EurActiv Logo
EU news & policy debates
- across languages -
Click here for EU news »
EurActiv.com Network

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

End doublespeak on energy efficiency, EU states told

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 26 September 2011, updated 10 June 2013

The European Commission's top energy official has criticised EU member sates for holding a double language on the bloc's target to cut energy use by 20% by the end of the decade.

Philip Lowe, the head of the Commission's directorate-general for energy, criticised EU governments for obstructing binding rules to promote energy efficiency, as part of efforts to meet the bloc's aspirational goal of a 20% cut in energy use by 2020.

In June, EU Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger proposed rules obliging energy firms to cut energy sales by 1.5% each year, and requiring 3% of public buildings annually to be given an energy-efficient makeover (see details).

Lowe said the Commission made its proposal after EU governments refused to consider making the bloc's 20% energy efficiency target legally binding.

"But the conclusion of the last meeting [with governments] was 'well, we don't really like binding measures either'," he said, following an informal meeting of EU energy ministers in Poland last week.

"So they don't like binding targets or binding measures, and yet they regard energy efficiency as the most important priority of the European Union. Sorry, but we must stop this," Lowe told an EU energy policy seminar held by the Brussels-based think-tank Bruegel.

The EU's efficiency goal is designed to cut Europe's carbon emissions while also keeping a lid on an energy import bill that currently amounts to about €270 billion a year for oil and €40 billion for gas.

But the EU is falling far short of its goal, and is set to only achieve about 9% efficiency gains by 2020.

Oettinger has said he will give EU countries two years to get energy efficiency savings back on track before proposing legally binding targets.

EurActiv with Reuters

COMMENTS

  • Phil is speaking sense. But it goes a bit further than “double speak” and well into the realms of double-think-no-action. Did you know that property owners in London are keen supporters of the Tailban?

    A stroll around anywhere in Central London will highlight the fact that whilst they may not have “double glazing salesmen shot on sight” signs up they might just as well (historic buildings doncha’ know – and other excuses too pathetic to list).

    Of course the energy sources to heat these incontinent buildings comes from, increasingly, gas. Notice the UK has built new gas import terminals, notice that the gas comes from theocratic dictators in the middle east (who are also London property owners). The self same gas salesmen also fund the Taliban (and other freedom fighting co-religionists - Euro40bn buys a lot os bullets & guns from the Euro Death Industries). I find it surprising that property owners in London, such as the Duke of Westminster, are Taliban supports – still life’s funny, perhaps he owns shares in various coffin makers as well?

    These are speculations and perhaps the good Duke (net worth circa £50bn) is unaware of double glazing and its energy saving properties (ditto other London property owners including the UK government) and has yet to make the connection between what his tennats pay in gas and who funds the Tailban. Don’t laugh at this, the former chairman of Barclays bank (2007) had to be shown how to use a …. Cash machine (Private Eye No 1297 – page 10). Thus it is quite possible that with respect to energy saving, our erected representatives and their acolytes are completely clueless in this area, hence double-speak, double-think-no-action (or perhaps clueless and hypocritical would be closer to the mark?).

    Not wishing to be seen as unfair to London, one could extend these comments to any number of Euro capitals (hi Brussels).

    By :
    Mike Parr
    - Posted on :
    26/09/2011
  • The COM is totally wrong in defining energy efficiency as energy savings or cut of sales. Energy efficiency must be a relative term, measuring energy consumption to an amount of goods produced or value added. If energy efficiency is measured in absloute terms, like the COM does it, then you could be more energy efficient if you would shut down your industry.

    By :
    MichaelE
    - Posted on :
    30/09/2011
  • If we look at plenty new buildings signed by top architects we are able to understand how far is these goals: Such energy mistakes made by professional what expect fom the normal citizan?

    By :
    antonio cristovao
    - Posted on :
    01/10/2011
Background: 

Energy companies will need to make savings among final customers of 1.5% a year under a new regime of audits, inventories and savings obligations outlined in a draft EU directive tabled by the European Commission in June.

However, at the insistence of Germany and Sweden, the draft directive was watered down in a way that allows EU states to "opt to take other measures to achieve energy savings among final customers" than compelling efficiency savings.

In 2009, EU member states committed to meet three targets for 2020: a 20% cut in emissions reductions, a 20% rise in the share of renewables in the energy mix, and a 20% cut in energy consumption, all on 1990 levels.

But the efficiency pledge was voluntary, and it is the only one that Europe is on track to miss.

More on this topic

More in this section

Advertising

Sponsors

Videos

Energy Supply News

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Energy Supply Promoted

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Advertising

Advertising