resolution booklet of the hague 2013

The Hague 20132nd International Forum of EYP The Netherlands

Young Energy for Europe

RESOLUTION BOOKLET

2



TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROCEDURE FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

PROGRAMME OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, PUBLIC HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY I I

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS I

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND ENERGY I I

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON CLIMATE CHANGE

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND ENERGY I I I

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND ENERGY I

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS I I

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, PUBLIC HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY I

3



PROCEDURE FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

General rules

Procedure of the General Assembly

The wish to speak is indicated by raising the committee placard. The authority of the board is

absolute.

Procedure and time settings

– Presenting of the motion for the resolution by the board

– Reading of the operative clauses

– 3 minutes to defend the motion for the resolution

– 5 minutes to attack the motion for the resolution

– 2 minutes to respond to the attack speech

– General debate

– 5 minutes to sum-up the debate

– Voting procedure

– Announcing the votes

Point of personal privilege

Request for a delegate to repeat a point that was inaudible.

Point of order

A delegate feels that the board has not properly followed parliamentary procedure. The

placard is used by chairpersons after a request from a delegate.

Right to Respond

Once per debate, each committee may use the “Right to Respond” sign. Should a committee

member raise the committee placard and the “Right to Respond” sign, the board recognises

them immediately. The “Right to Respond” sign is used to contribute to the point made

directly beforehand.

4



PROGRAMME OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Thursday 7th of November

Opening of General Assembly

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety 2

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Foreign Affairs 1

Coffee Break

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy 2

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Climate Change


Friday 8th of November


Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

Coffee Break

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Foreign Affairs 2

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Development

Lunch

Motion for a Resolution by the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety 1

Closing Ceremony

5



MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, PUBLIC

HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY II

Is fracking the future? With shale gas posing an attractive option for reliable domestic energy production, what stance should the EU take on

the matter taking into account both potential implications for environmental integrity and implications for the development of carbon-free

technologies?

Submitted by: Markos Christou (CY), Víctor Escuder (ES), Stanisław Gackowski (CZ), Hanna

Jensen-Torp (SE), Yagmur Kokbudak (TR), Ursula Marshall (UK), Emilia Ovaska (FI), Riccardo

Terribili (IT), Annika Werly (DE), Nora Willhelm (Chairperson, CH)

The European Youth Parliament,

A. Noting that global oil and gas reserves are steadily declining,

B. Taking into consideration that the European Union (EU) member states currently

import 55% of their total energy supply and 64% of the all natural gas of which 34%

comes from Russia,

C. Convinced that relying on imported energy and thus having no control over the

production process is problematic,

D. Bearing in mind the presence of significant shale gas reserves in Europe,

E. Having considered that due to the increase in energy demand, the extraction of shale

gas might not reduce the import dependency of the EU, however it might offset the

decline in conventional European natural gas production foreseen for the post-2020

period ,

F. Bearing in mind the established Roadmap 2050 , especially regarding:

a. increased domestic production of energy,

b. diversification of the sources of energy,

c. reducing GHG emissions by 80%,

d. the increase of the share of renewable energy sources in the EU energy grid,

G. Deeply concerned that current renewable energy sources and solutions are not able

to provide enough affordable energy to suffice to Europe’s needs,

6



H. Observing that emissions from shale gas are significantly lower than the ones

resulting from the use of coal,

I. Aware of the fact that the aforementioned benefit is reduced in case of long-distance

transport of both water and gas by trucks running on fossil fuels,

J. Realising that, due to environmental regulations, geological and geographical aspects,

shale gas extraction in the EU cannot take place on the same scale as in the United

States,

K. Recognising that further research on the effects on the environment and public health

is needed in order to establish the risks related to fracking with certainty,

L. Alarmed by the fact that the current fracking process uses a large quantity of non-

recoverable fresh water, which can only be filtered through a laborious and costly

process which requires a significant investment in infrastructure,

M. Further noting that without the appropriate legislation, the fracking process has the

potential to cause:

a. water contamination due to leaks of chemicals present in the fracking fluid

which might cause respiratory diseases and intoxication,

b. soil contamination, which might be a threat to vegetation, animals and public

health,

c. atmospheric pollution through fugitive emissions of methane ,

N. Fully aware of the fact that the current fracking process lacks efficiency, especially in

the areas of:

a. transport, stemming from the large use of fossil fuels,

b. storage of polluted water,

c. use of water,

O. Realising the lack of European legislation defining minimal safety standards as well

as of organisations responsible for monitoring the fracking process,

P. Keeping in mind the opposition to fracking and lack of understanding of the process,

Q. Welcoming the amendments to the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive

proposed by the European Commission (EC),

1. Declares that the extraction of shale gas would constitute a reliable source of

domestic energy, but only after implementing effective new legislation on the basis of

a further assessment of the risks ensuring the safety of the procedure;

