EU under fire for unrealistic energy package

Spain and Germany are leading a campaign against the EU package on renewable energy, to be unveiled on 23 January.

The disagreement centres on the commission’s ambitious renewables targets, agreed last March by EU ministers.

Member states agreed that 20 per cent of European energy must come from clean sources by 2020.

At the moment, only 8.5 per cent of the EU’s energy comes from such sources.

British MEP Chris Davies and rapporteur on car emissions said, “Be under no illusions, the target Europe has set itself is very tough.

“Assuming international agreement is secured the EU is committed to reducing its carbon emissions by 30 per cent within 13 years. On present performance there are many amongst the 27 member states who will find it very hard to deliver.”

According to Reuters, which has obtained the letter sent by the Spanish and Germans to energy commissioner Andris Piebalgs, the two governments have accused the EU of undermining existing systems in the two countries.

The commission wants to encourage private companies to trade in renewable energy produced from clean sources (wind, solar, hydro-electric), but Madrid and Berlin want governments to maintain control of energy policy.

Spain currently operates a ‘feed in’ system where utility companies buy renewable energy from clean sources at set prices above market rates. Trading by private companies in such energy would shake the government-regulated system.

In a briefing note on EU renewables targets leaked last August, the UK government said that achieving the 20 per cent renewables target risks causing spiralling energy costs within the emissions trading scheme, also under review in the commission’s energy package.

“The costs of increasing renewable energy technology use to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is around three times higher than allowing flexibility in reducing options through emissions trading. This additional cost will be reflected in increasing electricity and other energy prices,” says the note.
 
Speaking to the Parliament Magazine about the emissions trading scheme, Green MEP Caroline Lucas welcomed the commission's proposal, but thinks member states need to be effectively policed.

“A positive step forward [in the commission’s plans] will be the centralised allocation of emissions by the EU.

But she added: “Member states proved they couldn't be trusted to do it during the first phase, allowing overly generous allocations to their industries and seriously compromising the scheme’s effectiveness.”

However, Finnish EPP-ED deputy Eija Korhola criticises the very basis of the scheme, saying it offers no incentives to actually cut emissions.

“Industries will simply move to where there is no cost for emitting CO2. But a pollution shift is not a pollution cut. A unilateral EU ETS hits the energy and employment intensive industries hardest. So, ‘polluter pays’ becomes ‘polluter wins’ or ‘polluter relocates’.”

Spanish daily El País reports that the main criticism Spanish and German ministers have levelled against the commission is the proposed system of ‘certificates’ that guarantee certain energies comes from renewable sources.

According to the proposal, companies can buy and sell these certificates to the highest bidder, and countries that acquire them can use the certificates to help meet their targets for renewables.

Chris Davies thinks along similar lines when it comes to auctioning allowances within the ETS.

“The commission’s latest proposals include more than a little fine-tuning. Its plans to move towards 100 per cent auctioning of carbon allowances are more ambitious than many predicted, and perhaps even go too far.”

Caroline Lucas is still cautious about the proposals.

“While the commission’s leaked proposals show encouraging signs, there is every danger that, by the time of publication on 23 January, industry interests will once again see them watered down and that the ETS will prove to be a lot of hot air in the fight against climate change.”

• Previous article
• Next article