1. No category

BRINGING E UROPE AND T HIRD COUNTRIES CLOSER
TOGETHER THROUGH RENEWABLE E NERGIES
Why aiming for RES cooperation
Why aim for RES cooperation?
The need for and benefits of enhanced RES cooperation
from a EU member state perspective
Gustav Resch, Lukas Liebmann,
Sebastian Busch, Andre Ortner
Energy Economics Group (EEG),
Vienna University of Technology (TU Wien)
15th of May 2014, Ankara
Why aiming for RES cooperation
Why aiming for RES cooperation?
•
The RES Directive (2009/28/EC) sets
binding national 2020 RES targets
for all EU member states
•
These targets do not explicitly reflect
the national resource availability.
RES share on gross final energy demand
[%]
70%
Source: DG Ener
RES share 2005
RES potential 2020 - share on current (2005) demand
60%
RES target for 2020
50%
40%
30%
20%
EU27
United Kingdom
Sweden
Spain
Slovenia
Slovakia
Romania
Portugal
Poland
Netherlands
Malta
Luxembourg
Lithuania
Latvia
Italy
Ireland
Hungary
Greece
Germany
France
Finland
Estonia
Denmark
Czech Republic
Cyprus
Bulgaria
Belgium
0%
Austria
10%
Source: Green-X database / Re-Shaping study
Why aiming for RES cooperation
Why aiming for RES cooperation?
By joining forces, countries may
explore potentials which otherwise
would have remained untapped.
70%
RES share 2005
RES potential 2020 - share on current (2005) demand
60%
RES target for 2020
50%
40%
30%
20%
Source: Green-X database / Re-Shaping study
EU27
Spain
Sweden
Slovakia
Slovenia
Romania
Poland
Portugal
Malta
Netherlands
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Italy
Latvia
Ireland
Greece
Hungary
France
Germany
Finland
Estonia
0%
Denmark
10%
United Kingdom
•
Source: DG Ener
Cyprus
In order to allow for cross-border
support of renewable energy in a
most cost-efficient manner, articles
6 to 11 of that Directive introduce
cooperation mechanisms, providing
member states as well as third
countries with an option to agree on
cross-border support of RES.
Czech Republic
•
Bulgaria
These targets do not explicitly reflect
the national resource availability.
Austria
•
Belgium
The RES Directive (2009/28/EC) sets
binding national 2020 RES targets
for all EU member states
RES share on gross final energy demand
[%]
•
Why aiming for RES cooperation
Outcomes of the bottom-up assessment:
Planned RES cooperation from
a MS perspective
•
Several (12) countries express
their aim to achieve a surplus in
RES generation by 2020
Luxembourg (previously also
Italy) indicates that there will
have a gap by 2020
3,500
Planned surplus or deficit
in RES volumes by 2020
3,000
2,500
2,000
[ktoe]
•
1,500
1,000
0
UK
Sweden
Spain
Slovakia
Poland
Malta
Luxembourg
Italy
Hungary
Greece
Germany
-500
Denmark
 Thus, Member States remain
reluctant in expressing their
intentions
500
Bulgaria
 Despite a possible surplus there
is uncertainty / unclearness
on the detailed use of
cooperation mechanisms …
Complementary “top-down” assessment:
Why aiming for RES cooperation
RES cooperation from
a modelling perspective
The need for and impact of RES cooperation
according to a study done for the European
Commission, DG Energy on
Method of
approach
RES cooperation*
*Klessmann C., E. de Visser, F. Wigand, M.
Gephart (Ecofys); G. Resch, S. Busch (TU
Vienna) (2014): “Cooperation between EU
Member States
under the RES Directive - Task 1.“ A study on
behalf of the European Commission, DG ENER
led by Ecofys, Uetrecht/Karlsruhe/Wien, 2014.
•
TU Wien’s Green-X model was applied to perform a detailed
quantitative assessment of the future deployment of renewable
energies on country-, sector- as well as technology level.
