Skip to content

ESA Member States have unanimously voted to extend the Envisat mission through to 2013. Envisat – the world’s largest and most sophisticated satellite ever built – has been providing scientists and operational users with invaluable data for global monitoring and forecasting since its launch in 2002.


“The decision to extend the Envisat mission operations, taken during the last ESA Earth Observation Programme Board meeting, is a recognition of the success of the mission, in terms of the wide number of scientific and operational users served and the good technical status of the satellite after seven years of operations,” Envisat Mission Manager Henri Laur said.

Envisat, short for environmental satellite, has a unique combination of 10 different instruments which collect data about Earth’s atmosphere, land, sea and ice – providing scientists with the most detailed picture yet of the state of the planet.

Envisat data have never been in more demand than today, and many of these established services rely upon being able to access near-real time (NRT) data. The data are being increasingly used for routine applications, such as monitoring sea ice, oil slicks and illegal fisheries, which require the fastest possible access to the data so that quick decisions can be made.

Envisat NRT data make it possible to provide daily sea surface temperatures, worldwide fire maps, UV radiation levels and ozone forecasts, accessible through Today’s Earth check-up on ESA’s Earth observation website.

Another reason the mission was extended is the need for scientists to be able to access data over long periods of time in order to identify and analyse long-term climatic trends and changes (such as greenhouse gas concentrations, sea surface temperature, sea levels, sea-ice extent).

Envisat affords this by providing continuity of data initiated in the early 1990s with previous ESA satellites, ERS-1 and ERS-2. With the extension, Envisat will bridge the gap in data supply until the launch of the Sentinel satellites that will be launched as part of the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) initiative.

Sentinel-1 will ensure the continuity of radar imaging. Sentinel-3 will ensure continuity with Envisat’s radar altimeter and optical sensors. Sentinel-5’s precursor mission will ensure continuity with Envisat’s atmospheric sensors.

The Envisat mission generates a large amount of daily data through its European-wide network of acquisition stations and processing centres. Access to Envisat data has continuously been upgraded since its launch, with an increasing amount of data available online free of charge.

Source ESA

From 4-7 June, 375 million European citizens were called upon to vote for the 736 members who will represent them in the European Parliament until 2014.

Policy Summary Links

From 4-7 June, 375 million European citizens were called upon to vote for the 736 members who will represent them in the European Parliament until 2014.

The European Parliament is the only EU institution directly elected on a strictly European mandate.

Over the past 30 years, since the first EU elections, the Parliament has gained more powers, but many citizens still see the ballot as a national mid-term poll for punishing the parties in government.

Issues:

The EPP group is credited with 264 members of the European Parliament, against 161 MEPs for the Socialists, according to the European Parliament website. In the outgoing 785-member European Parliament, the former EPP-ED group had 284 MEPs to the PES’s 215.

This time, the British Conservatives left the group after their leader, David Cameron, decided to form a separate anti-Lisbon political group (EurActiv 02/06/09). Despite being deprived of some 29 British MEPs, the EPP remained by far the largest grouping in the 736-seat parliament.

The Alliance of Liberal and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) obtained 80 seats, down from 103 in the previous legislature. The Greens/European Free Alliance group won 53 MEPs, up from 42 last time around.

The Eurosceptic Independence-Democracy group, which previously had 24 members, lost seats and has now 18 MEPs, while the Union for Europe of the Nations group (UEN) also lost members and is down from 44 to 35 MEPs. Similarly, the Confederal Group of the European Left/Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL) is down from 44 to 32 MEPs.

Election_results_ok_01.jpg

For a full overview of the distribution of seats by member states and political parties, please click here

Centre-right successful in ‘big five’

In the five largest EU countries – Germany , the UK, France, Italy and Spain – the EPP did well. German MEP Hartmut Nassauer, EPP vice-president, said he was happy with the results in his country, where the conservative CDU obtained 30.7% (34 seats) against 20.8% (23 seats) for its rival, the SPD.

“It’s a good signal for 27 September,” said Nassauer, referring to his country’s upcoming national poll.

In France , President Nicolas Sarkozy’s UMP scored 27.8% (29 seats) against a dismal 16.48% (14 seats) for the Socialists, who were almost overrun by the Greens after Europe Ecologie scored 16.28% (14 seats). French MEP Joseph Daul, the EPP group chairman, said his group had won because it had spoken “about Europe” and had not got involved in controversy like its Socialist opponents (EurActiv 07/06/09)

In Italy , Berlusconi’s ‘Party of Liberty’ (PdL) scored 35.26% (29 seats), against 26.13% for its main rival, the centre-left PD (21 seats).

