the approach he is taking. Let us not over-react in haste to a situation that is changing as we speak; prices are moderating to some extent and we should let the market work.

If there are problems that should be specifically addressed, for example if there are concerns over the poor and vulnerable and disadvantaged, then we should use alternative social measures to assist them and not fall for the short-term fix of cutting tax. The fundamentals of our situation remain unchanged: the EU is heavily dependent on oil and heavily dependent on imports of oil. We should seek to reduce that dependency through measures of efficiency, conservation, substitution and new technologies.

There is an important principle that taxes should remain set by Member States. This should not be surrendered in favour of the ephemera of an EU-wide tax system. It is also important to remember that in the road transport sector by far the largest element of the price of fuel is taxation. Therefore, to those who are concerned about the windfall profits of oil companies, I would say perhaps we should be more concerned about the windfall profits of finance ministers or the tax man.

Finally, I wonder whether in addition to looking at the transport sector and roads, we should be thinking again about the aviation sector, to see whether we could find international agreement on achieving efficiencies and conservation of fuel in that sector. At the moment it is by its very nature untaxed.


  Hannes Swoboda, im Namen der PSE-Fraktion. Herr Präsident! Ich möchte zu Beginn meiner kurzen Ausführungen festhalten, dass wir Sie, Herr Kommissar Piebalgs, sehr schätzen ob ihrer effizienten und engagierten Art, die Energiepolitik voranzutreiben. Ich bin sehr froh, dass Sie das auch in den letzten Tagen wieder unterstützt und betont haben. Ich bin auch sehr froh, dass die Präsidentschaft hier einige Zusagen gemacht hat, was die Frage der Energiepolitik betrifft.

Dennoch ist es aus der Sicht unserer Fraktion ein bisschen zu wenig gewesen, was die Kommission oder der Kommissionspräsident zu diesem Thema gesagt haben, denn – wie auch Minister Alexander dargelegt hat – es geht hier um sehr intransparente Märkte, wenn man überhaupt von einem Markt reden kann. Dem gegenüber müsste doch eine klare politische Sprache der Europäischen Union in allen Bereichen – von der Außenpolitik bis zur Verkehrspolitik, von der Landwirtschaftspolitik bis zur Handelspolitik – gesprochen werden. Dies gilt auch – natürlich nicht nur – ganz besonders für die Energiepolitik.

Ich bin sehr froh über Ihre heutige Erklärung gewesen, weil sie im Vergleich zu dem, was wir bisher diskutiert haben, schon einen kleinen Schritt weitergeht. Sie haben das ja auch heute früh im Ausschuss gesagt. Wenn es um die Frage der Ölkonzerne geht – ich neide weder ihnen noch den Aktionären ihre großen Gewinne –, glaube ich aber, dass ein größeres Maß an gesellschaftspolitischer Verantwortung für unsere gemeinsame Gesellschaft und für die Zukunft der Konzerne selbst notwendig ist. Man muss doch sehen, dass nur ein kleiner Teil dieser Gewinne verwendet werden kann für verstärkte Investitionen im eigenen Interesse zum Beispiel in die Beimischung von Biotreibstoffen, was jetzt in einigen Ländern der Fall ist, und sicherlich auch in die Forschung und Entwicklung, was alternative Energien betrifft.

Herr Kommissar, Sie haben heute früh gesagt, Sie wissen, dass es nur Peanuts sind, die bisher ausgegeben werden. Ich hoffe, dass es nach Ihrem Gespräch, das hier angekündigt ist, zumindest einige Peanuts mehr sein werden. Wenn Sie noch länger Kommissar sind, wird dann vielleicht im Laufe der Zeit sogar noch einmal ein Kuchen entstehen, ein Energiekuchen, der den europäischen Bürgerinnen und Bürgern dargereicht werden kann. Ich wünsche Ihnen viel Glück und viel Kraft, und sagen Sie den Chefs der großen Ölgesellschaften, hier im Parlament erwartet man, dass sie etwas für unsere gemeinsame Gesellschaft tun.


  Fiona Hall, on behalf of the ALDE Group. Mr President, I welcome the emphasis that has been given this afternoon to the demand aspects of the oil problem. It would be easier for us to focus on the supply side and the difficulties caused by Hurricane Katrina, but if we did that we would just be applying a sticking plaster, when what we really need is major surgery.

At the bottom of the problem is Europe's over-dependence on oil. With a third of EU oil being imported from Russia and a quarter from the Middle East – and those proportions are rising – we face a structural problem which goes far beyond any short-term crisis. The simple fact is that we have to cut oil consumption: really cut it, not just talk about cutting it, and we have talked about it a great deal in the context of curbing CO2 emissions. But there is still a huge gap between the grand rhetoric about using less oil and the amount of real practical action taking place on the ground.

I have two specific requests for the Council and Commission today. It is welcome news indeed that the UK Presidency is committed to getting an agreement before the end of December on the energy efficiency and energy services directive, but will the Minister assure us today that this will be a directive with big teeth; one which makes serious, binding commitments on energy reduction; one which sets a framework for energy efficiency and stimulates a rapid growth in energy efficiency services across Europe? That is the sort of commitment we need if we are going to tackle the demand side of oil dependency, rather than just talk about it.

Secondly to the Commission: will the Commission commit to engaging in joined-up thinking on the issues of alternatives to oil? I welcome the forthcoming strategies which Mr Piebalgs mentioned. I hope that these will be coming not just from the Energy Commissioner, who we know is deeply committed to promoting energy saving and renewables. I hope that there will be wide and integrated Commission strategies to stimulate European action across the board, bringing together policy initiatives on transport, industry, taxation and agriculture. In many cases we have the technology, we even have a successful pilot project somewhere in the EU, but what we do not have is the means to roll out the technology and make it mainstream.

In my own region we have the beginnings of a successful bio-diesel industry in the Tees Valley. Very high-yield oil seed rape grows right next to an existing petrochemical industry. We already have the start of a 'green route' of filling stations supplying 5% biodiesel, but there is not yet the infrastructure, the capacity, or the tax regime to roll out that biodiesel programme everywhere. Biodiesel is just one case where the talking has to stop. I am afraid oil demand will not go down unless there is more concrete structural action on both renewables and energy efficiency.


  Claude Turmes, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. Mr President, let me first thank the Commissioner for setting the right priorities. We live in a world where there will be 150 million cars in China in 2015, whereas today there are only 6 million. We have to stop allowing two-ton monsters to transport people who weigh 80 kilograms. So long as we are not serious about efficiency, especially in the transport sector, there will be no answer to oil or to climate change.

In its resolution tomorrow, Parliament will call for Europe to become the most energy-efficient and least oil-dependent economy by 2020. This is a huge opportunity for environment policy and for employment policy. For every euro we spend to heat a house with oil, we send money outside Europe instead of investing in insulation and in jobs in Europe.

As happy as I am with the Commissioner's proposals, as scandalised as I am about the Barroso Commission as a whole, it is ridiculous to come up with a communication on oil without a single sentence on transport, when we all know that transport accounts for 70% of oil consumption in Europe. Therefore my question to you, Commissioner, is: when will the Commission come up with a plan under which Mr Barrot, Mr Kovács and Mr Verheugen take on their responsibilities? It is not you alone who have to do so.

My final question is to the UK Presidency. You did not mention the directive on road tolls for lorries. That is on the table. So if the Council wants to produce not only words but also action, why does the UK Presidency not press for an agreement on road tolls based on the Swiss model?


  Umberto Guidoni, a nome del gruppo GUE/NGL. Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, il problema che abbiamo davanti è garantire un approvvigionamento energetico per le esigenze irrinunciabili della nostra società moderna e assicurare al tempo stesso un bassissimo impatto ambientale e una riduzione dei rischi per la salute dei cittadini.

