One target of reducing carbon emissions, accompanied by financial support for new EU states – this is the position of Romania in the European Summit on Energy and Climate Change, scheduled to begin Thursday in Brussels. Răzvan Nicolescu, Minister for Energy, made the arguments in the EU’s summit of Southeast Europe, organized by The Economist, an event where energynomics.ro is official media partner.

If we have multiple targets, we cannot obtain financial compensations 

“For Romania, the maximum acceptable would be to have a single target, reducing carbon dioxide emissions”, said Minister for Energy. According to Răzvan Nicolescu, the situation in recent years has shown that addressing the issue of reducing the environmental impact unilaterally is wrong.

Ambitious targets assumed by EU led to strong pressure on European industry, without the Union model be taken up by other major global polluters. “Countries like China, India, Brazil and the USA need to be convinced to join the European approaches”, said Nicolescu, continuing: “We cannot save the planet alone!”

Răzvan Nicolescu was asked to come up with explanations, given that within the EU there are at least two divergent attitudes; on the one hand, Germany insists on taking the ambitious targets for developing renewable energy resources and abandoning nuclear power, while Poland leads the camp of those who warn of the costs incurred by the continent’s industry after the accelerated implementation of green policies. “If we have multiple targets, we cannot obtain financial compensations. It’ll be just obligations”, said Nicolescu.

He said that new entrants to the EU will be most affected by these decisions than those who are older in the bloc, as the pressure will be for end users, so that there should be measures to support these countries.

“I hope the team that will go to the European Council this week to convey the position of Romania and to persuade other countries”, continued Nicolescu, who criticized the tendency of politicians in Romania and Europe, impatient to take “green” political positions from populist considerations, ignoring the costs imposed on the economy and energy industry.