I have updated and somewhat expanded the existing text, also I added subcategories:
The link to the pad takes me to a site that requires a login. Would it be possible to paste the text into the Discourse?
That is strange, the pad should be open.
Environment, Climate, Energy Preamble
Environment and climate do not stop at borders, energy also crosses borders in a common Europe. But so far way too many things are done just on a national level.
We want to ensure that future generations will have a base for a life in freedom and dignity. A healthy environment, biodiversity, sustainable use of resources, and equal access to energy, food, and water are fundamental requirements for this. To ensure a safe future we want a fast transition to a clean, circular economy that reduces its environmental impact to net zero.
Environment - Sustainability
The PIRATES support the aims and principles declared by the EU to safeguard our water, air, soil, natural environment and raw materials for the sake of our health and well-being. We also agree with doing this in a sustainable way by taking account of economic, social and regional aspects and by acting responsibly towards future generations and animal welfare.
The PIRATES appreciate the progress made thanks to EU environmental laws. However, while voluntary measures by potential polluters may work sometimes, they cannot be relied upon. Legal loopholes and weaknesses are being used to serve economic interests with the public ultimately having to pay for the environ- mental and health damages. We, therefore, seek more effective implementation and enforcement of the principles of precaution, prevention, ‘polluters paying’, as well as tackling problems at their sources. Sanctions in the case of non-compliance need to be strengthened. Environmental whistleblowers play a vital role for the benefit of society. They need to receive more support and compensation arrangements which match more realistically their professional and personal damages.
Environment - Science based rules
To increase transparency and reliability, we want to make the scientific approach mandatory in any environmental decision- making process. The public has the right to easy, timely and reliable access to environmental data and the decisions resulting from it. This information should also include methods of monitoring and investigations. The data should be available at
all times on governmental websites. Scientific advice and specifications which form the basis for administrative and legal decisions need to be sourced from independent experts. Participation in relevant meetings needs to be affordable. Furthermore, a diverse supply of independent scientists needs to be maintained. This can only be achieved by adequately funding aca- demic research into acute and emerging environmental problems rather than increasingly promoting research with links to industry.
Environment - Consistent and effective rules
Implementation of environmental laws has to focus on achieving the stated aims and not just generate additional records and registrations. Regulations must not require registrations in every single EU country, a central registration should be sufficient so as not to obstruct access to the common market for small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). The environmental impact of any associated bureaucracy has to be taken into account when deciding on the suitability of an approach.
Diverging national rules must be stopped. In a common market it is not acceptable to have different requirements for labeling or recycling products in each country.
Environment - Circular economy
Preserving and reusing resources by recycling is key to a sustainable economy. To ensure the long term availability of materials it is necessary to implement a circular economy based on the cradle-to-cradle principle. Export of waste to third countries must be effectively restricted to make sure materials are not lost or destroyed.
Climate
The Paris Agreement to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels has to be implemented. Even if it should become impossible to still meet the 1.5°C target we must strive for staying as close as possible above that limit.
Climate - No time to lose
The necessary concepts and technologies for achieving the climate protection goal have been developed and most are already in use, it is necessary to roll them out in large scale. The PIRATES demand the legal conditions for these technologies to be used.
All subsidies for activities impacting the climate negatively must be stopped, this includes financing or providing securities for financing climate averse projects abroad.
Climate - Stop carbon leakage
Emissions of climate gases for imported goods, (i.e. resulting from power generation at the production location) should be attributable to the importing countries. Imported goods must be taxed to account for carbon leakage, to stimulate more climate friendly production for goods imported to the EU.
Climate - Not just CO2
CO2 is the largest part of the climate averse emissions but other emissions have to be controlled too. Gases like fluorocarbons with high climate impact have to be reduced, replaced, contained. All emissions of climate active gases have to be controlled and reduced.
Climate - Reverse emissions
The climate gas levels in the atmosphere are already too high and must be produced. We want to stimulate projects that capture climate gases and use them as base materials for long lasting products.
Energy
We want to establish a sustainable and reliable energy infrastructure that offers as much participation and transparency as possible.