L'unica risposta è avviare una transizione per uscire dall'era del petrolio, anche se non ci sono ricette miracolistiche, due sono le opzioni su cui bisogna agire: risparmio energetico e fonti rinnovabili. Solo così l'Europa potrà garantire risposte immediate sia alla crisi di approvvigionamento e agli alti prezzi che alla diversificazione energetica per ridurre la dipendenza estera dal petrolio.

Per il pianeta potrebbe significare attenuare i punti di tensione che sono alla base di molti conflitti. Siamo sul punto in cui un regime energetico è diventato troppo oneroso rispetto ai benefici: non solo i costi economici - cento dollari al barile che sembrano ormai imminenti - ma i danni ambientali, i rischi per la salute e il peso di un apparato militare e logistico per garantire il controllo delle aree di produzione e la sicurezza dei trasporti al livello planetario.

In Europa occorre affrontare la crisi energetica con programmi di ricerca capaci di stimolare lo sviluppo tecnologico dei sistemi energetici sostenibili e competitivi anche economicamente, (l'oratore è interrotto) per sviluppare l'occupazione. Anche per questo, la strada per arrivare ad un'economia basata sull'energia rinnovabile e sul risparmio energetico non può fare a meno del ruolo guida dell'investimento pubblico.


  Guntars Krasts, UEN grupas vārdā. - Priekšsēdētāja kungs! Pašreizējās augstās un nepastāvīgās naftas cenas var ietekmēt pasaules ekonomikas izaugsmi. Tas būtu īpaši sāpīgi tām Eiropas Savienības dalībvalstīm, kuras pēdējos gados nav piedzīvojušas strauju ekonomikas augšupeju, bet spiestas maksāt augstāku cenu par naftu, ko diktē straujā pasaules ekonomikas izaugsme. Vairākās Eiropas Savienības jaunajās dalībvalstīs pieaugoša inflācijas spiediena pamatā ir arī naftas cenu kāpuma komponenti, ko nosaka veco un energoietilpīgo tehnoloģiju izplatība to ekonomikās.

Šobrīd nav objektīvu priekšnosacījumu tam, vai tirgū pieaug naftas daudzums. Ja arī tuvākajos pāris gados tas notiku, tad tomēr nemainīsies tās ieguves ģeogrāfiskais izvietojums, un tas nozīmē, ka saglabāsies daudzi riski, kas neļaus naftas cenai būtiski pazemināties. Tāpat ir maz cerību, ka naftas ieguves valstis būs patiesi ieinteresētas un spējīgas koordinēties ar naftas patērētājiem, lai padarītu naftas tirgu stabilāku. Nesenā ideoloģiskā nevis ekonomiski motivētā naftas uzņēmumu nacionalizācija Krievijā un Venecuēlā padarīja naftas ieguves sektoru šajās valstīs mazāk pārredzamu un prognozējamu. Tā ir realitāte, ar kuru jārēķinās, veidojot Eiropas Savienības politiku, un ne tikai enerģētikas jomā.

Pie pašreizējiem īstermiņa uzdevumiem — situācijā, kad brīvās naftas rezerves tirgū nav, — vienīgais pieejamais instruments naftas stabilizēšanai ir patēriņa samazināšana. Šajā sakarā pārtraukt visa veida subsīdijas un nodokļu atlaides naftas pārstrādes sektoram un patērētājiem. Atlaides dod nepareizu signālu tirgum par naftas cenu virzienu un veicina patēriņu, un galu galā papildina naftas kompāniju peļņu. Eiropas Komisijai, koordinējoties ar dalībvalstu tirgus uzraugošajām institūcijām, vajadzētu veidot naftas tirgus uzraudzības mehānismu, lai mazinātu spekulācijas nepārredzamajā naftas tirgū. Pie visām iecerētajām Komisijas prezentētajām rīcības stratēģijām energoportfeļa paplašināšanai un naftas atkarības samazināšanai Eiropas Savienībā jāsaka, ka būtiski būtu skatīt finanšu perspektīvā būtisku finansējuma pieaugumu energoportfeļa paplašināšanai.


  Sergej Kozlík (NI). Pred pár mesiacmi sa inštitúcie Európskej únie zapodievali otázkami energetickej bezpečnosti Európy. Bolo konštatované, podotýkam, platonicky, že v priebehu dvadsiatich rokov sa závislosť európskych krajín na vonkajších energetických zdrojoch zvýši z 50 na 70 percent.

Krajiny Európskej únie nedisponujú významnými prírodnými energetickými zdrojmi. Preto podporujem opatrenia na zvyšovanie energetickej účinnosti, alternatívne a obnoviteľné zdroje energií a zabezpečenie energetických úspor. Podobne podporujem plánovité opatrenia na zvýšenie zásob ropy a ropných produktov v členských krajinách, ako aj spoločný postup Európskej únie pri rokovaní s krajinami OPEC a ďalšími krajinami v záujme vyššej stability na trhu s ropou a energetickými médiami.

Na druhej strane však treba uplatňovať aj prezieravejšie prístupy inštitúcií Európskej únie k odstávkam existujúcich energetických zariadení. V tejto súvislosti musím kriticky spomenúť skôr politicky motivované predčasné odstavenie jadrovej elektrárne Jaslovské Bohunice napriek tomu, že spĺňala kritériá pre bezpečnú prevádzku. To oslabí energetický potenciál nielen Slovenska, ale aj Európskej únie.


  Robert Goebbels (PSE). Monsieur le Président, nous vivons dans un monde affamé d'énergie, alors que quelque 1,5 million d'êtres humains n'ont pas accès à l'électricité. Des crises comme celle qui secoue le marché du pétrole démontrent notre trop grande dépendance par rapport aux énergies fossiles. L'humanité ne manquera probablement jamais de pétrole, mais l'extraction du pétrole restant deviendra si chère que nos économies seront forcées de s'en détourner. Raison de plus pour préparer l'après-pétrole. Économies d'énergie et meilleure efficacité énergétique sont des priorités. Toutes les formes d'énergie renouvelable doivent être encouragées.

Néanmoins d'importants sauts technologiques restent nécessaires pour renforcer l'utilisation économique des énergies dites douces. L'Europe doit investir davantage dans toutes les formes de recherche énergétique, dans le développement technologique relatif à l'hydrogène. La transformation de l'hydrogène exigera beaucoup d'énergie. L'humanité n'échappera pas de sitôt au nucléaire. Nous réaliserons, je l'espère, à travers ITER la fusion. En attendant, le charbon restera une source d'énergie primaire importante, même s'il faudra développer des technologies plus propres.

Actuellement, les mouvements erratiques du cours du brut posent des problèmes. On peut douter de l'intelligence de ce marché face à la brusque explosion des prix provoquée par l'annonce d'un cyclone et au dégonflement de ces mêmes prix consécutif à l'essoufflement de Katrina ou Rita. Il y a trop de spéculations à court terme sur ce marché très spécial façonné par un cartel et des oligopoles. La Commission devra suivre de plus près l'activité prédatrice de certains fonds hautement spéculatifs et viser à assurer une plus grande transparence dans la formation des prix du pétrole. Les citoyens européens lui sauront gré d'un engagement plus régulateur.


  Vittorio Prodi (ALDE). Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, vorrei ringraziare anche il Commissario per la sua presenza e il suo impegno. Stamattina abbiamo già discusso sugli approcci da seguire e condivido il suo parere sulla necessità di un approccio sistemico a questo problema, proprio perché siamo di fronte ad una sfida enorme.

