Comments on Europe’s energy transition by Dr. Benny Peiser, Director of the London-based Global Warming Policy Foundation, appeared in the Japanese Yomiuri Shimbun, the world’s leading daily in terms of circulation.
Image: Yomiuri Shimbun
Dr. Peiser gave a lecture at the Cannon Institute for Global Studies in Tokyo on October 1st and this was the basis for the Yomiuri Shimbun feature article.
Little dissent in Japan
Traditionally the Japanese population is virtually universal in its belief that the global warming of the past century is mostly due to man. But according to Japanese blogger Kirye: “It’s due in large part to the fact that the overwhelming mainstream media ignore climate science dissenting views, and uncritically report alarmist claims.”
Kirye, who wishes to remain anonymous, said she became skeptical of alarmist climate science in 2013 after having read books by Dr. Kiyohiko Ikeda, Shigenori Maruyama and Kiminori Itoh — rare dissenting voices in Japan.
Dr. Peiser, who received a Ph.D. from Frankfurt University in Germany, gave a lecture titled: “The Crisis of the EU Climate Policy“.
Early green party member turned off by the “exaggeration”
The Yomiuri Shimbun article starts by mentioning how in the late 1970s Dr. Peiser was involved in creating the German environmental political party “The Greens”, but wound up taking a realistic stance after doubts over exaggerations made by the environmentalists. One example was the claim Germany forests would die due to the acid rain problem.
In 2009, together with former UK Finance Minister Nigel Lawson, Dr. Peiser established the Global Warming Policy Foundation from the standpoint that balanced analyses and recommendations regarding global warming were necessary to avoid faulty policy.
Public opinion undergoing a transformation in Europe
In the Yomiuri Shimbun article Dr. Peiser says public opinion has undergone a transformation in Europe and that he senses “a clear debate growing over the last couple of years”.
The Israeli born Dr. Peiser says the EU has in fact been two-faced about energy and climate policy.
Image: Dr. Benny Peiser.
Climate, energy policy losing importance
The EU often claims it is ready for climate action, yet drags its feet when it comes to taking real action. “The tone has changed from consideration of environmental importance to a direction of considering a balance with the economy,” Peiser told the Yomiuri Shimbun.
He also notes that in a survey asking what is the most worrisome problem, “climate change is falling in rank” in Europe. “Problems such as immigration, economy, employment, and health are the highest now.”
Climate policy backfiring
In his lecture, Peiser noted the EU’s climate policies have failed to live up to the Paris Accord climate commitments to reduce CO2 emissions, have increased energy prices significantly, reduced European competitiveness, increased dependence on Russian energy and given rise to widespread public discontent.
Scaling back the subsidies
Now the energy transition to renewables is the causing Eurocrats to worry and European governments have been scaling back support for reneabkle energies through the introduction of a bidding system. “But the wind farm operators are not sure how profitable they will be. It is not a situation where building is progressing with vigor,” Dr. Peiser notes in the Yomiuri Shimbun article.
No real reductions foreseeable for Germany
He also added: “Germany will have to increase its reliance on fossil fuel power plants in order to eliminate nuclear power by 2022” and “it is impossible to substitute with unstable renewal energies that depend on the weather.”
He also believes that greenhouse gas emissions will increase over the next few years.
No unilateral solution
Dr. Peiser adds: “There are many countries in the world which are reluctant to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In order not to lose global economic competition, it is undesirable for European countries to unilaterally reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I do not think that the policies of European governments will change dramatically, but such discussions and assertions are gradually strengthening.”
Thanks to Kirye for translating the Yomiuri Shimbun Japanese text.
11 responses to “EU Climate Policy “In Crisis” Says Director Of London-Based Foundation To Leading Japanese Daily”
[…] Full post […]
Personally I think Peiser’s description of Europe’s green energy situation is very accurately described.
Germany and Ontario Canada have proven that the actual market value of wind and solar energy is in the high negative range.
It is impossible to make a profit on that without subsidies.
Sorry, but this is BS. If anything is proven, then it’s nuclear not being economical. Same as fossil fuel power plants when one factors in all external costs. Wind and solar are economical in some regions already and price continues to fall.
Carry on being deluded.
It’s good to know you are safe in your mum’s basement.
Lol … you are out of arguments, like always. I’m beginning to think you write out of your own experience here (“safe in your mum’s basement”).
It is not simply a matter of increased cost. The ENERGY consumed to design, manufacture, install, maintain and administer renewables exceeds the energy they produce in their lifetime. Without the energy provided by other sources, renewables could not exist. They can only exist now because fossil fuels are still used to power the industry to manufacture and install them, heat/cool the homes, power nearly all vehicles, power farming, etc. in support of the people involved. Incorporating mandatory storage and/or standby CSGT makes it much worse.
IF production of CO2 from coal fired generators is considered a problem why is Germany closing nuclear powered stations which do not produce CO2?
We have heard about Japans tsunami disaster but what is the chance of a tsunami affecting nuclear stations in Germany?
Why are Thorium reactors not being built as replacement base load generators for the aging uranium reactors?
Nuclear (and Thorium — still a vision) power is high cost planning and construction. Who will fund something that the government prevents from producing near an optimal load?
Investors will look for better outcomes.
What John said. Nuclear needs to run nearly 100% of the time at full capacity. And even then it costs more than any other power plant tech (see the costs of newly build reactors). Thorium or molten salt reactors are basically fantasy technology. Nobody has build one yet, same as fusion reactors.
Germany is closing nuclear power plants because of safety concern. Even France is about to shut down part of their subsidized fleet.
France was about to shut down some of its nuclear estate while eco-fanatic Hulot was energy minister. He took his ball and went home (very publicly) when Mano said “non”.
France does not pay direct subsidies to EDF for nuclear generation. Whether, and if so what, indirect subsidies it pays is largely unknown since these transfers are intra-governmental and well hidden. Don’t pretend you know better, Seb, you’ll just make yourself look ridiculous. Again.
Flamanville is due to come on-stream in 2020 — allegedly, since it is already years late and massively over budget. For this reason EDF is forecasting that future nuclear build will need guaranteed pricing. This is mainly posturing since small modular plants are probably the more likely way forward in France. Also should sanity break out in Germany where nuclear has to be preferable to lignite!
The “safety concerns” exist solely in the minds of eco-idiots. The next time Bavaria suffers a tsunami we’ll have more to worry about than its effect on nuclear power stations!