Talk:WindEurope
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
Untitled
[edit]I would suggest adding a current WindEurope logo to replace the old EWEA logo. I am uncertain about how to obtain a current logo from WindEurope, and if granted permission to use its logo for this purpose, how to prove that this permission has been granted RDgalli (talk) 16:00, 14 December 2016 (UTC)RDgalli
Tro2000 (talk) 11:09, 15 May 2013 (UTC) On agreement of author Watti Renew, I deleted the section below, as it referred to a past event, and not EWEA in general, which is the topic of the page. The deleted text was as follows:
Europe’s Wind Energy Event
[edit]In the Europe’s Premier Wind Energy Event February 2013 wind was evaluated by Robert Clover from MAKE Consulting as the cheapest electricity technology after 2020 meeting 50% of electricity demand in Europe by 2050.[1] According to Fatih Birol, Chief Economist at the International Energy Agency without a phasing out of fossil fuel subsidies, we will not reach our climate targets. The fossil fuel subsidies were half a trillion dollars in 2011. 80% of fossil fuel subsidies go to middle and high income households. The biggest challenges of wind energy is the lack of predictability of government policies, and not the lack of predictability of wind power, Birol said. According to Vice-President of the European Parliament Anni Podimata retroactive policy changes undermine investment in renewable energy projects.[2] The European wind industry needs skilled workforce.[3] The EU wind energy capacity in the end of 2012 was 105.6 GW. Renewable energy represented 69% of new power capacity in 2012, while fuel oil, coal and nuclear capacity saw negative growth due to decommissioning.[4]
Tro2000 (talk) 10:23, 29 April 2013 (UTC) I would suggest deletion of the section entitled === Europe’s Wind Energy Event === from this page. It is a poorly written section, with several grammar errors. It is hard to follow the logic of this section, and refers to wind energy in general, not EWEA, which is the topic of this page.
}}