Il petrolio è scarso e scarsa è pure la capacità dell'ecosistema di accogliere le correnti di scarto e i prodotti di combustione. Dobbiamo uscire dall'età del petrolio, questo è semplicemente quello che dobbiamo fare, ma ciò implica un cambiamento e di conseguenza anche la necessità di una leadership per il cambiamento; non si può accettare l'inazione dimostrata parecchi governi nazionali sul sistema, è come dare tutto per scontato. In effetti, è scontato che il petrolio salirà a prezzi ancora più alti, perché non ci sono ragioni per cui, data la domanda attuale, il prezzo possa scendere.

Dobbiamo agire, subito, e intervenire già nelle linee ricordate in precedenza: risparmio, efficienza, fonti energetiche diversificate. Occorre concentrarsi soprattutto sulle energie rinnovabili, che sono quelle che ci permettono di rispettare l'impegno che abbiamo assunto con le nuove generazioni. Inoltre leadership implica una capacità di dirigere, anche culturalmente, il processo proprio perché il vero cambiamento dal lato della domanda si può preparare attraverso un simile cambiamento culturale.

Non è per austerità, non è per sobrietà, ma possiamo impostare una civiltà di ordine superiore attraverso la società della conoscenza presa sul serio, questo dobbiamo fare come sistema e questo è l'impegno di leadership che dobbiamo assumere.


  Satu Hassi (Verts/ALE). Arvoisa puhemies, öljyn hinnan nopea nousu on saanut jokaisen ymmärtämään, että öljy ei ole ikuista. Ajatteleville ihmisille tämä on ollut selvää jo kauan, viimeistään niiden analyysien jälkeen, joita öljygeologit ovat tehneet öljyn kysynnän ja öljyn vuosituotannon kehityksen suhteista.

Nyt on keskityttävä niiden vaihtoehtojen kehittämiseen, jotka ovat puhtaita ja joilla on kestävä tulevaisuus, kuten uusiutuvaan energiaan ja energiatehokkuuden parantamiseen. Nyt olisi typerää haaskata resursseja vielä öljyäkin likaisempiin fossiilivaihtoehtoihin, kuten kivihiilestä valmistettuun polttonesteeseen tai öljyliuskeeseen.

Kuten kollega Turmes sanoi, valtaosa öljystä kuluu liikenteessä. Siksi liikennejärjestelmämme on ajateltava uusiksi. Biopohjaisten polttoaineiden lisäksi on määrätietoisesti kehitettävä joukkoliikennettä, esimerkiksi EU-rahoilla toteutettavissa väyläinvestoinneissa on painotettava aikaisempaa enemmän rautateitä.


  Δημήτριος Παπαδημούλης (GUE/NGL). Κύριε Πρόεδρε, λυπάμαι αλλά, παρά το γεγονός ότι η πετρελαϊκή κρίση σοβεί εδώ και έναν χρόνο, η αντίδραση της Επιτροπής είναι τουλάχιστον υποτονική, του δε Συμβουλίου ανύπαρκτη. Ακούσαμε σήμερα, για μια ακόμη φορά, καλές διακηρύξεις που δεν συνοδεύονται όμως από αντίστοιχα μέτρα. Πράγμα που δείχνει έλλειψη διορατικότητας.

Ερωτώ: πάρθηκαν δραστικά μέτρα για την ελάττωση της εξάρτησης από το πετρέλαιο; Αναζητήθηκαν λύσεις στον ενεργοβόρο τομέα των μεταφορών, που καταναλώνει το 70% της συνολικής παραγωγής; Η απάντηση δυστυχώς είναι "Όχι".

Το συμπέρασμα είναι ότι η αύξηση των τιμών του πετρελαίου, σε συνδυασμό με τις φυσικές καταστροφές που οφείλονται - σε μεγάλο βαθμό - στην αλόγιστη κατανάλωση ορυκτών καυσίμων, επιβάλλει την εγκατάλειψη ενός ενεργοβόρου μοντέλου ανάπτυξης και την ταχεία ανάπτυξη εναλλακτικών μορφών ενέργειας. Αλλά για να το πετύχουμε αυτό χρειαζόμαστε χρήματα και δυστυχώς και το Συμβούλιο αλλά και η Επιτροπή αρνούνται την ιδέα ενός έκτακτου φόρου επί των καυσίμων που θα χρηματοδοτήσει αυτήν την επένδυση στο μέλλον.


  Liam Aylward (UEN). Mr President, while I welcome what has been said by the Council and the Commission, the reality today is that there is an ever-growing demand for fossil fuels. In the coming years, Chinese requirements alone will increase to unheard-of levels. Eventually they will be competing directly with the US for ever-diminishing supplies, which is a forbidding thought and, as we know, fossil fuels are running out very quickly.

Alternative energy sources are vital for our future. What will it take to make us serious about this? Bioethanol is one of these sources. The EU Commission recognises the importance of this industry and the fact that certain agricultural products, including sugar, could be used for producing bioethanol.

The Commission currently contributes financially to the creation of European biofuel projects. Regrettably the take-up and use of these funds by the Member States is still deplorably low.

More land will become available for alternative use as a result of the mid-term review of the common agricultural policy. Our farmers, who are guardians of the rural environment, could and would seriously contribute to controlling climate change by alternative use of agricultural land for the production of alternative and renewable sources. Is it not time that we really got serious about this?


  Luca Romagnoli (NI). Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, quando parliamo di petrolio dovremmo interrogarci sulla politica estera dell'Unione, sul suo sostanziale avvallo della politica di aggressione e di rapina delle risorse energetiche e delle principali materie prime posta in essere dalle multinazionali e dagli USA.

Tutto quello che produce da un lato ricchezza e dall'altro impoverisce i legittimi proprietari delle risorse diventa puntualmente bersaglio dei tentativi di rapina delle amministrazioni finanziarie e politiche menzionate. Non si vuole parlare qui di riduzione dell'IVA o delle accise e allora, cosa si può fare per liberare i nostri popoli dal giogo della dipendenza degli interessi esterni all'Europa?

1. Nazionalizzare le risorse; 2. rafforzare legami politico-economici con i paesi produttori divenendone gli interlocutori privilegiati; 3. smettere di sostenere o essere complici della politica estera statunitense; 4. liberare da ricatti e condizionamenti e sostenere invece con forti stanziamenti gli enti di ricerca europea sulle fonti di energia alternativa, specialmente quelle da biomassa, geotermiche e ogni altra fonte rinnovabile; 5. monitorare i prezzi che le compagnie petrolifere applicano nei diversi paesi dell'Unione.


  Christoph Konrad (PPE-DE). Herr Präsident, meine sehr verehrten Damen und Herren, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist wichtig zu unterstreichen, dass auch die EVP-Fraktion für alternative Energien ist, für die Förderung alternativer Energien, allerdings auch mit der Zielsetzung, diese Energien wettbewerbsfähig zu machen. Es kann nicht sein, dass sie auf Dauer Subventionstatbestände bleiben. Wir müssen diese alternativen Energien zur Wettbewerbsfähigkeit führen.

Wenn ich mir die Debatte in diesem Haus anhöre, stelle ich fest, dass auch an dieser Stelle wieder viele Kollegen eine große Staatsgläubigkeit haben. Hier wird davon geredet, dass der Staat eingreifen müsse, und hier wird im Grunde auch vergessen, dass sich der Ölpreis in einer Wettbewerbswirtschaft immerhin noch am Markt bildet. Das ist zunächst einmal ein Marktpreis. Das haben wir zu akzeptieren. Wir alle wissen doch, dass dies letztendlich auch ein Problem der Raffineriekapazitäten ist, die im Moment zu niedrig sind. Hier wird sich wieder etwas verändern.

