Разисквания

Сряда, 30 януари 2008 г. - Брюксел

22. План за действие за енергийна ефективност: реализиране на потенциала (разискване)

  Le Président. – L'ordre du jour appelle le rapport de Fiona Hall, au nom de la commission de l'industrie, de la recherche et de l'énergie, sur le plan d'action pour l'efficacité énergétique: réaliser le potentiel (2007/2106(INI)) (A6-0003/2008).

  Fiona Hall, rapporteur. − Mr President, I would like to begin by thanking the shadow rapporteurs very much for their good collaboration on this report.

Energy efficiency is vital for cutting carbon emissions, enhancing security of supply and boosting economic efficiency. In October 2006 the Commission produced an action plan for energy efficiency, proposing a 20% improvement in energy efficiency by 2020 and setting out 10 priority areas for action. These ranged from appliances to buildings and transport and included financial incentives, energy efficiency awareness and much more. EU Heads of State endorsed the Commission’s action plan last March and energy efficiency made the headlines because Chancellor Merkel declared that inefficient incandescent light bulbs should be banned.

Now it is the Parliament’s turn to assess the action plan. I hope that our report will send out a strong signal about what MEPs want to see happen on energy efficiency. The first signal that this report makes is that some of the Commission’s proposals do not quite go far enough. I would like to give three examples. Firstly, the proposal to revise the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive: the Commission proposes minimum energy performance requirements for buildings and for building components, which is good. Buildings are key to cutting energy demand. Over 40% of the energy we use is consumed in buildings and 75% of the buildings standing today will still be here in 2050, so we need to tackle energy efficiency in existing buildings as well as in new stock. But we should not just be lowering the 1 000 m2 threshold in the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive – we should be getting rid of it altogether and applying the Directive to all buildings requiring heating and cooling, regardless of size. We also need to bring forward the deadline for a passive house standard for residential and non-residential buildings across Europe. It is not good enough just to have this as a medium-term goal.

Secondly, on appliances, Parliament’s report welcomes the proposal to put in place minimum energy performance requirements coupled with a dynamic system of energy labelling, to keep up with advances in technology. But our report calls on the Commission to come forward with a one-watt performance requirement for standby, and to carry out an analysis of the potential energy savings to be made from eliminating standby altogether. Our report also urges the Commission to set a timetable for taking completely off the market some very energy-inefficient items of equipment, such as patio heaters.

Thirdly, the report calls for more help for small businesses, which are particularly affected by rising fuel prices and in need of energy efficiency. Unfortunately, both the EU and national financing schemes tend to be complex. It is fine if you are a big company, but if you are a microbusiness with a handful of employees, you do not have the capacity to access complex programmes. Small businesses need to be treated like domestic households and offered simple schemes and up-front money.

So that is the first message of the report: that we need to go a little further. The second big message is that there has been a failure by both the Commission and national governments to implement existing energy efficiency legislation. The Commission’s action plan for saving 20% by 2020 is not a stand-alone plan. It builds very heavily on previous legislation, and the implementation of this legislation has been a disgrace. The Buildings Directive has only been properly transposed by a handful of Member States. Six months after the 30 June deadline, a third of Member States have still not submitted their national energy efficiency action plans. The Commission has not put in place all the 20 extra staff it said were necessary to deliver energy efficiency commitments and, for that reason, the timetable on the action plan has slipped.

I would, however, like to thank the Commission for responding in a very positive and constructive manner to the criticisms voiced in this report and, in particular, the exchange of letters between Commissioner Piebalgs and Ms Niebler, which has brought an update to Parliament on the situation.

  Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission. − Mr President, I would very much like to thank Ms Hall for a very timely and important report.

We are definitely concentrating our efforts not only on the implementation of current legislation but on actually delivering our agenda of energy efficiency action plans. I would like to mention that we have also achieved sustainable successes. This week we launched the Covenant of Mayors, in which more than a hundred cities are now participating. We have now adopted in the College a renewable energy directive which indirectly strengthens energy efficiency. We adopted the proposal for CO2 reduction in the non-ETS sector. We adopted a proposal for emissions from cars. I could name more very strong measures, where the Commission has delivered. We have not only delivered on issues of legislation. Sustainable Energy Week is a good example of how the Commission policy of promoting energy efficiency and renewables is bearing fruit.

I believe that we should strengthen implementation. The Commission has started launching 59 infringement cases for non-timely implementation. Today, 42 infringement cases are running. The Commission will continue to work on this and will also check all the legislation on compliance. The European Commission is strongly focused on this. I believe the current legislative proposal on ETS, on non-ETS and on renewables will definitely make the Member States put more emphasis on energy efficiency.

Concerning the energy efficiency action plans, we had rather a lukewarm start. I wrote to ministers reminding them about their duty to report and to make qualitative plans and now 21 out of the 27 Member States have done so. We have made a preliminary analysis of energy efficiency action plans, which are part of the package and sometimes a bit overshadowed by the legislative efforts. I believe that it is right that we continue to do this.

On the issues Ms Hall mentioned, a recasting of the Buildings Directive is in this year’s work plan. We are now in the final stages of defining energy performance in appliances. We will also change the Labelling Directive. We are in fact following all the requests that the European Parliament has made of us.