In Poland , the governing Civic Platform won 25 seats (44.43% of votes), 10 more than during the previous legislature. Together with the Peasants Party (PSL), this means Poland will have 28 seats in the EPP group. The conservatives of President Lech Kaczyński’s PiS (Law and Justice) party scored well with 27.4% of the vote (15 seats). The socialists lost one seat, returning seven MEPs to the EU assembly, while no liberal, independent or far-right candidates ran for election this time around (EurActiv 17/06/09)

Electors punish Socialists

In other countries, several ruling parties suffered losses and the opposition made gains. In Spain , governed by socialists, the centre-right Popular Party scored 42.23% (23 seats) against 38.51% for the socialist PSOE (21 seats).

In Greece , the governing centre-right New Democracy party obtained just 32.29% of the ballot against 36.65% for the opposition PASOK. Both won eight seats.

In Bulgaria , which is governed by a socialist-led coalition (GERB and SDS-DSB), two EPP-affiliated opposition parties recorded a total of 32.31% (six seats), against 18.5% (four seats) for the socialist BSP. Despite suspicions of vote buying (EurActiv 14/05/09) and fraud, “the Bulgarian Central Electoral Commission (CEC) turned down demands for a manual recount of the vote” tabled by the Blue Coalition (formerly anti-communist) and the Lider party, according to Vihar Georgiev, writing on Blogactiv

In Hungary, a country hit hard by the economic crisis, the ruling socialists lost to the opposition FIDESZ-KDNP, which scored a remarkable 56.36% (15 seats), against only 17.37% for the ruling MSZP (four seats). Significant gains were made by the far-right Jobbik party, which scored 14.77% (three seats).

“The left-wing results are much worse than expected in the polls,” writes Dániel Antal on Blogactiv . “The Socialist party, which has received the most votes in all national elections since 1994 and was kept out of power only by a three-party right-wing coalition between 1998-2002 […] was beaten in many districts by Jobbik. Their result will sooner or later undermine the hugely unpopular Socialist minority government,” he adds.

In Belgium , “the results reflected a deepening divide in Belgian political life” and “there are no common trends,” according to Jean-Michel de Waele, a political science professor at the Unversité Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) (EurActiv 08/06/09). “In Flanders, the Christian Democrats are on the rise, in coalition with a small separatist party on the up, N-VA (8.21%), but their Walloon equivalent, cdH, lost ground. In Flanders, the Liberals scored well but plummeted in Wallonia. The rise of the Greens in Wallonia is remarkable, but their equivalent is stagnant in Flanders,” de Waele said.

Impact of far-right

The far-right won substantial support in some member states, particularly in the Netherlands and Austria. In the Netherlands , the anti-immigration Freedom Party (PVV) became the second-largest political force, with 16.97% of the ballot and four seats (EurActiv 05/06/09).

In Austria, the Freedom Party (formerly led by Jorg Haider) scored 12.71% (two seats), while another far-right party he founded, ‘The Alliance for the Future’, picked up 4.58%, not enough to get an MEP.

In Belgium , anti-immigration party Vlaams Belang, which advocates independence for Flanders, obtained 10.88%, below the 11.6% won five years ago.

In Bulgaria , ultra-nationalists Ataka scored 11.96%, less than their 14.2% in the 2007 by-elections. They party will send two MEPs, one less than before.

In Romania , the Great Romania (PRM) party of ultranationalist Cornel Vadim Tudor scored 8.65% and obtained three seats. In the 2007 by-elections after Romania’s accession, it obtained only 4.15%, failing to send an MEP to Strasbourg (EurActiv 09/06/09)

In the United Kingdom, the far-right British National Party entered the European Parliament for the first time, winning two seats. The BNP gained the seats in two regions of northern England at the expense of Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s Labour Party, which has been hurt by a scandal over politicians’ expenses (EurActiv 08/06/09)

“There has not been a surge in the [BNP] vote. It was the dip in the vote for the major parties, particularly Labour, due to the major scandal that helped them,” according to British Labour MEP Richard Corbett, who lost his seat to the BNP in these elections (EurActiv 09/06/09)

The pan-European anti-Lisbon Treaty party Libertas suffered a harrowing defeat in the European elections, electing just one MEP in the EU 27, its head of list in the west of France and sitting MEP Philippe de Villiers. Party figurehead and leader Declan Ganley failed to win a seat in Ireland (EurActiv 08/06/09)

Low turnout ‘doesn’t mean EP lacks legitimacy’

Despite fears that voter turnout would plunge, participation in these elections remained stable, with 43.08% of voters heading to the polls. In the 2004 elections, it was 45.47%.

Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) leader Graham Watson said the low turnout could be interpreted in two ways: “Either people don’t go to vote because they are perfectly satisfied, or because there must be something wrong.”

“We need to work towards a proper policy of communication about what happens at EU level, give Euronews the status of public station broadcaster in all of our countries, and elect a percentage of the European Parliament on a pan-European list. That might help us to have a European debate, rather than help us to have 27 national debates,” he said.

“I propose that all Europeans vote on the same day in order to create a European public space,” French Commissioner Jacques Barrot told EurActiv. “These elections are too fragmented and only national views prevail,” Barrot said, adding: “The European project is complex and it is necessary to familiarise children with these complex data at school,” he added.

Asked what effect the low turnout would have on the Parliament’s legitimacy, Professor Mario Telo, president of the European Studies Institute at the Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), said: “It is incorrect to talk about lack of legitimacy. A possible reading could also be that the European system is so well-established that even Eurosceptic parties want to be represented in the European Parliament.”

“The participation crisis can be blamed on national parties, which did not do their job in explaining Europe and campaigning on European issues. Europe is still perceived as boring and too complex,” Telo continued, adding: “The election results reveal a crisis of national democracy rather than at EU level. In member states, we are seeing more and more of a resurgence of populism, sadly enhanced by political scandals.”

A top European Parliament communication adviser told EurActiv the poor turnout had once again exposed “the failure of national political parties to engage citizens”.

“The European Parliament has launched an institutional campaign to raise awareness, but no political party campaigned on European manifestos,” the official said, noting that not one party mentioned that three-quarters of national legislation is produced in Brussels.

Possibly more women, but no equal representation

Once again, women will not be equally represented in the new European Parliament, despite much talk and fully-fledged legislation to ensure gender equality (EurActiv 11/06/09)

The exact distribution of men and women will only be known at the inaugural session of the new legislature in Strasbourg on 14 July, but initial data show that the number of female MEPs will not come close to equally representing the bloc’s population, of which 52% is female.

In the 2004-2009 legislature, the European Parliament was composed of 31% women and 69% men.

“It is not surprising as it is due to the slight shift to the right,” said Cécile Gréboval, policy director at the European Women’s Lobby (EWL), the largest umbrella organisation of women’s groups in the European Union.

Positions:

Hailing their victory, EPP-ED group chairman Joseph Daul and EPP president Wilfried Martens said European citizens had “decided to make the road map from the EPP manifesto for the next five years their own”. “The message that European citizens want to pass to their politicians is crystal clear: they must put ambition and political will back at the heart of European action to meet the daily concerns of citizens and to ensure Europe’s place in the world,” they said in a statement.

“This new parliamentary term will be decisive for the European Parliament. With new, improved working methods, and the statute of co-legislator strengthened by – and we hope as quickly as possible – the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the Parliament will be in a strategic position at the heart of European decision-making,” the leaders said.

“The EPP parliamentary group will have a particular responsibility in Parliament in view of its position in this Institution and the weight of the challenges we face both internally and internationally,” they added.

Asked why the Socialists had performed badly, Belgian Green MEP Philippe Lamberts said: “The Socialists have not been able to take advantage of the problems caused by ideologies put forward by the conservatives, such as deregulation and free markets. They did not articulate a clear vision, while the Green vision was very clear: a Green New Deal with growth through green investment and transformation of lifestyles.”

“The economic crisis has deeply touched the electors. I think we all have a responsibility at European level to find solutions to this crisis. If we fall into nationalism and protectionism, we are dead,” said Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) leader Graham Watson (UK).

“The Socialists have lost many seats in these elections, while the liberal democrats maintained their position and might be a tiny bit stronger than in the previous parliament,” Watson said.

Commenting on the results, Socialist Group leader Martin Schulz (DE) said: “There are days you win and days you lose. I would have liked extra seats, but we have to take what the electors give us.”

“We will continue our fight for progressive policies. We will continue the fight for social Europe, building up on our manifesto,” he added.

European Liberal Democrats (ELDR) President Annemie Neyts told EurActiv that the result meant the Liberals’ standing in the Parliament was more or less “equal” to what it was before the poll.

“There are countries where we have lost seats. Indeed, some of our delegations have been wiped out altogether – the Alliance of Free Democrats in Hungary didn’t make the threshold,” she noted.