Aber wenn Staaten in Europa, wie etwa die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, bei den Treibstoffpreisen an der Tankstelle einen Steueranteil von über 70% haben, dann müssen wir als Parlamentarier an die nationalen Regierungen appellieren, hier ad hoc etwas zu tun, um den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern gerade in den Hochsteuerländern etwas zurückzugeben, damit die Mobilität in dieser Arbeitsgesellschaft erhalten bleibt. Das ist zunächst einmal eine Forderung, die auch in Richtung Politik geht. Man kann nicht die Märkte beschimpfen und für 70 % des Preises selbst verantwortlich sein. Das ist die falsche Verantwortungszuweisung. Von daher sind wir gut beraten, deutlich zu machen, dass der Staat die alternativen Energien unterstützen soll – dies in Maßen –, dass wir aber auch auf neue Technologien setzen sollten. Hier gibt es eine Menge Möglichkeiten, etwa den Hybridantrieb und andere Dinge. Aber das sollten wir mit Augenmaß und Vernunft tun und mit weniger Ideologie.


  Reino Paasilinna (PSE). Arvoisa puhemies, Venäjä on lisäämässä yhteistyötään OPECin kanssa. Öljyntuottajien kartellista on tulossa entistä voimakkaampi. Uusiutuvien energialähteiden kehittämistä koskevat toiveet ja toimet eivät tehoa riittävän nopeasti. Öljyn hinta pysyy korkealla, Euroopan riippuvuus ja kriisialttius lisääntyvät.

Kun toisella mantereella voimistuu tuuli, Eurooppa syöksyy kriisiin. Yhdysvalloissa tuuli ja vesi pysäyttivät kymmeneksen öljynjalostuksesta, mutta hinta nousi 40 prosenttia. Öljyn kysyntä ja tarjonta ovat niin lähellä, että kriisejä on tulossa lisää. Yhtiöiden voittoja tulisi suunnata kestävien vaihtoehtoisten energiamuotojen kehittämiseen. Kysyntää siis alas ja tilalle tutkimusta, biomassaa ja vaihtoehtoja.

Emme ole kuitenkaan yrittäneet laatia lakeja, jotka vähentäisivät hintaa nostavaa pörssipeliä, kuten kollega Goebbels sanoi, tai öljypohjaista sosiaalista eriarvoistumista. Onko puheenjohtajamaa, joka johtaa myös G8:aa, valmis järjestämään tärkeimpien kuluttajien ja myyjien huippukokouksen mahdollisimman pikaisesti jo ennen ensi kevään öljyministerikokousta? Meidän olisi saatava vakautettua öljyn hinta.

Lopuksi, komissaari Piebalgs, mikä on Euroopan unionin ja Venäjän energiadialogin tilanne? Edistyykö se?


  Roberto Musacchio (GUE/NGL). Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, questo nostro parlare del problema del petrolio significa oggi parlare dei drammi del nostro presente, dalle guerre all'esaurimento delle risorse non rinnovabili, al degrado ambientale, e decidere se ci sarà un futuro diverso oppure se non ce ne sarà nessuno.

La crisi del petrolio non è congiunturale, ormai è evidente, è connessa all'esaurirsi degli attuali assetti sociali, geopolitici e di modelli di sviluppo. Per uscirne occorrono equità, distribuzione delle ricchezze, nuovi assetti dello sviluppo, nuove scelte energetiche fondate sul risparmio e su fonti alternative rinnovabili, pulite e sicure, l'opposto del carbone e del nucleare. Pace, equità e ambiente sono le uniche scelte in grado di portarci al futuro. Dobbiamo renderle realtà con politiche concrete, delegate non al mercato, ma a nuove scelte politiche e a nuovi interventi pubblici.


  Luis de Grandes Pascual (PPE-DE). Señor Presidente, señor Comisario de Energía, gracias por su presencia, que resulta muy oportuna. Sin duda constituía un clamor unánime de la Unión la necesidad de afrontar la dura realidad que significa la escalada del precio del petróleo. La situación era predecible, pero la realidad ha sido mucho más dura que la esperada. Lo cierto es que las previsiones se han duplicado y el impacto de los precios del crudo está teniendo una repercusión en el crecimiento económico y en el bienestar de los ciudadanos de la Unión.

El diagnóstico es común y las recetas para paliar el desequilibrio macroeconómico en un escenario de precios al alza del crudo se parecen bastante unas a otras. No diré que sean malas las coincidencias en el análisis, pero sí digo que son soluciones a medio y largo plazo y que a su vez son voluntaristas, insuficientes a corto plazo.

Si me permiten, no perderé el tiempo, que no tengo por otra parte, en lugares comunes. Quiero, por el contrario, llamar la atención desde la Comisión de Transportes y Turismo respecto a la situación límite a la que ha llegado el sector del transporte por carretera, no de forma coyuntural, sino estructural y de difícil salida.

Estaremos de acuerdo con actuaciones de los Estados que tiendan a adoptar medidas para facilitar el cambio modal hacia modos de transporte más eficientes. Estaremos de acuerdo en adoptar medidas para un uso más eficiente de los distintos modos de transporte y, por último, estaremos de acuerdo en que se tomen medidas que mejoren la eficiencia energética de los vehículos. Pero, dicho esto, tendrán que convenir conmigo en que a corto plazo no es posible modificar la realidad y en que quien sufre principalmente el resultado de esta situación es un sector como el del transporte, que depende en exceso de la evolución de la demanda y es rehén de las fluctuaciones de los precios del petróleo.

Las constantes subidas del precio del crudo han generado un fuerte incremento de los costes de explotación de las empresas, colocando al sector en una situación de total impotencia ante la imposibilidad de trasladar las subidas a los precios del servicio que prestan. Por todo ello, a nuestro juicio es oportuno que, sin perjuicio de la adopción de medidas de carácter general con las que estaremos de acuerdo, por otra parte, la Comisión estudie con los Estados miembros medidas que permitan armonizar a la baja la imposición del gasóleo con fines profesionales y que modulen la fiscalidad para que repercuta seriamente en el empleo.


  Ewa Hedkvist Petersen (PSE). Herr talman, herr rådsordförande och herr kommissionär! Som det har sagts här så står transportsektorn för den absolut största delen av den totala oljekonsumtionen i EU. Vi är alla extremt oljeberoende för att transportera varor och för att röra oss, eftersom vägtransporterna dominerar så.

Det här har vi och industrin vetat under en längre tid, men medvetandet har inte kommit till handling. Vi måste nu ställa om och påbörja arbetet mot förnybara energikällor och bränslen. Men man kan också se positiva tendenser, medvetenheten ökar och bilindustrin i USA har efter Katrina begärt att presidenten skall inkalla ett toppmöte om vad man kan göra för att utveckla alternativa bränslen. De stora biltillverkarna säger också att man i USA måste minska bensinberoendet. Vi måste använda oss av denna medvetenhet och skapa förutsättningar i våra samhällen och i vår union – och det är ju det som vi som politiker kan göra. På transportområdet måste vi forska fram nya förnybara bränslen, t.ex. satsa på syntetisk diesel. Vi måste gynna alternativa bränslen, som etanol. Vi måste förnya fordonsparken, och här går det att göra ganska mycket, ganska fort. Vi måste också satsa på alternativa transporter.

Vi har pratat om järnvägarna idag och beslutat att utveckla järnvägstrafiken. Det är viktigt, men vi måste också i översynen av vitboken skriva mer och ta fler beslut när det gäller alternativa bränslen och förnyelse av bilparken.


  Carmen Fraga Estévez (PPE-DE). Señor Presidente, vengo aquí para hablar de un sector que está viéndose especialmente afectado por esta situación: el sector pesquero. Estoy de acuerdo con la Comisión en que es necesario elaborar un plan de acción a medio y largo plazo, que permita a la flota afrontar un estado de cosas que obviamente es estructural y no coyuntural, aunque también tengo que decir claramente que no niego que algunas de las soluciones que está apuntado la Dirección General de Pesca, para ahorro de energía, como es el desguace de la flota comunitaria, nos producen a muchos un gran desasosiego.