2. Calls upon the EC to initiate the aforementioned legislative proposals including the

7



following obligations to any company performing hydraulic fracturing:

a. appropriate pressure in pipes to avoid pollution and increase efficiency,

b. optimise well spacing for efficient recovery of natural gas,

c. underlining of drill pads with a synthetic liner protected by decking

material to limit possibility of leakages,

d. complete filtering of all water used in the process of fracking,

e. ensure micro-seismic and baseline monitoring in order to detect potential

geological hazards and record data,

f. drilling of multiple horizontal wells from a single pad to increase efficiency

of gas production and reduce costs of infrastructure,

g. periodic reporting of activity,

h. proximity to suitable connections for the transport of gas in order to

reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and maximise efficiency;

3. Further recommends the introduction of rules directed at reducing damage due to

potential earthquakes by:

a. appropriately situated wells to avoid areas with known seismic activity,

b. requiring that houses built within a certain critical perimeter of existing

fracking sites to be built according to specific architectural stability

standards,

c. construction permits for new wells should be issued only if they are

situated outside the critical perimeter;

4. Endorses the establishment of an independent monitoring body as part of the

proposed regulation consisting of:

a. National government representatives,

b. EU representatives,

c. experts on fracking,

d. NGOs focusing on public health or the environment;

5. Further proclaims that the tasks and duties of this monitoring body should include:

8



a. ensuring that the materials and infrastructure are thoroughly checked to

guarantee high quality and safety,

b. verifying that safety requirements established in the aforementioned

regulation are met,

c. guaranteeing the transparency of fracking operations,

d. performing periodic environmental impacts assessments for different

types of shale gas exploration and extraction;

6. Encourages the Technical Working Group (WG) on Environmental Aspects of

Unconventional Fossil Fuels to conduct further research into:

a. alternative fracking fluids which use less hazardous chemicals,

b. recycling of water in the fracking process,

c. large scale closed loop systems to ensure that water is neither

contaminated nor lost through the process,

d. the use of different materials and methods which reduce the emission of

methane into the atmosphere and soil;

7. Urges the Council of the European Union to accept the amendments to the EIA

Directive proposed by the European Commission;

8. Emphasises the responsibility of the EU to respond to public concerns about

hydraulic fracturing as carried out by:

a. continuing to publish reports about potential risks and benefits of fracking,

b. directly releasing information concerning any fracking-related incident,

c. the establishment of a neutral online platform where all reports and data

concerned fracking, including a summary of the key facts and figures, are

available to the general public,

d. raising awareness about the risks and benefits of this procedure using

various methods such as the media channels of the EU and social

networks.

9



MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS I

Dependence or interdependence: with Russia as the EU’s biggest

importer of oil, uranium and coal, how should the EU balance its role as an advocate of democracy whilst ensuring the safety of its energy

supply from Russia?

Submitted by: Max Schöchl (AT), Nora Ammann (CH), Konstantinos Araouzos (CY), Sep de

Baan (NL), Karina van den Berg (NL), David Biasi (DE), Esther Duerinck (BE), Mia Georgis

(UK), Solja Harjusalmi (FI), Lola Hourihane (IE), Zuzanna Janiszewska (PL), Ali Kahyaoğlu

(TR), Bogdan Kozub (UA), Federico Loreti (IT), Karim Skandrani (CZ), Hugo Dürr

(Chairperson, SE)


A. Condemning the human rights violations in Russia with special regard to oppression

of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, recent anti-gay legislation and

regression of democracy,

B. Noting with regret that there is no common stance taken by European Union (EU)

member states on energy trade relations with Russia,

C. Realising that there is a lack of trust between the EU and Russia,

D. Taking note of the different political cultures of the EU and Russia,

E. Fully aware of the fact that Europe imports 35% of its gas and 34% of its oil from

Russia and that 70% of Russian energy exports go to Europe leading to

interdependence between the two actors,

F. Deeply conscious of the fact that European competitiveness is directly influenced by

the energy prices and reliability of trade partners such as Russia,

10



G. Recognising the Russian monopoly on international energy exports1 and the lack of

an available single alternative supplier with the same capacity as Russia on the

international stage,

H. Bearing in mind that European energy demand is expected to grow from currently

485 billion cubic meters of gas used annually to 585 billion cubic meters annually by

2023,

I. Alarmed by Russia’s non-compliance with World Trade Organisation (WTO)

regulations such as monopole pricing,

J. Believing that Russian social, environmental and political development is progressing

unsustainably,

K. Recognising the need for short-term solutions to the energy dependency in Europe

whilst bearing in mind that short-term solutions are not always sustainable,

L. Aware of the need for long-term solutions to decease the energy dependency in

Europe whilst recognising that establishing these solutions is expensive and time

consuming,

M. Deeply disturbed by the fact that Russia is currently willing and able to use its energy

supply as a political tool;

1. Calls for the European Commission (EC) to set common goals regarding EU-Russian

diplomatic relations;

2. Endorses the financial and political support of Russian NGOs committed to the

promotion of democracy, such as the Moscow-Helsinki Group and the Association of

Regional Human Rights Organisation;

3. Encourages the work of the Human Rights Working Group, set up by the European

External Actions Service (EEAS), to ensure a dialogue between the EU and Russia;

4. Calls upon the EEAS to establish an EU embassy in Russia;

5. Approves the establishment of a platform of exchange, building on the EU-Russia

Energy Dialogue, in order to facilitate discussions on developing future energy

possibilities;

