European energy
The European Union (EU) revealed on January 23rd, 2008, how it plans to save the world. A mammoth1
climate-change plan spells out in detail how much pain each of its 27 members will have to bear if the EU is
to meet ambitious targets set by national leaders last March.
The aim is to cut greenhouse-gas emissions by 2020 by at least a fifth, and more than double to 20%4
the amount of energy produced from renewable sources such as wind or wave power. If fuel from plants proves
green enough, 10% of the fuel used in transport must come from biofuels by the same date. The new plan turns
these goals into national targets. Cue much grumbling, and no doubt months of horse-trading, as the European7
Commission's recommendations are turned into binding law by national governments and the European
Parliament.
Countries with greenery in their veins are being asked to take more of the burden than newer members.10
Sweden, for example, is being invited to meet 49% of its energy from renewables. At the other end, Malta gets
a renewables target of just 10%. It is a similar story when it comes to cutting greenhouse gases: by 2020,
Denmark must cut emissions by 20% from 2005 levels; Bulgaria and Romania, the newest members, may let13
their emissions rise by 20%.
EU leadership on climate change will not come cheap. The direct costs alone may be i60 billion ($87
billion), or about 0.5% of total EU GDP, by 2020, said the commission's president, José Manuel Barroso. But16
this is still presented as a bargain compared with the cost of inaction, which Mr. Barroso put at ten times as high.
Oh, and leading the world in the fight against climate change need not cost jobs, even in the most heavily
polluting branches of heavy industry. “We want to keep our industry in Europe”, insisted Mr. Barroso.19
Internet: <www.economist.com> (adapted).