12 September 1994

Doc. 7137

1403-8/9/94-1-E

OPINION

on the energy/environment interface

(Rapporteur: Mrs GRAENITZ,

Austria, Socialist Group)

      Since the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm in 1972, environmental protection has become one of the major concerns of our societies, which by and large have pursued their activities indiscriminately for decades, with serious and sometimes irreversible consequences for the planet's resources.

      The Rio Conference on Environment and Development in June 1992 highlighted the need to devise strategies for sustainable development of the planet, preserving its resources while ensuring satisfactory development for humanity as a whole and redressing the balance between north and south.

      Energy carries considerable weight in the framing of these strategies because it is essential to most human activities and is a major factor for development.

      However, energy-related activities are the prime cause of environmental problems. Their often devastating and sometimes irreversible effects are such that incorporating environmental policies into energy policies is considered a priority in most industrialised countries, which assert their intention of adopting the least environmentally damaging and cheapest possible energy policies reasonably soon (within 10-15 years). The same approach is expected to apply in developing countries, particularly through technology transfers.

      This obviously entails considering all the available possibilities and their various consequences. In some cases the aims of environmental protection and those of energy policy clearly converge: examples include improving energy efficiency, introducing a number of fuel substitutes and devising new, cleaner and more efficient techniques.

      The main feature of the current world energy situation is steadily increasing consumption in the industrialised countries and a marked shortage in developing countries, whose consumption will rise nonetheless. Fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas) are still the prime source of energy production. Nuclear energy remains stable (13% of overall production and 23% of electricity production).

      Disturbingly, this increase in consumption causes a corresponding increase in serious damage to the environment due, for instance, to emissions of greenhouse-effect gases, long-life nuclear waste, marine pollution by hydrocarbons and soil pollution.

      As things stand, the consumption of fossil fuel energy is such that it is already arousing anxiety over possible supply problems in the medium and even the short term. As for CO₂ emissions, most experts agree that they have already exceeded the planet's tolerance threshold.

      This raises the worrying issue of how to cope with the energy supply problems which are bound to arise in the near future, when the world population is much larger (population experts forecast that in little more than a century the current population of 5 thousand million will rise to about 10 thousand million), and the problems of environmental damage.

      Clearly, carrying on with the conventional policies that are now so widespread would lead firstly to the speedy depletion of reserves and secondly to irreversible environmental damage, including substantial global warming. Nor would all this necessarily be combined with a corresponding degree of development in developing countries...

      All this has been widely discussed, not only at the Rio Conference but in many other circles. The conclusion is always that "measures are urgently needed"... Unfortunately, these may be planned and even officially recognised, but governments are reluctant to apply them on a large scale because they normally call for extensive reorganisation of the energy sector and institutional changes.

      The general aim of a comprehensive energy strategy must be to ensure sustainable development through rational energy use without giving priority to unbridled energy production.

      A basic component of such an energy policy is undoubtedly energy efficiency, which must become the prime goal in the development of new technologies. Technological progress may realistically be expected to result in considerable gains in energy productivity, which should mean improved output in energy production and a drop in the amount of energy required to meet a given need. Substantial, long-term efforts are needed to achieve this.

      However, the increase in energy demand will persist, albeit curbed by improved efficiency; the aim should then be to satisfy this need while continuing to work towards sustainable development.

      This presupposes that the surplus demand should be met by recourse to renewable energy sources, which have two advantages: they make it unnecessary to dip into fossil fuel reserves and they do not add to CO₂ emissions.

      But, this depends on several conditions being met. At present renewable energy sources are often regarded as palliative, as marginal extra sources not destined to play a major part in world energy policy. Some even forecast that they will simply disappear.

      So if renewable energy sources are to be properly exploited — that is with due regard for economic productivity requirements — it is important to investigate their usefulness in terms of energy efficiency and their potential uses where they are produced. The solar panels used for domestic purposes in areas with plenty of sun, for example, are a profitable substitute for fossil fuel energy.

      It is important, therefore, to use renewable energy where its sources are located and where it meets a need. When both these requirements are met, it is also essential to aim for maximum energy efficiency, which of course depends on technological progress.

      This approach clearly demands far-reaching organisational changes in energy production: in most cases the decision to use renewable energy will be taken at a specified geographical level, that is to say where it is justified. This is obviously an application of the "think global, act local" principle, which will mean following the subsidiarity principle and dropping centralised management of energy production and supply.

      Developing the use of renewable energy and making it pay is crucial for the planet's sustainable development. The success of the operation depends on designing local, national and international progress which will have to be incorporated into a consistent overall framework. It will also be necessary for the appropriate choices to be made at all the requisite levels, by institutions which have both the authority and the competence required for proper management of energy efficiency and exploitation of renewable energy sources.

