Good or bad credits from European sources?


The paper gives an example regarding the manner, how economical and ecological arguments can
be brought together in order
(1) to reject the populist legitimation of the assault of the financial sector on European
governance arguing with inevitable tax transfers, and
(2) to remind upon alternatives regarding
(a) possible use of existing, but underused and underestimated EU credit institutions. This
institutional acheology is taken from the historical and actual contribution of economist and
historian Stuart Holland to thinking about European governance to overcome its flaws;
(b) problematic green technologies and ressource uses which should not be credited to be part of the
transition to renewables. This argument is developed from a critique of Danish policies as seen from
the view of grass roots and scientists cooperating to restrain the backward step from fine-tuned
fossil fuel use in dense settlements to noxious applications of more polluting, less energy efficient
and actually also more CO2-emitting forms of combustion of biomass. An accounting model used
by the State administration of Massachussetts for discussing time-profiles for renewable forestry
and wood combustion substituting the combustion of fossil fuels will be discussed. A perspective
of likely impacts of climate change on forests is added in order to counteract the timeless 'truth' of
'CO2-neutrality' as applied to the combustion of forest products leading to wrong incentives and
and to investments into false renewables.

Good_or_bad_credits_for_European_sources.pdf688.57 KB
Rolf Czeskleba-Dupont

Ph.D., M.Sc. Social Science Basic Studies Department of Society and Globalisation, Roskilde