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

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

EU leaders to square the circle of cheap energy

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 08 May 2013, updated 25 June 2013

EXCLUSIVE / EU leaders will grapple with controversial issues including shale gas development and climate change mitigation at an energy summit on 22 May, documents obtained by EurActiv show.

As agreed at the 14-15 March summit (see background), EU leaders will meet to discuss how to lower energy prices and so improve the Union’s industrial competitiveness.  

According to the draft guidelines for the summit conclusions, prepared by the services of Council President Herman Van Rompuy, the EU heads of state intend to focus on “key aspects” of energy policy aimed at boosting growth, productivity and employment to help overcome the effects of the economic crisis.

“High energy prices and costs hamper European competitiveness,” the document says. It invites discussion on how Europe could stay competitive globally and bring down energy prices at a time when Europe is facing massive investment shortfalls in energy infrastructure and generation capacity.

Van Rompuy’s services also call on the EU leaders to discuss ways of further increasing energy efficiency, developing "indigenous resources" and facilitating investment. The Commission will be tasked with developing a “predictable climate and energy policy framework post-2020”.

Re-thinking climate policies 

An analysis of energy-price costs in member states will be requested from the EU executive by the end of 2014, highlighting the EU’s competitiveness with its global counterparts.

Competitiveness, in the EU energy policy context, translates into a re-thinking of the Union’s climate policies. 

Recently, the powerful employers’ group BusinessEurope called on European Commission President José Manuel Barroso to radically shift the EU's energy policy away from climate change mitigation towards cost-competitiveness and security of supply. [more]

The Draft Conclusions say that the EU's goal is to ensure “a level playing field for business and industry”, so they can compete in the global marketplace, having regard inter alia to the impact of carbon leakage”.

“Carbon leakage" is jargon for the relocation of European businesses abroad because of the comparative advantage they may gain from looser climate regimes.

Shale gas

Leaders are also expected to task the Commission to assess a “more systematic recourse to indigenous sources of energy, both conventional and unconventional”.

Unconventional sources usually refers to shale gas, which many believe has triggered an industrial revival in the USA, but is viewed with suspicion by several EU countries.

Regarding conventional resources, several EU countries are exploring offshore fields for gas and oil, their industrial partners being companies from the USA or Israel. The Commission has rarely played a part in these ventures.

Van Rompuy’s services say that they aim at establishing a regular exchange of information between EU countries on “major national energy decisions with a possible impact on other member states”.

Although the document gives no details, sources told EurActiv that it primarily covers upcoming decisions on new nuclear plant builds. Austria, which decided not to develop nuclear energy, has complained about potential health and environmental risks from the Mochovce and Temelín nuclear plants, sited just across the border in neighbouring Slovakia and the Czech Republic.

Large sections of the Conclusions appear in brackets or underlined, which means that countries still have to give final assent to the wording. As an example, the “positive effects” of the unbundling provisions of the Third Energy package are praised “generally”, indicating a lack of unanimity.

EurActiv.com

COMMENTS

  • Energy efficiency could be Europe's response to shale gas! There is an abundant potential available at costs that are lower than zero. Proven by the Commision by the IEA and by the German ministry of enviroment.

    So why on Earth o huntng for more fossil and in particular when it requires environmentally hazardeous exploitation?

    It seems as if several leaders have difficulties to disinguish price and cost. Costs can be lowered by reduction of energy use, and that should be the priority since more efficient technoogies are cheaper.

    By :
    Hans Nilsson
    - Posted on :
    08/05/2013
  • Energy is not expensive!!!
    Today citizens and industry pay a lot because of transmission, distributions, tax and plenty of other fees. The power maket allow players to take advantage and with appropriate bidding having higner prices in a period of the day that usually was low prices. The is an huge intransparency in the systemt, export of "gren/gray" power an so on...but at the end citizens pay. The market liberalisation was a mean to reduce prices...not an aim itself, the question today is did the prices went down?

    By :
    Carlo Caleffi
    - Posted on :
    08/05/2013
  • The article asks: "...how Europe could stay competitive globally and bring down energy prices at a time when Europe is facing massive investment shortfalls in energy infrastructure and generation capacity."
    The answer is through much more ambitious roll-out of energy efficiency, particularly in the buildings sector. Increasing energy efficiency will reduce consumption thus taking pressure off energy infrastructure and capacity. And by the way, in the construction sector, create significant growth and create hundreds of thousands of long-term, stable, local jobs.