Creo que, mientras se prepara el futuro, también hay que tener en cuenta el presente, puesto que la flota ya está en una situación desesperada y no nos convencen las medidas que a corto plazo se han apuntado en el último Consejo de Ministros de Pesca.

Las paradas temporales del IFOP no han sido pensadas para afrontar este tipo de crisis, porque los gobiernos, además, tienen ya comprometidos sus fondos y las reprogramaciones son problemáticas. El anuncio del Comisario Borg sobre la elevación de ayudas de minimis tampoco arregla el problema, puesto que hay que esperar nueve meses para que esto se solucione y haya una nueva normativa comunitaria.

Esto está dando lugar a que muchos Estados miembros acudan a ayudar a sus sectores de la mejor manera posible, lo que también produce una importante distorsión de la competencia. Por tanto, ante la Comisión, aquí representada por el Comisario de Energía, reiteramos la petición que formulamos aquí hace un año para permitir al sector pesquero salir de esta crisis, que consiste en lanzar un mecanismo que pueda desencadenarse de una manera automática cuando existan unas alzas bruscas o continuadas del precio del combustible, y que debería activarse antes de que las empresas pesqueras empiecen a quebrar en masa.


  Mechtild Rothe (PSE). Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Herr Minister, Herr Kommissar! Es gibt eine Reihe von wichtigen Antworten auf die derzeitige Ölkrise. Ich bin aber zutiefst davon überzeugt, dass die einzig langfristig richtige Antwort die ist, die Abhängigkeit vom Öl zu überwinden, einer Energiequelle, die vielleicht noch für 40 bis 60 Jahre verfügbar ist und die krisenanfällig ist, die teurer wird, je knapper sie wird. Wir sehen also, dass die Alternativen offensichtlich sind.

An erster Stelle muss die Energieeinsparung stehen. Studien beweisen, dass wir im Verkehrsbereich 14 %, im Gebäudebereich 20 % einsparen können, und das ohne jegliche Einbuße beim Komfort. Mein ganz dringender Wunsch richtet sich an die Ratspräsidentschaft. Herr Minister, ich hoffe wirklich sehr, dass es uns gerade in dieser schwierigen Situation gelingt, einen vernünftigen und tragfähigen Kompromiss für die Richtlinie zur Energieeffizienz und zu Energiedienstleistungen zu erreichen.

Im Bereich erneuerbarer Energien haben wir eine Menge in der Europäischen Union geleistet, aber wir haben noch Defizite. Knapp die Hälfte der Energieproduktion geht in den Bereich der Wärmegewinnung, ein großer Teil aus Öl. Gerade hier sehen wir, dass die Marktdurchdringung nicht so geschieht, wie sie nach dem Potenzial geschehen könnte. Deshalb, Herr Kommissar, die ganz dringende Bitte, hier wirklich eine entsprechende Richtlinie vorzulegen, die klare Ziele vorgibt und entsprechende Maßnahmen in den Mitgliedstaaten nach sich zieht.


  Paul Rübig (PPE-DE). Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Wir haben derzeit eine sehr unbefriedigende Situation beim Ölpreis.

Auf der einen Seite bezahlen die Konsumenten und Verbraucher sehr hohe Preise, auf der anderen Seite gibt es die so genannten windfall profits, nicht nur im Ölbereich, sondern auch in anderen Energiebereichen. Ich glaube, es gehört schon zur Verantwortung, dass man darüber diskutiert, was die Firmen am besten mit diesen windfall profits machen könnten, und vor allem auch, was die Staaten, die am meisten davon profitieren, mit diesen Steuern machen können.

Thema Nummer eins muss sein, dass diese Gelder nicht in andere Bereiche investiert werden. Vielleicht sollte die Kommission einen Aktionsplan zu dem Fragebogen, wie die Firmen bzw. insbesondere auch die Nationalstaaten diese Gelder, die hier zusätzlich in die Kassen gespült werden, am besten einsetzen könnten. Unter Umständen könnte eine Art Benchmark- und Best practice-Projekt gestartet werden, damit diese Gelder für Forschung und Entwicklung, Effizienzmaßnahmen, Steuererleichterungen – nicht beim Verbrauch, sondern im Bereich der Investition –bei Betriebsansiedlungen und für das CIP-Programm verwendet werden.

In diesem Bereich tut sich eine völlig neue Möglichkeit auf, einen neuen Weg einzuschlagen. Ich glaube, hier könnten wir Beispiele sammeln, wie man dies in den Nationalstaaten – und vielleicht auch auf internationaler Ebene –am besten in den Griff bekommt.

Der zweite große Punkt ist Folgendes: Derzeit wird in Dollar fakturiert. Das ist für uns derzeit vielleicht ganz günstig. Aber es kann auch mal ins Gegenteil umschlagen, nämlich, wenn die Preise weiter steigen und der Dollar sich in die andere Richtung bewegt. Deshalb sollte man vielleicht für die Nicht-OPEC-Länder überlegen, ob man nicht einen eigenen Euro-Raum im Energiebereich oder auch Anreize dafür schaffen könnte, einen Euro-Raum zu bilden, weil das auch ein gewisses Maß an Stabilität und Unabhängigkeit bringt.

Letzter Punkt: Für die Hedge-Fonds brauchen wir Eigenkapital-Bestimmungen, Haftungsvoraussetzungen, die eingehalten werden, und letztlich auch Transparenz, um in Zukunft der Spekulation, die unnötig am Markt vorkommt, entsprechend vorzubeugen.


  Riitta Myller (PSE). Arvoisa puhemies, tuen niitä, jotka ovat ymmärtäneet, että riippuvuus öljystä tulee katkaista päättäväisellä panostuksella uusiutuviin energialähteisiin ja energiansäästöön. EU:n on tuettava uusien ympäristöteknologioiden läpimurtoa. Uusien innovaatioiden avulla voidaan paitsi lisätä energiaomavaraisuutta myös parantaa ilmanlaatua ja vähentää kasvihuonepäästöjä.

Monet ympäristöä säästävistä uusiutuvista energialähteistä ovat jo kätemme ulottuvilla. Biomassaa voidaan hyödyntää monipuolisesti lämmityksessä, sähköntuotannossa ja polttoaineena. Se on toistaiseksi ainoa uusiutuva energialähde, jolla voidaan korvata liikenteen nestemäisiä polttoaineita. EU:n tulee asettaa kunnianhimoisia tavoitteita öljyriippuvuuden vähentämiseksi ja säästötavoitteiden lisäämiseksi. Vähintään 25 prosenttia EU:n kokonaisenergiankulutuksesta vuoteen 2020 mennessä tulee hoitaa uusiutuvilla energialähteillä.


  Ján Hudacký (PPE-DE). Súčasná energetická situácia spôsobená prevažne ropnou krízou nás stavia do pozície promptného riešenia. Je preto viac ako aktuálne využívať ropu čo najefektívnejšie a najúčinnejšie. Niet pochýb, že dôležitým krokom v tomto úsilí Európskej únie musí byť čo najrýchlejšia eliminácia ropy ako zdroja pre výrobu elektrickej energie. Je čas hovoriť o tomto probléme skutočne otvorene.

Jadrová energetika poskytuje oveľa efektívnejšiu substitúciu za ropu tak z pohľadu rýchlej dostupnosti výrobných kapacít, ako aj z pohľadu ochrany životného prostredia. Jadrová energetika má zavedené najmodernejšie technológie s vysokým stupňom bezpečnosti. Okrem toho je čistým zdrojom energie bez akejkoľvek emisie CO2. Nedostatok, ktorý odporcovia jadrovej energetiky radi zdôrazňujú, jadrový odpad, je už v súčasnosti tiež bezpečne riešený. Investície do výskumu bezpečnej recyklácie jadrového odpadu a ďalší rozvoj nových technológií, ktoré Európska únia môže poskytnúť aj vo forme prístupu k 7. rámcovému programu, môžu v blízkej budúcnosti eliminovať akékoľvek pochybnosti ohľadom bezpečnosti jadrových elektrární.

