Recognising industry’s contribution to clean energy

The European Commission has published its proposals for the contribution of clean energy in meeting the EU’s obligations for the Paris climate agreement.

Published on 30 November, the “winter package” is appropriately entitled “Clean Energy for All Europeans”. The Communication proposes a binding target for energy saving for 2030 and it includes recommendations to adapt the Energy Efficiency Directive, the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, and other existing guidance.

The Communication states the three main goals as:

  • Putting energy efficiency first
  • Achieving global leadership in renewable energies
  • Providing a fair deal for consumers.

The proposals put a welcome focus on energy demand, calling for all consumers to be involved – whether they are consumers of energy-related technologies or of energy. Whether the proposals are sufficient to significantly contribute to the EU meeting its Paris climate obligations is up to debate.

But there are clear, and somewhat puzzling, proposals for industry too.

The Communication includes an impact assessment for industry using policy scenarios to calculate that the proposals could achieve reductions in industry by 2030 ranging from 0.5% to 12%. But the savings are mainly driven by the EU Emissions Trading System and the impact of Ecodesign on the performance of industrial motors. In the more ambitious scenarios, there are also savings from horizontal measures and the application of best available technologies. The forecast improvements in energy intensity in industry are a minimal compared to the residential or services sectors.

This seems a rather partial assessment of the potential for energy savings in industry. The 2012 Energy Efficiency Directive emphasised mandatory audits for large industry, the promotion of energy efficiency in SMEs, and the promotion of energy management systems. Yet the recent Communication makes no mention of how those mandatory industry audits that have been completed can be used to undertake and track reductions in energy use and increases in energy efficiency.

The package makes no mention of the potential for using those audits to establish a database of potential savings. It does not discuss whether the Commission will help finance specific recommendations that flow from the audits. What will the Commission do to further support energy management systems such as ISO 50001? Such systems are crucial to change the culture within businesses as well as achieving real efficiency.

The Communication includes many proposals for facilitating actions related to industry, including initiatives to accelerate clean energy innovation, fostering competition, maximising Europe’s leadership in clean energy technologies and services to help third countries. Further, the Communication mentions spurring investment and technological leadership that will create new employment opportunities and enhance citizen welfare.

Yet the Communication itself casts some doubt on the degree of the Commission’s commitment to realising the potential of industrial energy efficiency. While the Communication says that EU industry must be at the forefront of the clean energy transition, it adds that the “Commission will support industry-led initiatives to promote EU global leadership in clean energy and low-carbon technological solutions.”

It does not seem highly ambitious for the Commission to wait for industry to lead, and to assign itself the reactive role of simply providing support. The more so, when in a discussion of energy intensive industries, the Communication urges further energy efficiency improvements and notes that “Such investments generally pay off in terms of reduced energy costs.” Really? Has the Commission not moved beyond the need to mention that energy efficiency is good for the bottom line.

The publication of the Communication is the starting gun on negotiations to set a long-term policy framework for 2030. Policymakers, industry associations, environmental groups, consumer groups and others will now be dissecting it and suggesting changes, endorsing certain parts and helping to ensure that Europe does, indeed, set a framework for clean energy to contribute significantly to the Paris climate obligations.

So now is the chance to correct the weaknesses, through critical consultation.





4 thoughts on “Recognising industry’s contribution to clean energy

  1. A most perceptive post.

    Effectively you have identified the great fissure within the Europe Commission on energy efficiency policy, between DGEnergy and DG Climate Change. As the original begetter of the emissions trading scheme, DG Climate Change clings to the (largely theoretical) belief that Eu:ETS must be the cornerstone of all European policy. And that it is being undermined by any of the other kind of policy interventions of the type identified in the Winter Package( the sole exception being eco-design product policy , which transparently affects companies out with the EU:ETS)

    Over recent years there have been a fair number of heavy energy users and electric/gas companies , which so benefit from the toothlessness of the ETS’ lax rules that it has been turned into a “nice little earner” for too many.

    There is little independent evidence that the EU:ETS has had any profound impact upon the energy efficiency of such companies’ activities.Meanwhile these companies increasingly protest that almost all the of the proposed interventions to be found in the Winter Package undermine the “primacy” of the EU:ETS within energy efficiency policy .

    • Thanks, Andrew. A few weeks ago Leonardo Energy organised a workshop in Brussels, chaired by Paul Waide. It was about ETS and energy efficiency. The general consensus was that ETS has not delivered and unlikely to, given its current state. Yet, there is this fissure as you say. It is amazing how the Commission has clung on to defend ETS. Is it better or worse now that both DGs share the same Commissioner? I don’t know. In reviewing the winter package from an industry perspective, it was depressing to see how little there was for industry. Well, how little ambition there was in general. It is almost as if the Commission does not believe energy efficiency can do more to achieve our Paris climate obligations. I really would like to see a more detailed analysis of the impact assessment because I believe it is there we see the true colours of the Commission.

      We will have quite a challenge this year as the negotiations gather pace. It is not too late to change (or improve) the direction. But, will it happen?

      • What on earth is Leonardo Energy?

        On 19 December 2016 at 10:53, Energy in Demand – Sustainable Energy – Rod Janssen wrote:

        > Rod Janssen commented: “Thanks, Andrew. A few weeks ago Leonardo Energy > organised a workshop in Brussels, chaired by Paul Waide. It was about ETS > and energy efficiency. The general consensus was that ETS has not delivered > and unlikely to, given its current state. Yet, there is” >

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.