But I believe this directive also offers very good guidelines for the Commission to follow, because it is very concrete. I could say in some cases things are better and in some cases worse. I really believe that we are paying attention, but we could pay more attention. We will definitely deliver. This report will not stay on the shelf but we will use it as working document. I will be continually updating Parliament on how we are proceeding in the area of energy efficiency.

  Ευαγγελία Τζαμπάζη (PSE), Εισηγήτρια της γνωμοδότησης της Επιτροπής Περιβάλλοντος, Δημόσιας Υγείας και Ασφάλειας των Τροφίμων. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριοι συνάδελφοι, κύριε Επίτροπε, η έκθεση είναι συνεκτική και ολοκληρωμένη. Με τη γνωμοδότησή μας από την Επιτροπή Περιβάλλοντος υπογραμμίσαμε σημαντικά ζητήματα. Αποτελεί πλέον κοινή παραδοχή ότι η βελτίωση της ενεργειακής αποδοτικότητας είναι ο πλέον γρήγορος, αειφόρος και οικονομικός τρόπος προκειμένου να μειωθούν οι εκπομπές αερίων του θερμοκηπίου και να αυξηθεί η ενεργειακή αποδοτικότητα. Οφείλουμε να ενθαρρύνουμε την έρευνα και την οικο-καινοτομία μέσα από την ανάπτυξη ενεργειακά αποδοτικών τεχνολογιών, χωρίς ωστόσο να παραβλέπεται η ανάγκη για μεταστροφή των καταναλωτικών μας συνηθειών. Υπογραμμίσαμε το ρόλο που μπορεί να διαδραματίσει ο δημόσιος τομέας στην επίτευξη των ευρωπαϊκών στόχων μέσα από την επιλογή ενεργειακά αποδοτικών προϊόντων και υπηρεσιών.

Να επισημάνω ότι μπορούμε όλοι οι Ευρωπαίοι πολίτες να συμβάλουμε στην προσπάθεια, τόσο σε επίπεδο χάραξης πολιτικών όσο και εφαρμογής της υπάρχουσας νομοθεσίας, μέσα από τις επιλογές που κάνουμε στην καθημερινότητά μας.

  Avril Doyle, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group . – Mr President, I agree with Ms Hall when she points out in her report that energy efficiency is the most cost-effective and immediately available tool in the battle to cap greenhouse gas emissions.

Yes, the Commission is right when it states in its action plan on energy efficiency that, more than anything, political will and engagement at national, regional and local level are necessary if the objectives here are to be achieved.

The whole report has been rightly critical of both the Commission and Member States for not doing more to implement existing energy-efficiency legislation. This pressure has resulted in the Commissioner augmenting his staff in the area of energy efficiency and, I understand, setting up a special unit to follow up on the energy efficiency plan, underscoring the priority the Commission is finally giving to energy efficiency in order to contribute to a reduction of our CO2 emissions and to help tackle the critical issue of climate change.

However, Parliament’s report shows that progress on Member States submitting their national energy efficiency plans is still lamentably slow and I would ask the Commission to continue to put pressure on them.

Even in Bali, Europe was criticised for not giving enough emphasis to the area of energy efficiency and our efforts to reduce our CO2 emissions. We need a mixture of legislative and market-based responses. For instance, if all EU lighting switched to new technologies, there would be massive savings on energy. Fifty million barrels of oil would be saved and CO2 emissions would be reduced by 28 million tonnes per annum.

We await the revision of the Energy Efficiency Labelling Directive from the Commission this year, as the current A to G scheme for household appliances allows no further room for increased energy efficiency and, while very clear and consumer friendly, it is now creating marketing problems for genuinely more efficient products as it has reached its limit. Many appliances are classed as A+ or A++, categories that do not even exist. On the other hand, there are currently 188 million household appliances in the EU that are over 10 years old and are frighteningly inefficient.

I thank Ms Hall for her wide-ranging report and I commend it to colleagues.

  Adam Gierek, w imieniu grupy PSE. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Sprawozdanie Fiony Hall, której gratuluję kompleksowości podejścia, zwraca uwagę na znaczne opóźnienia we wdrażaniu przez rządy państw członkowskich i Komisję dotychczasowego prawodawstwa w tym zakresie.

Efektywność użytkowania energii pierwotnej zależy od poprawy efektywności konwersji energii pierwotnej w elektryczną, od wprowadzenia standardów minimalnego zużycia końcowego energii, od szeroko prowadzonej termomodernizacji budynków, od szerokiego zastosowania kogeneracji poprzez usuwanie barier administracyjnych, od zmniejszania strat przesyłu energii, od zmniejszania strat tarcia.

W sprawozdaniu dostrzega się również wymiar globalny problemu, a w tym kwestię konieczności ograniczenia emisji gazów cieplarnianych. Mieszkalnictwo pochłania około 40% całkowicie użytkowanej energii, zaś termomodernizacja oznacza zmniejszenie jej użytkowania co najmniej o połowę, co stanowi 20% energii całkowicie użytkowanej. Kogeneracja natomiast, a także zmniejszanie strat przesyłu energii pozwala na około dwukrotny wzrost efektywności. Łącznie więc potencjalne oszczędności energii pierwotnej jedynie z tytułu znanych technologii, tj. termomodernizacji oraz kogeneracji, można szacować na około 25 do 30%. O tyle też procentowo zmniejszy się emisja CO2.