1 Gazprom is the world’s largest exporter of gas.

11



6. Recommends that the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) is updated on

the conditions of mutual respect for human rights and trading regulations set up by

the WTO;

7. Requests the European Council to set the direction to gradually decreases the EU’s

dependency on Russian energy by diversifying suppliers and resources through:

a. increasing shale gas imports from the USA to 16 billion cubic meters by the

end of 2017,

b. completing the construction of the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) and the

Trans-Anatolian Pipeline (TANAP) by 2018 to supply Europe with 31 billion

cubic meters of natural gas by 2026,

c. completing the construction of the Trans-Caspian Pipeline and its connection

to TANAP to facilitate the aforementioned supply by 2018,

d. supporting the completion of the Adriatic gas corridor by 2018 to supply

Europe with 15 billion cubic meters of gas;

8. Emphasises that future energy trade partners should comply with a common EU

standard on human rights development;

9. Proclaims that Member States with greater dependence on Russian energy receive

proportionally greater supplies from new resources;

10. Further proclaims that the EC establishes a project between researchers and

universities to focus on research and development in the fields of renewable energy

generation, energy conservation, and areas where gas can replace oil;

11. Calls the EC to set a directive instructing Member States to improve generation

facilities for renewable energy to supply electricity to a newly constructed continental

grid by fulfilling at least 25% of their potential for renewable energy generation by

2050.

12



MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND

ENERGY II

New fuel for the economy: with the economic crisis slowly behind us, is there a chance for Member States to increase their spending in

Research and Development? Should the EU focus more on research and development, especially when it comes to safeguarding sustainable

energy supplies?

Submitted by: Francesco Armillei (IT), Chibuye Changwe (NL), Inés Hidalgo (ES), Liliya Illyushko (UA), Ann Mirianashvili (GE), Leah Robert Packer (UK), Kamiel Peeters (BE), Sofie Pedersen (DK), Kaisa Peiponen (FI), Cecilia Puiatti (CH), Lisa Smith (IE), Tereza Voženílková (CZ), Bernet Meijer (Chairperson, NL)


A. Bearing in mind that Member States have different energy resource allocations,

B. Noting with regret that Member States have not reached the target set in the Europe

2020 Strategy of spending 3% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP)2 on Research

and Development (R&D),

C. Aware that R&D projects in renewable energy are dependent on subsidies from

national governments,

D. Alarmed by the length of time it takes the EU to process applications for financial

funding of R&D,

E. Observing the reluctance of individuals, companies and NGOs3 to invest in R&D due

to the current economic climate,

F. Emphasising the need for all Member States to introduce more sustainable energy

infrastructure so as to phase out fossil fuel usage,

2 GDP is the market value of all officially recognised final goods and services produced within a country in a given period of time. 3 Non-governmental organisations are legally constituted corporations created by natural or legal people that operate independently from any form of government.

13



G. Deeply concerned that certain energy companies hold a monopolistic position in their

respective markets,

H. Noting that the absence of short term returns to investment in R&D acts as a

disincentive to prospective investors,

I. Realising that Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) do not have sufficient means,

such as human resources, to participate in public-private partnerships (PPPs)4;

12. Proclaims the prerogative of Member States’ to decide which renewable energy

resource to produce;

13. Strongly encourages the Member States to reach the target of spending 3% of their

GDP on R&D through public sector research institutions;

14. Designates EU subsidies for R&D in renewable energies in the European private

sector with the financial support of programs such as Horizon 2020;

15. Requests national governments to encourage individuals, companies and NGOs to

invest in R&D through the use of tax incentives;

16. Strongly recommends Member States to allocate a fixed percentage of their GDP to

the development of a pan EU smart energy grid;

17. Urges Member States to set a maximum price for exported energy between EU

countries;

18. Recommends the European Commission to create EU guidelines for R&D in

renewable energies for the period of 2020-2030;

19. Further recommends the EU to finance professional assessments of SMEs

development and implementation of new technologies so as to allow for their

participation in PPPs.

4 PPP involves a contract between a public sector authority and a private party, in which the private party provides a public service or project and assumes substantial financial, technical and operational risk in the project.

14




Keeping up with Kyoto: With growing criticism on the EU’s Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) and the weakened European energy market, is the ETS a mere distraction to fighting climate change as some claim?

What is the future of the ETS?

Submitted by: Marilena Antoniou (CY), Katie Bailey (IE), Loïc Blondeel (BE), Gurhan Camgoz

(TR), Cordelia Drew (UK), Alexandra Epstein (CH), Zurab Giorgobiani (GE), Victor Ryott

Hööglund (SE), Heinrich Lanzdorf (AT), Daniel Míka (CZ), Zoë Niezen (NL), Martyna

Ostapczuk (PL), Tuuli Toivonen (FI), Christian Browne (Chairperson, UK)


A. Deeply concerned by the predicted failure of six out of 28 Member States in keeping

to their 2020 Kyoto targets5

B. Disappointed that the Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) is not helping ETS members

to significantly reduce their CO2 emissions

C. Troubled by the lack of trust in the European Energy Market (EEM) and unpredictable

nature of European Union Allowance (EUA) prices6, as demonstrated in Phase I of

the ETS7

D. Alarmed by the failures of the ETS to change the habits of Member States,

consequently lowering the sense of urgency regarding the issue of climate change,

resulting in:

a. profiteering by states,

b. inefficient factories which cause pollution,

5 International agreement linked to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which commits signatories to set internationally binding emission reduction targets, coming into effect in 2005. 6 EUAs refer to the carbon credits traded under the ETS, one EUA is equivalent to one tonne of CO2. 7 Phase I was the first phase of the ETS which ran from 2005 to 2007, and has been regarded as a learning phase.

