We should reject nuclear energy more strongly and not present it as climate-friendly.
Political Platform: | FYEG Political Platform - A Sustainable Europe |
---|---|
Proposer: | GRÜNE JUGEND |
Status: | Published |
Submitted: | 05/21/2021, 16:32 |
Political Platform: | FYEG Political Platform - A Sustainable Europe |
---|---|
Proposer: | GRÜNE JUGEND |
Status: | Published |
Submitted: | 05/21/2021, 16:32 |
Although nuclear energy*Nuclear energy is a low-carbon way to produce energy, it raises many serious concernshigh-risk form of energy production with dangerous long-term consequences. The residual risks of nuclear energy by far outweigh the benefits. These include issues regarding the extraction of uranium*, the disposal of nuclear waste, the safety of nuclear installations, the security
Europe. The phase-out of nuclear energy should be carried out in a way that does not endanger climate objectives. We strongly take a stand against any attempt to frame nuclear energy as a climate change solution.
The climate crisis is one of the main threats facing humanity. Climate change is
caused by human activities and without urgent action, it will jeopardise many
human achievements and fundamental rights, endanger food and water supply, and
put many territories at risk. Climate change is also likely to have important
geopolitical consequences.
FYEG considers climate change a real injustice. Those who are the most
responsible for climate change are least likely to be affected by it, whereas
those who are the least responsible will bear the brunt of its negative effects.
FYEG believes it is essential to adopt an intersectional approach when analysing
the causes and effects of the climate crisis. We advocate for just solutions to
the climate crisis that take into account the racial, gender, class, age,
disability, and colonial dimensions of the climate crisis.
Since the adoption of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change* in 1992,
the Paris Agreement* in 2015, and the declaration of climate emergency by the
European Parliament in 2019, and thanks to the work of many activists and
scientists, awareness of the seriousness of the crisis has grown. But the
actions that have been taken to tackle climate change, including those of the
EU, are still widely insufficient. The world is still on track for an increase
in global temperatures way above 2 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial
levels*.
The climate crisis is not the only global existential crisis humanity is facing.
The biodiversity crisis is also a reality, the seriousness of which is still
being underestimated. The sixth mass extinction*, resulting from human activity,
is accelerating. Various sources of pollution are still the cause of many
diseases and deaths.
FYEG considers these crises as symptoms of a broken system that relies on the
exploitation of animals and nature. We need to rethink that relationship and
offer concrete solutions to these crises.
FYEG supports the objective of maintaining global warming below 1.5 degrees
Celsius. Much stronger action is needed to fight climate change. This implies
changing our entire economic system in an extremely short time. This cannot be
done by the market; instead, strong action from the state is needed.
Europe historically holds greater responsibility for climate change than most
parts of the world. This means that Europe holds a bigger responsibility to
tackle climate change and its worldwide consequences. Europe must be the
frontrunner in reducing its greenhouse gas emissions. FYEG supports an EU
emissions reduction target of at least 80% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels, as
well as European climate neutrality by 2035 at the latest. Countries with the
most resources should be even more ambitious and reach those targets earlier.
Europe must also provide support in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions to
poorer countries, including via financial support and technology transfer. It
must also assist them in tackling the effects of climate change, as well as
supporting them in making their societies, their economies, and their food and
water supplies more resilient to climate change. We must also be careful to
ensure that Europe’s path to climate neutrality does not involve externalising
emissions to third countries. Instead, it should aim to reduce the emissions
caused in third countries as a result of European consumption.
Globally, but also within Europe, the transition towards a climate neutral
economy must be socially just. We are concerned about the unequal impact of
climate change and of environmental hazards which often disproportionately
affect poor people and marginalised groups. We need to make sure our response to
the climate crisis does not reinforce existing inequalities. For example, the
extraction of rare minerals needed for this transition should not be at the
expense of the populations of the countries in which those minerals can be
found.
Current mainstream environmental and climate policies do not affect everyone in
the same way. FYEG calls for those policies to be both socially just and to
fight inequalities. We call for support measures for every worker at risk of
losing their job because of the transition towards a carbon neutral economy*.