    By :
    Adrian Joyce
    - Posted on :
    08/05/2013
  • This is all about "framing" the argument. The line in the EU document that asserts that "High energy prices and costs hamper European competitiveness,” hinges on how and where you are buying your energy. It also carries with it the implication that high energy prices (relative to…?) ipso facto must hamper Euro competitiveness.

    More than 50% of German companies are in the process of building their own power generation systems or considering doing so. Looking at costs, on-shore wind costs around 5 euro cents/kwhr (source BNEF). Industrial electrical power in Germany costs around 11.47 euro cents (source: EC web site). Even off-shore wind power only costs 6 euro cents/Kwhr (source: data from Alpha Ventus). Moving to PV, this costs roughly the same as industrial electrical power (but would allow you to lock-in energy costs). Thus renewables if generated and used locally are low cost – not high cost. Same comments apply to CHP using biomass.

    For those that claim renewables are intermittent and ill suited to providing a stable energy supply – well it depends on how you combine them – PV and wind work well together both on a macro and micro scale and seasonally. If you need process heat CHP is the way to go All this means much lower cost and tax free energy.

    Energy efficiency is indeed worth doing. A 2009 report by two Franhofers on EE in German manufacturing industry noted saving of up to 25% were possible over 5 years (i.e. by 2014). This finding could be extended to the rest of the Euro manufacturing industry. What has happened in the intervening period?: Germany (& the UK & other MS) undermined the EE directive (aided and abetted by that pack of liars: Business Europe)

    The article claims that the document was prepared by the services of Council President Herman Van Rompuy. Well either the council president's service don't know what they are talking about or they are idiots. I leave it to them to decide which.

    The elected cretins and hypocrites that constitute the Euro body politic talk a good talk prefer just that - talk to any meaningful action.

    By :
    Mike Parr
    - Posted on :
    08/05/2013
  • I am surprised by the aggressiveness of some comments. If the energy switch in Germany - the poster project for a precipitated switch to green energy - we would not see intelligent people writing meaningful and credible articles in Germany, showing the amount of the disaster that is emerging - in terms of cost, environment and price impact. For me windparks have a significant impact on the landscape and the natural environment that environmentalists should not ignore. Should I believe that energy prizes are going down in Germany due to the Energy Switch any time soon and that the increase that hit the German consumers is just fake - a conspiracy from the fossil energy lobby? I feel insulted when someone puts everybody who does not follow their opinions in the pocket of idiots. But this attitude is not entirely new for certain circles...

    By :
    Richard Straub
    - Posted on :
    08/05/2013
  • What were the EU bureaucrats and politicians thinking when they signed onto expensive, intermittent "renewable" energy schemes bolstered by huge subsidies? Did they look at the cost-benefit analysis of these systems? Of course not. Now they are reaping what they sowed.

    By :
    Karl
    - Posted on :
    09/05/2013
  • Karl - your statement is basically one long assertion with a couple of errors.

    "What were the EU bureaucrats and politicians thinking when they signed onto expensive, intermittent "renewable" energy schemes bolstered by huge subsidies?"

    Euro bureacrats don't set subsidy levels - member state politicos do.

    renewables - expensive - how so? when on-shore wind is about the same as the cheapest generation (CCGTs = 5 euro cents/kwhr - source BNEF)

    Huge subsidies - they seem to be going down on a regular basis & as noted - were devised by the politicos in your own country.

    By :
    Mike Parr
    - Posted on :
    09/05/2013
  • Energy euro-shambles! You couldn't make up what these clowns have devised. Carbon trading - ha ha ha! Collapsed in all but name. The Eurocrats running a market economy?? Massive subsidies for inefficient processes? Sounds like another Union which died in the 1990s after limping along for decades.

    Turning now to shale gas - the Gazprom president of the Czech Republic is dead set against it. I wonder why that is? And when I say Gazprom, an "ex-Communist" his campaign was funded by Gazprom. I wonder what his orders are?

    By :
    David Stephenson
    - Posted on :
    09/05/2013
Background: 

At their 14-15 March summit, EU leaders decided to hold a series of thematic discussions on sectoral and structural issues key to economic growth and European competitiveness.

They decided that the first such discussion would be on energy, and would take place in May 2013. The next summits will be on innovation and digital and other services (October 2013) and on defence (December 2013). [more]

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