But gains were made elsewhere. “The Dutch Liberals-combined gain one seat, and in Germany, the FDP made a big jump,” Neyts observed.

Describing the results as a “success”, the ELDR president said: “This was our ambition, given that as the financial crisis deepened everyone was indicating that liberals were the big culprits and deserved a beating”.

“So by succeeding in keeping the same number of MEPs, we have done rather well,” she concluded.

European Commission President José Manuel Barroso described the outcome as “an undeniable victory for those parties and candidates that support the European project and want to see the European Union delivering policy responses to their everyday concerns”. “The political forces that constructively address policy challenges, and that have constructively engaged with the Commission during the past legislature, occupy the overwhelming majority of the seats in the next European Parliament,” he said.

“From today onwards, Europe owes it to the voters to show once again that it can deliver. It must continue to pave the way through the economic and financial crisis. It must do all it can to support those most vulnerable in society, especially those facing unemployment. And Europe must grasp the opportunity to build a new social market economy that puts a smarter, greener growth at its core, so as to decisively address climate change,” the Commission president continued.

“The turnout compared to 2004 shows that this is not the time for complacency. National politicians, whose debates all too often remain largely national in their focus, must acknowledge themselves more consistently as both national and European actors. The Commission will continue with its efforts to put the European Union at the centre of the political debate in all member states,” he said.

Commenting on the relative failure of the European centre-left at these elections, Jackie Davis, an analyst at the European Policy Centre, a Brussels think-tank, said the results “show how divided the centre-left forces are at the moment. Normally sitting governments are punished at European elections”.

“It is not the centre-right winning, but rather the centre-left going down, and the votes are shifting to extremist parties,” Simon Hix, a professor at the London School of Economics, told EurActiv, commenting on the results (EurActiv 09/06/09). “Mainstream centre-right parties in most places have adopted the agenda of social democrats,” Hix said, meaning that “they are now in favour of public spending as a result of the economic crisis”.

Links Policy Summary :http://www.euractiv.com/en/eu-elections/2009-2014-centre-right-european-parliament/article-183383#summary

European Union

  • European Parliament: Election results: towards the new Parliamentexternal [FR]external [DE]external
  • European Parliament: Turnout at the European elections (1979-2009)external [FR]external [DE]external
  • European Parliament: Seats by political group in each Member Stateexternal [FR]external [DE]external
  • European Parliament: Distribution of seats by Member State: parties and political groupsexternal [FR]external [DE]external
  • European Parliament: Distribution of men and womenexternal [FR]external [DE]external
  • European Parliament: Composition of Parliament since 1979external [FR]external [DE]external
  • European Parliament: EU elections results in 2004-2007external [FR]external [DE]external
  • European Parliament: Number of Members per Member State since 1979external [FR]external [DE]external

Press articles

  • EurActiv France: Elections 2009external
  • EurActiv France: Les 72 députés européens français (2009 – 2014)Pdf external
  • EurActiv France: Biographies des 72 élus français au Parlement européenexternal
  • Dnevnik Bulgaria: Избори 09external
  • EurActiv Czech Republic: Evropské volby 2009external
  • EurActiv Germany: Wahlen in Europaexternal
  • EurActiv Hungary: Európai Parlamentexternal
  • EurActiv Poland: Eurowyboryexternal
  • EurActiv Romania: Alegeri 2009external
  • EurActiv Slovakia: Slovensko v EPexternal
  • EurActiv Turkey: 2009 AP Seçimleri

Blogs

  • Blogactiv: A l’heure européenneexternal
  • Blogactiv: EuroJunkieexternal
  • Blogactiv: The new European Parliament: reflectionsexternal
  • Blogactiv: Libertas Failsexternal
  • Blogactiv: Famous Bulgarian Mobsters Will Run for Parliamentexternal
  • Blogactiv: England voted BNP, not UKexternal
  • Blogactiv: David Cameron on track to form alliance of Euroscepticsexternal
  • Blogactiv: Far right make gains in 10 member statesexternal
  • Blogactiv: ‘Law and Justice – come back to EPP!’external
  • Blogactiv: Bulgarian Electoral Commission Refuses Manual Vote Recountexternal
  • Blogactiv: A bit of a problem!external
  • Blogactiv: After the European elections, what next?external
  • Blogactiv: La droite aux commandes de l’Europe : Les citoyens en attente d’un retour aux “fondamentaux” pour les partis de gaucheexternal
  • Blogactiv: The European elections and the anti-EU case in the UKexternal
  • Blogactiv: Bulgarian EP Elections – Fair or Not?external
  • Blogactiv: Gordon ‘The Terminator’ Brownexternal
  • Blogactiv: Bulgarian EP Vote Resultsexternal
  • Blogactiv: Hungarian Results: The Left-Wing Wiped Outexternal

SOURCE EURACTIV

Two new reports examining climate change adaptation and policy making across Europe will be launched today in Brussels in the presence of Peter Gammeltoft, Head of Unit ‘Protection of Water and Marine Environment’ at the European Commission.

