我很高興向大家介紹歐拉考2015年年度報告。今年對煤炭行業(yè)來說是忙碌的一年，它不僅要面對艱難的市場環(huán)境，還要面對激進(jìn)的氣候政策帶來的諸多挑戰(zhàn)。反化石燃料運(yùn)動獲得了新的勢頭，我們必須學(xué)會以不同的觀點(diǎn)看待進(jìn)步。許多人希望煤炭消失，但我們不能簡單地拋棄歐洲的工業(yè)基礎(chǔ)，希望享受未來的繁榮。氣候政策的一個令人擔(dān)憂的結(jié)果是，取消那些為經(jīng)濟(jì)增長創(chuàng)造條件的活動。為了那些需要負(fù)擔(dān)得起和安全的電力消費(fèi)者，我們應(yīng)該避免依賴世界上不穩(wěn)定的地區(qū)來獲取我們的能源。鑒于關(guān)于“能源轉(zhuǎn)型”的辯論，審查轉(zhuǎn)型期煤炭的社會經(jīng)濟(jì)價值是正確的。對未來能源供應(yīng)的展望受到了EURACOAL的歡迎，但謹(jǐn)慎的做法是，將這一愿景建立在當(dāng)今能源供應(yīng)的現(xiàn)實(shí)基礎(chǔ)上，而不要忽視“老工業(yè)”仍然必須提供的服務(wù)。這一轉(zhuǎn)變將在全球范圍內(nèi)進(jìn)行：歐盟目前在世界舞臺上的作用正在減弱，僅占全球能源需求的12.5%和全球溫室氣體排放的10%。過去幾年，煤炭工業(yè)發(fā)生了很大變化。全球煤炭市場供過于求，價格低廉，對生產(chǎn)商不利。在巴黎舉行的聯(lián)合國氣候變化框架公約第21屆締約方大會之前，各國發(fā)布了政策聲明，旨在影響能源部門變得更具可持續(xù)性，但有些人擔(dān)心目標(biāo)不現(xiàn)實(shí)。EURACOAL始終相信自由和競爭的市場，在健全的能源政策的三個優(yōu)先事項(xiàng)之間保持平衡：經(jīng)濟(jì)增長、供應(yīng)安全和環(huán)境保護(hù)。在歐盟委員會，氣候行動總司就與煤炭工業(yè)直接相關(guān)的問題與DG環(huán)境和DG能源合作。歐盟委員會認(rèn)為，煤炭的持續(xù)使用與歐盟的脫碳目標(biāo)不一致：到2050年，大部分煤炭消費(fèi)的電力部門應(yīng)該完全脫碳。歐洲理事會主席提出的能源聯(lián)盟概念旨在促進(jìn)包括煤炭在內(nèi)的本土能源資源，并在談判購買進(jìn)口天然氣時加強(qiáng)歐盟的地位。相反，能源聯(lián)盟已成為氣候政策的延伸，反映了應(yīng)對人為氣候變化的首要政治優(yōu)先事項(xiàng)。面對今天的挑戰(zhàn)，我們需要堅(jiān)強(qiáng)起來，抓住煤炭的優(yōu)勢：煤炭資源豐富，價格合理，而且是可以利用的。我們需要繼續(xù)開發(fā)新的潔凈煤技術(shù)，進(jìn)一步實(shí)現(xiàn)工業(yè)現(xiàn)代化。燃煤電廠能夠很好地平衡風(fēng)力渦輪機(jī)和太陽能光伏電池板的間歇輸出。千百萬年來，煤炭給人們帶來了溫暖和光明，并可以繼續(xù)發(fā)揮這一作用，滿足目前控制污染的所有要求，并保持在歐盟排放交易體系不斷下降的溫室氣體排放上限以下。至少有一位美國總統(tǒng)候選人的演講中已經(jīng)可以聽到這種做法的跡象。與此同時，能源聯(lián)盟意味著擺脫由化石燃料驅(qū)動的經(jīng)濟(jì)。當(dāng)我第一次聽到這個提議時，我想到了我在石油和天然氣行業(yè)的同事，他們和煤炭行業(yè)一樣，現(xiàn)在受到威脅。不幸的是，一些公司假裝自己不是真正的公司，甚至加入綠色運(yùn)動，希望獲得競爭優(yōu)勢。綠色非政府組織本身已經(jīng)變得非常強(qiáng)大，富有的捐助者提供的資金遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過其他利益集團(tuán)所能獲得的資金。許多人發(fā)起了反煤運(yùn)動，媒體的存在影響到幼兒園的兒童、學(xué)校的學(xué)生、大學(xué)的學(xué)生和廣大公眾。企業(yè)紛紛加入，以利用一種偏愛昂貴能源而非競爭性能源的情緒。例如，一些人投資于反對煤炭的運(yùn)動，因?yàn)槿绻麤]有“舊能源”的競爭，新能源融資將帶來更大的回報。風(fēng)險很高：誰將在能源轉(zhuǎn)型期間積聚最多的財(cái)富？

I am pleased to present the EURACOAL Annual  Report 2015. It was a busy year for the coal  industry which had to face many challenges  arising not only from a difficult market  environment, but also from aggressive climate  policies. The anti-fossil fuels movement gained a  new momentum and we must learn to live with a  diversity of views on progress. Many would wish  coal to disappear, but we cannot simply throw  away Europe’s industrial base and hope to enjoy  future prosperity. Dismantling the very activities  that created the conditions for economic growth is  a worrying result of climate policy. For the sake of  electricity consumers who want affordability and  security, we should avoid becoming dependent on  unstable regions of the world for our energy. Given the debate on an “energy transition”, it is  right to examine the socio-economic value of coal  during the transition. A vision for the future of  energy supply is welcomed by EURACOAL, but it is  prudent to base that vision on the realities of  today’s energy supply and not to ignore what the  “old industries” still have to offer. The transition  will take place within a global context: the EU  now plays a diminishing role on the world stage,  accounting for just 12.5% of global