Carbon neutral Europe in 2050?

[sicetaitsimple]

One of the many news links you can find on the subject today:

https://www.20minutes.fr/planete/267401 ... 50-pologne

Certainly very ambitious and we will have to see the practical declination (directives, ....) in the months and years to come, but it is better in my opinion to have objectives and not necessarily to achieve them completely than not to have them and let it go.

[sen-no-sen]

but in my opinion it is better to have objectives and not necessarily achieve them completely than not to have them and let it go.

Certainly, however we can ask ourselves the following question: Will the EU still exist in 2050?

[sicetaitsimple]

but in my opinion it is better to have objectives and not necessarily achieve them completely than not to have them and let it go.

Certainly, however we can ask ourselves the following question: Will the EU still exist in 2050?

I don't know, but the countries that compose it should still exist! Will it be possible to have policies fundamentally different from those of its neighbors, not sure, in any case I do not want it. But it is indeed a question.

For the moment and to come back to the subject, there is at least one direction, let's move forward and we'll see. Ask yourself in 2019 the question whether the EU will still exist in its current form in 2050, it's just intellectual masturbation allowing to stay in the scheme "it's fucked up, everything is wrong, there is nothing to do, everything will fall apart, and I would have told you so ".

[sen-no-sen]

For the moment and to come back to the subject, there is at least one direction, let's move forward and we'll see. Ask yourself in 2019 the question whether the EU will still exist in its current form in 2050, it's just intellectual masturbation allowing to stay in the scheme "it's fucked up, everything is wrong, there is nothing to do, everything will fall apart, and I would have told you so ".

No, it's not intellectual masturbation, it's prospective ...
In reality the EU has no choice, we simply do not have enough fossil resources to operate the 2th global economy.
Carbon neutrality is a nice twist on a much simpler thing: the replacement of fossils (especially oil) or the economic collapse of the EU.

[izentrop]

What they want to do is a decoy: replace charcoal with wood because wood is renewable, but not in forced market as planned http://www.amisdelaterre.org/Six-raison ... DF-en.html

We send as much CO2 into the atmosphere while destroying biodiversity and soils even more, seen https://reporterre.net/Troquer-le-charb ... uvernement

Exemptions, already https://www.usinenouvelle.com/article/s ... 24.N912824

And to top it all https://www.upr.fr/actualite/emmanuel-m ... ret-brule/

[sicetaitsimple]

Carbon neutrality is a nice twist on a much simpler thing: the replacement of fossils (especially oil) or the economic collapse of the EU.

If I have to choose, I vote for the 1 proposal.

[dede2002]

And I vote for the 2 proposal

To begin with, if we want to achieve this utopian objective of a CO2 neutral Europe, it would be advisable to count the "gray" CO2 coming from all the materials and imported materials (it is known, the CO2 knows no borders), we can't even do it for gray energy!

And on this point I agree with Izentrop, how can a tree, which takes decades to grow, and a few days to burn, be considered "CO2 neutral"

[sicetaitsimple]

To begin with, if we want to achieve this utopian goal of a CO2 neutral Europe, it would be advisable to count the "gray" CO2 coming from all the materials and imported materials.

No, to start with, you must first hit the hill .... It is large enough that there is time to modify accounting conventions (which change nothing at the global level of emissions) over time.

[moinsdewatt]

Carbon neutrality in 2050: the EU is committed, but without Poland

AFP • 13 / 12 / 2019

The European Union is committed to becoming climate neutral by 2050, a "strong signal" sent by the continent in the middle of COP25, but tarnished by the absence of Poland, which it did not have managed to convince.

"We have reached an agreement on climate change, it is very important, it is crucial", launched the President of the European Council Charles Michel during a press conference.

For his baptism of fire at the head of the cenacle of European leaders, the Belgian was faced with a difficult discussion.

His decision to announce an agreement despite the lack of consensus surprised even if Poland did not go so far as to block the adoption of the summit conclusions.

The leader, and by his side the president of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, tried to minimize the delay granted to Poland until June.