      It will be for the international community to define the overall framework, see to the consistency of the programmes carried out at all levels and provide for the skills essential to the success of this approach (for example training, research); the organisations working in this area will have to give these tasks priority — particularly because, as emphasised above, this new international energy policy entails major institutional changes which are bound to be facilitated by a concerted approach at international level.

      This change of direction in energy policy will obviously be at a cost — that of the investment needed to develop energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. Funding will be required for infrastructure investment, the development of research and training programmes and the changes to be made in current energy systems. Funds will therefore have to be released for the purpose.

      Here it must be pointed out that fossil fuels are sometimes buttressed by subsidies which artificially diminish the cost to the user and also boost energy consumption.

      Added to this is the fact that little or no account is taken of the environmental costs of energy sources as a whole, so that prices are underestimated.

      Social costs are a major factor in assessment of the various energy sources, as the report of the Committee on Science and Technology makes clear.

      Unfortunately, the tragic consequences of the Chernobyl disaster demonstrate the potential extent of the social costs engendered by some energy sources. But "ordinary", day-to-day pollution also engenders substantial social costs stemming from damage to human health, to the natural and built heritage and to the planet's resources.

      Introducing a sustainable energy policy must involve redressing the financial balance so that the appropriate choices can be made, since it will then be possible to compare the real costs of the different types of energy.

      The report of the Committee on Science and Technology also outlines the requirements for the success of the necessary tax measures. Tax levels must be chosen so as to avoid making the measure pointless (if the tax is too low) or producing adverse effects (if the tax is too high) liable to disrupt the market and endanger security of supply. Use of the tax revenue must be restricted to energy efficiency and investment in infrastructure and research.

      This opinion would not be complete without reference to the thorny and controversial issue of nuclear energy — probably the most controversial of all.

      Views differ widely on many aspects of the energy question. The use of coal is an example, with lively discussions and divergent but equally forceful pronouncements on the pressing need to drop coal or reduce its use to a minimum or — conversely — on the advantages of coal over other fossil fuels.

      The advocates of nuclear energy naturally adduce the most cogent argument, the fact that it causes no damage to the atmosphere and can therefore help to resolve the serious problem of global warming. As far as the risk is concerned, nuclear experts confidently predict the advent of small-size, high-security nuclear power plants before long, as well as equally safe technologies for radioactive waste storage.

      The fact remains, however, that as things stand — and this is not only confined to the disastrous situation in eastern Europe, which demands immediate action — nuclear power plants represent a real danger of irreversible major disasters.

      Only reactors with high intrinsic security, that is to say independent of human intervention and external supervision, might possibly be acceptable, provided that the risk of radioactive leaks is completely ruled out.

      For the present, waste still involves a risk, even if this can be reduced to a minimum. So far, however, no convincing solution appears to have been found to the problem, so it would be unreasonable to heighten the risks in order to bypass the harmful effects of fossil energy sources.

      As things stand, it seems reasonable to regard nuclear energy as a transition technology.

Conclusion

      The introduction of a new energy policy is one of the basic components of a strategy for sustainable development which will help preserve the planet's resources and therefore ensure its survival, while affording our societies equitable and satisfactory development.

      A wide range of scenarios have been suggested for the impact of energy on the environment, ranging from absolute nightmare to insane optimism.

      Despite these differing views, it seems to be agreed that action must be taken in the energy sector to secure supplies without depleting resources, while halting adverse effects on the environment.

      However, depending on the emphasis placed on the various aspects of the issue, the variables in the equation evolve differently. Factional controversies then drain energy and sometimes financial resources at the expense of action, which is more and more urgently needed.

      What is chiefly called for is a concerted approach at international level which will result in decision-making and action at different levels, designed first and foremost to:

      —im       prove energy efficiency;—

      —an       alyse the overall potential of renewable energies and, in reasonable time, finalise plans for exploiting them as efficiently as possible;—

      —al       locate sufficient funds to achieving these goals primarily in energy-hungry sectors such as transport and the building industry;—

      —re       move the institutional restrictions which hamper practical action on these points.As

      As the report of the Committee on Science and Technology rightly says, the question of the north/south energy-environment interface lies beyond the scope of this report. However, it should be stressed that a European energy policy must be part of a world strategy and must therefore help to promote the development-environment synergy which is essential to balanced development worldwide; so it must take account of these countries' needs and contribute to the technology transfers they need in order to reach a satisfactory level of development. In its energy options Europe must consequently bear in mind its responsibilities towards developing countries and countries in transition.

      Reporting committee: Committee on Science and Technology (Doc. 7122).

      Committee for opinion: Committee on the Environment, Regional Planning and Local Authorities.

      Reference to committee: Doc. 6389 and Reference No. 1957 of 28 June 1994.

      Opinion approved by the committee on 5 September 1994.

      Secretaries to the committee: Mrs Cagnolati-Staveris and Mr Sixto.