The preliminary conclusions of the research were used in the European Commission’s White Paper on climate change, published in April 2009.

The reports are published by the Partnership for European Environmental Research (PEER), a grouping of seven of the biggest European environmental research institutes. PEER is chaired by Professor Pat Nuttall, Director of the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology.

Speakers at the Brussels event include Prof. Nuttall, the lead authors of the two reports, Rob Swart, from Alterra in the Netherlands and Per Mickwitz, from Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE), Ellen Margrethe Basse from Aarhus University, and Katherine Richardson, Vice Dean, University of Copenhagen, Denmark, who organised the recent Climate Change Conference in Denmark held in March 2009

Peter Gammeltoft said, “I greatly welcome the publication of these two new reports from the Partnership for European Environmental Research. It is this sort of dialogue between the research institutes across Europe and national and European policymakers that is essential if we are to successfully deal with the many threats that climate change poses.”

The first new report from PEER, ‘Europe Adapts to Climate Change: Comparing National Adaptation Strategies’, critically analyzes the current status of national adaptation strategies in EU member states, and identifies a variety of opportunities to strengthen their further development and implementation, including timely and targeted scientific research.

The second report, ‘Climate Policy Integration, Coherence and Governance’, concludes that specific measures to tackle climate change, such as emissions trading, will only be successful if they are coherently supported by other government policies addressing economic and social issues.

Professor Pat Nuttall, Director, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, UK, said, “As PEER chair, I know how important it is to work together within Europe to ensure that future decisions will be based on the best information available, minimizing risks and, in some cases, turning threats into opportunities. There is a huge need for increased policy and programme evaluation from a climate change perspective, and these reports are a contribution towards achieving this goal.”

The new reports deal with several aspects of implementing climate policy in Europe. The first report analyses the adaptation strategies of the EU member states, identifying a number of common strengths and weaknesses of the current strategies in the countries studied. The second report assesses the degree of climate policy integration in six different European countries, at national and local levels, as well as within key policy sectors such as energy and transport. It analyses measures and means to enhance climate policy integration and improve policy coherence.

Rob Swart, from Alterra in the Netherlands, the lead author of report 1 on ‘Europe Adapts to Climate Change: Comparing National Adaptation Strategies’ said, “We note that communication and awareness raising is going to be important to get public support for adaptation measures, and to help stakeholders to adapt. Since adaptation is very different from mitigation, communication should be designed specifically for that purpose, including exchange of experiences on adaptation practices. It could well be that breaking down institutional barriers will actually be more important than the technical feasibility of adaptation options.”

Dr. Per Mickwitz, from the Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE), lead author of report 2 on ‘Climate Policy Integration, Coherence and Governance’, said, “Although the inclusion of climate change mitigation and adaptation in general governmental programmes and strategies has substantially increased in recent years, much more is needed in terms of integrating climate issues into specific policy measures. Annual budgets, environmental impact assessments and spatial planning procedures are three examples of existing measures which we believe have significant potential to be climate policy instruments.”

TerraDaily

EC White paper “Adapting to climate change: Towards a European framework for action”

The earth’s climate is changing and the impacts are already being felt in Europe and across the world.

Global temperatures are predicted to continue rising, bringing changes in weather patterns, rising sea levels and increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather events such as storms, floods, droughts and heat waves. Such climatic events can have a major impact on households, businesses, critical infrastructure (transport, energy and water supply) and vulnerable sections of society (elderly, disabled, poor income households) as well as having a major economic impact. We must therefore prepare to cope with living in a changing climate. This process is known as adaptation.

In April 2009 the European Commission presented a policy paper known as a White Paper which presents the framework for adaptation measures and policies to reduce the European Union’s vulnerability to the impacts of climate change.
Decisions on how best to adapt to climate change must be based on solid scientific and economic analysis. It is therefore important to increase the understanding of climate change and the impacts it will have. The White Paper outlines the need to create a Clearing House Mechanism by 2011 where information on climate change risks, impacts and best practices would be exchanged between governments, agencies, and organisations working on adaptation policies.

