Green Economics - Playground games in Brussels

Many moons ago, while still at school I used to come up with ideas on how to make the world a better, richer happier place (particularly my little bit of it). My ideas, such as one which involved the Government providing a decent private income to a select group of people would have meant that I could be idly rich, but becuase I beleived myself to have exquistie taste I thought that the money I spent would trickle down in a splendid fashion, thus enriching those around me. (Indeed this one seems to have come true at least in part, but those loafers with 63 children and a house the size of Patagonia seem to lack the required taste).

The latest wheeze from the European Parliament's Environment Committee however puts my childish day-dreams into perspective.

The EU would be acting in its own economic interest if it raised its 2020 CO2 reduction target to 30%, says Parliament's Environment Committee in a resolution, approved on Tuesday,

OK, so far so counter intutive,

"If the EU is not a leader in climate protection, it will be a loser in economic growth. The EU needs to act in its own interest by stepping up to a 30% reductions target, and in favour of vulnerable developing countries by respecting its financial commitments towards them. Today's Environment Committee resolution points out that a global warming target below 1.5°C, not just below 2°C is needed", said Environment Committee chair Jo Leinen (S&D, DE).
30% less CO2 = more economic growth

The resolution states that setting a target to reduce CO2 emissions by 30% by 2020 (based on 1990 levels) is "in the interest of the future economic growth of the European Union". The EU position has hitherto linked a 30% target more closely to conditions (such as an international agreement being in place), than to the benefits that the EU can reap from steering its economy away from fossil fuels and towards green alternatives

Cannot see anything there that would produce growth.

Here is a report/opinion passed by the Committee this week,

2. Points out that, whilst the EU has a binding target of 20% renewable energy sources (RES) by 2020 and a directive in place which sets out the method of achieving this target, energy efficiency, which is a more cost-efficient instrument, is not subject to similar regulation. Considers, therefore, that it is appropriate that any future EU legislation should lead to the same level of investment in the area of energy efficiency as in RES; and calls on the Commission, by the end of 2010, to present a legislative proposal similar to the RES Directive which would introduce a binding target for the reduction of energy consumption by 25 %;

3. Points out that long-term targets are also of crucial importance to economic actors, and therefore proposes long-term targets for reducing energy consumption by 42% by 2030, and by 75% by 2050;

This is what is driving those 10:10 thugs, this level of economic lunacy has the stamp of EU fanaticism.