Paradoksem jest jednak, że realizacja tych planów działań może być spowolniona z powodu innych, późniejszych regulacji Komisji Europejskiej. Szczególnie dotyczy to restrykcyjnych norm emisji CO2, co w wypadku starych, wymagających modernizacji elektrowni i elektrociepłowni oznacza wzrost kosztów produkcji i zmniejszenie modernizacyjnych możliwości inwestycyjnych.

Inny aspekt globalnego wymiaru omawianego problemu dotyczy wypracowania wspólnych standardów sprawności ekologicznej zarówno w ramach Unii Europejskiej, jak i u jej partnerów. Jest to warunek zarówno korzystnej współpracy, jak i uczciwej konkurencji na rynkach światowych.

  Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, im Namen der ALDE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine Damen und Herren! Zunächst mein Dank und Glückwunsch an meine Kollegin Fiona Hall. Sie gibt hiermit die richtige Antwort auf eine sehr wichtige und richtige grundsätzliche Initiative der Kommission. Ich muss Kommissar Piebalgs dafür loben, dass er sich an die Spitze derjenigen gesetzt hat, die sich für Energieeffizienz einsetzen. Denn Energieeffizienz ist tatsächlich eine der größten Quellen der Energieunabhängigkeit. Sie ist auch eine Quelle für Innovation, denn wenn wir das alles machen, was wir in dem Bericht fordern, dann werden wir uns auch im Weltmaßstab, was Innovation und den Lissabon-Prozess angeht, ganz nach vorne setzen.

Gleichwohl fällt mir die übertriebene Lifestyle-Kritik an manchen Stellen auf. Ich möchte ein Beispiel aus diesem Bericht nennen: In Ziffer 16 wird ganz lapidar davon gesprochen, die Kommission möge doch einige Gerätschaften vom Markt nehmen. Freiluftheizungen werden hier erwähnt, oder, im Volksmund, Heizstrahler, Heizpilze. Die Klimahysterie trägt doch teilweise wirklich totalitäre Züge!

Wir haben es gerade vollbracht, die Raucher aus den Cafés herauszubringen. Ich finde das richtig, ich finde das in Ordnung, ich habe kein Problem damit! Viele Wirte haben jetzt clever gehandelt und diese Heizpilze draußen aufgestellt. Es hat sich eine neue Kultur entwickelt. Die Menschen haben gesellige Abende entwickelt, rauchen draußen, und jetzt kommt die Europapolitik, wir paar Menschen hier, und sagen 490 Millionen Menschen, was sie in ihrer Freizeit zu tun und zu lassen haben! Wir wollen jetzt den Lifestyle wieder umändern. Ich glaube, die Bürger werden das lange Zeit nicht mitmachen.

Es ist richtig, die Klimaschutzziele hoch anzusetzen, aber überall im Detail Lifestyle zu regulieren – da müssen wir uns doch wirklich fragen, ob wir das machen wollen. Oder wollen wir die Weihnachtsmärkte, die wir aus Deutschland und auch aus Luxemburg – lieber Claude –, aus Belgien und aus Österreich kennen – wollen wir denen jetzt auch vorschreiben, dass auf den Weihnachtsmärkten keine Freiluftheizung mehr zu sein hat? Ich rate uns allen, dass wir die Mitbürger nicht aus dem Blick verlieren und nicht dort eingreifen, wo die Gesellschaft so sympathisch ist, nämlich im Privatleben.

  Mieczysław Edmund Janowski, w imieniu grupy UEN. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Homo sapiens do tej pory spowodował poważną degradację środowiska, którego sam jest najważniejszym elementem. Ma to w znacznym stopniu podłoże energetyczne. W tym też kontekście pozytywnie oceniam sprawozdanie pani Hall dotyczące racjonalnego zużycia energii.

W szczególności doceniam poruszenie kwestii związanych z wymogami wobec budynków. Najwyższe standardy wydajności energetycznej i termoizolacyjności muszą obowiązywać nie tyko w nowych obiektach, ale także w budynkach remontowanych.

Kolejna sprawą jest wykorzystanie oświetlenia bazującego na diodach LED, które są energooszczędne i trwałe. Także wiele domowych urządzeń elektrycznych może zużywać znacznie mniej energii podczas eksploatacji. Dotyczy to również marnotrawstwa poprzez tzw. stand-by.

Wyrażam poparcie dla zachęt podatkowych wspomagających racjonalne zużycie energii. Pragnę również podkreślić znaczenie edukacji energetycznej społeczeństwa, od dzieci poczynając. Musimy to zrobić, by nie przegrać przyszłości naszej planety.

ΠΡΟΕΔΡΙΑ: ΡΟΔΗ ΚΡΑΤΣΑ-ΤΣΑΓΚΑΡΟΠΟΥΛΟΥ
Αντιπρόεδρος

  Claude Turmes, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, the Hall report is ringing the alarm bells. We are in the middle of Sustainable Energy Week and, however positive this event is, it should not divert attention from the fact that what governments, in particular, have achieved over the last two or three years on energy efficiency is extremely disappointing. Not implementing legislation, sending energy efficiency action plans which are not action plans but just a compilation of some sort – that is ridiculous!

I call on the pride of prime ministers. Come on, prime ministers! You come to Brussels in March one year after the historic summit where you prime ministers have given a lot of speeches about the priority of priorities being energy efficiency, and then you come one year later and you have achieved almost nothing as governments!

I think we should all join forces to urge governments forward. The Commission must also approve and take new initiatives on building on CHP and on labelling electricity savings.

