EPP Group denounce utopian approach to energy savings

Setting up unrealistic targets will brutally affect the EU's main climate policy tool - the Emissions Trading System (ETS)

“The effective use of energy is one of the best ways to save energy and meet the ambitions of the Energy Union in Europe. We regard an energy savings goal of 30 percent by 2030 as ambitious, but feasible if subject to reviews. We can join in on the target,” says Markus Pieper MEP, EPP Group responsible for the Energy Efficiency Directive, which will be voted in the Industry, Research and Energy Committee (ITRE) tomorrow.

He underlines that the EPP Group is in line with the responsible and balanced approach taken by both the Council and the European Commission.

“The EPP Group has balance and realism as its trademark. We have showed willingness to compromise and for instance offered them a binding target corridor between 30 and 35 percent, which was to be evaluated at regular intervals This has been rejected, as well as an EPP Group request for Parliament's own Impact Assessment,” says Markus Pieper.

Unfortunately, the S&D Group, the Greens and parts of the ALDE Group have fallen prey to the populist games played by extremist NGO lobbying organisations. By setting up fantasy goals of 40 percent savings, they have lost the connection to reality - to the detriment of both citizens and businesses.

“Some groups have not moved a millimetre away from the utopian binding 40 percent savings target, despite the fact that such a target would brutally effect the ETS trading system and - according to the impact assessment from the Commission - would destroy the incentives for energy transition,” Markus Pieper says.

Markus Pieper also lashes out against the complete removal of flexibility for Member States in important aspects of the file (Article 7). And the demands for renovation requirements in buildings will not fly.

“The unrealistic renovation requirements for cities and communities hint strongly at unilateral lobbying by certain economic sectors and NGOs. But the Parliament should not bow down.”

"It is imperative that we stick to the original proposals which offer flexibility for the Member States. It is important, for instance, to allow for taking into account alternative measures, such as the savings effects of subsidy programmes or tax credits, in the achievement of the targets,” Markus Pieper says.

Moreover, the EPP Group is in favour of leaving it up to EU countries whether or not to include the already heavily-regulated transport and ETS sectors (energy-intensive industry) in the calculations.