Na druhej strane nechcem podceňovať ani iné alternatívne zdroje na výrobu elektrickej energie, samozrejme, tie, ktoré neemitujú CO2. Vážnosť momentálnej energetickej situácie si však vyžaduje realizovať jediné racionálne a rýchle riešenie: návrat k jadrovej energetike budovaním nových výrobných kapacít.


  Mia De Vits (PSE). Commissaris, om de directe gevolgen van de stijging van de olieprijs op te vangen, is het niet voldoende om alleen maar met langetermijnoplossingen te komen. Wij verwachten van de Commissie dat zij ook een coördinerende en leidinggevende rol speelt, ook voor maatregelen op korte termijn. Degenen die het slachtoffer zijn van de dure olie, zijn de mensen en vooral de zwakkeren, de laagste inkomens. Het is aan elk land om maatregelen te nemen om deze problemen op te vangen, maar de Europese Commissie zou de coördinatie van de maatregelen op zich kunnen nemen door bijvoorbeeld binnen haar bevoegdheden een lagere BTW toe te staan. De Commissie staat ook sceptisch tegenover steun aan sectoren die getroffen zijn door de dure olieprijs, en dan denken we vooral aan de transportsector, maar ook aan de visserijsector. Ook hier zou de Commissie een belangrijke coördinerende rol kunnen spelen bij de omschakeling naar energievriendelijke apparatuur. Veel vissers, mijnheer de commissaris, beschikken niet over de financiële middelen om deze kosten te dekken en daarom wil ik u vragen om een verhoging van de steun ten einde deze omschakeling te bewerkstelligen.


  Alejo Vidal-Quadras Roca (PPE-DE). Señor Presidente, señor Comisario, señor Presidente en ejercicio del Consejo, en primer lugar quisiera felicitar al Comisario de Energía por su rápida reacción a la extrema y reciente volatilidad de los precios del petróleo a través de este plan, del cual nos ha expuesto hoy las líneas principales y con cuyas bases conceptuales y medidas concretas coincido plenamente.

El precio del crudo aumentó un 50 % el pasado año y este incremento se nota en un sensible deterioro de la competitividad de nuestra economía. Por eso, muchos gobiernos se ven sometidos a fuertes presiones para reducir los impuestos al petróleo en ciertos sectores del transporte. Pero, tal como ha dicho el Comisario con toda la razón, esa no es la solución. Además de crear distorsiones en el mercado y problemas con las reglas a las ayudas de Estado, abre la puerta a posibles aumentos en el consumo y a futuras subidas en el precio del barril.

Hemos de adoptar las medidas que el Comisario señalaba en el plan: impulso decidido al uso de las renovables y a la mejora de la eficiencia, incremento de la capacidad de refino, lucha contra los movimientos especulativos, consideración de la energía nuclear como una opción indispensable en la estrategia de seguridad y abastecimiento y fomento del uso de biocarburantes. Estamos debatiendo hoy sobre una crisis, pero debemos extraer de ella fuerza suficiente para diseñar inteligentemente nuestro futuro.

No quisiera terminar sin rogarle al Consejo, cuyo representante está en este momento contemplando un papel con enorme interés, que haga una reflexión muy seria sobre los efectos de una reducción intolerable en los fondos dedicados a investigación e innovación tecnológica en el séptimo Programa marco en unas circunstancias como las que ahora estamos viviendo.


  Antolín Sánchez Presedo (PSE). Señor Presidente, el sistema energético tiene un carácter vital y una dimensión global. Las medidas paliativas por aumento de precio que se adopten en el ámbito de la Unión Europea deberán responder a un enfoque coordinado y ser coherentes con nuestros compromisos multilaterales.

Es necesario conseguir más transparencia y equilibrio en la formación de precios, persiguiendo las conductas especulativas, excluyendo los abusos de los grandes operadores y evitando las acciones públicas distorsionadoras. Debemos introducir más racionalidad y eficiencia en el sistema global, evitando el despilfarro energético que todos pagamos —los Estados Unidos gastan un 50 % más de energía por dólar de su PIB que la Unión Europea.

Debemos reducir la disparidad de regulaciones ambientales, puestas de manifiesto dentro de los Estados Unidos por los recientes huracanes, propiciando una gestión de stocks menos ajustados por las compañías e impulsando nuevas inversiones.

Hemos de avanzar hacia un nuevo modelo energético mediante la innovación en los transportes, el desarrollo de tecnologías para la descarbonatación y la diversificación y el desarrollo de los recursos renovables, así como mediante una cooperación internacional estable y duradera.


  Peter Liese (PPE-DE). Herr Präsident, sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich schließe mich denjenigen an, die dem Kommissar Piebalgs für seine aktive und kohärente Strategie Dank und Anerkennung ausgesprochen haben.

Ich möchte jetzt über das Thema erneuerbare Energien sprechen, nicht, weil ich glaube, dass das die einzige Lösung für das Problem ist, sondern weil ich da als Schattenberichterstatter für meine Fraktion besondere Verantwortung trage. Es ist richtig: Erneuerbare Energie ist ein Teil der Antwort auf die hohen Ölpreise. Aber es ist meiner Ansicht nach auch wichtig, dass wir in Europa und in den Mitgliedstaaten nicht immer die richtigen Prioritäten im Bereich der erneuerbaren Energien gesetzt haben.

Wir haben eine Richtlinie und Aktivitäten im Strombereich. Wir haben etwas weniger Aktivitäten im Bereich der Biokraftstoffe. Wir haben aber keine kohärente europäische Strategie zur Förderung der erneuerbaren Energien im Bereich Heizung und Kühlung, obwohl hier die Abhängigkeit von Öl und Gas am stärksten ist. Warum das so ist, wissen wir auch, und zwar, weil viele, die erneuerbare Energien unterstützen, sie nur als Gegensatz zur Kernenergie sehen. Aber ich frage mich, ob es wirklich das Wichtigste ist, aus der Kernenergie auszusteigen. Ist es nicht viel wichtiger, die Abhängigkeit von Öl und Gas zu reduzieren und die Folgen des globalen Klimawandels so gut es geht in den Griff zu bekommen?

Nun kann man sagen, dass man das eine tun und das andere nicht lassen soll. Aber das ist nicht so ganz einfach, wenn man beschränkte Mittel hat. Wir haben zum Beispiel in Deutschland ein Erneuerbare-Ernergie-Gesetz, wo wir 50 Cent pro Kilowattstunde für Photovoltaik investieren. In den nächsten Jahren sind das kumuliert 3 Milliarden Euro, die wir in diesem Bereich aufbringen. Das Geld fehlt natürlich an anderer Stelle.

Wir müssen uns vergegenwärtigen, dass wir, wenn wir einen Euro im Bereich Heizung und Kühlung einsetzen, zum Beispiel bei Heizung auf der Basis von Biomasse, Wärmepumpen oder Solarthermie mit dem einen investierten Euro 45mal so viel CO2 und 45mal so viel fossile Rohstoffe einsparen. Deswegen ist es Zeit für neue Prioritäten.


