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

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

Energy efficiency talks focus on finance, deal uncertain

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 11 January 2012

Financing aspects are dominating ongoing talks on the energy efficiency directive, but member states are keeping their hands firmly on their wallets, EurActiv has learned.

As negotiations over the energy efficiency directive reopen under the Danish EU presidency, discussions are  focusing heavily on financing aspects.

However, several options floated by the European Parliament to break the deadlock already look like non-starters, EurActiv was told.

And opposition by some EU states is making a binding 20% energy efficiency target impossible, Martin Lidegaard, Danish minister for climate, energy and building, told journalists in Copenhagen.

Bendt Bendtsen, a Danish member of the European Parliament who is following the dossier for the European People's Party (EPP), told EurActiv that funding mechanisms currently contemplated by Parliament will be blocked by the EU Council of Ministers, which represents the EU's 27 member states.

“The provision on ear-marking of financing, such as national energy efficiency funds will not be part of the final piece of legislation,” Bendtsen said.

“It is generally quite difficult to convince member states to earmark funds," said  Bendtsen, adding that "this has even been the case before the crisis emerged”.

“I feel that the Council has a hard job ahead, the ball is really on their table,” he said.

Danes revive talks

Both the European Commission and Parliament were forced to change their position on the proposed energy efficiency directive in order to accommodate the Council's views. Member sates first refused to sign up to binding targets on energy savings, which prompted the Commission to propose binding "measures" instead.

Now, the Council does not want binding measures either, Bendtsen said, “unless the targets are measured differently or there are opt-outs or something else”.

The Danish presidency was expected to meet the Council’s energy working group yesterday (10 January) for the first time since it took over the EU's rotating presidency on 1 January. The Danes are hoping to piggy-back on discussions over the EU's energy roadmap to 2050 in order to re-launch the stalled talks on the directive.

Funding to be discussed

But financing issues are more likely to be addressed in wider talks over the EU budget for 2014-2020, the Multi-Annual Financial Framework (MFF), which covers areas such as research and regional funding.

The funding aspect of the directive “has to be seen in the full picture of the European Regional Development Fund and 'Horizon 2020' [research agenda], but should not necessarily be a part of the directive,” an EU official told EurActiv.

Member states are avoiding signing up to a specific wording on financing issues in the text of the directive, as they do not want to prejudge the ongoing negotiations over the EU’s budget for the 2014-2020 period, EurActiv understands.

The upcoming months will see “tough talks” on the proposed directive, with “a large majority of the European Parliament” wanting binding financial facilities in place to fund the energy efficiency measures and member states being reluctant to allocating further money.

The talks are "like a poker game" where governments keep their cards close to their chests, said Claude Turmes, a Green MEP from Luxembourg who is spearheading talks for the European Parliament.

Claire Roumet of CECODHAS, a federation promoting social housing in Europe, said financing issues were crucial as renovation work in homes help bring energy bills down for the poorest. The efficiency directive “is looking at more than just EU finance. Tapping money for energy efficiency is not touched fully by the MFF, because it does not take into consideration all alternative types of funding,” Roumet told EurActiv.

Roumet was also adamant that binding measures were necessary:​ “If there is an obligation without specific measures, it will never be complied with."

March vote in Parliament

Meanwhile, the European Parliament's committee on industry, research and energy (ITRE), which has the lead on the dossier, has pushed back its vote on the draft text from 24 January to 28 February. A full parliamentary vote is expected to take place late March.

The delay can be explained by the huge number of amendments, with more than 1,800 changes proposed to the draft energy efficiency bill.

“The number of amendments shows just how important this directive is,” said Claude Turmes, a Green MEP from Luxembourg. The industry committee aims to integrate all those into 60-70 compromise amendments for the final vote of the Parliament.

“We are entering the eye of the storm, we are trying to build alliances with friendly governments,” Turmes said.

On financing aspects, he said he was optimistic: “We are very much still in the negotiations, it is still very probable that we will have a text on this issue of financing in the directive".

The Green MEP said that the Parliament's insistence on having financial facilities included in the text of the directive gives the Assembly “visibility” and allows it “to have a tough discussion on financing” with member states.

Targets to stimulate investment

And as financing aspects remain the most difficult part of the negotiation, some are trying to revive an old idea – making the EU's 20% energy efficiency target legally-binding.

Proponents say a binding target would make it harder for countries to argue against energy efficiency funds, because they would be compelled to allocate some money from the EU budget to meet that objective.

"A way of seeing it is the spine is the target and the flesh is the European budget to add meat to the bone," said Sanjeev Kumar of environmental group E3G.

And even if the EU allocates some specific funds for energy efficiency, without targets investments might remain scarce, efficiency advocates argue.

The European Commission’s last report on the 2007-2013 budget says that "certain energy and environmental investments are not progressing  as expected" and this must be redressed by the member states and regions.

"The direction for 10-20 years is vital so that you can cast these investments over a longer time," Kumar said. "It gives people certainty that their efforts will not be reversed."

Roumet and Turmes agree that binding targets create an incentive for investment in energy efficiency.

The  Danish presidency, described as “ambitious, but realistic” its aim to finalise talks between the European Commission, Council and Parliament on the energy efficiency directive during the first six months of 2012.

Next steps: 
  • Jan.-Feb. 2012: First discussions on the directive between member states.
  • 7 Feb. 2012: Stakeholder conference on the 2050 Energy Roadmap.
  • 28 Feb. 2012: Parliament committee on Industry, Reserach and Energy (ITRE) votes on the Energy Efficiency Directive.
  • 28 Mar. 2012: Expected parliament plenary vote on the energy efficiency directive.
Ana-Maria Tolbaru

COMMENTS

  • The entire discussion on energy efficiency has all the coherence of one between two drunks on a Saturday night. The discussion is also at such a high level that it in no way relates to realities on the ground:

    March 2009: EIB at the sustainable energy week explains how they fund companies that renovate buildings in Eastern Europe by purchasing (capitalising) the resulting energy savings – the company gets money (to do more renovations), the EIB gets a stream of income. Why is this approach not massively expanded? Because the stick of mandatory EE targets for a given member state does not exist.

    London now: invisible signs in capital saying “double glazing salesmen shot on sight” – some of the most expensive real estate on planet earth urinates energy straight out of the windows/walls/roofs (double gazling? where?). Why? No legislation to force the UK pubic schoolboy government to do anything with respect to EE.

    The debate about energy efficiency is amongst the most pathetic I have ever seen. EE pays for itself – the EIB makes money by capitalising the long term savings of the pathetic number of EE projects it funds. The losers in EE? The energy supply companies (even they are starting to get the message – e.g. EON starting an ESCO). Does this mean that, member states/council by delaying legislation to save citizens money favour energy supply companies? This would certainly seem to be the case.

    Another tough question to answer: if the above is true, why do citizens insist on voting for doorknobs year after year?

    By :
    Mike Parr
    - Posted on :
    11/01/2012
Background: 

Europe aims to reduce its primary energy use by 20% in 2020 “simply by applying cost-effective energy savings measures”.

The proposed Energy Efficiency Directive was unveiled by the Commission in summer 2011 to update the previous Energy Efficiency Action Plan, which had not been designed to create full energy savings. The 20% will not be reached, unless the EU doubles its energy savings efforts from the current projection of 9%.

The European Commission proposes individual measures for each of the sectors that could play a role in reducing energy consumption. However, talks on the directive are expected to be "very tough".

More on this topic

More in this section

Advertising

Sponsors

Videos

Energy Efficiency News

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Energy Efficiency Promoted

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Advertising

Advertising