There are two competing renewable energy proposals being floated right now. One is from Brazil, and calls for a target of 10% of primary power to be generated by NEW renewables by 2012. This is the good one.
The EU has been working on an alternative calling for 15% to be generated by renewables. BUT there's been some disagreement about what constitutes a renewable. Currently, they're considering allowing large-scale hydro and traditional biomass (e.g., burning dung and wood) to count as "renewables." Nice one. The CURRENT percentage of power being generated by renewables under their definition is 13.9%, so that whopping big number of 15% is a pretty slimy showpiece if they allow hydro and biomass in.
Brazil's proposal is stricter, and would lead to development investment in small-scale solar, wind, and other forms of cleaner energy.
The EU started out strong on this, but as we overheard: "In typical fashion, the Euro-weenies have caved to their fall back position on the first day."
They discussed the proposal today with other countries, and here's a few choice reactions:
The US: "As you know, we're the world's leaders in renewable research" [AHEM, he didn't note that they are also shamelessly behind most OECD countries in the percentage of power which renewables deliver] "we should encourage investment, but targets are unacceptable."
["Hello, Exxon, this is George Bush. Heh heh, I'm calling to encourage you to develop solar power, ok? No, no, that's ok, I can wait on hold as long as you want, sir! in fact, I didn't really mean to bother you I know how busy you are, I'm just ticking off my to do list from the Earth Summit...."]
The G77: "Targets are for developed countries. For developing countries, the focus needs to be on energy access."
[Now who was speaking for the G77 and suggesting that renewables were less important for the developing world? Oil giant IRAN, that's who!!!!! To market, to market...]
Japan:: Said they could not agree a 15% target, because that could lead to less flexibility in their national energy policies.
[We're not here for flexible national energy policies, folks, we're here to agree international action to save the freaking planet. If you want worldwide action, you gotta give up a little "national flexibility," eh????]
"For Japan, what is important is energy security, economic growth, and environmental ummmm ummm ummm ummm ummmm ummm ummmm [this was, I swear, a painful ten second struggle to find the right word...] ummm umm ummm ummm
consideration.
Posted by overheard at August 27, 2002 04:44 PM