The EU Commission wants an economy without greenhouse gases by 2050. The Green MEP Rebecca Harms complained, nevertheless, a policy of delay: All the ambitious measures would be shelved.
Deutsche Welle: The EU Commission has presented before the UN climate conference climate strategy. The European Union (EU) is to be carbon neutral by 2050. How would you rate the strategy?
Rebecca Harms: It is a major step forward. The first Time the European Commission has formulated a complete strategy for Decarbonisation. This is right in every case. The problem I see is not in the formulation of the long-term goals, but in the lack of ambition in climate protection between now and the year 2030.
Why?
It will be very difficult to achieve the long-term goals for CO2 reduction, if we move all of the really ambitious measures, which will also require big changes, to the time after 2030.
What we need now – in the next ten years, effective steps to Decarbonisation, and the current target in the EU for 2030 is not ambitious enough. The essential steps are postponed to the time after 2030, so on to the next Generation of politicians.
This behavior has become typical in the field of climate policy. It is always ambitious objectives are formulated for the years that lie in the distance. And you don’t do enough in the time you have the rudder in their own hands.
Warns of delay: The European politician Claude Turmes (Green) at the UN climate change conference in 2017 in Bonn
What follows from this?
We now need to tighten the objectives for 2030 in the EU. But this is also true for other industrial countries at the UN climate change conference. At the same time, we must admit that we have not done enough to reduce the combustion of fossil fuels.
In your scenarios, the EU continues to pursue nuclear power. How do you rate this?
In the EU, the forecast and two new construction projects write since the reactor disaster of Chernobyl since 1986. It is clear that nuclear power plants are competitive. The EU Commission is trying to keep nuclear power in the energy mix of the EU, by pleading for the life of the old power plants extensions. I think that is a madness. It is the attempt to combat the devil with the Beelzebub.
This is a High-risk strategy, and before you can warn only. A systematic policy for energy efficiency, conservation and renewable energy competition, however, is capable of, and also creates more jobs.
There are on the one hand, the climate movement would like to have fossil fuels as possible from the market. In contrast, a movement that campaigns for the Expansion of the fossil fuel industry. US President, Donald Trump has set on top. How do you see the balance of power?
Behind Donald Trump, the capital is quite a large scale. It is the large capital – for example, the billionaire brothers Koch, big business, set on a future with fossil fuels without climate protection. This is different than a movement.
In Europe and especially in Germany, the consciousness also grows in Parts of the civil society, the not necessarily belong to the climate movement, that climate protection is necessary – for example, in the case of the trade unions. It is clear that we have on climate friendly and climate change friendly products if we want to remain competitive.
Currently I discuss with representatives of the industrial Union of metal and the automotive industry. Although this is still a difficult debate, but it is in the unions and in the auto industry, meanwhile, is the insight that the Blocking climate protection is not a good way.
For experts clear: The transport sector needs to change by 2050, radically
There are currently great challenges and rapid changes. Where will we be in five years?
Either we succeed through political control of the transition to a climate-friendly, resource-efficient economy in the EU through its own policies, or we may be pushed from the outside, and this is also disruptive moments.
The auto industry will be very heavily challenged by large markets such as China. The Chinese government has set a clear path to the electrification.
We can use the 1.5 degrees target is to be reached?
The IPCC report has said that this is yet to be created, if one is ambitious. My idea is that the EU acts of a similar nature as at the beginning of the construction of the European community only with other hard – to.
At the time, it has a steel joint contracts for the extraction of, coal-, and nuclear industry completed. Today, a climate-Union would have to be the big project for the future of the EU. Then I would Worry more about where we are in five or ten years.
But they are not so optimistic?
I work for it.
Rebeccca’s Harms climate policy spokesperson of the Greens/EFA group in the European Parliament and was, until 2016, the Chairman of the Greens in the European Parliament .
The Interview was conducted by Gero Rueter