energy  demand and 10% of global greenhouse gas  emissions. The last few years have seen much change for the  coal industry. The oversupplied global coal  market, with its low prices, is not favourable to  producers. Policy announcements, made in the lead up to the UNFCCC COP21 conference in Paris,  aim to influence the energy sector to become  more sustainable, but some are concerned about  unrealistic targets. EURACOAL has always  believed in free and competitive markets, with a  balance between the three priorities of a sound  energy policy: economic growth, security of  supply and environmental protection. At the European Commission, the DirectorateGeneral for Climate Action works with DG  Environment and DG Energy on issues of direct  interest to the coal industry. The Commission  sees the ongoing use of coal as inconsistent with  EU decarbonisation objectives: by 2050, the  electricity sector, where most coal is consumed,  should be completely decarbonised. The concept  of an Energy Union, proposed by the President of  the European Council, was intended to promote  indigenous energy resources, including coal, and  to strengthen the EU’s position when negotiating  to buy imported gas. Instead, Energy Union has  become an extension of climate policy, reflecting  the overriding political priority to tackle manmade climate change. We need to be strong in the face of today’s  challenges and hold onto the benefits of coal: it is  abundant, affordable and available. We need to  keep working on new clean coal technologies and  further modernise our industry. Coal-fired power  plants are well able to balance the intermittent  output from wind turbines and solar PV panels.  For eons, coal has brought warmth and light to  people and can continue in this role, meeting all  current requirements for pollution control and  staying below the declining greenhouse gas  emission cap of the EU emissions trading system. One can already hear signs of this approach in the  speeches of at least one of the US presidential  candidates. In the meantime, Energy Union implies a move  away from an economy driven by fossil fuels.  When I first heard of this proposal, I thought of  my colleagues in the oil and gas industry which,  like the coal industry, is now threatened.  Unfortunately, some companies pretend to be  something other than what they really are and  even align themselves to the green movement, in  the hope of gaining a competitive advantage. The green NGOs themselves have become very strong,  with financing from rich benefactors that far  exceeds what is available to other interest groups.  Many have sponsored anti-coal campaigns with a  media presence that influences children in  kindergartens, pupils at schools, students at  universities and the public at large. Corporations  are moving in to take advantage of a sentiment  that favours expensive sources of energy over  competitive sources. For example, some people  invest in campaigns against coal because, without  competition from “old energy”, new energy  financing promises greater returns. The stakes are  high: who will amass the most wealth during the  energy transition?