15



E. Aware that the EU possesses limited power to enforce adequate fines on ETS

members which can coerce them into meeting their Kyoto targets.

F. Believing that an expansion of co-operation between ETS members, such as

Australia and China, will stabilise the EEM as well as deter large EUA consumers due

to an increase in EUA price caused by increased demand.

G. Keeping in mind that the energy mix8 of a particular country is dependent of the

country’s environmental and geographical conditions,

H. Convinced that the State should not intervene directly in the energy consumption

pattern of individual citizens;

1. Recommends the EU Environmental Commission reviews ETS targets with the aim

of increasing the annual reduction in the overall emissions cap;

2. Demands that ETS members be required to invest a percentage of their profits, made

from auctioning surplus EUA, into alternative energy technology initiatives, such as

the United Nations Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from

Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD);

3. Suggests the introduction of EU Environmental Commission advisors on the ETS,

which can assist industries continuously failing to reduce emissions to ensure they

meet their reduction targets;

4. Calls for the extension of the EU Environmental Commission competence to:

a. decide the allocation of National Emission Caps;

b. increase the responsibility of Member States to ensure they meet their target;

c. reduce the supply of EUAs, thus combating over-allocation;

d. supervise and ensure the stability of the EEM;

5. Requests the European Commission support Member States in their preparation for

Phase IV.

6. Advises a review by the EU Environmental Commission on the current fining system

to ensure substantial action, in the future, can be taken to ensure ETS members

meet their targets;

16



7. Proposes increased communication between either existing non-European ETS

members or those interested in adopting the scheme, and subsequently hopes for

increased negotiation to allow more states to enter the EEM.

17




Factsheet

Ad. IC F.:

Phase III

For Phase III (2013–20), the European Commission has proposed a number of changes, including:

• the setting of an overall EU cap, with allowances then allocated to EU members; • tighter limits on the use of offsets; • limiting banking of allowances between Phases II and III; • and a move from allowances to auctioning.

Phase IV

The fourth trading period may possibly run from 2021 to 2028. Preliminary suggestions for improving the ETS in this period have included:

• increasing the rate at which the overall emissions cap is reduced, from 1.74% each year;

• extending coverage to other sectors, such as household fuel consumption; • limiting access to international credits; • introducing a price floor for allowance auctions.

18




ENERGY III

A renewable power plant in every home? In order to achieve the EU’s ambitious goals in the field of future energy production, what strategy

should Europe adopt when developing its future energy grid?

Submitted by: Giz Belkaya (TR), Núria Danés (ES), Phoebe Dodds (UK), Mykhailo Komarov

(UA), Ella-Maria Palkoaho (FI), Sylwia Pieńkowska (PL), Katrine Panch Schaldemann Jensen

(DK), Ciaran Schutten (IE), Tomas Turner (CH), Veronika Wilhelmová (CZ), Jan Nedvídek

(Vice-President, CZ)


A. Recognising that the traditional energy production methods do not fully meet the

criteria of reliability, sustainability and affordability, B. Recognising the importance of public awareness in the field of energy production and

use and its influence over energy consumption patterns,

C. Aware of the fact that microgeneration technology cannot on its own satisfy the high

demands of the energy market,

D. Fully aware of the fluctuations caused by the nature of microgeneration technologies9,

E. Bearing in mind that the large-scale use of microgeneration increases demand for

energy storage capacity,

F. Noting with regret the insufficient technological knowledge currently available in the

fields of nuclear fusion10, renewable energy and storage of energy,

G. Keeping in mind that the energy mix11 of a particular country is dependent of the

country’s environmental and geographical conditions,

9 Small-scale generation of heat and electric energy by small communities to meet their own energy needs using photovoltaic panels, heat pumps, small wind turbines and similar devices. 10 Nuclear fusion is a reaction in which two or more atomic nuclei collide at very high speed and join to form a new type of atomic nucleus causing matter to be converted into energy. 11 Energy mix refers to the distribution of the consumption of various energy sources (e.g. crude oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear energy and renewable energy) within a given geographical area.

