831
edits
No edit summary |
m (Admin moved page Kristýna Sosnovcová to Students:Kristýna Sosnovcová) |
||
(3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
I'm happy we were there only so few days because writing the diary takes so long... | I'm happy we were there only so few days because writing the diary takes so long... | ||
I woke up that morning more easily than I expected and I also remember first lecture again at university even the topic wasn't my cup of tea (not during the morning). At least we refreshed the situation of our Green Party and discovered some aspects of success of German one. | I woke up that morning more easily than I expected and I also remember the first lecture again at university even though the topic wasn't my cup of tea (not during the morning). At least we refreshed the situation of our Green Party and discovered some aspects of success of German one. | ||
Later two people from NGO DialogN came and spoke about what they were doing. It was the only NGO we spoke with so I'm happy for that. Unfortunately the NGO is fully dependent on support from projects so very limited in long-term aims | Later two people from NGO DialogN came and spoke about what they were doing. It was the only NGO we spoke with so I'm happy for that. Unfortunately the NGO is fully dependent on support from projects, so is very limited in long-term aims that could be even more influential. | ||
During the afternoon we visited IBA...the topic of sustainable houses also interested me so I was really curious what is "IN" in Germany. To be honest the time dedicated | During the afternoon we visited the IBA in Hamburg...the topic of sustainable houses also interested me so I was really curious what is "IN" in Germany. To be honest, the time dedicated to the visit was too short because it was based on informational panels in the IBA center it seemed to be quite a complex concept for cultivating an industrial part of the city. I'm glad we visited the energy bunker because the idea of rebuilding a grey depressive bunker into an energy generator and as a point of tourist interest and a local lookout tower. | ||
== Day 5 == | == Day 5 == | ||
The last day. To be honest I was pretty tired in the morning so the lecture about Leuphana Innovation Incubator was too difficult or maybe too impersonal, so I hardly paid attention. The second part of the morning was better because the PhD projects may be up my alley but mainly because the girls had interesting topics. The third part was the best...that is what I'm missing at Czech unis - the participation of students, creating by themselves under a supervisor, leading and least but not last thinking! It was great to try to be a speaker of one topic and coordinate the result on paper but it meant that I could not cooperate with others on the next two topics. So for next time on the last day it should more relaxing and refreshing because it is clear that the last night must be special. | |||
The way back home was fine. Except first hours in Germany when it started to be | The way back home was fine. Except the first hours in Germany when it started to be hot in the traffic jam on the highway. The rest of the time went quite quickly because we played games at the back of the bus:-) | ||
== == A personal reflection == == | == == A personal reflection == == | ||
My overall opinion about the field trip is very good. Not only we | My overall opinion about the field trip is very good. Not only were we an interesting group of people but mostly the program was great, fresh and varied. I really appreciate that we have been to several places and each of them was different but still green. Everybody could find his/her own area of interest. Of course the outdoor trips are easier to remember but the lectures were important as well. For example, the lecture of Mrs. Alexa Lutzenberger which majority of other participants found rather useless was worthy of being listened to for me. | ||
The topic is in general | The topic is in general greatly relevant to our country because of several factors. First, Germany is a powerful member of the EU and therefore it plays an important role other than in policy making. For now the EU has adopted Directive 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from Renewable sources (RS) where the target is to achieve 20 % of energy (electricity, heating, transport etc.) from RS in the EU by taking individual national goals. The Czech Republic unsurprisingly accepted the low target of 13% because our starting position in 2010 was rather weak (we had only 9% energy from RS) but also because our government doesn't like to be challenged. The situation in Germany wasn't much different - they adopted only 18% goal from the 11% starting level in 2010. After the Fukusima catastrophe it changed and now Germany is working on 100 % energy from RS by 2050. The idea looks very nice - instead of burning fossil fuels they will use never-ending sources of energy. It means that Germany can be a pioneering country which can show the others whether it is possible to go this way and how sustainable RS is. Furthermore, thanks to government support there will be intensive research into technologies which, as I hope, will lead toward higher efficiency and new possibilities - another thing which is necessary to do but not popular because it doesn't bring money now but in the long-term. | ||
On the other | On the other hand, after listening to the lecture on the topic it seems to me that Germany first made the target and after that started to count whether they can fulfill the limits. It is clear that Germany cannot stop all its nuclear power plants and replace them by RS so at the beginning they have to buy energy from their neighbors (e.g. Czech), energy which is produced from fossil fuels. Besides that, renewable technologies are quite materially demanding, even though it is improving, and it also matters where these materials came from, how they were mined or where e.g. where wind turbines were produced. If Germany doesn't consider all the consequences of its 100 % policy, it would exploit other countries and wouldn't reduce CO2 emissions but only transfer responsibility to different states. I would say that similar problems occurred with the promotion of energy from biomass in EU by the Biomass Action Plan 2005: a target was set and subsidised but no one had thought about the land use change it would cause, high GHG emissions by transporting biomass from Latin America to Europe or the loss of biodiversity due to the farming of monocultures. | ||
One other thing is that one country can afford to try such a change but if a huge number of countries follow Germany where they will find the resources and what consequences will it cause? Fortunately, the Czech public doesn't sympathize with RS after the PV issue and green topics are not popular in political discussions, therefore the Czech Republic is secure for several years. |