Issues Navigator

Global Challenges

Strategic Regions

Domestic Debates

Tag cloud

See All Tags

June 13, 2007 |  2 comments |  Print | E-Mail Your Opinion  

US and EU Should Cooperate on New Energy Technology

Katherina Reiche: I remind you that the G8 agreement on emission reductions means that all nations will have a part to play in reducing greenhouse gases. The transatlantic partners must work together now - on energy conservation, energy efficiency and renewable energies - to ensure market leadership in the future.

The G8 summit achieved great progress on climate change policy. The leading industrialized states now aim to reduce global greenhouse emissions by at least half before 2050, as part of a UN process. Many participants altered their positions quite considerably: the agreement that binding goals on reducing emissions were necessary was an important signal. The US approach was also incorporated, namely including the biggest greenhouse gas emitters outside the United States, especially China and India, into the agreement. The environment ministers of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change can now negotiate details of how these goals regarding global reductions are to be achieved. It is clear that all countries are responsible for reducing greenhouse gases, but in different ways. The industrialized countries must take the first step, but this agreement will apply to everyone.

There are sometimes differing views in the Europe and the USA about which path we should take forward and the instruments we should deploy. Regardless of the approach we take or the goal we are pursuing - climate protection, energy security, or both - the key to the resolution of these problems is the same. This is why Europe and the USA should work together to deal with these issues. If we can do this, we will undoubtedly be able to manage the risks we face.

There are many areas in which we can cooperate pragmatically: the development of clean coal-burning power stations, the further evolution of renewable energies, research into biofuels or fuel cell and hydrogen technology. We will all benefit from such cooperation: first, because we can combine and bundle the technological expertise of Europe and the USA. Second, it will enable us to reduce the length of time it takes to carry out research and so ensure costs remain manageable. If we do not develop these new technologies and bring them to market maturity, others will do it instead. The markets for energy security and climate protection technologies are currently being divided up, and we know that it is very difficult indeed to win back market share once it has been lost. A look at the capital markets shows how important this field is for the future.

The problems of climate protection and energy security lead to one clear, general conclusion: Energy policy must concentrate on energy saving, energy efficiency and renewable energies. Energy efficiency and a expansion of renewable energies will involve the comprehensive modernization of our infrastructure and capital assets, technological innovation and the development of important future markets. The careful management of energy by the industrialized and threshold countries is also a form of applied security policy because it will reduce the risk of conflicts over the distribution of resources and enable the developing countries to gain access to affordable energy. Our response to the growing demand for energy and our efforts to reduce climate damage and air, soil and water pollution therefore need to be combined with measures that allow the world’s poorest people to have access to energy resources. We therefore need to collaborate closely on these issues, creating the preconditions for energy supply systems robust enough to cope with the challenges of the future.


Katherina Reiche is a Member of the German Parliament and Deputy Chairwoman of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group.


Related Materials From the Atlantic Community:

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this Article! What's this?

 
 
Comments
Raffaello  Pantucci

June 13, 2007

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I am not as optimistic about the success of the G8 meeting. While there was agreement, i saw nothing that was immediately rigidly binding, and anyway the G8 has a pretty poor record of following through on things (witness Africa). Nonetheless, it is a positive noise to make and one should not discount the value of that.

My suspicion is that to get the US and EU to cooperate on clean energies is going to be somewhat difficult, since both have very competitive industries within them. In fact, at the moment, my understanding is that Europe is doing slightly better than the US in the clean energy pursuit. In this case, i would recommend as a first step that the Europeans concentrate on focusing our own capabilities to make the EU the world leader in such energies. While working with the US is a good idea, it seems replete with the potential for competition or technology sharing issues, whereas within Europe, we should be able to surmount these somehow.
 
Thomas  Haelsig

June 20, 2007

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I agree with you, that few of the final agreements of the G8 summit were binding, as far as I can recall, 50%reductions until the year 2050 were 'taken into serious consideration'.

To revert the famous quote from Neil Armstrong "That's a small step for man, but a giant leap for mankind' the results from the G8 summit were "a giant leap for the G8, however a small step for mankind", since we need more and drastic measures to curb with the global climate change.

The a UN resolution in 1970 the developed countries already pledged 0.7% of their GNI in form of Official Development Assistance, but while only five (rather smaller) countries have met this target, the big countries are struggling even to meet the 0.5 percent.

I also agree that the EU US cooperation might become difficult, especially to agree on similar targets and strategies. How ever, we must not always point the finger at the US, since especially their biofuels production is extremely high and their universities and innovation centers (such as silicon valley) are vital to improve technologies and other mechanisms to reduce CO2 emissions.

Of course each region must fully exploit their potential to reduce their emission and EU should not 'wait' for the US, but only if both have coherent and similar strategies will it be possible to urge upcoming polluters like china and India to implement those strategies themselves.

It will be good if the EU is world leader in clean energies, however they should not use this position to point at other countries (namely US) but to use their knowledge and money to help.
Tags: | US EU G8 |
 

Create Comment

Type the characters shown in the image below into the textfield.
Captcha

What are tags?

Community

Jobs / Internships

Call for Papers

Atlantic Events

Partners

User of the day

Anna  Przybyll
Anna Przybyll
"A wise old owl lived in an oak The more he..."

Poll

Should NATO intervene in Syria?