19



H. Convinced that the State should not intervene directly in the energy consumption

pattern of individual citizens;

1. Calls upon the European Union (EU) member states and private companies to further

invest in the research of energy storage technologies, such as Pumped-storage

Hydroelectricity Systems12 or Hydrogen Storage Facilities13;

2. Encourages European national and regional governments to support small local

communities in purchasing micro generators in order to increase the self-sufficiency

for energy of those communities;

3. Urges Member States’ political institutions to cooperate with private businesses in

raising public awareness of the advantages of Demand Side Management (DSM)14

through traditional and social media campaigns;

4. Requests the introduction of a scheme of financial subsidies for the purchase of

electric and electronic devices equipped with DSM technologies to be organised by

the Member States with financial contribution from the EU funds;

5. Recommends that Member States keep using the current energy production methods

for infrastructure of national importance until more efficient methods of micro

generation and renewable energy generation are developed;

6. Requests more EU funds to be directed into the research of:

a. increasing the efficiency of the already existing renewable energy sources,

b. improving the sustainability of long-term storage of nuclear waste,

c. developing nuclear fusion.

12 An energy storage method based on potential energy of water, pumped from a lower elevation reservoir to a higher one. 13 An energy storage method which uses the different chemical and physical qualities of different forms of hydrogen molecules. 14 Demand Side Management (DSM) is the modification of consumer demand for energy through various methods such as financial incentives and education. The goal of Demand Side Management is to encourage the consumer to use less energy during peak hours, or to move the time of energy use to off-peak times such as nighttime and weekends.

20




ENERGY I

Filling the policy gap between the Europe 2020 Targets and the Energy Roadmap 2050: With a new climate and energy framework on the horizon, what long-term policies and binding targets should the

European Union introduce with a view to ensuring a secure, competitive and low-carbon energy sector beyond 2020?

Submitted by: Sara Alfivef (HR), Ahmet Buğra Keleş (TR), Claudia Dalby (IE), Felix Fricke

(DE), Robyn Hanssens (BE), Iida Kalliokoski (FI), Laura Lebrun (FR), Benedetta Miccioni (IT),

Laura Nash (UK), Dominik Němec (CZ), Alejandro Newsome (ES), Niall Murphy (Vice-

President, IE)


A. Recognising the fact that high levels of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions leads to

global warming,

B. Taking into account the existence of a policy gap between the Europe 2020 Targets15

and the Energy Roadmap 205016,

C. Aware of the lack of legal obligations on Member States to fulfil the targets specified

in the Energy Roadmap,

D. Bearing in mind the unreliability of certain renewable energy sources due to their

reliance on weather cycles,

E. Regrets that European governments are inclined towards short term energy policies,

F. Observes the different viewpoints of Member States on the issue of nuclear power,

G. Deeply concerned that there has been insufficient research into renewable energy

resources,

H. Noting with regret the lack of competition within the energy production market;

15 A document which lays out CO2 emission reduction targets for the Member States. 16 A commission white paper which aims to reduce CO2 emission by 80-95% of 1990 levels by 2050 and outlines five alternative strategies for achieving this goal.

21



1. Calls for the adoption of the aims laid out in the Energy Roadmap 2050 which

advocated a 40% reduction of GHG emissions in comparison with the 1990

emissions level by 2030 and an 85% reduction by 2050;

2. Endorses the use of the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) for European energy

suppliers with the gradual reduction of available permits for GHG emissions in

accordance with the aforementioned GHG reduction goals;

3. Proclaims that the high energy efficiency option as outlined in the 2050 Energy

Roadmap will also be an essential element in achieving the 2050 goals;

4. Requests the European Commission (EC) to encourage more research and

development in the areas of:

a. renewable sources of energy,

b. nuclear waste and energy safety;

5. Strongly condemns an increase in the production of nuclear energy as long as

concerns about nuclear safety and waste have not been alleviated;

6. Encourages all Member States to emphasise energy, industry and environmental

challenges through their national education systems;

7. Supports the further development of a pan-EU energy smart grid coordinated by the

EC.

22




ENERGY I

Factsheet Energy Roadmap 2050:

- Suggests that the EU reduce CO2 emissions levels by 80-95% against 1990 levels.

- Lays out seven alternative options which can be pursued by policymakers over the coming

years (two where the EU decides not to reduce emissions by 80-95% and five where they do).

- Proposes the following five different decarbonisation strategies:

1. High energy efficiency; reduce the amount of energy consumed by

retrofitting buildings and upgrading public facilities, homes and making

utilities’ more energy efficient.

2. Technologies compete openly; the option believes that the market will find

sufficient incentive to develop new technologies which would reduce

emissions, once they have been incentivised to do so by government.

3. Renewable energy sources; sets a high focus on altering Europe’s sources

of energy so that the focus of the EU’s energy development strategy would

be on incentivising the use of renewable energies.

4. Technologies compete with restrictions on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS); this approach is similar to option two however restricts research in the

area of CCS. This option gives nuclear a more central role.

5. Technologies compete with restrictions on nuclear; this approach is

similar to option 4 except that this time there would be a greater emphasis on

CCS and restrictions on nuclear.

- It is important to note that the Commission accepts alternative combinations that could also

be viable; many of the options listed within the Roadmap are not mutually exclusive and

certain alternative energy combinations are viable.

23



MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE

AND HOME AFFAIRS

“Not In My Back Yard”? With the ever-growing need to invest in new energy infrastructure, how should we balance private property rights

with projects aimed at building new energy sources? What role should citizens play in the future of the EU’s energy infrastructure?