Since the impacts of climate change will vary by region – with coastal and mountain areas and flood plains particularly vulnerable – many of the adaptation measures will need to be carried out nationally or regionally. The role of the European Union will be to support and complement these efforts through an integrated and coordinated approach, particularly in cross-border issues and policies which are highly integrated at EU level.

Adapting to climate change will be integrated into all EU policies and will feature prominently in the Union’s external policies to assist those countries most affected.

White Paper on adapting to climate change

Documents and links

  • Impact assessment on the White Paper on adapting to climate change (April 2009)
  • Executive summary of the impact assessment (April 2009)
  • Citizens’ summary on the White Paper (April 2009)
  • Discussion paper on agriculture (April 2009)
  • Discussion paper on health (April 2009)
  • Policy paper on Water, Coasts and Marine issues (April 2009)
  • Press release on adapting to climate change (April 2009)
  • Questions and answers on adaptation to climate change (April 2009)

Source EC.Europe

Over the years to come climate change is likely to have considerable economic and social impacts in the EU, particularly in sectors such as agriculture, energy, health and maritime ecosystems.

Despite the emissions reduction targets that the EU is committed to achieve, some consequences of climate change are inevitable and could be even more substantial and swifter than expected. Finding a comprehensive strategy for adaptation to climate change is therefore needed in addition to mitigation measures, which is the key objective of the White Paper issued by the Commission on 1 April 2009.

The document outlines concrete actions for strengthening the Union’s capacity to adapt to the effects of climate change in a time framework split in two phases. The first phase (covering the period 2009-2013) will seek, among others, to increase knowledge on climate change impact and to integrate adaptation to key EU policies (such as agriculture, health, maritime and fishery affairs). This phase should lay the groundwork for the second phase: a comprehensive EU adaptation strategy to be implemented from 2013 and beyond.

The consequences of climate change will vary from one region to another. Therefore the Commission proposes most adaptation measures to be carried out at national or regional level, while the EU would support these efforts through an integrated and coordinated approach, particularly in cross-border issues and common EU policies.

In order to develop knowledge on climate change impact, the Commission suggests establishing an IT tool: a Clearing House Mechanism by 2011. The later would contribute to the Shared Environmental Information System (an initiative by the European Commission and the European Environment Agency seeking to establish an integrated and shared EU-wide environmental information system). The Commission states also that the Clearing House Mechanism will rely on geographical information provided by GMES.

With regard to upcoming actions, the Commission will set up by 1 September 2009 an Impact and Adaptation Steering Group (IASG) consisting of representatives from Member States involved in the drawing up of national and regional adaptation programmes. The group will consult with representatives from civil society and the scientific community.

Source GMES.Info

More information on

White paper Adapting to climate change: Towards a European framework for action

(Feb 2009) the European Parliament adopted a resolution on climate change. The ’2050 Report’ aims at pursuing coordinated negotiations on a post-2012 international climate change policy framework.

It underlines detailed measures to be taken in key areas of society, such as CO² Capture and Storage (CCS), agriculture, forestry, emission trading scheme, fisheries, and health etc. It also calls for climate change issues to be incorporated in other policies and areas, e.g. international trade. Importantly, the report acknowledges that long-term education efforts as well as technology development and transfer are crucial and that research and development focused on more environmental-friendly methods should be reinforced.

On 4 February 2009, the European Parliament passed a resolution on climate change policies setting out measures covering diverse areas of society: emission trading scheme, CCS, agriculture, forestry, soil protection, fisheries, and health, to name but a few.

For instance, it recommends the EU to set up satellite-based monitoring systems and the necessary infrastructure to guarantee early detection and long-term survival, in particular of tropical and rainforests as well as boreal forests. Besides, the care and reforestation of the European forests are planned to be supported by monitoring programmes. Therefore, global monitoring systems require the establishment of a global fund as well as necessary institutional support and administrative bodies.

Furthermore, the European Emission Trading Scheme is considered a vital instrument for achieving emission reduction with maximum efficiency. The report also proposes criteria to be set for the approval of Clean Development Mechanism and Joint Implementation. It highly stresses the application of CCS, considering this as a bridging technology on the way to the decarbonisation of the energy system that, additionally, could serve to complement renewable technologies.

Research and development focused on more environmental-friendly methods of cultivation and optimised farm management should be enhanced as well as funding for research into innovative technologies for the desalination of sea water, new irrigation systems and agricultural and urban water consumption. Additionally, pilot projects to reduce damage from drought or flooding should be made available. Regarding the coordinating role of the EU in the health sector, the report stresses the importance of early warning systems, improved preparedness for disasters and emergency planning.

