National plan aims for reduction of greenhouse emissions by 24% compared to 2005 levels.
The plan sets a goal for a 24% reduction in greenhouse emissions in Cyprus by 2030, compared to 2005 levels (excluding emissions from electricity, cement and pottery / brickworks), when the EU target is 40% by 2030.
This is scandalous. The EU targets a 40% reduction by 2030 from all sources. Cyprus targets an estimated 12% reduction by 2030.
Why? When the quote says an already meagre 24% reduction? Because electricity, cement and pottery / brickworks are excluded and these account for a minimum guestimated 50% of the total. So, the official 24% reduction is, in effect, a downright lie because it comes essentially only from transport and heating.
I guess he means the emissions from electricity, cement manufacture, brick manufacturing..
we all know that EAC is still burning heavy fuel oil to power its generators. It was supposed to be installing gas fired generators some years ago..
1. EU suggests CO2 emissions be reduced to 40% by 2030
2. CY suggests CO2 emissions be reduced to 25% by 2030
3, This 25% reduction doesn't include emissions from power stations, cement works etc.
4. Emissions from power stations, cement works etc. are ~half of total emissions
5. Therefore, the pretended 25% reduction amounts to only ~half or ~12% of total if emissions from power stations, cement works etc. are included
6. CY is cocking a snook at the EU with a target reduction of only ~12% instead of the EU's 40%
Devil wrote: ↑Sun Jan 27, 2019 10:26 am
OK, I'll try and explain
1. EU suggests CO2 emissions be reduced to 40% by 2030
2. CY suggests CO2 emissions be reduced to 25% by 2030
3, This 25% reduction doesn't include emissions from power stations, cement works etc.
4. Emissions from power stations, cement works etc. are ~half of total emissions
5. Therefore, the pretended 25% reduction amounts to only ~half or ~12% of total if emissions from power stations, cement works etc. are included
6. CY is cocking a snook at the EU with a target reduction of only ~12% instead of the EU's 40%
It is not that difficult to understand if one is interested in environmental issues, but unfortunately there are not many concerned... yet
Thank you for the clarification Devil.
Happy in Cyprus wrote: ↑Sun Jan 27, 2019 6:47 pm
Bit like Italy, eh Sean?
There was in interesting article in the Sunday Mail today. Would be interested to know what Devil's take on it is. Though it's a lengthy article, I hope Dominic won't mind me posting it in full:
I gave a response on the CM 'forum'; 'Devil's take':
I have rarely had the opportunity to read such a tirade of unmitigated nonsense as this article by Elias Hazou offers. I refuse to contest each of the errors, simply because I do not have enough time and I doubt whether CM would publish such a long response.
In a former life, I worked for the United Nations Environment Programme over decades and have even been awarded some prestigious international prizes for my work. I say simply to Elias Hazou, get your feet on the ground and stop believing the errant idiocies that you try to propagate.