Submitted by: Roger Alabau (ES), Elisabeth Alexander (DE), Antoine Clerc (FR), Georgios

Hamatsos (CY), Amanda Urban Jensen (DK), Merel Jordens (BE), Tamta Jugashvili (GE),

Alexis Marin (CH), Anna Paliga (PL), Matilda Rosenlew (SE), Filippo Venturi (IT), Aoife

Watson (IE), Clemens Rawert (Chairperson, DE)


A. Realising that the conflict between the interest of private property owners and the

public interest of ensuring access to energy sources as the focal point to this topic,

B. Acknowledging that the aforementioned conflict exists as a result of the inevitability of

violating private property rights through the development of new energy infrastructure,

and that the level of such violation is increased through the expansion of renewable

energy sources,

C. Deeply alarmed by the lack of pan-European legislation regarding the definitions of

the terms ‘public interest’ and ‘fair compensation’, as well as the way in which

expropriation should be handled,

D. Appreciating the existence of Article 1717 of the European Convention on Human

Rights and taking into account article 34518 of the Treaty of the functioning of the

European Union,

17 Article 17:„Everyone hast he right to own,use,dispose of and bequeath his or her lawfully acquired posessions. No one may be deprived of his or her posessions, except in the public interest and in the cases and under the conditions provided for by law, subject to fair compensation being paid in good time for their loss. The use of property may be regulated by law in so far as is necessary for the general interest.“ 18 Article 345: “The treaties shall in no way prjeudice the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership.“

24



E. Noting with regret the lack of possibilities for affected citizens to participate in the

geographical planning of energy infrastructure projects,

F. Keeping in mind the increase of “Not in My Backyard” (NIMBY) protests are partially

caused by the lack of communication between affected parties,

G. Taking into account the individuals’ desire for peaceful enjoyment of private

possessions may oppose long term goals in environmental and economic policy,

H. Observing the European Court of Human Rights to have far reaching powers as the

highest juridical authority with the right to rule on property matters in the EU and thus

being the last court which a citizen may appeal to in cases of felt violation of property

rights,

I. Recognising Article 17 of the European Convention of Human Rights as granting only

fundamental property rights while Member States can rule on more specific matters

concerning property,

J. Realising property may have sentimental value to affected parties that may be difficult

to determine,

K. Viewing with appreciation the concept of co-ownership19 which has been working

successfully in Denmark and Germany,

L. Believing that one advantage of the co-ownership concept is the allowance of citizens

to have an interest in the long-term success of aforementioned projects,

M. Further believing that expropriation should only be used as a measure of last resort;

1. Urges the European Commission to draft legislation defining the handling of the

concepts of ‘public interest’ and ‘fair compensation’, and calls for the implementation

of such definitions into national law;

2. Reaffirms the freedom of Member States to legislate in so far as property is

concerned;

3. Recommends compensation in cases of violated property rights determined on a

case by case study to be paid to the full market value plus a premium,

19 An individual or group that shares ownership in an asset with another individual or group.

25



4. Further recommends for special consideration to be granted to cases involving

severe changes to the affected parties’ livelihood;

5. Endorses the British model of compensation assessment which is based upon

advance payments, a fixed expropriation date and the payment of a premium in

addition to market value;

6. Recommends a minimum notice before expropriation of at least one year;

7. Supports the choice for expropriated or otherwise negatively affected citizens to

become co-owners of the respective energy infrastructure project in addition to

receiving monetary remuneration;

8. Encourages all Member States to raise awareness and use their powers to promote

co-ownership systems aimed reducing NIMBY protests.

9. Furthermore emphasizes the strength of the of co-ownership concept in allowing all

affected parties to become active stakeholders in energy infrastructure projects;

10. Suggests planning authorities to include at least one representative of the affected

citizens on the project’s planning committee to represent the involved interests more

equally;

26



MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS II

Deserted energy: In the aftermath of the uprisings in the Arab world and

recent developments within the foundation, the Desertec project has entered a stage of uncertainty. After initial praise and wide range

support, what should be the future of this project? What role should the European Union take in it?”

Submitted by: Sophie Bennemann (DE), Arthur Chagué (FR), Aisling Doran (IE), Mikkel

Edelmann (DK), Talya Iscan (TR), Anastasiya Kyrychok (UA), Emily Riddell (UK), Caspar

Spillman (CH), Anna Švecová (CZ), Olga Wierzchowska (PL), Olivia Wittock (BE), Shayan

Yousefi (AT), Lara Lindlahr (Chairperson, DE)


A. Noting with deep concern the large expected increase in demand for energy due to

the growth of the world‘s population to 10 billion by 2050,

B. Aware of the European Union (EU)‘s dependence on energy exports from potentially

politically unstable countries in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region,