The “2050 Report” further demonstrates the European Parliament’s clear commitment both to an ambitious EU climate policy and to contributing actively to its development. It is stated that a commonality of views between the institutions is essential to maintain Europe’s leadership in the international negotiations on a new global climate deal.

More information

Source GMES.Info

The objective of the eSDI-NET+ project is to establish a network for communication and knowledge exchange of best practices on European Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDI), which will enhance the use of geographic information provided by the GMES.

Recently, a call for submission of best practices on SDI’s has been launched, focusing on sub national level, for the purpose of a board assessment campaign. After all the applicants have been evaluated through interviews and local workshops, successful ones will be awarded during an international conference planned for the end of 2009.

The eSDI-NET+ project (Network for promotion of cross-border dialogue and exchange of best practices on Spatial Data Infrastructures throughout Europe) is co-funded by the European Community programme eContentplus (within DG Information Society and Media) for a period of 3 years (2007-2010). The project targets users and aims at gathering European Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDI) stakeholders in a platform for communication and knowledge exchange at all levels, with an emphasis on the user benefits. The purpose of this network is to raise awareness of the important role SDIs play and to promote cross border dialogue resulting in the creation of synthesised SDI guidelines and standards. By establishing communication mechanisms between European and local levels, this initiative will support better use of geographic information provided by European initiatives such as INSPIRE, GMES and GALILEO.

Recently, the eSDI-Net+ project has launched a broad assessment campaign consisting of identification and analysis of SDI’s best practices at sub national level. This process will end up by the SDI Best Practice Award at the end of this year, during an international conference gathering the European communities involved in geo-information issues.

All types and sizes of stakeholders in charge of SDI developments from any region of Europe and at any level can apply before 22 September 2009. Applications should be submitted by organisations facilitating access to geographical content or providing geo-information services to end users. Afterwards, selected applicants will to present themselves to Spatial Data Experts and local SDI stakeholders during personal interviews and local workshops.

Each interviewed applicant will be evaluated by the national representative of the eSDI-NET+ project, taking diverse criteria into account among which:

  • Technological, innovative level and originality of the project;
  • Implementation and/or readiness for INSPIRE principles;
  • Level of fostering cooperation between different users (proof of visibility and/or user feedback);
  • Possibility of extension to other countries and regions.

More information at: http://www.esdinetplus.eu/get_involved/award_2009.html

SOURCE GMES.Info

Heinz Zourek, Director-General of the Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry in the European Commission, met the EUMETSAT Director-General, Dr. Lars Prahm, on 24 March at the headquarters of the European Meteorological Satellite Organisation in Darmstadt, Germany.

It was Mr. Zourek’s first visit to EUMETSAT.

The two Directors-General discussed cooperation between EUMETSAT and the European Commission, notably on Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES/Kopernikus). They also discussed their priorities for 2009. Dr. Prahm briefed Mr. Zourek on operational applications in meteorology, oceanography, atmosphere and climate. Mr. Zourek’s visit took place in the framework of activities covered by an exchange of letters between EUMETSAT and the European Commission in 2005. Discussions are currently underway on establishing a GMES/Kopernikus Operational Programme, in which EUMETSAT will have an important role to play.

During its 64th Council meeting on 1-2 July 2008, EUMETSAT agreed to provide its data and products for GMES/Kopernikus.

The agreement covers GMES/Kopernikus pre-operational services from 2008-2010, during which all EUMETSAT data and products, including real-time data, will be made available free of charge to the five GMES Core Services (three fast-track and two pilot services). The three fast track services are the Land Core Service, Marine Core Service, Emergency Response Support Service, and the two pilot services are Security and Atmosphere monitoring.

For more information click here

Source: EUMETSAT and EOportal

ESA starts implementing the second phase of the GMES Space Component Programme

The first phase of the GMES Space Component covers the period 2006-2013. It focuses on the development of the first Sentinel-1 (all-weather day and night radar imager for land and ocean services), Sentinel-2 (high-resolution optical images for land services) and Sentinel-3 (instruments for ocean and global land monitoring services) satellites.

The second phase of the programme is now about to start and will run through until 2018. It will cover the development of the ground infrastructure, the completion of the Sentinel-1, -2 and -3 pairs and the development of the first two atmospheric payloads Sentinel -4 and -5 precursors.

