Who said that good news is no news continues to do the crime reporter for newspapers in the province, but does not deal with the environment. In Europe, despite the many stupid still dedicated to the most rampant consumerism, for obvious psychological problems, now the air is definitely cleaner. almost certainly not have had the piccoli consumatori (il vasto pubblico, sempre molto lento ad adeguarsi), ma i grandi consumatori, cioè le industrie. Sono diminuite di molto le emissioni di anidride carbonica CO2 e altri gas serra. Tuttavia, precisa l'Agenzia, la riduzione del gas serra non sembra aver influito sulle emissioni delle polveri sulle città europee. L'inquinamento vero, grosso, resta tale e quale. Ma questo è un altro discorso. La riduzione insperata della CO2 è stata comunicata dall’Agenzia europea per l’ambiente con un ampio rapporto annuale, corredato di molte tavole scaricabili in formato zip. Interessante anche una sintetica tabella Comparison between EU member states (Italy is not a pretty picture).
causes? Also - but not only - the economic crisis, but much has helped the modernization of industries. The Report points out, for example, the massive replacement of coal with gas in Spain. The fact is that the carbon dioxide emitted in Europe was reduced by 17.3 percent (an aggregate that should be controlled better, dividing the country by country). We would point out that the starting date visible on the tables is 1990, while the ultimate goal of the Kyoto treaty is 2020.
right that the trend was in place for four years (a decided lowering of the emission rate began in 2003), but the magnitude the fall of last year was an unexpected shot. Again until two years ago, the Berlusconi government and Confindustria, lingered to argue with the European Union, and regarded with irony, a program from the Kingdom of Utopia, the objective of saving 20 percent of CO2 by back in 2020. Already, however, that goal appears within reach. It refers briefly
V. Guarlerzi Republic online on September 11 :
.
"A goal unrealistic, expensive and catastrophic for our economy. These were the lapidary definitions with slightly less than two years ago Berlusconi government and Confindustria boycotted approval 20-20-20 of the EU directive to reduce carbon emissions and increase energy efficiency and renewables. At the end of the European Commission did manage to establish themselves and now the latest data seems to corroborate the persistence of Brussels. The violent opposition campaign launched by the Prime Minister and the President of the Industrial Marcegaglia argued that cutting CO2 emissions by 20% compared to 1990 levels by 2020 was a titanic undertaking that would cost Italy a figure between 18 and 25 billion per year, equivalent to about 1, 14 of the GDP. Also would have triggered a flight of many energy-consuming products (primarily concrete and steel) to countries without environmental constraints.
"Today, according to certifies that the European Agency for the Environment, that goal is one step away from being reached even though the expiration of ten years and are still missing this bloodbath is hard to find tracks. Thanks of course also the undesired complicity of the recession, according to figures released by the EEA, in 2009 the EU-27 emissions fell to -17.3 from 1990. "Awesome - continues Republic - a decline during a single year with a - 6.9% compared to 2008. The Agency believes, however, that the crisis is just one of the reasons that led to the collapse in energy and an economic recovery would lead to reductions in emissions less visible, but hardly a turnaround trend. "It is true that the recession has contributed to relatively low emissions (especially in countries that have done almost nothing and have a strategy, such as Italy) - says Maria Grazia Midulla, head of WWF's climate and energy - but emissions European fall for several years, even before the crisis. "The economy will recover thanks to new industries to low-carbon, and not to the polluters of the past." "We hope - he adds - that Italy will seize this opportunity, also industrial, and do not always play the role of those who oppose the advancement of the objective to hide inaction at home: now that the new low carbon economy to take a leading role here too. "
"On the carpet there is in fact the proposal - backed by the first big France, Germany and UK but opposed by Rome - to bring the objective of the European Directive in 2020 to a 30% cut. An ambition that seems much more appropriate the excellent results achieved so far and that the WWF would like to be pushed up to 40%. "With reductions already 17.3% - said Midulla - the idea that Europe cuts emissions by only 20% for 2020 is ridiculous, would be to stop and wait for reducing emissions to 2020 folded arms. It should be - he concludes Gualerzi - raising the European target of 40%: this is in line with what is necessary to avoid dangerous climate change and would bring enormous benefits to the population and economy, providing a real boost to technological innovation. "
.gif){kind=spacer}