Finally, on my good friend Schatzi:

Der einzige Hansel hier, das bist Du, denn Weihnachtsmärkte gab es schon, als es noch keine Heizlüfter gab, und ich denke, das Parlament ist komplett in seinem Recht, um zumindest die Frage zu stellen, welche Inkonsequenz wir in diesem Bereich haben. Das ist kein Eingriff in die Lebensgewohnheiten, sondern, das ist den Punkt auf eine Wunde legen, und die wir gemeinsam betreten müssen.

  Nils Lundgren, för IND/DEM-gruppen. – Fru talman! Det råder stor enighet i EU om att vi måste minska utsläppen av växthusgaser för att hejda en klimatförändring, men detta får inte leda till ett byråkratiskt samhälle utan frihet och dynamik.

Då gäller två grundprinciper: Vi ska sätta upp mål för utsläppen för varje land och sedan lämna till dessa länder och till marknaden att nå målen under fri tävlan och vi ska med tillräckligt dyra utsläppsrätter internalisera kostnaderna för utsläpp. Då kommer dessa automatiskt med i alla de miljarder ekonomiska beslut som tas varje dag runtom i världen av hushåll och företag. Då väljer hushållen självmant lågenergilampor, biltillverkare gör bränslesnåla fordon, fastighetsägare bygger passiva hus, energiproducenter får fram energi med låga utsläpp. Då lönar sig forskning och utveckling på området.

Men EU ska inte införa förbud och detaljregleringar. Därför ska vi säga nej till förbud mot terrassvärmare. Därför ska vi säga nej till skattelättnader för att riva hus och nej till offentlig finansiering av energisparande.

  Άννυ Ποδηματά (PSE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, θα ήθελα κατ’ αρχάς να συγχαρώ την εισηγήτρια, κ. Hall, για τη γενναία και σφαιρική της προσέγγιση στο θέμα της ενεργειακής απόδοσης, που πραγματικά πηγαίνει πιο μπροστά τις προτάσεις της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής.

Με τα σημερινά ενεργειακά δεδομένα, η εξοικονόμηση ενέργειας αποτελεί το αποτελεσματικότερο εργαλείο για την αντιμετώπιση της κλιματικής αλλαγής, λαμβάνοντας υπόψη ότι το σύστημα εμπορίας εκπομπών αερίων του θερμοκηπίου δεν έχει επιφέρει ακόμη τα επιθυμητά αποτελέσματα.

Αναφορικά με την εξοικονόμηση το βάρος θα πρέπει να δοθεί στον κτιριακό τομέα καθώς ευθύνεται για την κατανάλωση ενέργειας σε ποσοστό πλέον του 40%. Στην Ελλάδα ο κτιριακός τομέα καταναλώνει το 1/3 περίπου των συνολικών ενεργειακών πόρων και συμβάλλει κατά 40% στις εκπομπές διοξειδίου του άνθρακα. Παρ’ όλα αυτά η Ελλάδα δεν έχει ενσωματώσει ακόμη στο εθνικό δίκαιο την οδηγία για την εξοικονόμηση ενέργειας στα κτίρια και γι’ αυτό καταδικάστηκε πρόσφατα από το Ευρωπαϊκό Δικαστήριο, ενώ συγκαταλέγεται στις 10 χώρες που δεν έχουν παρουσιάσει ακόμη εθνικό σχέδιο δράσης για την ενεργειακή απόδοση. Ωστόσο, εάν η εναρμόνιση των εθνικών νομοθεσιών με την κοινοτική νομοθεσία είναι απαραίτητη, δεν αρκεί για την ικανοποίηση των επιδιωκόμενων στόχων. Η Ένωση, και χαίρομαι που το επεσήμανε αυτό και ο κ. Επίτροπος, πρέπει να δώσει βάρος στην όσο το δυνατόν πιο συνεκτική εφαρμογή των ενεργειακών επιδιώξεων από όλα τα κράτη μέλη.

Τα μέτρα και τα κίνητρα που προτείνονται στην έκθεση, όπως η πρόσβαση σε διαρθρωτική χρηματοδότηση για την επίτευξη της ενεργειακής απόδοσης, η αύξηση του ελάχιστου ποσοστού διαρθρωτικής χρηματοδότησης και χρηματοδότησης συνοχής, τα φορολογικά κίνητρα και κυρίως η μείωση του συντελεστή ΦΠΑ στις ενεργειακά αποδοτικές κατοικίες και μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις, μπορούν να διαδραματίσουν εξαιρετικά εποικοδομητικό ρόλο προς αυτήν την κατεύθυνση.

Το στοίχημα της κλιματικής αλλαγής δεν μπορεί να κερδηθεί μεμονωμένα αλλά από όλα τα κράτη μέλη. Εάν θέλουμε να παραμείνει η Ένωση στην πρωτοπορία αυτής της προσπάθειας και ισχυρή διαπραγματευτικά έναντι των υπολοίπων, θα πρέπει να δώσουμε βάρος στο κλείσιμο της ψαλίδας ανάμεσα στις χώρες που πρωτοστατούν και σε εκείνες που υστερούν.