They should receive help including, but not limited to, job prospects in other
sectors through retraining. It is also important to reinforce our social welfare
mechanisms (see chapter 5) and to take into account the gender and racial
aspects of a just transition*. Failure to tackle the climate crisis would have
terrible implications for all, including workers. We should make the transition
a just transition.
In order to meet our climate objectives, a deep transformation of our energy
system is needed.
Europe must phase out all fossil fuels, starting with coal and fracked gas*,
which must be phased out in Europe by 2027 at the latest. Fossil fuels must be
replaced by renewable and emission-free solutions: wind energy, solar energy,
marine energy, sustainable bioenergy*, and waste heat recovery*. The production
of electricity should be 100% renewable by 2035 at the latest. Taxpayers’ money
should therefore not finance fossil fuels. The opening or extension of fossil
fuel extraction sites should be prohibited, and existing sites should be closed
as soon as possible. New fossil fuel infrastructure should not be built in
Europe. This includes gas infrastructure.
The cleanest and quickest way to achieve the energy transition is to reduce our
energy consumption. Efforts should be made to improve energy efficiency, to
renovate all buildings, and to transform the industry. Governments must organise
the renovation and insulation of all buildings by 2030. This would also play a
key role in reducing energy poverty across Europe.
FYEG supports energy democracy and stands for the development of a decentralised
and interconnected energy system. Energy systems should be localised. We support
forms of collective ownership of energy production, such as energy cooperatives.
Networks to transport energy are crucial to enable this transition; they should
be owned, developed, and operated as commons, for example being publicly owned.
Although nuclear energy*Nuclear energy is a low-carbon way to produce energy, it raises many high-risk form of energy production with dangerous long-term consequences. The residual risks of nuclear energy by far outweigh the benefits. These include issues regarding the extraction of uranium*, the
serious concerns
disposal of nuclear waste, the safety of nuclear installations, the security
measures and level of state control required, the huge consequences of potential
accidents, and the link with nuclear weapons. Potential solutions such as
nuclear fusion* will be unable to provide a concrete response in time to solve
the climate crisis. We therefore believe that no new nuclear plants should be
built, and that nuclear energy should be phased out as soon as possible across
Europe. The phase-out of nuclear energy should be carried out in a way that does
not endanger climate objectives. We strongly take a stand against any attempt to frame nuclear energy as a climate change solution.
We believe natural carbon sinks* such as forests, oceans, wetlands, and
peatlands have an important role to play in reducing the concentration of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Policies should be adopted to protect and
enhance their potential. On the other hand, carbon capture and storage* and geo-
engineering*, among other technologies, are often presented as solutions to
fight climate change, but their large-scale efficiency remains undemonstrated
and they are likely to pose great risks to society. These technologies are often
used as an excuse to continue the burning of fossil fuels and delay real climate
action. FYEG believes they should be treated with caution and their development
must not be made a priority.
Food is essential to life. It therefore cannot be considered as a commodity.
FYEG stands for food and agricultural policies that guarantee that every person
has access to local, healthy, diversified and quality food.
Farmers and agricultural workers play an essential role in ensuring this right
to food and their own rights should be respected, as enshrined in the United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural
Areas*. Farmers and agricultural workers should be able to earn a decent revenue
from their work. We believe in a model consisting of numerous small- and medium-
scale farms, guaranteeing thriving countrysides.
Industrialised agriculture is responsible for substantial greenhouse gas
emissions, massive biodiversity loss, water scarcity, soil depletion, and a
range of public health issues (e.g. antimicrobial resistance*). A transition
towards a form of agriculture which respects the environment, preserves soil,
water, and the climate, and is based on agroecological practices and organic
agriculture is urgently needed. Artificial fertilisers and pesticides* should be
phased out, starting with the most dangerous (e.g. neonicotinoids and
glyphosate). A rapid drop in animal farming and in the consumption of animal
products is also needed. We should aim at reducing the use of antibiotics in
animal farming, including by limiting the concentration of animals held in one
place.
Food systems should be rebuilt on the principles of food sovereignty*,
eliminating corporate capture of food, reducing food waste, prioritising short
supply chains and locally produced food, ending imports of deforestation-driving
products such as soy or palm oil, and making sure that European agriculture is
not exported in a way that harms agricultural systems in other countries. To
achieve this, we need a food production system that ensures environmental and
economic sustainability and food security for all, without endangering the food
security* of future generations. It is of utmost importance to find ways to
guarantee an economically viable system that does not have negative effects on
nature and the wider environment.