C. Alarmed by the lack of support from the EU for the Desertec project, due to a lack of

consensus between the Member States,

D. Concerned by the June 2013 split between the Desertec Foundation (DF) and the

Desertec Industrial Initiative (Dii), the two organisations responsible for Desertec,

leading to an uncertain future for the project,

E. Concerned that two key investors, Siemens and Bosch, withdrew from the Desertec

project due to risks associated with the projected costs and the socio-political

developments in the region resulting from the Arab Spring,

F. Regrets the lack of dialogue between the EU and the recently established

governments in MENA countries, which leads to a lack of progress in advancing

Desertec and similar renewable energy production projects,

G. Takes note of the potential risk of the local population involved in the Desertec project

in the MENA region energy suppliers not benefiting from the energy production if

27



such production is exported elsewhere,

H. Aware that the amount of water used by the Desertec project might exacerbate the

problem of water scarcity in the MENA region,

I. Realising that the Desertec Criteria is a tool aimed at reducing the negative impact of

energy projects, thereby increasing stability in MENA countries,

J. Drawing attention to the fact that the largest share of energy production is from fossil

fuels, and that sustainable energy capacity is underdeveloped;

1. Encourages the European Parliament and the Council of the EU to find consensus on

the support of the Desertec project;

2. Strongly recommends the European Council to set the direction for the EU’s active

engagement with the MENA region in the Desertec and similar projects;

3. Asks the European External Action Service to negotiate with MENA countries to

ensure their cooperation with the Desertec project;

4. Calls upon the DF and the Dii to organise meetings about EU-MENA energy relations

like the Desert Energy Conference in Rabat more frequently;

5. Recommends the DF and Dii to collaborate in implementing sustainable energy

projects like Desertec;

6. Strongly recommends all stakeholders involved in Desertec energy projects to adhere

to the Desertec Criteria.

28



MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT

“Energising Development”: With one in five people still ‘living in the

dark’ and in the framework of the UN’s Sustainable Energy for All Initiative (SE4All), how should the EU fulfil its commitment to bring

sustainable energy to everyone by 2030?

Submitted by: Lotje Beek (NL), Merel Blok (NL), Karolien Buytaert (BE), Nikita Ekman (SE),

Manya Eversley (UK), Felix Faltings (CH), Giorgi Gugenishvili (GE), Alexandros Karamallis

(CY), Doroteja Kovacevic (RS), Jacub Kulsia (PL), Julian Mollin (DE), Thomas Monaghan (IE),

Carmen Nicholas (FR), Anna Wolff (AT), Lucy Bradfield (Chairperson, IE)


A. Bearing in mind the projected growth in world population will increase the global

demand for energy accordingly,

B. Confident that a unified response to the issue of sustainable development will be

more efficient and effective than a divided one in which individual states undertake

different initiatives,

C. Alarmed by the lack of awareness of the UN SE4All20 initiative,

D. Fully aware of the European Union’s (EU) position as the main actor in the SE4All

initiative, as well as its responsibility for 50% of global Official Development

Assistance,

E. Noting with regret that other partners of the SE4All initiative have not shown the

same level of commitment as required in order to fulfil its aims,

F. Noting with satisfaction the already existing small-scale initiatives in the area of

sustainable energy while regretting the lack of support for such projects,

G. Fully aware that stakeholders are more likely to invest in projects when further

information regarding the profitability of such projects is provided,

20 The UN SE4All Initiative aims to make sustainable energy for all global citizens a reality by 2030.

29



H. Aware of the fact that investing in renewable energy is not yet attractive for the

private sector due to its unreliability and cost,

I. Taking into consideration the poor infrastructure in developing countries which leads

to energy development difficulties,

J. Recognising the lack of practical knowledge on sustainable energy in developing

areas,

K. Expressing its dissatisfaction at the inadequacy and inaccuracies of available data by

countries concerning their energy requirements, usage and production, as well as the

effects that developmental aid has;

1. Affirms the need for increased cooperation between EU member states and third

countries under the SE4All initiative in order to better coordinate fund allocation,

2. Encourages the introduction of a directive to call upon Member States to offer tax-

advantages to companies which invest in sustainable energy projects in developing

countries,

3. Asks the European Commission to initiate legislation drafts for a multi-media annual

International Sustainable Energy Week in order to raise awareness about such

issues,

4. Mandates the EU Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger to investigate the

possibility of experts in sustainable energy educating receivers of aid in order to allow

them to become knowledgeable in the field of energy production and therefore more

independent,

5. Invites the Directorate-Generals on Energy and Development and Cooperation to

propose increased funding for university research of renewable energy,

6. Requests the European External Action Service21 (EEAS) to promote the Sustainable

Energy Action Plan to non-EU countries at relevant UN summits,

7. Calls upon the EEAS ins the cooperation with the UN to create an organisation to

facilitate the set-up and running of local energy projects that will provide:

21 The European External Action Service serves as the foreign ministry for the EU and speaks on behalf of the EU at the United Nations.