  Jerzy Buzek (PPE-DE). – Panie Komisarzu! Gratuluję podejmowanych akcji. Najważniejszy problem europejski dzisiaj to energia i związany z tym efekt klimatyczny. Jest dzisiaj ważniejszy dla Europy niż produkcja żywności – to wiemy. Dokładnie sprawdziłem: spośród ostatnich 8 prezydencji wszystkie uczyniły z tego priorytet, niektóre umieściły to na pierwszym miejscu. Ale jeśli to jest tak ważne, to musi iść za tym w parze odpowiednie finansowanie spraw związanych z energetyką. Inaczej będziemy ciągle tylko przekazywali sobie puste słowa bez pokrycia.

Wiemy, jakie znaczenie ma wartość dodana, jeśli w Unii Europejskiego zabieramy się do tego razem. Ona polega na tym, że dzielimy się doświadczeniami, bierzemy najlepsze rozwiązania, dodajemy je do siebie i dzięki temu możemy liczyć na wielki postęp. Stawiam wobec tego pytanie, czy jesteśmy gotowi na wydanie wspólnych europejskich pieniędzy na badania, technologie, innowacje, także wdrożenia w zakresie energii?

Wydajność energetyczna, o której tu mówimy, sprawność, oszczędność, jest w zakresie energetyki najważniejsza, jeszcze ważniejsza niż energetyka odnawialna czy czysty węgiel. Tymczasem w programach europejskich na badania i wdrożenia w naszych wspólnych programach mamy jedynie kilkaset milionów euro na 7 lat w budżecie, który liczy tysiąc miliardów euro.

Apeluję do Pana Komisarza, do Komisji Europejskiej, do Rady Europejskiej, o przemyślenie tej sprawy i pójście najpierw drogą szybkiego rozwoju technologicznego, a potem stawiania bardzo ostrych norm emisyjnych.

  Владимир Уручев (PPE-DE). – Днес за пореден път в този парламент обсъждаме важни енергийни въпроси, което е доказателство, че решаването на енергийните проблеми във взаимовръзката им с измененията на климата е един от най-високите приоритети на европейските институции. Прекрасният и всеобхватен доклад на г-жа Фиона Хол е също доказателство за това.

Няма съмнение, че енергийната ефективност е един от стълбовете, на които ще се опира нашата енергийна политика за дълъг период от време. Европейските граждани съзнават своята роля и ролята на енергийната ефективност за целите за стабилизиране на климата и за едно по-сигурно енергийно бъдеще. Затова, когато е налице такава обществена подкрепа и такава благоприятна политическа ситуация, насърчавам Комисията да бъде още по-инициативна, да използва всички механизми на въздействие, за да се осигури изпълнението на амбициозните двадесет процентни цели, за да бъде докоснат от ползите на енергийната ефективност всеки европеец.

Същевременно, ако крайната ни цел е да спасим планетата от катастрофалните изменения на климата и в същото време да имаме една енергийно осигурена и конкурентноспособна Европа на глобалния пазар, то оставащите 80% от енергетиката трябва да получат адекватно на важността си внимание. Сред тези 80% е ядрената енергетика, която към момента е недооценена, над която продължават да тегнат страхове и догми от последните две десетилетия. Трябва да съберем цялата си мъдрост и разум, за да преодолеем това и да заговорим да ядрената енергия открито и ясно като за бизнес и възможност, която човечеството и Европа не могат да си позволят да пропуснат. Всички ние в тази зала носим политическа отговорност това да се случи.

  Lambert van Nistelrooij (PPE-DE). – Het is me een groot genoegen om hier volgens de catch the eye -procedure te mogen spreken; in het debat hier over het verslag van mevrouw Hall komt heel nadrukkelijk naar voren dat we moeten versnellen. Er zijn zoveel kansen bij de energie-efficiency. We drukken het in het Nederlands wel een uit als "laaghangend fruit"; als je die kansen pakt, dan is er inderdaad heel snel bij te dragen aan de doelstellingen die we gezamenlijk hebben gesteld, die we in Bali nóg eens hebben uitgesproken, en met het pakket van de Commissie van 23 januari nog eens hebben bevestigd. De heer Piebalgs heeft daar een uitdrukkelijke rol in gespeeld.

In de Commissie regionaal beleid hebben we kunnen constateren - en de heer Buzek sprak daar ook al over - dat het in de periode tot 2006 mogelijk was in de doelstellingen van de structuurfondsen prioriteit te geven aan energie en energie-efficiency. Slechts 1,16% is eraan besteed. Welnu, mevrouw Hübner heeft in het overleg met de Commissie regionaal beleid vorige week aangekondigd de verordening te zullen herzien en in de programma's 2007-2013 meer prioriteit te zullen geven aan deze zaken. Dus, mijn conclusie wat dit betreft is: versnellen en beter gebruik maken van de bestaande instrumenten op Europees niveau.

  Andris Piebalgs, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I would like to thank Members of Parliament for a very substantial debate. As I said, it is the Commission’s ambition to follow the energy efficiency action plan. I know sometimes you wish that we would move faster, but there are some steps that we should also take – better regulation, public consultation and impact assessment. Everything takes time. I believe we need a debate about regulation and also incentives. I think both should be in balance but both instruments should be used.

Today I met a Minister from Montenegro. They have an excellent energy strategy developed until 2025, but I urged him to go very strongly for regulation, because this is a country which will have a huge increase in its buildings. They will not deter investors if they set an extremely tough requirement for the immediate reintegration of renewable energies. All standards and the country will benefit. Otherwise, the taxpayers will pay for additional energy supplies.

