Just recently, the EU proposed new climate and energy objectives for 2030. A reconsideration of previous environmental targets came as an attempt to aid industrial recovery and encourage investment in EU member states.

After the European Union set carbon emissions targets lower than those present in 1990, there has been a considerable increase in subsidies and spending on renewable energy sources' research and development.

Some of the money to fund these R&D projects has come from increased utility charges and, in an effort to comply with regulations, energy companies have increased their expenditure. These costs will keep rising over the years if ways are not found to make environmental targets more cost-effective.

Persistent high compliance costs and subsidies for renewable energy sources could hinder the competitiveness of European business. We could be risking a decrease in foreign direct investment due to high energy costs.

In an effort to address this problem, as well as to revive the industrial sector in Europe, the European Parliament decided to review the Commission's proposal on emission goals for the new climate and energy objectives for 2030 with a different focus. By considering environmental targets and industrial prosperity side by side, EU policymakers sought to revive industrial activity to pre-crisis levels.

A balanced approach towards potential new climate and energy targets, taking into account the negative effects on the industrial base and employment in the Union will lead to a decrease in the costs of establishing and running a business in Europe. Lower costs of production mean more businesses and therefore more job opportunities for EU citizens.

The EU’s 2020 climate policy requires businesses to achieve environmental goals that our Asian and American counterparts are not eager to match. European manufacturers are expected to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 20% by the end of the decade. This is decreasing businesses' incentives to invest in Europe. A coherent approach in climate and energy policy is required that does not undermine industry policy goals and impede job creation.

While importance of supporting renewable energy and protecting the environment must never be undervalued, it can be argued that a change in perspective is needed when a cost-benefit analysis shows polices may lack proportionality. In this case, it has been suggested that explicit costs as well as the opportunity costs of setting possibly overly ambitious environmental targets without looking at their impact on the European industrial sector could be higher than the overall benefits of achieving those targets.

Regarding reindustrialization policy, which has been led in most part by Commissioner Antonio Tajani, the recent document on the "European Industrial Renaissance" has set a target for industry to make up 20% of the continent's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 2020. This goal is non-binding, and it sets industry's contribution to GDP 2 percentage points above that at the beginning of the century.

As labour prices in emerging markets begin to rise, it is possible that companies who opted to outsource in the past will start looking into returning to the regions from which they originated. Caution is warranted however overly incentivising firms with high local manufacturing costs to bring back their production solely for the purpose of increasing industry contribution to GDP as this could result in price increases and market inefficiencies.

As I insisted in my Opinion "on a 2030 framework for climate and energy policies" there are several ways in which we can create jobs by supporting the green energy sector. It fact there exists a great deal of potential for job creation in the green economy. However, striking a balance is required between our objectives of becoming more sustainable and resource efficient and the tendency for these objectives to place disproportionate strains on European industry.

David Casa is the PN MEP head of delegation and a candidate for the 2014 MEP elections