With the increasing role of renewables the number of privately owned electricity generation is exploding, former consumers become prosumers, cooperatives take the local supply in their own hands. The legal framework has to be adapted for this new situation where no longer only a few large companies make up the energymarket.
Our future development, including building a circular economy, depends on energy. We have to make sure that we have clean, reliable, and abundant energy available.
Energy - Becoming sustainable
The transition from fossil resources to sustainable and clean energy sources is necessary. Use of energy sources must not be in conflict with other environmental objectives and agriculture for food production. The technologies with the lowest impact must be prioritized and their construction supported.
Energy - Becoming resilient
Recent developments have shown the negative impact of being dependent on the import of energy resources in times of crisis. The EU has all the necessary technology and resources available domestically to build an energy system without critical dependencies on outside countries.
We want to set up an IPCEI (Important Project of Common European Interest) to build domestic production capacities for all components necessary for a transition to a green economy.
Energy - Becoming efficient
Energy use must be optimized to be efficient. For this goal we want to support energy efficient technologies and the transition of energy sectors to electricity as the primary energy form. By eliminating energy transformation steps a lot of losses are eliminated too. By electrifying transport, heating, and many industrial processes the required primary energy is dropping, though the need for electricity is going to rise.
Energy - As local as possible as central as necessary
The European electricity grid is great to compensate temporary fluctuation in demand and supply and prevent regions from getting into trouble in case of local supply problems. Though expanding the grid to move major parts of the energy for a whole country accross the continent is costly and produces bottlenecks that can lead to major failures.
Primarily production and demand should be matched locally as much as possible and the European grid should act as a safety net.
1 Like
Hi,
thank you for the draft! I have been working on an alternate version, will post it below. First, few comments:
Structure
a) it is imho better to have the methods in the preamble, not as chapters. Mixing goals and methods can get a bit tricky in drafting.
Content
a) scientific approach being mandatory is not really a valid a political statement I am afraid. We already do a lot of science based decisions, but science cant prescribe policy. Even the conservatives are shielding themselves with “science”
b) availability of data on governmnent websites at all times is a bit of a stretch abd probably not a priority. Auditable or open data should be enough. Also, it directly clashes with the goal of “less bureacracy”.
c) I am really not sure what is meant by “we have the technology here”. We have some of it, Europe is already rolling it out quite fast, what exactly are we going to do with that on Parliamentary level?
d) the f-gases have not only been diminishing quite fast, but the last weeks regulation is banning them fast. No sense to ban them more.
e) CBAM is already being implemented, not sure if Stop carbon leakage should be a goal
f) the resilience suggested is already built in the Net Zero Industry Act: which we have also criticised, because while dependence on China is obviously a bad idea, trying to achieve autarky in renewables is a very bad idea for both economy and ecology
Details
a) why are we protecting the raw materials? Seems a bit counter productive, for example setting up rules to protect lithium or other renewables critical materials would be really shooting our efforts in the same part of the program in the leg
Alternative draft based on the last programme
Environment, Climate and Energy
Principles
The public has the right to easy, timely, and reliable access to environmental data and the decisions resulting from it. This information should also include methods of monitoring and investigations. Scientific advice and specifications that form the basis for administrative and legal decisions need to be sourced from independent experts. Participation in relevant meetings needs to be affordable.
Long-term sustainability of data-based policy can be achieved only by adequately funding academic research into acute and emerging environmental problems, rather than increasingly promoting research with links to industry.
As parliamentarians, we should set up goals, rules, and limitations, but we should never try to predict or dictate the specific methods on how to reach these goals. All legislation, especially environmental legislation, should be goal-oriented and future-proof.
Environmental whistleblowers, both within and outside the European Union, play a vital role in benefiting our shared planet. They need to receive more support.
Environment
The Pirates support the aims and principles declared by the EU to safeguard our climate, natural environment, biodiversity, water (including oceans), air and soil for the sake of our health and well-being. We also agree to do this in a sustainable way by taking into account economic, social, and regional aspects and by acting responsibly towards future generations and animal welfare.