So I believe ambition is needed. We have set out new guidelines on the budget issue. We need to make much more effort to establish when state aid for new technologies, energy efficiency and renewables is to be applied. We are also working on an international platform for energy efficiency that could create synergies at international level. However, budgetary authority lies not only with the Commission but also with Parliament.

I am very grateful for the work Mr Buzek did for the seventh Framework Programme. I think that we still have substantial means. It is also part of your good work and the work of this House. An increase in the budget or redistribution is a much more complex issue, one I cannot answer. I would not mind additional money in my colleagues’ budget – Mr Potočnik’s budget or the external relations budget – but it should be seen in common in the budget debate.

So I thought this an excellent report. It is not always very kind to the Commission but it is not about kindness. We are speaking about energy efficiency and ambitions will definitely be high on the Commission’s side as well.

  Fiona Hall, rapporteur. − Madam President, I would like to thank colleagues for their positive and supportive comments, and also to say again that I appreciate that the Commission is being very constructive in response to the criticism from Parliament.

I would just like to take up two points. First, I think it was indeed a shame that there was not more attention paid to the Commission’s assessment of the energy efficiency action plans that came out with the energy package last week because it was a very worryingly downbeat assessment. It is clear that national governments are still not being ambitious enough in their action plans. They are not looking ahead to the 20% target and, to quote the Commission, there exists a ‘considerable gap’ in certain Member States ‘between the political commitment to energy efficiency … and the measures adopted’. I think that this is worrying.

Secondly, the fact that we now have the Renewables Directive and the targets therein means that energy efficiency has never been more important. If we are going to reach the 20% binding target across the EU, we have to keep energy demand under control. We can only do 20% if the 100% of the total amount of energy use is something that is reduced rather than being allowed to increase.

So I hope this report does mark a new beginning and that it marks the start of a closing of the gap between political rhetoric on energy efficiency and its actual implementation.

  Πρόεδρος. – Η συζήτηση έληξε.

Η ψηφοφορία θα διεξαχθεί αύριο Πέμπτη, 31.1.2008.

Γραπτές δηλώσεις (άρθρο 142)

  Roberta Alma Anastase (PPE-DE), în scris. – Doresc să salut elaborarea acestui raport şi abordarea globală pe care acesta o propune pentru domeniul eficienţei energetice în Uniunea Europeană, atât din punct de vedere tematic, cât şi geografic. Este important că vorbim astăzi despre un plan de acţiuni şi detaliile acestuia, fapt ce ne demonstrează că am trecut la paşi concreţi în această direcţie.

În calitate de Raportor pentru cooperarea regională la Marea Neagră, doresc să subliniez importanţa asigurării eficienţei energetice în această regiune, cu scopul realizării obiectivului de securitate energetică şi de reducere a dependenţei faţă de sursele de livrare energetică.

În paralel, apreciez examinarea tematicii prin prisma abordării internaţionale şi analizării provocărilor de ordin global. Salut astfel că Parlamentul European este conştient de viitoarea incapacitate a Rusiei de a satisface cererea internă şi contractuală de gaz natural şi îşi exprimă preocuparea în această direcţie.

Acest fapt ne permite sa reiterăm instituţiilor europene importanţa a două obiective majore: înlocuirea crescândă a importurilor energetice în UE cu alte surse şi metode eficiente de asigurare a securităţii energetice europene, precum şi necesitatea de a promova reforma energetică în regiunea Mării Negre şi în ţările învecinate cu UE în scopul de a crea un sector energetic transparent şi durabil.

  John Attard-Montalto (PSE), in writing. – The Plan of Action was targeting 20 % efficiency by 2020 is an ambitious plan but a necessary one. On the other hand, it is useless to set targets if there isn't a will to achieve them. For instance, out of a total of 21 actions scheduled for completion by 2007 only three were completely finalised. This is a dismal record. It is true that many others are in progress but nonetheless a percentage which is less than 15 % of completed projects is not something to be proud of.

I am ashamed to say that in me country, Malta, the issue has not been tackled seriously. In an island where the sun and wind exist in abundance one would have expected that full use would be made of these two elements.

Regarding solar energy very few private, commercial and public buildings make use of this alternative energy.

Wind energy was more popular in the past in agricultural areas. The Government is intent on setting up offshore wind farms notwithstanding that the technology is not available for the depths of Maltese waters. Not only but it has made it known to a major developer, who waited to set up four wind mills generating energy, that the permission would not be given because of aesthetic reasons.

  András Gyürk (PPE-DE), írásban. – Az energiahatékonyság javítása a leginkább kézenfekvő megoldás a károsanyag-kibocsátás mérséklésére. Az együttes fellépés ezen a téren ahhoz is érdemben hozzájárulhat, hogy oldódjék Európa függőségi viszonya az energiaellátás terén.

A legnagyobb energiamegtakarítási lehetőség talán az ipari és lakóépületek hatékonyságában rejlik. Mindez fokozottan igaz az új uniós tagállamokra. A szocialista nehézipari létesítmények és a térségben oly jellemző, százezreknek otthont adó panelházak az energiapazarlás szimbólumaivá váltak. Örömteli, hogy az Európai Bizottság cselekvési tervében felismerte a volt szocialista országok sajátos helyzetét, és kiemelt célkitűzésként fogalmazza meg az energiahatékonyság ösztönzését az új tagállamokban.

