Internship at the European Parliament

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Internship at the European Parliament"

Christina Andrews
6 years ago
Views:

1 Internship at the European Parliament Final Report Isak Öhrlund Autumn 2011

2 My Internship This final report describes my internship experience that I had at the Science and Technology Options Assessment unit (STOA) of the European Parliament in Brussels during the fall of 2011 an internship that was carried out as a part of my studies at the master programme in Sustainable Development at Uppsala University and the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. In this report I will describe STOA and my tasks, briefly summarize my accomplishments and give some personal reflections as well as a self evaluation. The Science and Technology Options Assessment unit My internship was conducted at the Science and Technology Options Assessment unit (STOA) of the European Parliament which is a secretariat under the directorate for Legislative Coordination and Conciliations (Directorate E) of the Directorate General for Internal Policies. STOA is the European Parliament s own Science and Technology Options Assessment unit that Committees and individual members of the European Parliament (MEPs) can utilize when independent expert assessments of various scientific or technological options are needed in the policy making process. Since independence is an important factor, STOA does not carry out any research of its own but instead it is carried out in partnership with external experts. The STOA secretariat assists the STOA panel which consists of 15 members of the European Parliament who is nominated by six of the permanent Committees (ITRE, EMPL, ENVI, IMCO, TRAN and AGRI). The STOA panel carries the political responsibility for STOA's work, decides on all STOA s activities and reviews ongoing or recently completed projects. The secretariat is responsible for the practicalities around STOA meetings and the supervision of STOA s external research projects. My Tasks What kind of tasks interns at the European Parliament are given is highly dependent on what section of the Parliament they are assigned to. Generally, interns are assigned to different parts of the parliament according to their background and preferences and their work is mostly administrative helping out with meetings, answering e mails, writing briefings and meeting minutes etc. When I applied for internships I was very keen on having an internship that would give me the opportunity to fully utilize my knowledge in the field of environmental science and sustainable development. I did not want to waste a whole semester doing administrative tasks, not even at the European Parliament. So when the European Parliament replied to my application and offered me a place at the Science and Technology Options Assessment unit, I

3 had my supervisor assure that I would actually do something useful during my time there. Luckily enough, my supervisor held his word and I almost exclusively got tasks and worked with projects that required knowledge within the field of environmental science and sustainable development. I will now go through the main tasks that I was given during my internship and describe them in more detail. The Annual Lecture The Annual Lecture is STOA s biggest event during the year where renowned researchers from all over the world come to the Parliament to discuss scientific topics of interest to STOA and the European Parliament. This year s Annual Lecture was to be held in the end of November with the topic Sustainable Management of Natural Resources the same topic as one recently launched STOA project that has a special focus on the sustainable management of soil and water. One of the first tasks I was given at STOA was was to help out my colleague Miklós Györffi to suggest speakers for the STOA Annual Lecture, and since I am very familiar with the topic I was more than happy to assist. I suggested a bunch of speakers, out of which Miklós after having talked to the responsible Member of Parliament (MEP) approved four. Next, I was asked to contact the speakers to see if they would be available. This was a somewhat complicated task, since we (Miklós and those responsible for the Annual Lecture) could not tell the speakers if they would be given the chance to attend or not. This resulted in some communicative issues with our speakers, and after months of changes in the Annual Lecture program it was finally decided that only one of the speakers I had contacted would get the chance to attend. The other spots were taken by MEPs and other speakers that hadn t confirmed their attendance earlier. Project Quality Control When independent expert assessments of various scientific or technological options are needed in the policy making process, the members of the STOA panel have the right to suggest STOA projects. The MEP(s) that suggest a project design project specifications together with the secretariat. The specification is the legally binding document describing the content of the project, the time frame and the budget. Once the specifications are finished, a suitable external contractor is hired and a time plan is agreed upon. Usually, the contractor is asked to provide a so called opinion which is a pre study describing what they intend to include in the project. The opinion is controlled by the secretariat and the responsible MEP(s), and if it does not match the specifications or if some changes are needed comments are given and the contractor is asked to deliver an updated opinion. Once the opinion has been accepted, the project is launched for real and depending on the size of the project the contractor may produce several deliverables (i.e. partial reports) along with a final deliverable/report. All deliverables and the final report are controlled by

