As it happened: Clean energy law hurdles cleared

19-06-2018 (updated: 20-06-2018 )

Two crucial energy files on governance and energy efficiency could be closed tonight by EU negotiators. [European Parliament AV]

EU energy law negotiators met for the final time under the Bulgarian Presidency in a last ditch attempt to sign off on energy governance and efficiency legislation. Check out how EURACTIV covered the breaking developments and talking points of the talks.

Following the collapse of energy efficiency talks last week and the successful completion of the renewable energy directive, EU officials managed to broker an agreement on energy savings before working into the night on energy governance.

It brings a somewhat successful end to the Bulgarian Presidency of the EU’s tenure on energy legislation and now leaves the Austrians a lighter workload than initially feared.

EU strikes deal on 32% renewable energy target and palm oil ban after all-night session

Talks on renewable energy policy in Europe reached un unexpected breakthrough early this morning after negotiators from the European Parliament and EU member states were able to reach a compromise on a 32% headline objective and a complete phase out of palm oil use in transport by 2030.

Energy savings law limps across the finish line

EU negotiators finally signed off on new energy efficiency rules Tuesday evening (19 June), as Bulgaria’s EU Presidency wrapped up another clean energy file. But some of the concessions made by MEPs have already provoked criticism.

EU strikes early morning deal on energy governance bill

Negotiators from the European Commission, Parliament, and Council struck a deal on the energy union governance regulation after an all-night session where they agreed to “consider” a net-zero carbon emission goal by 2050, with a carbon budget.

Clean Energy Package negotiations will continue in Q3 on electricity market design, stay tuned to EURACTIV for continued coverage.

Comments

One response to “As it happened: Clean energy law hurdles cleared”

Mike Parr says:

31/05/2018 at 09:36

Chapeau to Euractiv – very good outline. moving on to the substance/specifics, I have some “problems” which go to the heart of the current “debate” on targets both for EE and RES. The problem is encapsulated by “IRENA found that a 33% target would be attainable at reasonable costs.” – “reasonable costs” – what does this mean?

Euractiv had a recent article on EE “costs” specifically the cost for a deep energy renovation of households. The lobby paper that was linked to in the article was excellent & I found myself nodding in agreement on every page. The paper was based on numbers & facts.

Now we come to the heart of the matter. Around 70% of multi-family homes and single family homes have internal rates of return after deep-energy-rennovation of better than 5% (the single family homes sit mostly in the band 5 through to 15%).

So energy efficiency has a COST but is also has a RETURN i.e. undertaking energy renovation is most cases is PROFITABLE. I have yet to see in any discussion whatsoever on this topic these elements: COSTS & PROFITS from energy renovation.

I am certain that in the triologues COSTS will be focused on PROFITS will never get a look in. Why? Why is there never a discussion – apart from in the most woolly and general terms of the BENEFITS of energy efficiency actions. I have an answer to this question.

A brief diversion: You may have seen my comments with respect to Dutch politicos being forced by Dutch judges (don’t forget kids – judges are enemies of the people) to do something with respect to emissions. Politicos don’t like having to “do something” – ever – hence the synchronised whinning from the Dutch political “elite” (irony alert).

Admitting that energy efficiency actions have very significant benefits that can be quantified with hard numbers would mean that, again, politicos would have to get off their arses, pull their fingers out and – you know – do something, – come up with a plan (shit a – plan! – but it could fail!). It is this reluctance to take risks, make plans, fail, make another plan, learn as you go along, set up financing that will renovate millions of homes (or offices) that lies at the heart of the problem.

The haggling over numbers disguises a deeper malaise – our erected politicos much prefer steady as she goes – they are ill equipped to make hard decisions – tell the populace hard truths etc etc. Most policy making and “initiatives” are along those lines – slow & steady.

Until the institutions develop action plans (which include financing) to renovate a significant lump of the 250 million +/- dwelling in the EU – all the talk of targets, all the negotiations (& nice lunches) will be meaningless. The noise produced by a child hitting the lid of a pot with an old toothbrush would have more meaning.

There are some that would argue that targets (33%, 35% etc) are the first step. I disagree, the setting of targets will have little impact because EU politicos prefer inaction to action. Targets, high or low will have no impact, as long as these attitudes persist.

The above covers EE – the comments could also apply to RES. it is clear that in most cases off-shore wind could be built with zero subsidy – what do the politicos do? In the case of Angie in DE – nothing, in the case of the Uk – Brexit, in the case of the French – work out how to max-out on French added value. How very very ….. provincial.

Log in to Reply

As it happened: Clean energy law hurdles cleared

EU strikes deal on 32% renewable energy target and palm oil ban after all-night session

Energy savings law limps across the finish line

EU strikes early morning deal on energy governance bill

Topics

Supporter

Subscribe to our newsletters