Sajnálatosnak tartjuk, hogy számos tagállam nem tartja be vállalásait az energiahatékonysági jogszabályok végrehajtása során. Így például a magyar kormányzat, miközben a szavak szintjén kiáll az éghajlatvédelmi intézkedések mellett, hónapok óta halogatja a Nemzeti Energiahatékonysági Cselekvési Terv elfogadását.

Üdvözlendő ugyanakkor, hogy egyes közösségek mindezek ellenére élnek a lehetőségekkel. Jó példa erre a Budapest egyik legnagyobb kerületében, Óbudán elindított program, amely keretében közösségi támogatások segítségével számos panelház kerül felújításra az elkövetkezendő években.

Meg vagyunk győződve arról, hogy Európa képes vezető szerepet játszani az energiahatékonyság ügyében. Ez elsődleges érdeke is. A hatékonyabb energiafelhasználás ugyanis hatékonyabb gazdaságot is jelent. Új munkahelyeket és javuló versenyképességet, s nem utolsó sorban: élhetőbb környezetet.

  Gábor Harangozó (PSE), in writing. – First of all, I would like to welcome the initiative report by Ms Hall. As a matter of fact, this report comes at a time where all initiatives aiming at reinforcing concrete actions for greater energy efficiency should be warmly welcomed. Energy efficiency is indeed the most effective objective providing already available technological tools for genuinely and rapidly addressing the challenges of global warming and limited fossil resources. We are now embarked on a plan to cut energy consumption and it is essential that we reach our goals on schedule. But of course such a plan will require enormous costs and economical sacrifices. These costs and sacrifices will be especially very challenging for those countries with the lowest budgets and less developed economies. It is essential that the energy efficiency targets will not simply worsen the situation of the weakest economies and industries in the poorest Member States. Therefore, ad hoc transitional measures to support the most vulnerable sectors and countries while implementing the legislation are required to avoid market failures. Of course, in the long run, there is indeed huge cost-effective potential of energy conservation and stronger energy efficiency policy would very likely benefit the job market in the Union.

  Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE), kirjallinen. – Harvan päätöksen vaikutukset lienevät Euroopassa yhtä kauaskantoisia ja keskenään ristiriitaisia kuin neuvoston kevään 2007 ilmastopoliittisen triplan – päästövähennys 20 prosenttia, energiansäästö 20 prosenttia sekä uusiutuvia 20 prosenttia, kaikki vuoteen 2020 mennessä. Jälkimmäinen sitova tavoite kun uhkaa valitettavasti kiihdyttää ilmastonmuutosta. Kunnes tämä ymmärretään, ilmastollinen hyöty on saatavissa vain kahdesta ensimmäisestä.

Energian säästö nimenomaan energiatehokkuuden parantamisessa onkin kiistatta yksi tehokkaimmista työkaluista ilmastonmuutoksen torjumiseksi. Tästä ja mietinnön sisällöstä vallitsee parlamentissa laaja konsensus; kiitän esittelijä Hallia siitä, että hän työllään mahdollisti sen syntymisen.

Arvokasta mietinnössä on se, että siinä on ymmärretty asian laajuus ja mahdollisuus: vaatimuksella energiatehokkuudesta tulee olla yhteiskunnallinen läpäisyvaikutus. Sen pitää kohdistua kaikkeen suunnitteluun ja toimintaan kaikilla tasoilla. Energiatehokkuustavoitteiden ja sääntöjen piiriin on suljettava yhtälailla laitteet, rakennukset, energiantuotanto ja –siirto, liikenne sekä kulutustottumukset.

Toimia tarvittaisiin viipymättä. Siksi on valitettavaa, että parlamentin pitää muistuttaa komissiota siitä, että lainsäädäntöä on jo alalla valmiina. Jäsenmaiden täytäntöönpano on ollut tähän asti huomattavan vajavaista, mihin komission on kiinnitettävä huomiota.

Energiatehokkuuden parantamisessa on kyse kilvoittelusta, jossa ilmaston kannalta paras tulos saavutetaan markkinoiden omin ehdoin. Tästä esimerkkinä ovat erilaiset standardointijärjestelmät. On varottava joustamatonta lainsäädäntöä: Kun paras käytettävissä oleva tekniikka valjastetaan käyttöön kepin ja porkkanan avulla, hevosvoimia riittää – lainsäätäjän yksityiskohtainen keinovalikoimiin puuttuminen vain uuvuttaa juhdan.

  Zbigniew Krzysztof Kuźmiuk (UEN), na piśmie. – Panie Przewodniczący, Panie Komisarzu, W debacie poświęconej racjonalizacji zużycia energii, zgadzając się z głównymi tezami autorki raportu Pani Poseł Fiony Hall chcę jednak zwrócić uwagę na kwestie szczególnie ważne dla nowych państw członkowskich.

1. Kraje te chcąc skracać dystans dzielący je od najbardziej rozwiniętych państw UE muszą rozwijać się 2 - 3 razy szybciej od nich więc przynajmniej w tempie 6% wzrostu PKB rocznie. Takie tempo rozwoju będzie oznaczało znaczący wzrost emisji CO2 co nie zostało uwzględnione w przedłożonych ostatnio przez Komisję Europejską propozycjach zawartych w tzw. pakiecie klimatyczno - energetycznym.