This transition towards a more sustainable and fairer agricultural system
requires changes in the regulatory framework as well as ambitious public
policies. FYEG stands for more transparent labelling, with details of origin,
composition, methods of production, use of pesticides, animal welfare, and
nutritional values. A thorough reform of the Common Agricultural Policy* is
needed. The promotion of sustainable and plant-based diets should also be
encouraged.
The use of GMOs in agriculture is sometimes portrayed as a solution to some of
the challenges faced by our food system, by providing better yields or
contributing to adaptation to climate change. We consider the use of GMOs* to
have many disadvantages, including increasing corporate control over the food
system and the dependence of farmers on biotech companies, threats to
biodiversity, and the filing of patents on plant and animal life. Most GMOs are
developed to be resistant to chemical herbicides and their use therefore results
in an increase in pesticide consumption. We also believe that the challenges
faced by our food system are better solved with heirloom seeds and the
development of agroecology. This is not compatible with the large-scale
development of GMOs in agriculture. We therefore support regulations that ensure
a ban on the cultivation of or import of GMOs into the EU, including new GMOs.
Transport is responsible for almost a quarter of greenhouse gases emitted in
Europe and is one of the only sectors in which emissions have risen in recent
years, despite important technological progress. Transport is also one of the
main sources of air pollution, which is responsible for the premature deaths of
400,000 people in the EU each year. Changes in both practices and modes of
transport are needed, with a shift towards zero-emission travel a priority.
While keeping up efforts to reduce aircraft emissions, Europe needs to fly less.
This can be achieved by introducing a EU-wide kerosene* tax, and an end on both
the construction of new airports and the extension of existing ones. Train
travel should be favoured over air travel. An effective policy could involve the
phase-out of commercial flights for trips where it is possible to use an
alternative, more environmentally friendly means of transport with a journey
time of less than 10 hours. At the same time, train networks should be further
developed, including the construction of high-speed trains and the introduction
of more night train routes, with the aim of achieving a network of high-speed
lines connecting major cities in Europe. We should prioritise the renovation of
existing train tracks over the construction of new ones whenever possible in
order to minimise the environmental impact. Efforts should be made to achieve a
100% decarbonised network by 2035. Travelling across Europe by train should be
made easier, for example by the introduction of a European train ticket system.
For everyday shorter journeys, regions and cities should continue developing
public transport networks as well as safe and efficient cycling and pedestrian
networks. We should aim to eliminate the use of private cars in city centres.
Comprehensive urban planning* plays a crucial role in creating socially
accessible and ecologically just residential areas in which people can live,
work, and spend free time without having to travel long distances. During air
pollution peaks, teleworking should be made mandatory. Rural areas should not be
left out: regions should guarantee public transport solutions, relying on
intermodality between cycling, buses, trains, and private cars. New fossil-fuel
vehicles should no longer be available for purchase in Europe by 2025, and their
use should be phased out as soon as possible. FYEG also supports efforts to
introduce fare-free local public transport throughout Europe, starting with
people belonging to vulnerable groups and young people.
Further efforts should be made to ensure that public transport is fully
accessible for all, including people with disabilities.
Technological innovation and new technologies can bring about substantial
positive change in society. Progress in the medical sector, in digital
technologies, in energy production, and in the development of clean vehicles is
crucial to fight the ongoing crises Europe is facing.
Technological progress is not always a synonym for social and societal progress.
We are firmly attached to the precautionary principle, meaning that innovations
should be assessed thoroughly and should be proven harmless for the environment,
human health, and society as a whole before being authorised. Uncertainty should
not be used as a reason to postpone measures to prevent environmental
degradation or preserve public health. New innovations should be open to
scientific and public assessment to determine their potential costs and
benefits.
While we believe that technological progress has an important role to play in
solving the climate and biodiversity crises, we are critical of approaches that
tend to overestimate the positive impact of uncertain future technologies to
avoid addressing core issues and engage in systemic change. An example is carbon
capture and storage*, often used as a reason for less ambitious emissions
targets, in spite of the fact that the technology has not yet been fully
developed.