The Pirates appreciate the progress made thanks to EU environmental laws. However, the EU framework has become outdated and needs upgrades. Legal loopholes and weaknesses are being exploited to serve economic interests, with the public ultimately having to pay for the environmental and health damages.
We, therefore, seek more effective implementation and enforcement of the principles of precaution, prevention, ‘polluters paying’, active habitat restoration, as well as tackling problems at their sources. Sanctions in the case of non-compliance need to be strengthened. Costs of externalities need to be internalized where possible to achieve both a fair market and, even more importantly, a sustainable environment and preservation of our natural heritage. We also propose a robust re-evaluation of European policies and subsidies in terms of environmental impact, where long-standing policies like the Common Agricultural Policy need rethinking in the new context.
Climate
We have been successful in implementing our program in the last mandate. We have enshrined ambitious, yet realistic, climate goals. We have managed to implement the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), motivating our trade partners to cut down on the carbon intensity of their exports. We have been able to find a working compromise on internal combustion engines, gradually lowering European emissions on the path to net-zero. Europe now has working, socially sensitive, and efficient rules on building effectiveness.
However, much still needs to be done. We need to ensure that polluters really do pay. We need to stop harmful subsidies and indirect support of fossil fuels, including untaxed aviation fuels and other loopholes.
Biodiversity
The climate crisis is not the only emergency we are facing. Biodiversity loss is continuing fast, on an unprecedented scale and without adequate public attention.
We appreciate ambitious goals set on EU and UN levels (namely EU Nature Restoration Law , UN Ocean treaty and COP15 Montreal goals and targets) regarding species’ habitat protection and restoration, relevant funding, and prescribed measures.
A major task for both Pirates and the European institutions as a whole is to see through the specific, practical implementation of these goals. Pirates will be fervent in demanding transparency and compliance with the proposed measures, as well as fair and independent feedback on their effectiveness.
Energy
The recent crisis has shown us the need for a real, bold energy transition away from fossil fuels. Our goal is to promote a decentralized, market-driven, and carbon-effective energy sector. Only that model can deliver a sustained, long term benefits.
Sorry, but that is an extremely weak text. Basically it lists stuff that has been done and sets no goals. A program has to be forward looking.
When it comes to the environment, and we speak about the rules for products and
services, I think we have a problem with the harmonisation. That nothing can be done if not every country does it, that it is not possible to go ahead with environmental demands on products, that would create a pressure on companies to go ahead to satisfy the forerunner.
Like what happened in the USA, when California used its self determination and went ahead demanding catalytic cleaning for cars. This hurried up the global development to a reasonable extent because the companies wanted to sell cars in California, expecting others to follow:
Of course it is a good thing that countries with lower environmental standards become “lifted” with the harmonisations, but it is sad to sacrifice the ones that could go ahead in environmental adaption. I would prefer a system when the ones lagging would have to face the debates and arguments from the ones ahead within their own democratic systems. More of a “nudging” than a forced harmonisation.
In the same direction I wouldn’t say:
The PIRATES appreciate the progress made thanks to EU environmental laws
I mean the laws about environment that are outside the scope of products are OK, but for products I am not appreciative, see above
That is not what I meant.
We currently have diverging national rules for basically the same things. Actually in many cases under the roof of a European regulation that allows countries to implement their own stuff which sometimes results in very negative effects for the common market without added benefit for the environment.
A recent example are the diverging rules for packaging materials in several countries. France has implemented their own marking system, Austria requires a notarized local representative, and more countries are brewing up their own solutions that could likely require different packaging for different countries and a lot of bureaucracy.
Maybe we can start by adressing the problems in your draft, like, asking for things that are already done (or even a bit problematic). Or suggest the goals you want to attain.
However, that will be especially in environment a hard thing to do realistically. Adding new goals when we already have a very ambitious strategies that are not really being fulfilled even by the most prosperous countries is something we should be cautious about. Especially because we voted for a lot of those ambitious plans and turning around and saying “not enough” now might be a bit inconsistent.
2 Likes