2. Przedstawione przez KE propozycje idą wyraźnie w stronę ograniczenia korzystania ze źródeł węglowych co godzi głównie w gospodarki takie jak Polska gdzie np. energetyka oparta jest głównie na spalaniu różnych rodzajów węgla.

3. Propozycja aby już od 2013 energetyka w całości kupowała swoje prawa do emisji CO2 na aukcjach spowoduje gwałtowny wzrost cen energii szczególnie dotkliwie odczuwany przez gospodarstwa domowe. Już w tej chwili gdy polska energetyka kupuje zaledwie 10% prawa do emisji na aukcjach a cena energii elektrycznej w roku 2007 wzrośnie o ok 15% a w kolejnych kilku latach dodatkowo o 20 - 30 %.

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE-DE), in writing . – This report on energy efficiency is timely - given our concerns about climate change and the need to face up to the finite energy resource of fossil fuels.

But eliminating waste of energy is positive in its own right and from a purely selfish point of view; improving energy efficiency should cut costs for households and businesses.

Many individuals are aware of the need to be more conscious of energy use. Many already know that a TV on standby uses 45pc of the electricity used by a TV that is on, that electrical equipment on standby uses 10pc of household energy in the EU and that leaving phone re-chargers plugged in uses energy - 95pc of which is wasted.

And while we can all act to switch off power to electrical gadgets, would it not be more effective is the manufacturers designed the equipment with an eye to eliminating the energy waste.

A combination of new development in manufacturing and increase awareness among consumers will yield results, but industry needs incentives to develop new products with energy efficiency in mind and the public need positive messages to educate them about the extent of energy savings which can be made in the home and office.

  Péter Olajos (PPE-DE), írásban. – Mint a környezetvédelmi bizottság néppárti előadója az energiahatékonyság javítására kiadott zöld könyvnek (Doing more with less), üdvözlöm az ismételt és fokozott közösségi erőfeszítéseket ezen a téren.

Ugyanakkor csalódottságomnak kell hangot adnom amiatt, hogy míg az Európai Bizottság és a Parlament komoly erőfeszítéseket tesz, hogy konszenzusos szabályokat alkosson, végrehajtható terveket készítsen, addig azok megvalósítása sok esetben a tagországok hozzáállásán megbukik.

Az akciótervek elkészítésének határidejét hónapokkal, fél évekkel túllépik egyes tagországok, például még mindig van 7 ország, amely a mai napig nem adta le immár 7 hónapos késés ellenére.

De nemcsak ez a baj. Hiányos ezen tervek társadalmi egyeztetése és sokszor az elkészült akciótervek is igen vérszegények, számos alkalommal nem tükrözik a közösen elfogadott célok megvalósításának reális menetrendjét és eszközrendszerét.

Ennek következtében bátran kimondhatjuk, hogy számos uniós tagországban csak szavakban támogatott - az energiahatékonyság és a takarékosság, valamint az ennek nyomán megvalósítandó "low carbon society" azaz alacsony, sőt: zéró széndioxid kibocsátású gazdaság, háztartás és közlekedés?

Jó lenne, ha az uniós jogszabályok őre, a Bizottság időről-időre összefoglaló elemzéseket, értékelést készítene arról, hogy egyfelől milyen minőségűek a benyújtott nemzeti tervek, másfelől hogy azokat a tagországok milyen mértékben hajtják végre.

  Bogusław Rogalski (UEN), na piśmie. – First of all, I would like to welcome the initiative report of Mrs Hall. As a matter of fact, this report comes at a time where all initiatives aiming at reinforcing concrete actions for greater energy efficiency should be warmly welcomed. Energy efficiency is indeed the most effective objective providing already available technological tools for genuinely and rapidly addressing the challenges of global warming and limited fossil resources. We are now embarked plan to cut energy consumption and it is essential that we reach our goals on schedule. But of course such plan will require enormous costs and economical sacrifices. These costs and sacrifices will be especially very challenging for those countries with the lowest budgets and less developed economies. It is essential that the energy efficiency targets will not simply worsen the situation of the weakest economies and industries in the poorest Member States. Therefore, ad hoc transitional measures to support the most vulnerable sectors and countries while implementing the legislation are required to avoid market failures. Of course in the long run there is indeed huge cost-effective potential of energy conservation and stronger energy efficiency policy would very likely benefit the job market in the Union.

  Toomas Savi (ALDE), in writing. – First of all I would like to congratulate Ms Hall on a truly comprehensive report, dedicated to improving energy efficiency and calling on the Member States that are far behind the implementation of existing legislation to take all the necessary measures.

Secondly, I am glad to concede that the report has not only pointed out ways for industrial consumers to save energy, but for small consumers as well – especially by means of raising consumer awareness and providing reliable information of the most environment-friendly options. It must be noted that the consumption of households accounts for 40% of overall energy consumption. Therefore it is an individual responsibility for all of us to contribute to maximise energy efficiency.

Thirdly, energy consumption is progressively increasing and so does the expenditure on energy. It is simple common sense to enforce measures for energy efficiency in order to gain the optimal use of means of production.

  Alyn Smith (Verts/ALE), in writing. – Mr President, I congratulate Ms Hall on this report, which contains a number of sold, sensible, achievable suggestions to encourage energy efficiency. Amidst the current fuss on generation and security of supply we risk losing sight of the fact that changes in building and equipment standards, as well as how we use energy, will in themselves allow a great deal of energy capacity. I am glad to support this report and hope that it will be the start of more measures in this direction.