  Péter Olajos (PPE-DE). Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Habár az elmúlt három év alatt majd háromszorosára nőtt a nyersolaj világpiaci ára, az emberiség mohó energiaéhsége nem látszik csillapodni. Ráadásul az idei év természeti katasztrófáinak gazdasági hatásai megkondítani látszanak benzinüzemű társadalmunk felett a vészharangokat. Az EU legtöbb tagállama messzi területek, távoli országok energiaforrásaira támaszkodik, ezáltal más, sokszor nem éppen demokratikusan működő államoktól függünk. Ha nem cselekszünk, a növekvő igények miatt az eddigieknél is szennyezőbb fűtőanyagokra fanyalodunk rá, ugyanis elfogy a tiszta kőolaj és földgáz, aminek az eddigieknél is súlyosabb környezetvédelmi következményei lesznek. Ezért is üdvözlöm a Bizottság ötpontos tervét, különösen annak energiahatékonyságról és alternatív energiahordozókról szóló részét.

Mindenképpen csökkentenünk kell az olajfelhasználást az energiatermelésben, de legfőképpen a közlekedés területén. A bioüzemanyagok térnyerésének érdekében komolyabban kell vennünk az erre vonatkozó irányelvet. Adókedvezményekkel és adminisztratív módszerekkel kell ösztönöznünk a szolgáltatókat és a fogyasztókat. Fontos, hogy Európában nagyobb mértékben támogassuk közösségi és tagállami szinten is a nem olaj alapú energiatermeléssel kapcsolatos kutatásokat. A nanotechnológia a napenergia területén, a biotechnológia a bioüzemanyagoknál, a MUX az atomnál, vagy a termonukleáris energiatermelésnél az ITER támogatása környezeti és gazdasági szempontból is elengedhetetlen ahhoz, hogy a vészharangok elhallgassanak. Üdvözlendő jó hír, hogy a jelentős olajfelhasználó és környezetszennyező országok, mint az USA, Kína, India, Ausztrália, Japán és Dél-Korea ez év júniusában, mintegy „ellen-Kiotóként” Laoszban megállapodást írt alá a tisztább energiák és technológiák kifejlesztésére és terjesztésére, hisz miképp a probléma, úgy a megoldás is globális kell legyen.


  Ivo Belet (PPE-DE). Voorzitter, mijnheer de commissaris, dure olie is natuurlijk de beste stimulans voor zowel de overheid, de industrie als de consumenten om op zoek te gaan naar alternatieven en we steunen uiteraard voor het volle pond de initiatieven die u daarover ontwikkeld hebt sinds een aantal weken. Op langere termijn allemaal zeer goed voor ons maar op korte termijn - het is hier al gezegd vanmiddag - dreigen ontelbare gezinnen, alleenstaanden, ouderen, jongeren, de komende maanden letterlijk in de kou te komen staan, omdat zij, mijnheer de commissaris, gewoon hun verwarmingsfactuur niet meer kunnen betalen. Ik vrees dat de Commissie met haar consequente, maar toch ook wel harde houding hiervoor te weinig aandacht heeft.

Intussen nemen diverse nationale regeringen allerlei maatregelen, zij het allemaal in gespreide slagorde. De Belgische regering bijvoorbeeld, gaat een stukje van de stookolie terugbetalen om de pijn te verzachten, maar dergelijke ingrepen lossen natuurlijk de dreigende, acute verwarmingsproblemen van heel veel mensen niet op. Vandaar mijn oproep aan u om toch eindelijk ook eens iets op korte termijn te doen - een tijdelijke BTW-verlaging voor huisbrandolie, misschien is dat toch niet zo'n slecht idee. Ik weet dat u er niet achter staat, maar het gaat om een sociale maatregel, mijnheer de commissaris. U zou op iets langere termijn misschien ook werk kunnen maken van een soort van bandbreedte, ik bedoel daarmee niet alleen een minimumtarief maar ook een maximumtarief. Dus een ondergrens en een bovengrens waarbinnen de lidstaten zich zouden moeten bewegen. Zo kunnen we iets doen, mijnheer de commissaris, aan de grote, de belachelijke prijsverschillen tussen de lidstaten.

Stookolie, gas en elektriciteit, inderdaad elementen, instrumenten voor huisverwarming, het zijn niet bepaald luxegoederen, ze zijn levensnoodzakelijk en een groot deel van de prijs gaat, dat weet u beter dan ik, via BTW en accijnzen naar de staat. Dus er is daar wel degelijk ruimte om structureel iets te doen, zeker op korte termijn.

Mijnheer de commissaris, en ik sluit af mijnheer de Voorzitter, u moet uiteraard het belang van de Europese Unie op langere termijn bewaken, maar u zou op korte termijn toch wel een zeer mooi gebaar kunnen stellen, met name voor al die kwetsbare gezinnen die de komende weken in de problemen dreigen te komen.


  Ivo Strejček (PPE-DE). Mr President, I wish to make a few remarks that some might find heretical.

In my opinion, the European Union should encourage international political debate that would open the way for investment in developing countries. The benefits of this are obvious: major European companies would contribute financial resources to developing countries, while Europe would benefit from the cheaper oil from those countries and help to increase living standards there.

From an economic point of view, we should let the market work without any regulation, any limitation or any further burdens. We should stop dreaming of cure-all renewable energy sources and remain realistic. We should not make any attempts to artificially influence oil prices. The only possible solution is to let the market work. The market forces stemming from a supply and demand approach will themselves re-establish the balance between high consumption devices and the natural and consumer-friendly development of brand new products.

We must not step up our efforts to achieve tax harmonisation at a supranational level and we must not promote tax incentives that would result in lower rates of taxation for individual segments of the energy or oil industry.


  Douglas Alexander, President-in-Office of the Council. Mr President, I thank all the honourable Members for their speeches. I am conscious of time, but let me seek to respond to a number of the points made in the course of what was a useful and timely debate.

Mr Chichester began the debate with a clear plea for the maintenance of national taxation and urged a measured view of the present situation. I have some sympathy for the views that he outlined.

Mr Swoboda echoed points I had made earlier about ensuring transparency in relation to the operation of international oil markets. Ms Hall asked about the energy end-use efficiency and energy services directive. I can assure her that Member States and Parliament are working hard to identify compromise positions on those issues where there is still divergence between the Council and Parliament. We hope that all the institutions will engage constructively in a process to secure what is an important directive for all of us.

Mr Turmes raised wider questions of environmental sustainability – I have just mentioned the energy end-use efficiency and energy services directive. He also, however, referred to what he called 'the Swiss model agreement on road tolls'. On the assumption that he was referring to the Eurovignette, let me set out the Presidency's position. As the Presidency, we will make real efforts to secure a negotiated agreement with the European Parliament at second reading. However, I should stress at this stage that the agreement reached on 5 April at the Transport Council represents a delicate balance and a delicate compromise, so that there is limited room for further changes in light of the decisions reached at that stage.

Mr Kozlík welcomed the steps that have already been taken in relation to oil shocks and the greater cooperation that has been established with OPEC. On the issue of investment in refining capacity, it is important to recognise that this is already taking place, but prices are sending a signal that even greater investment is needed throughout the oil sector, including in refining capacity; greater transparency and improved investment climates are needed to help bring forth the necessary investment that we have been arguing for.

Mr Goebbels argued powerfully for hydrogen transformation and urged greater transparency – a point I have already addressed.

In relation to the more general question of speculation by traders, it is difficult to know exactly the balance, the exact role that speculation has played in prices. However, I would refer to the analysis produced by the IMF in its recent World Economic Outlook, which implies that speculative activity follows movement in oil prices, raising doubts about whether speculation has really been the key driver of the current high prices.

Mr Prodi argued that it is unacceptable for us to do nothing. I hope that my remarks and the Commissioner's remarks at the outset of this debate have been sufficient to convince him that steps are being taken and will be taken in the future.

Mrs Hassi raised questions relating to the sustainability of supply. The International Energy Agency noted in its 2004 World Energy Outlook that most estimates show that proven oil reserves are sufficient to meet projected world demand over the next three decades and that global oil production will not peak before 2030, provided the necessary investments – which is an important caveat – are made. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, the key challenge is creating the right climate for that investment now to be made.