While most European citizens agree that the welfare of animals should be
improved, not a lot is being done. Reflecting on the condition of animals
requires us to recognise our place within the animal realm and realise that we
are not superior to it. We must extend our empathy and our moral sense to other
animals. We must stop considering them as objects but rather as sentient beings
with rights and who should be protected from harm.
Animals should not be subject to cruel treatment. FYEG stands for the immediate
ban of the cruellest practices, such as the production of foie gras through
force-feeding*, corrida*, fur farming, dolphinariums*, and hunting with dogs. We
also believe that animals should not be kept in conditions contrary to their
natural behaviours. We believe animals should not be allowed to be kept in a
circus and that zoos should be subject to a much stronger regulation.
Every year, nearly 70 billion land animals are slaughtered worldwide for food.
With the industrialisation of animal farming, the conditions in which farm
animals live have become worse and worse. It is essential to both reduce the
consumption of animal-based products and improve the welfare of farm animals.
Cage farming, one of the commonest forms of industrial animal farming, should be
phased out. FYEG defends the small-farm model in which animals have access to
sufficient space, are able to go outdoors, play and interact with others of
their kind. Newly created animal breeds that favour rapid animal growth but
often cause the animal to suffer should also be phased out. Stronger regulation
of animal transport should be put in place, with a ban on the export of live
animals outside the EU.
FYEG also stands for the stronger regulation of the use of animals in tests.
Using animals in scientific testing should be illegal in the event that there
are alternatives. The welfare of animals raised for animal testing should be
significantly improved.
Wild animals should also benefit from better protection, with the protection of
wild natural spaces and the stronger regulation of hunting (see g). The Covid-19
pandemic, which likely originated from interactions between wildlife and humans,
is one example of the consequences that zoonotic diseases* can have on
humankind, and has clearly demonstrated the need to take measures to prevent
their development.
FYEG also defends stronger regulation in order to fight overfishing, regenerate
fish populations, and restore marine ecosystems. The use of fishing techniques
with a low impact on the environment should be encouraged, while higher impact
techniques such as bottom-contacting fishing gears, electric pulse fishing*, and
fish aggregating devices* (FADs) should be banned. Small-scale fisheries should
be prioritised, and measures should be taken to stop the concentration and
industrialisation of the fishing sector in Europe. The rapid development of
industrialised fish farming in recent years should be addressed, with the
introduction of stronger regulations on fish welfare and environmental
protection.
Nature should not be regarded as a commodity, as something humanity is separated
from, but as something that it belongs to. Like climate change, nature knows no
borders. We believe it is time that nature be properly recognised and protected.
FYEG supports giving rights to nature that ensure its protection under national
and international law. We want the crime of ecocide to be recognised in domestic
and international criminal law. The most destructive fishing, deforestation,
soil degradation, and mining practices should be banned. We must fight
overfishing. Hunting should be strongly regulated, no longer permitted for
commercial and leisure purposes, and only authorised as a last resort to
preserve balance within an ecosystem.
We support the objective of giving protected status to at least 30% of our
planet’s land and seas, with 10% granted a particularly high level of
protection. The rainforests, coral reefs, Arctic ice pack, and oceans are global
commons, and decisions regarding these global commons should be a global concern
for all. We reject approaches to nature conservation that perpetuate colonial
domination and violate fundamental rights.
We are on the brink of mass extinction. It is not enough to just protect
ecosystems; we must promote the restoration and renaturalisation of devastated
areas according to scientific criteria. Furthermore, our own human ecosystems,
such as cities, can and must be renaturalised — allowing space for new
ecosystems to flourish.
Across the world, environmental defenders are facing threats and violence, with
many being murdered for their defence of the environment. This is unacceptable.
Defending the natural world is not a crime. Those who threaten environmental
defenders must be prosecuted, and the European Union should grant protection and
offer asylum to those under threat.
The transition to a zero-carbon society might also have an impact on and
conflict with nature conservation. The impact of infrastructures such as wind
farms, hydropower plants, and high-speed railways should be minimised as much as
possible.
We should reject nuclear energy more strongly and not present it as climate-friendly.