Raül Romeva i Rueda

Segons que ens comunica na Caroline Lucas, eurodiputada verda (Anglaterra) responsable de fer el seguiment de les qüestions relacionades amb el canvi climàtic, així com ponent de la posició del Parlament Europeu sobre la legislació europea relativa a la incorporació del transport per avió en les quotes sobre emissions de CO2 (veure Estrasburg juliol06: Contaminació aèria, català, franquisme i CIA ), la darrera proposta que fa la Comissió sobre la qüestió fa una passa enrera en moltes de les exigències que se li feien des del Parlament Europeu. Així, l’esborrany presentat exclou  (segueix…):

tots els vols que surtin o que vagin cap a destinacions de fora de la UE. Amb aquesta exclusió es redueix a 44 milions de tones de carboni que s’estalviaran d’emetre d’ara fins el 2020, mentre que si incorporessim a la llista tots els vols, tants els de dins la UE, com els externs, arribariem a estalviar fins a 183 milions de tones. Molta declaració, per tant, davant el canvi climàtic, pero poca voluntat de fer-hi front de manera radical. Segons la nota que va emetre la mateixa Caroline Lucas:

Emissions trading: EU aviation plan ‘a watered down disaster’

LEAKS of European Commission proposals to include airlines in the EU’s emissions trading scheme suggest the Commission has backed down on key elements of the legislation, severly undermining its potential impact on reducingclimate change, the European Parliament’s spokesperson on aviation and climate change has warned.Last-minute wrangling between members of the European Commission seems to have ripped the guts out of the legislative proposals, said Caroline Lucas, who drafted the European Parliament’s position on aviation and climatechange, today. Draft legislation due to be published by the European Commission tomorrow will exclude all flights originating from or flying to non-EU destinations, and will allow the airlines to make windfall profits from trading permits given to them for free ? and at the same time contribute to rising emissions from non-CO2 sources.

Dr Lucas said:"If the Commission limits the scope to flights within the EU, it will undermine the environmental integrity of the scheme: just 44 million tonnes of carbon will be saved by 2020 compared to 183 if non-EU flights are included." The market pressure arising from such confined coverage will be insufficient to meaningfully influence aircraft design towards the cleanest, most efficient technologies – falling far short on the incentivising potential of a global emissions trading scheme, she added. The Commission’s proposals will call for airlines operating flights within the EU to be incorporated into the existing emissions trading mechanism. They will be given 6ver 90 per cent of their ‘pollution permits’ for free (allowing them to generate billions in windfall receipts from their sale, according to research published by the Institute for Public Policy research in the UK this week) ? and be allowed to increase their emissions annually as long as other industries reduce theirs.

Dr Lucas said:
"This is effectively going to reward the airlines for their contribution to climate change, and allow them to increase total greenhouse emissions. "As well as the CO2 they emit, airlines produce other greenhouse gases meaning their total contribution to climate change is between two and four times greater than other industries ? yet these proposals take no meaningful account of these non-CO2 emissions."The proposals require adoption by the European Parliament before taking effect, but MEPs are unlikely to endorse them while they run completely counter to their clearly stated view that all flights into and out of the EU should be included, and that the non-CO2 emissions should be taken into account. Dr Lucas added: "These proposals flatly contradict the position adopted by the European Parliament in July, which expressly calls for all flight landing or taking off from EU airports to be included, whatever their origin or destination.   "This is an issue on which the Parliament must endorse proposals before they take effect and, as author of the Parliament’s position, I will be pressing strenuously for our view to prevail." She concluded: "These measures are supposed to be about combating aviation’s growing contribution to climate change ? but they do no such thing in theircurrent form. There is no political, legal or economic reason for theconcessions to the airlines the Commission has made ? and they must reverse them before they will be either acceptable to MEPs or effective in the fight against climate change."

Font foto: BBC