<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Breaking Up The Power Giants?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://fistfulofeuros.net/afoe/governments-and-parties/breaking-up-the-power-giants/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://fistfulofeuros.net/afoe/governments-and-parties/breaking-up-the-power-giants/</link>
	<description>European Opinion</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:34:30 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jon Worth</title>
		<link>http://fistfulofeuros.net/afoe/governments-and-parties/breaking-up-the-power-giants/#comment-13822</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Worth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2006 01:10:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fistfulofeuros.net/wordpress/?p=2415#comment-13822</guid>
		<description>While the concerns over the last couple of years about European energy policy are new, at heart the reasons why Europe is not going to get to grips with this are far older: a lot can be traced back to the 1970s and different Eu countries' approaches to nuclear power.

Nuclear has been such a touchy issue for many EU member states, with Austria cheerleader for the opposition and France being very supportive.

Any efforts to get to grips with the current situation are going to have to say something about nuclear - you can't talk EU energy policy without mentioning it somehow - whether your take is for or against.

This issue has meant that bold decision making, or real Commission initiatives on energy policy have been hard to achieve. Combine this with the adverse take on liberalisation in some countries, a cleavage that cuts very differently to the nuclear one, and you have an extremely hard situation to solve.

If I was to try to think positive, we have at least reached the first stage needed for a consensus: that things need to change and new approaches are needed. But that could be a lot easier than working out what actually to do...
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While the concerns over the last couple of years about European energy policy are new, at heart the reasons why Europe is not going to get to grips with this are far older: a lot can be traced back to the 1970s and different Eu countries&#8217; approaches to nuclear power.</p>
<p>Nuclear has been such a touchy issue for many EU member states, with Austria cheerleader for the opposition and France being very supportive.</p>
<p>Any efforts to get to grips with the current situation are going to have to say something about nuclear - you can&#8217;t talk EU energy policy without mentioning it somehow - whether your take is for or against.</p>
<p>This issue has meant that bold decision making, or real Commission initiatives on energy policy have been hard to achieve. Combine this with the adverse take on liberalisation in some countries, a cleavage that cuts very differently to the nuclear one, and you have an extremely hard situation to solve.</p>
<p>If I was to try to think positive, we have at least reached the first stage needed for a consensus: that things need to change and new approaches are needed. But that could be a lot easier than working out what actually to do&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Edward</title>
		<link>http://fistfulofeuros.net/afoe/governments-and-parties/breaking-up-the-power-giants/#comment-13821</link>
		<dc:creator>Edward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Mar 2006 19:12:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fistfulofeuros.net/wordpress/?p=2415#comment-13821</guid>
		<description>"The new Green Paper has some wonderful fantasies for foreign energy policy"

"So in conclusion, I reckon Kroes is overpromising!"

well you may well both be right. Certainly no-one could accuse you of not being realists. But on the other hand the problem is quite serious in principle, so this time there may well be that pressure to actually do something.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The new Green Paper has some wonderful fantasies for foreign energy policy&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;So in conclusion, I reckon Kroes is overpromising!&#8221;</p>
<p>well you may well both be right. Certainly no-one could accuse you of not being realists. But on the other hand the problem is quite serious in principle, so this time there may well be that pressure to actually do something.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: varske</title>
		<link>http://fistfulofeuros.net/afoe/governments-and-parties/breaking-up-the-power-giants/#comment-13820</link>
		<dc:creator>varske</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Mar 2006 01:49:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fistfulofeuros.net/wordpress/?p=2415#comment-13820</guid>
		<description>The whole unbundling issue is fraught. The so-called national champions are often able to run rings round their governments or have captured them.  How long before the European Commission buys the idea that European champions like Eon are the best  to negotiate with Gasprom rather than the Commission itself?

The new Green Paper has some wonderful fantasies for foreign energy policy</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The whole unbundling issue is fraught. The so-called national champions are often able to run rings round their governments or have captured them.  How long before the European Commission buys the idea that European champions like Eon are the best  to negotiate with Gasprom rather than the Commission itself?</p>
<p>The new Green Paper has some wonderful fantasies for foreign energy policy</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon Worth</title>
		<link>http://fistfulofeuros.net/afoe/governments-and-parties/breaking-up-the-power-giants/#comment-13819</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Worth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Mar 2006 21:33:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fistfulofeuros.net/wordpress/?p=2415#comment-13819</guid>
		<description>There are 2 lines of attack for Kroes: the weak, and the impossible. The weak option is to  use the tools already at her disposal, designed for generic competition matters. She and Piebalgs have launched their sectoral enquiry, but while this is useful, it is not going to get to grips with the issue of unbundling / separation of supply and distribution.

For that you would need new legislation - a 3rd Energy Market liberalisation package. The 2nd package, implementation of which is due to be complete by 2007, was drafted in a very different economic climate and with France, Spain and others behaving as they are presently, I don't see how Member States would agree to anything much more radical than the 2nd package. With France, Spain and Germany reluctant to change, this option seems impossible to me in the short term.

So in conclusion, I reckon Kroes is overpromising!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are 2 lines of attack for Kroes: the weak, and the impossible. The weak option is to  use the tools already at her disposal, designed for generic competition matters. She and Piebalgs have launched their sectoral enquiry, but while this is useful, it is not going to get to grips with the issue of unbundling / separation of supply and distribution.</p>
<p>For that you would need new legislation - a 3rd Energy Market liberalisation package. The 2nd package, implementation of which is due to be complete by 2007, was drafted in a very different economic climate and with France, Spain and others behaving as they are presently, I don&#8217;t see how Member States would agree to anything much more radical than the 2nd package. With France, Spain and Germany reluctant to change, this option seems impossible to me in the short term.</p>
<p>So in conclusion, I reckon Kroes is overpromising!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