4 the STOA secretariat to see if they match with the project specifications before they are sent to the responsible MEP(s) and finally accepted by STOA as a finished study. Unfortunately, STOA does not have the expertise within all subject fields needed to control the quality of the actual content. Since sustainable development has gained significant attention in the policy making process over the last decades, many STOA projects are directly linked to sustainability issues. Strangely enough, STOA does not have a single employee who is educated within the field of sustainable development or environmental science, which is probably one of the reasons why STOA wanted me as an intern. Quite short after my arrival, I was therefore asked by my colleague Peter Ide Kostic to help him out with the quality control of a STOA project called Systematic Approach to Adaptation to Climate Change and Renewable Energy Harnessing. I read the full report thoroughly and compared it with the project specifications, and it turned out that the contractor had missed several important parts of the project. Peter was very happy with my critical review of the project and took my comments and sent them directly to our contractor Jane Desbarats at the Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP). Jane replied to my comments and largely agreed with them, but also referred to another set of revised project specifications. It turned out that the contractor had corresponded with the MEP who ordered the study and interpreted the specifications in another way than was originally meant. According to the STOA rules, it is however only the original set of specifications which are legally binding, so I, together with Peter, came up with some revision requirements. The contractor revised and a few weeks later Jane came from London to Brussels to meet up with us and discuss the project. Peter asked me to come with him to the meeting (since I was the one who had actually controlled their project), but it turned out that Jane was late and Peter had another STOA meeting to go to, so he left me in charge over the meeting. I was not prepared for this meeting, but I managed to hold a very constructive meeting with Jane anyway and we discussed the content, some issues and her presentation for the responsible MEP which she was going to hold in the end of the year. A few months later, Jane came back to Brussels and held a presentation to the responsible MEP (Mr. Vittorio Prodi). Vittorio was happy and Peter was impressed that I had managed to take care of everything around the project. After this success, Peter asked me to comment on two other projects as well one on Technology Options in Urban Transport (a part deliverable focusing on maritime shipping) and one on Eco efficient Transport (a part deliverable focusing on transport habits). I read and commented both reports and Peter was very thankful, but since both projects were still ongoing I did not get the chance to correspond any further with the contractors.

5 My Personal Project When I first arrived at STOA, my supervisor told me to read the project specifications of the just lunched project on the Sustainable Management of Natural Resources and try to see if I could find a topic to write about within the frames of that project. My own project would be something that connected to the subject (Sustainable Management of Natural Resources) and something that would contribute to earlier findings. I spent the first three weeks desperately looking for a topic to write about. I had quite a few ideas, but after having done a bit of research, I found that most of them were already within quite established fields of research and that it would be hard for me to contribute to what had already been done. After having had some discussions with my supervisor and a meeting with some people from the secretariat of Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) Committee, I decided to write about metals since that was a hot topic that my supervisor was interested in and since it partly connected to a few legislative proposals currently underway such as the recast of the WEEE directive. I spent a week or so on developing the topic and I proposed three alternative focuses to my supervisor: 1. Consequences of metal supply scarcity in terms of limiting the deployment of green technologies 2. Environmental consequences of increased demand for rare metals 3. Rare metal recycling technologies My supervisor responded by saying that I could include all three focuses in my project. After that, I felt the pressure of producing something that would satisfy my supervisor and that would actually be useful to the Parliament, so I started working full time with my project. I dedicated the first weeks to searching and reviewing tons of articles and studies on the topic of critical and scarce raw materials as well as metals use in green technologies. After having read for a few weeks, I decided to narrow down my study to metals that are used in green energy technologies and finally to metals used only in photovoltaic cells and wind turbines. I found that the topic of critical and scarce raw materials is a rather young field of research, and that there is almost no studies done on the potential impact of metal supply scarcity on the deployment of green energy technologies. Therefore, I decided to focus on answering whether the supply of certain metals could limit the successful deployment of photovoltaic cells and wind turbines. To answer that, I would have to model the future metal demand from photovoltaic cells and wind turbines and compare that with metal supply data. To do that I would need data on the metal use in these technologies, energy mix scenarios and technology mix scenarios, so I decided to get right to it and spent the following couple of months on obtaining all the crucial data by reading reports, contacting research centers, universities and consultancy firms.