More information on ESA website

Source GMES.info

A study on the competitiveness of the GMES Downstream Sector is available on the Europa website


The final report of the “Study on the Competitiveness of the GMES Downstream Sector” produced within the Framework Contract of Sectoral Competitiveness Studies (funded by the EC DG Enterprise and Industry) is available on the Europa website.

During the study, an analysis has been made of the performance of the European EO downstream sector, in terms of revenues, employment and productivity. Subsequently, the structure of the sector has been analysed. Furthermore, the competitiveness of the sector has been studied, taking into account aspects like production processes, imports and exports, profitability, and market structure.

These issues have been related to a number of regulatory and framework conditions in order to determine the impact of these conditions on the competitiveness of the sector.

Lastly, the EO downstream services sector has been compared with its US equivalent. Based on the analyses, a set of recommendations has been formulated.

The full document as weel as an executive summary can be downloaded from the Europa website.

Source GMES.Info

Key documents on GMES at the European Commission GMES website

Study on the Competitiveness of the GMES Downstream Sector

Other Documents by linking at European Commission GMES website

-COM748 – Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, Council, EESC and CoR: GMES: We care for a safer planet
-SEC2808 – Impact Assessment
-SEC2809 – Summary of the Impact Assessment
-Citizen Summary
-COM 565 Final – Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: GMES: From concept to reality
-COM 65 Final – Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: Establishing a GMES capacity by 2008 – (Action plan 2004-2008)
-COM 609 Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Outline GMES EC Action Plan (Initial period: 2001-2003)
-DIRECTIVE 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007, establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE)
-COM 46 Final – Communication from the Commission: Towards a Shared Environmental Information System

Studies

-Study on the Competitiveness of the GMES Downstream Sector
-Executive Summary

-more reference documents to be found here

SOURCE

Overview on What is GMES ?

GMES will be the European programme implementing an Earth observation service system with satellites, sensors on the ground, floating in the water or flying through the air to monitor our planet’s environment and to support the security of every citizen.

The information provided by GMES will help us understand better how and in what way our planet may be changing, why this is happening, and how this might influence our daily lives. In this way, GMES will improve people’s safety in many ways, such as by providing information on natural disasters such as forest fires or floods, thus helping prevent the loss of lives and large-scale damage to property. GMES also presents a clear potential for commercial applications in many different sectors by providing Earth observation data for free to anybody who might have a use for them. GMES will help us improve the management of our natural resources, monitor the quality of our waters and air, plan our cities and prevent urban sprawl, ease the flow of transportation, optimise our agricultural activities and promote renewable energy. Clearly, GMES has the potential to significantly improve the living conditions of our generation and the generation of our children.

Besides affecting our daily lives, GMES will provide vital information to decision-makers and business operators that rely on strategic information with regard to environmental, for instance, climate change and adaptation, or security issues.

The infrastructure needed to collect the observations used by GMES services is owned and operated either by international, European or national entities with their respective political and financial responsibilities. GMES aims at ensuring seamless data flow for sustainable services through effective coordination of all these capacities.

GMES is an initiative driven by the needs of its users, and the information it provides is freely and openly accessed. Significant impact on the economy is expected through the creation of large downstream value-adding service markets, which will grow and flourish provided that a long-term commitment to the GMES programme is secured.

What is the difference between Galileo and GMES ?

GALILEO and GMES are complementary systems making use of satellite technologies. GALILEO is essentially a satellite navigation system providing a positioning and timing services worldwide. GMES is an ‘Earth observation’ system providing information on the state and evolution of our environment and improving the security of our citizens.

There are other Earth-observation systems. What is the added value of GMES ?

Earth observation services already exist in Europe, but they are dispersed at national or regional level. With the exception of meteorological services, they cannot guarantee the long-term service availability and sustainability of timely and reliable information that GMES will provide. Further, in order to respond to ever growing challenges of global safety and to develop strategic policy options, such as climate change, Europe needs a well-coordinated, fully reliable Earth observation system of its own. GMES is that system.

What is at stake with GMES ?

Initially developed as a scientific project ten years ago, GMES needs to evolve into a fully mature operational service system.

This requires: a sustainable programme including long-term funding commitment; a robust governance structure; and tailor-made legislative and regulatory framework notably designing a data policy that stimulates jobs and growth.

Deciding not to implement a sustainable GMES programme would undoubtedly cause a significant loss of opportunity for Europe, in terms of the money already invested so far, the loss of market opportunities and stimulus for innovation as well as a loss of worldwide influence through a strong knowledge base in such strategic areas as climate change and global stability.