30



a. increased communication between all nations involved,

b. training of personnel in recipient nations,

c. support in the form of expert advice between relevant governments, long-

term investors, as well as energy suppliers and users,

8. Supports social enterprises22 on renewable energy from developing countries

through:

a. low interest rate loans provided by EU member states and the EC,

b. attracting long-term investors with incentives such as feed-in tariffs23

9. Requests to establish a system of rewards to Non-Governmental Organisations as

well as governments without sufficient data on energy usage and aid allocation to

provide information and transparency by:

a. helping to fill out the Global Tracking Framework Report24,

b. joining the transparency register International Aid Transparency Initiative.25

22 A social enterprise is an organisation that applies commercial strategies to maximise improvements in human and environmental well-being, rather than maximising profit. 23 Feed-in tariffs are long-term agreements with pricing tied to costs of production for renewable energy so that producers are sheltered from risks of renewable energy production. 24 The Global Tracking Framework Report is a report under the SE4All initiative under the Guidance of the International Energy Agency. Its aim is to track how much energy is used, produced and required in any given project. 25 The International Aid Transparency Initiative is a global campaign to create transparency in the records of how aid money is spent.

31



MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION BY THE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, PUBLIC

HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY I

The future of Europe’s energy supply or a recipe for disaster? With Member States’ highly differing stances on nuclear power, how should

the EU continue its path towards an emission-friendly supply, while ensuring the safety of its citizens?

Submitted by: Charlie Buyse (BE), Katherine Costello (UK), Gianmarco Franchini (IT),

Metehan Gudogdu (TR), George Hajivassiliou (CY), Alexander Jesserning (AT), Zuanna

Laudańska (PL), Amelia Lembske (SE), Adam Rosenheim (CZ), Ömer Tuzkapan (NL), Jakob

Wrenger (DE), Hans Maes (Chairperson, BE)


A. Fully aware of the limited legislative power of the EU concerning nuclear

energy,

B. Noticing the European Union (EU) member states’ differing stances and national

regulations on nuclear energy,

C. Recognising the possibility of diplomatic conflicts which could arise due to the

location of nuclear power plants (NPPs),

D. Concerned by the lack of awareness of the general public regarding nuclear power,

E. Acknowledging the increasing demand for energy in Europe as well as the finite

nature of fossil fuels,

F. Recalling the fact that nuclear fission accounts for 27.4%26 of electricity produced in

the EU,

G. Aware of the numerous institutions27 conducting and funding nuclear research and

development (R&D),

26 According to the World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2012. 27 On a European level, the European Parliament and the European Council co-decide on the allocated funds for research in the budget of the European Union. On a private level, energy supplying companies like E.ON support nuclear research.

32



H. Deeply concerned by the high investments required by nuclear power due to:

i. the increasing costs of high safety standards,

ii. the inevitable high costs of nuclear waste storage,

I. Recognising the high cost and low economic incentive to decommission old reactors,

J. Realising that certain companies running NPPs may prioritise their own profits over

safety of the general public,

K. Observing that there is always the chance of a Minimum Credible Accident (MCA)28

with enormous economic, environmental, social and health-related repercussions,

possibly triggered by:

i. natural disasters,

ii. human error,

iii. technical failures, in particular those caused by out-dated technology,

L. Noting the fact that nuclear power is not completely carbon neutral, due to the:

i. environmental consequences of uranium mining,

ii. storage and transportation of nuclear waste;

1. Calls for the European Parliament to submit a proposal to the European

Council for amending the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community

(Euratom) to include clauses binding Member States to adhere to a harmonised high level

of safety;

2. Encourages stakeholders to carefully consider the location of new NPPs to avoid:

a. diplomatic conflicts between countries,

b. accidents due to natural disaster;

3. Calls for the promotion of information outlining both advantages and disadvantages of

the use of nuclear energy in order to raise public awareness;

28 A Minimum Credible Accident (MCA) is a postulated accident that a nuclear facility must be designed and built to withstand without loss to the systems, structures, and components necessary to assure public health and safety.

33



4. Strongly recommends that Member States continue utilising nuclear power as an

economically viable energy source until more efficient renewable energy sources are

available as an alternative;

5. Proposes the creation of an open, pan-European, digital research database to allow

for the constant exchange of information and ideas on nuclear energy;

6. Strongly urges companies and regulators operating NPPs to place the safety of the

citizens above economic interests by bearing any expense necessary;

7. Invites Member States to decommission Generation II29 reactors when they reach the

end of their typical operational lifetime of 40 years;

8. Further calls upon Member States to replace aforementioned reactors with the latest

technology available30;

9. Expresses its hope that in the near future fossil fuels will become redundant as they

gradually get replaced by nuclear and renewable energy.

29 Generation II refers to a class of commercial reactors designed to be economic and reliable. They mainly include pressurized water reactors and gas-cooled reactors. Generation II reactors comprise the bulk of the global 400+ NPPs. 30 The latest nuclear technology currently available are generation III++ reactors. These reactors use improved or slightly altered methods to fission radioactive elements, and have improved safety measures, such as automated shutdown in case of emergency. Additionally, a lot of research on generation IV reactors is being conducted. This generation utilises very-high-temperature reactors and supercritical-water-cooled reactors. The building of generation IV reactors results in an increased efficiency of NPPs, and thus a decreased amount of plants, a decrease in waste production, decreased risks, and less serious consequences in the case of human error.

34



resolution booklet of the hague 2013

Documents

committee placard

committee member

development motion

home affairs motion

climate change motion

development lunch motion

netherlandsyoung energy

general assembly programme