The European Council has "endorsed" the objective of climate neutrality by 2050, but it is noted in the conclusions that a member state "at this stage cannot commit to implementing this objective as far as it is concerned. concerned".

According to several sources, Warsaw had asked to be able to sign up for a date later than 2050 - 2070 was mentioned - which was refused.

The fact that Poland remains out is "completely acceptable", assured Mrs von der Leyen.

"This objective (of neutrality) will engage the EU as a whole", we assure the Elysee. It is up to the other countries to convince Warsaw to join forces next summer.

"We understand that (Poland) needs more time," explained Charles Michel. The country, still very dependent on coal, is one of the main polluters in Europe, and fears a disastrous energy transition in economic and social terms.

- "Major commitment" -

On arriving at the Council, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said that the cost of energy transformation in his country was "far higher" than in other countries.

If the rest of the EU shows understanding, Ursula von der Leyen nevertheless assured, the day after the presentation of the European Green Pact, that "this would not change the Commission's calendar".

This roadmap aims to put the EU on the rails of climate neutrality by the middle of the century, through various laws and action plans in various sectors.

By June, the Commission will have presented several legislative acts, underlined German Chancellor Angela Merkel. In particular, the great European "climate law", in which the Commission intends to include the 2050 objective, which must be presented by March.

European leaders will also have advanced by the summer in the discussion on the future multiannual EU budget for the 2021-2027 period, which should reflect the bloc's climate ambitions.

And in January, Ursula von der Leyen will present her "just transition fund", eagerly awaited by countries whose survival in certain regions is linked to coal.

At the start of the summit, Warsaw was not the only recalcitrant country. Hungary and the Czech Republic also displayed their skepticism, demanding financial guarantees, but also on the means to reach this climatic objective, including thanks to nuclear power.

Unacceptable for countries like Austria or Luxembourg, this reference to the atom was defended by the three eastern capitals. The other leaders eventually gave in and mentioned it in the conclusions. An important recognition because it opens the way to aid and subsidies.

Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babis congratulated himself on having "convinced" his counterparts that "nuclear energy is our path to climate neutrality".

According to the French presidency, the leaders of the 27 have also given "unanimous support" for the establishment of a "carbon tax" for products from outside the EU "if they do not comply with the same. climatic requirements than European companies ".

Clearly more nuanced, the official conclusions of the summit limit themselves to indicating that the Council "takes note of the intention of the Commission to propose a border adjustment mechanism for high carbon sectors".

The principle of such a carbon tax at the borders, long demanded by France, aims to fight against "environmental dumping" and prevent the displacement of CO2 emissions to countries where it is priceless.

The pre-summit had been marked by a spectacular action by Greenpeace, of which about thirty activists, deceiving the security of the Council headquarters, climbed the building, deploying a banner on "the climate emergency" and lit smoke bombs.

The new Commission's climate ambition is largely linked to the EU's future multiannual budget for the period 2021-2027. A thorny subject but on which the leaders did not linger, instructing the President of the Council Charles Michel "to advance the negotiations".

https://www.boursorama.com/actualite-ec ... 108499f81e

[dede2002]

To begin with, if we want to achieve this utopian goal of a CO2 neutral Europe, it would be advisable to count the "gray" CO2 coming from all the materials and imported materials.

No, to start with, you must first hit the hill .... It is large enough that there is time to modify accounting conventions (which change nothing at the global level of emissions) over time.

Yes, the mound is big enough, and CO2 is only one of its facets ...

The collapse of the system is inevitable, what is debatable is the duration and the modalities. By focusing on energy sources, without worrying about their impact, we continue to climb, and the higher we are the more it hurts when we fall.

Here in Switzerland, my children in public school study the gold circuit and learn that Switzerland is the hub of gold laundering, learn how multinationals work, and also that since "development aid "exists the number of countries classified as" LDC "has gone from 25 to 50, these examples tend to make me optimistic, insofar as our young people are prepared for" the collapse ", with avenues of reflection which may allow them to orient their daily actions towards a "happy degrowth" rather than a "generalized conflict" ...