Sweden is doing the most in the EU and the EU most in the world to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. There are, Svante Axelsson coordinator for zero carbon Sweden points out, a broad majority in the Swedish parliament for an ambitious climate policy, which shows the way in klimatomställningen.
But it is not enough that Sweden’s climate policy is ambitious, it must be feasible. The goal to reduce emissions from domestic road transport by 70% by 2030 compared with 2010 levels are high and can be compared with the EU’s ambition to reduce them by 20 per cent. Axelsson ask, therefore, whether it is possible to reach the climate objective, or whether it is too late. It is a highly relevant question. How Sweden can achieve its climate policy objectives deserve serious discussion. The problem is that Axelsson assume that the answer is more of the measures we are already implementing.
the Year before, with only 2 per cent. According to the Dmv, they must reduce by 8% each year for Sweden to reach the goal. Axelsson think it is possible on a range of measures to be taken. I hope that he has the right, but can also be noted that several of his actions are tainted with a big problem. Today’s tools are sufficient according to the Swedish transport administration to reduce emissions by at best 35 percent. Maria Börjesson, professor at the state VTI, mean that Sweden, with the current policy is far from achieving the objective.
Sweden’s main tool to reduce emissions from road traffic are the focus on biofuels through the so-called reduktionsplikten. Axelssons proposes more of the same and requires a radical increase in the admixture of biofuels in petrol and diesel. However, it is a vulnerable strategy. Sweden uses the highest proportion of biofuels in Europe: 30.3 per cent, compared with 7.1 in average in Europe. Axelsson would now like to increase Sweden’s share to 50 percent.
import Sweden, 65 percent of the european production and 35 per cent of global production. At the same time Sweden and the EU have a policy to phase out key raw materials for the production of HVO. It reduces the range further. The increased production of biofuels that Axelsson sees as a prerequisite for achieving the goal to 2030 covers only Sweden’s needs. As if Sweden is an isolated economy and klimatnyttigt biofuels produced here would be exported or used overseas.
It is enough that some large countries in the EUROPEAN union are using biofuels to the same extent as we of the asset will reduce and prices will be upwards. Already before these changes become reality, Sweden has the EU’s highest diesel prices. It takes place at the bekostnaden of jobs and growth, something that hardly inspires others to want to follow our example. We often talk about the Swedish climate policy should be an example that others charge for. However, the use of biofuels in the transport sector is based on the contrary on the contrary, that no other countries will take after.
Despite the mention Axelsson EU is not a single time, or the fact that the EU has its own goals, which stipulate that the use of biofuels shall be 14% in 2030, compared with the Axelssons 50. In the EU to be considered biofuels, unlike in Sweden, hardly a panacea. Instead, it is the electrification, which will reduce emissions in the transport sector.
This, Sweden is required to take relate to. But the Swedish demand is too small to alone push through the shift, and policies cannot order until technological development. Sweden can prepare in order to reap the maximum benefits of electrification when it passed through on a broad front.
That is why the Conservatives want to build out of nuclear power, to strengthen the capacity of the network and invest more in charging infrastructure for electric vehicles. The government, however, Sweden in exactly the opposite direction. The government says no to expansion of nuclear power and draws in the particular investment on charging infrastructure in their vårändringsbudget.
Sweden should pursue an ambitious climate policy. Axelsson’s post means, hopefully, the start of a serious debate on the objectives and means of Swedish climate policy and how these relate to the EU’s counterparts. The policy must carefully be careful not to set promises that are not met. Sweden’s most important contribution to the fight against climate change is not our own emission reductions, but that we get others to be like us. Biofuels are good, but should show the way in climate policy, the strategy can not be based on methods that assume that no one else follows our example.