6 Parallel to my data collection I began working on my model in Excel, and a few weeks before the end of my internship I had managed to model the metal demand from photovoltaic cells and wind turbines, using the best up to date energy and technology mix scenarios. The results were very interesting and many of the researchers along with Paul Anciaux (one of the lead authors of the Commissions Critical raw materials for the EU report) with whom I had a meeting with at the Commission showed great interest in my report. My supervisor told me that he wanted to publish my report on the STOA website, something which made me very happy but also quite stressed. I spent the last weeks of my internship working very hard with the last parts of my report, often staying until late in the evening. A few weeks before the end, I also got the chance to present my report to an MEP (a chance you don t get every day) who earlier had suggested that the Parliament should look closer at the issue of raw material scarcity, but whose proposal had been turned down. The MEP (Mr. Vittorio Prodi) and my supervisor listened to my presentation with great interest and the presentation couldn t have gone any better. I spent the last few days contacting people I wanted to cite and people from whom I had borrowed diagrams and pictures to ask for their permission to publish my work on the STOA website. Everything went smooth and I got all the permissions I needed. I finished the report just before I ended my internship, but my supervisor hadn t had time to read it all through, so he promised to give his comments so that I can revise anything if needed before STOA publishes it on the website in the end of January The Executive Summary of my report is pasted below to give you an idea of the content and extent of my work.

7 Executive Summary Our climate is rapidly changing, and to lower the risk of crossing a tipping point where dangerous climate change will be irreversible, greenhouse gas emissions must decrease rapidly within the coming decade and eventually be eliminated in a few decades ahead. To accomplish this, we will inevitably have to abandon fossil fuels and shift towards renewable energy systems such as photovoltaic cells and wind turbines. Recent events have however indicated that the supply of raw materials used in advanced and emerging technologies may not be able to keep up with the rapidly increasing demand. Since the world cannot afford any further delay in climate change mitigation, this study investigates whether the supply of raw materials may hinder the successful transition to a renewable energy supply by looking at the future metal demand from photovoltaic cells and wind turbines. The findings show that major deployment of photovoltaic cells and wind turbines may have a serious impact on the future demand of 8 significant elements gallium, indium, selenium, tellurium, dysprosium, neodymium, praseodymium and terbium. Yearly Global Metal Demand from Photovoltaic Cells and Permanent magnet Wind Turbines under the most optimistic deployment scenarios used in the study. Following the identification of the 8 significant elements, the study looks at recycling rates and practices as well as potential material and technology substitution options. It is found that current recycling rates of the 8 significant elements are less than one percent, that material substitution possibilities are very limited and that technology substitution options are moderately available. The findings suggests that if photovoltaic cells and wind turbines continue to rely on the 8 significant elements, demand will increase substantially and has to be met almost exclusively by virgin raw material extraction due to a relatively low recycling potential during the next two decades. A major increase in virgin raw material extraction will have severe consequences for local communities and the environment, including large emissions of greenhouse gases. Based on the findings and the experience gained while conducting the study, a set of policy recommendations are given. The recommendations are:

8 1. To Integrate Raw Materials Criticality in Energy Strategies and Targets. To prevent potential supply bottlenecks and unsustainable price developments, the European Union and the rest of the world must integrate knowledge on raw material constraints in energy strategies and targets. 2. To Cooperate on the Management of Raw Materials. To prevent potential supply bottlenecks of important raw materials and to assure economic, political, social and environmental sustainability, the European Union must work together with the rest of the world on establishing a global framework for cooperation on the management of raw materials and other natural resources. 3. To Increase Transparency and Research. To improve the reliability of raw material demand forecasts in order to avoid potential supply bottlenecks and to ensure strategic planning and sustainable management of raw materials, the European Union must ensure transparency on raw materials use.. Furthermore, the European Union must promote further research in the area of material flow analysis and raw materials use in strategic energy technologies, especially focusing on technologies that are crucial to the fulfillment of long term strategies and targets. 4. To Raise Public Awareness. To ensure that research and development promotes technologies that do not heavily rely upon raw materials with potential supply constraints, the European Union must act to raise public awareness about resource constraints. 5. To Set up Recycling Schemes. To close material loops, to increase supply security of critical raw materials and to ensure the sustainable use of natural resources, the European Union must develop proper recycling schemes for, and eliminate all exports of, products containing critical raw materials. 6. To Promote Sustainable Mining and Processing. To promote a sustainable supply of critical raw materials that ensures proper environmental standards, safety precautions and human rights, the European Union must step up efforts to promote sustainable mining and processing both within and outside of the EU. The study stresses the fact that the European Union must actively work to ensure that the demand for certain raw materials will not outstrip supply and cause a delay to any major deployment of photovoltaic cells and wind turbines. To do this, technological alternatives will have to be sought and implemented and the concept of raw materials criticality will have to be reassessed and integrated into energy roadmaps and targets. If this is not done, the future supply of certain raw materials may impose a risk of disabling a shift towards low carbon, and eventually carbon free, economies thereby disrupting European and global efforts to tackle climate change.

9 Other events Except for the main tasks described above I took advantage of the fact that I was in the center of European policy making, followed my supervisor s advice and attended a bunch of conferences and events that were of my interest and connected to my field of study. This opportunity was one of the best parts of my internship since I really had the chance to see how the discussions around sustainable development are at the top level. Additionally, all interns at the European Parliament have the chance to go to Strasbourg for a few days when there is a plenary session, and my supervisor insisted that I would go to the first session in September. Going to Strasbourg was a nice experience and I got to attend a plenary debate the first day and one of the larger STOA meetings the second day. Reflections My internship at STOA and the European Parliament was truly an interesting experience. I learned a lot about the everyday work at the parliament, about how European laws, directives and initiatives are made and about the relation between the European institutions, member states and European and global organizations. STOA was indeed the right place for me to be since a lot of its work is highly relevant to sustainable development and since I have a background within natural science and a great interest for science and technology. I also learned that European policy making is fairly easy to influence and that small ideas can grow big if you just find the right opportunities. However, my internship wasn t perfect and there were some things that could have been better. My main issue was that my supervisor was the head of unit and apparently was way too busy to supervise an intern. We rarely had any meetings so I basically had to supervise myself and I feel that I could have learnt much more if I had a supervisor who took time to show me around and introduce me to the work and the people of the parliament more thoroughly. Also, I was a bit disappointed in the beginning to realize that I would do a study of my own (just like I have been doing for the past 5 years at university) instead of working more closely with the people at STOA and the Parliament, but when I realized that STOA does not actually do any research of its own and when I finally finished my study I ended up being very satisfied despite my initial disappointment. To sum up, my internship at STOA and the European Parliament was a great experience and I got the chance to learn a lot about something which is very important for sustainable development both in the EU and globally European policy making. My internship at STOA gave me a lot of valuable experience for my future career and a lot of valuable contacts including the opportunity to do my thesis at the Swedish Riskdag s equivalent to STOA: Riksdagens Utredningstjänst.

10 Self evaluation If you get the chance of doing an internship at the European Parliament that is certainly not an opportunity to waste. This was the type of spirit I had during my internship so I really wanted to make the most out of my time in Brussels and to make sure that I wasn t just one among thousands of other interns. This in combination with the impression that my supervisor really had high expectations of me had me work extremely hard for the 17 weeks I spent at the Parliament. I think I did a great job with the tasks I was given and with my study, and my supervisor showed that he was more than happy with what I had accomplished by wanting to publish my report at the STOA website and by saying that the quality of my report was higher than that of several STOA projects. But since I really wanted to accomplish something with my project I also spent about 80 90% of my time at STOA with it possibly a bit too much time, at the expense of other experiences I could have had at STOA. I think that if I would have lowered my ambitions a bit I might have produced a worse study but instead gotten more time to work with my colleagues and established better contact with them something that would be valuable if I want to work for the Parliament in the future.

STOA Science and Technology Options Assessment

STOA Science and Technology Options Assessment Delegation report: Joint Research Centre (JRC) - Ispra - Italy 11 May 2012 Paul Rübig MEP, first STOA Vice-Chair, leading the delegation Malcolm Harbour MEP,