Prague approved the climate plan. According to the opposition, it is unrealistic and insufficiently prepared — ČT24 — Czech Television
“The plan was widely discussed with representatives and the public, there were several meetings, which means that it cannot be said that it was not discussed in sufficient time,” said Prague Mayor Zdeněk Hřib (Pirates). He added that a number of experts are expected on the climate plan.
Deputy Mayor Petr Hlubuček (STAN) said that key measures include, for example, the construction of a biogas station, the use of residual heat from waste water for heating homes, energy savings in city buildings and the placement of photovoltaic panels on their roofs.
Prague’s plans also talk about placing fast chargers for electric cars in public lighting lamps or buying emission-free vehicles for public transport.
“The climate plan is also the answer to how to keep household energy costs in the metropolis at a sustainable level for the future as well. Today, for example, the price of emission allowances is already high – 55 euros per ton of CO2 – the coal age will probably end much earlier than 2038, as presented by the Coal Commission. The transition to renewable energy sources and the maximization of energy savings becomes, in addition to ecological motivation, a clear economic decision,” outlined Hlubuček.
Two to three billion a year
After taking into account the subsidies and savings that the projects will bring, according to Hlubuček, the impact on the city budget will be between two and three billion a year. “This is an amount that is manageable for the capital,” commented the mayor’s deputy for finance Pavel Vyhnánek (Prague sebo). The success of the plan will depend on the ability to raise money from external sources, he said.
“It will be really difficult to get the necessary funding, of course I can’t deny that, nor do I want to deny it,” said Hlubuček. Nevertheless, the city can, for example, receive up to several tens of billions of crowns from the EU modernization fund, but for this the plan must be approved. That is why, according to him, he submitted the document at the right time. In response to criticism from the opposition, Hlubuček added to the solution that the plan will be presented to representatives again in May of next year based on developments.
Udženija: The city has no money for such investments
Opposition MP Alexandra Udženija (ODS) drew attention to the fact that, according to the plan, the city is supposed to invest 25 billion every year from next year, for which, according to her, it does not have the money. “So I didn’t see this money anywhere in the budget outlook,” she said.
Udzhenija pointed out that there is no national legislation yet for some of the proposed measures. According to her, it is also strange that the city is reducing money for cleaning, for example, and at the same time presenting such an expensive plan. The ODS unsuccessfully proposed that they only take note of the representative plan and commission its completion.
“There’s a lot of good stuff there. We really say that it is necessary to protect our environment and take such steps so that we can live better in Prague. But it is necessary to do it realistically and with the funds that are available,” Udzhenija added.
According to representative Václav Bílek (ANO), it is not clear from the document how much the given measures will lead to a reduction in CO emissions2. “I’m missing a table of the effectiveness of individual measures,” he said.
According to Nacher, the proposal does not take into account the consequences of covid
The ratio of the money spent and the effect of individual projects on achieving the overall goal is information that, according to the White representative, they should receive in order to make decisions. Patrik Nacher (ANO) again said that the material does not take into account the consequences of the covid-19 pandemic.
Representative Ivan Pilný (non-party) unsuccessfully proposed that the city management finalize the plan within three months and supplement it with any effect on the living costs of the residents, details of financing and other, according to him, missing documents.