Mr Papadimoulis raised a number of points. I have to say that I respectfully disagree with his views as to whether it is necessary or appropriate for the Council to seek to impose a Europe-wide tax in relation to the circumstances in which we find ourselves.

Mr Aylward raised the issue of the common agricultural policy. The British Presidency has never been averse to discussing that policy, but I would respectfully suggest that there are perhaps other forums in which it would be more appropriate to explore the wider issues raised by his speech.

Similarly, Mr Romagnoli raised a number of fascinating issues, including the foreign policy of the United States. However, regrettably, given that I have five minutes to wind up this debate, now is probably not the time to further explore those particular issues.

Mr Konrad raised the issue of refining capacity. I would refer him both to my introductory remarks and the remarks I have just made.

Mr Paasilinna raised the important issue of the relationship with Russia. Again, I would respectfully refer him to the fact that, in my introductory remarks, I stressed that there is an energy dialogue – perhaps that will be something to which the Commissioner will return – and that there is a continuing dialogue between Russia and the European Union during our Presidency, not just on energy matters, but on a whole range of issues.

Mrs Fraga Estévez raised important broader issues relating to fisheries policy and here I would make the same point I made in connection with the common agricultural policy. While I am alive to the burden being imposed on fishing communities by higher oil prices at the moment, there are many other forums in which a fuller and franker exchange can be held on the future of the common fisheries policy.

Mrs Rothe raised the issue of the directive on energy and efficiency and again I hope that I have dealt with that in the course of my remarks. Mr Rübig raised a number of points in connection with the new opportunities which he mentioned. I would certainly concede, and indeed trumpet, the fact that, in the automobile industry, for example, the markets themselves are providing solutions, such as the growth of hybrid cars, which are gaining an increasing market share in a number of European countries.

Mrs Myller made a powerful case for renewable technologies and one for which I have great sympathy. Mr Hudacký raised the issue of nuclear energy. I would candidly and respectfully suggest that how a country meets its energy needs and the role of nuclear power within that arrangement is ultimately a decision for each Member State. Nuclear power is certainly one option that countries can consider, but in considering it specifically as an alternative to oil we should certainly keep in mind the concentration of oil demand in the transport sector of which we have heard so much in our debates today.

Mrs De Vits raised the broader question of fuel duty levels. A number of honourable Members touched on the issue of whether a solution involving fuel duty levels could help relieve the burden of higher oil prices being experienced by Member States at present. I would again return to the recent informal Ecofin Ministers meeting at which it was agreed that distortionary fiscal and other policy interventions that prevent the necessary adjustments should be avoided by Member States. In particular, Ministers confirmed that, where short-term targeted measures are taken to alleviate the impact of higher oil prices on the poorer sections of the population, they should avoid distortionary effects.

Mr Sánchez Presedo and Mr Liese argued the case for renewable energies and I have already said that I have some sympathy with those points. Mr Olajos said that the problem we have been discussing during the last hour-and-a-half is a global one. I would respectfully suggest that is certainly the case, but so too is the remedy that needs to be found.

Mr Belet raised a number of questions for the Commission, so I shall leave those for the Commissioner to answer. Finally Mr Strejček offered what he suggested might be heretical remarks to conclude our debate today. I will leave it for others to judge whether they merit that description. I would simply suggest that, if he is earnest in his requirement or in his urging for a proper and frank international discussion of some of the issues that we have touched on today, then I would draw his attention to the priority that the British Presidency, the British Government, placed on the issue of climate change during our chairmanship of the G8 this year. I believe it was a brave and principled decision to say that, together with international development in Africa in particular, climate change would be the particular focus for the meeting in Gleneagles between 6 and 8 July.

As has been clear throughout the whole debate, this is an important issue not just for Europe but for the global economy and one that requires international and cooperative action. Sustainable economic growth depends on access to reliable and affordable supplies of energy. As I hope I made clear in my introductory statement, the keys to improving the functioning of the oil markets are better conditions for investment, greater market transparency and, in particular, better data, improved energy efficiency and the development of alternative technologies.

Consumer and producer nations and international organisations are already working well in these areas, with the European Union in particular playing a constructive and valuable role. Together our efforts can help the market adjust to the rise we have experienced in demand and help it cope more effectively with future shocks, affecting both demand and supply.




  Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission. Mr President, I should like to thank the European Parliament for its strong interest in and activity on sustainable energy issues, where we should address all the questions – security of supply, competitiveness and environmental challenges – at the same time. I expect that in future we will have more debates on this subject.

I should also like to thank the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and its chairman, Mr Chichester, for the possibility to discuss in detail today some of the issues raised in plenary with the committee members. That is why I shall not deal with each suggestion. I will concentrate my remarks on some particular points.

With regard to legislative proposals, I assume that we have a good chance of finding an efficient compromise for energy end-use efficiency and an energy services directive. In the current situation the need for such a directive is even stronger. In November the Commission will approve a biomass action plan. The next step could be a legislative proposal for using biomass in heating and cooling. These are short-term measures that could be adopted.

At the same time I can agree with the statement that there can be no miracle solution. It really means changing mindsets and asks for a systematic approach, not only from the Commission but also from the Council. I expect that during the Council meetings the energy situation will be discussed in more detail. The Council has already discussed fisheries. Other Councils also look at issues that relate to the new situation of supply and energy.

In all the cases the answer from Europe depends very much on investment in research and development. That is the right way to proceed. The financial limits of the Seventh Framework Programme will, to a large extent, determine how fast our response will be. I hope that by the time of the adoption of the Seventh Framework Programme there will be the financial means for critical needs in some particular areas to address the issues we have debated today.

I salute the motion for a resolution that you will adopt tomorrow. It is a very strong, ambitious and realistic resolution. The Commission will continue the activities on the five areas, but not only on these. A systematic approach, patience and consistency will be needed to achieve the results that European citizens expect of us.


  Πρόεδρος. – Έλαβα έξι προτάσεις ψηφίσματος σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 103, παράγραφος 2, του Κανονισμού, σχετικά με το πετρέλαιο(1).

Η συζήτηση έληξε.

Οι ψηφοφορίες θα διεξαχθούν την Πέμπτη 29.09.2005, στις 12 το μεσημέρι.

Γραπτή δήλωση (άρθρο 142)


  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL). A evolução recente do preço do petróleo colocou na ordem do dia o problema do pico petrolífero, face aos fortes impactos negativos sobre o crescimento económico e o emprego, num momento em que a economia da União Europeia está quase estagnada.

Como referia recentemente o escritor e Prof. Michael T. Klare, a era do petróleo fácil terminou. Este ocaso da era do petróleo está a caracterizar-se, cada vez mais, por uma crescente politilização da política do petróleo e pelo constante uso da força militar para ganhar o controlo dos fornecimentos disponíveis. Exemplos não faltam, de que a guerra no Iraque é um dos mais visíveis.

Consideramos fundamental que a questão da avaliação dos recursos e do esforço de prospecção e desenvolvimento de hidrocarbonetos, a nível europeu e mundial, seja objecto de aprofundado debate e seria sensato convocar uma conferência no quadro da ONU, para uma abordagem mundial da redução global do seu consumo.

É necessário prever o futuro e apostar na investigação, nomeadamente para reduzir a intensidade do petróleo ao nível do PIB, tal como se deve apostar noutras fontes energéticas e numa maior eficiência na utilização da energia que, em vários países, designadamente Portugal, é um dos graves problemas estruturais. As próximas perspectivas financeiras deveriam dar particular importância a esta questão, apostando também nas energias renováveis.


(1) Βλ. Συνοπτικά Πρακτικά

Informacja prawna - Polityka ochrony prywatności