•
The core strength of this tool lies on the detailed RES resource and
technology representation, accompanied by a thorough energy policy
description, which allows assessing various policy options with
respect to resulting costs and benefits.
•
A RES-policy assessment was conducted by means of conducting
scenarios on RES deployment assuming different RES policy
pathways (in line with national 2020 RES targets assuming
strong/moderate/limited RES cooperation)
Why aiming for RES cooperation
Complementary “top-down” assessment:
RES cooperation from a
modelling perspective
The need for & impact of RES
cooperation according to a recent
DG ENER study on RES cooperation
Assessed cases
The related modelling exercise builds
on three distinct case with respect to RES cooperation (between MSs):
In the default scenario of “strengthened national policies” (in line with 20%
RES by 2020) an efficient and effective resource exploitation is assessed
assuming only a limited level of cooperation between Member States.
Thus, this reference case of “limited (RES) cooperation” is contrasted by
two alternatives:
• a case of “moderate cooperation” where RES cooperation is more
frequently used (given that economic benefits exist)
• and a “European perspective” that can be classified as “strong
cooperation”, where an efficient and effective RES target achievement
is envisaged at EU level rather than the fulfillment of each national RES
target using domestic resources.
Why aiming for RES cooperation
Complementary “top-down” assessment:
60%
RES target
Limited cooperation (reference)
50%
40%
30%
20%
EU28
United Kingdom
Sweden
Spain
Slovenia
Slovakia
Romania
Portugal
Poland
Netherlands
Malta
Luxembourg
Lithuania
Latvia
Italy
Ireland
Hungary
Greece
Germany
France
Finland
Estonia
Denmark
Czech Republic
Croatia
Bulgaria
Belgium
0%
Cyprus
10%
Austria
RES share in gross final energy demand
by 2020 [%]
Results (RES target achievement)
RES cooperation from a
modelling perspective
2020 RES targets versus RES deployment according to the reference case
(of strengthened national RES policies with limited cooperation)
 There is a need for cooperation in some of MSs to
achieve 2020 RES targets in time!
MSs that have to rely
on (virtual) imports
(Virtual) exchange of RES volumes in 2020
due to cooperation mechanisms
[TWh]
40
Export
Why aiming for RES cooperation
30
Complementary
“top-down” assessment:
Limited cooperation (reference)
Moderate cooperation
20
Strong cooperation
10
0
-10
-20
-30
United Kingdom
Sweden
Spain
Slovenia
Slovakia
Romania
Portugal
Poland
Netherlands
Malta
Luxembourg
Lithuania
Latvia
Italy
Ireland
Hungary
Greece
Germany
France
Finland
Estonia
Denmark
Czech Republic
Cyprus
Croatia
Bulgaria
Export
Strong cooperation
(Virtual) exchange of RES volumes by 2020 for assessed cases – i.e. strengthened national policies with
limited, moderate or strong cooperation between MSs, expressed in relative (% - share in GFEC) or
United Kingdom
Sweden
Spain
Slovenia
Slovakia
Romania
Portugal
Poland
Netherlands
Malta
Luxembourg
Lithuania
Latvia
Italy
Ireland
Hungary
Greece
Germany
France
Finland
Estonia
Denmark
Czech Republic
Cyprus
Croatia
Bulgaria
Import
absolute terms (TWh)
 (Virtual)
exchange
amounts 2.4 to
3.6% of total RES
volumes …
…
corresponding to
4.6 to 7% of all
new RES
installations in this
decade
Limited cooperation (reference)
Moderate cooperation
Belgium
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
-1%
-2%
-3%
-4%
-5%
Belgium
Import
Austria
-40
Austria
(Virtual) exchange of RES volumes in 2020
due to cooperation mechanisms [% - share
in gross final energy demand]
RES cooperation from a
modelling perspective
Complementary “top-down” assessment:
20
10
Avoided CO2 emissions
Avoided fossil fuels
Capital expenditures
Additional generation cost
0
-2%
-1.6%
-4%
-6%
-0.2%
-2.2%
Cost savings: 6 to 11%
(compared to reference)
-5.8%
for support expenditures
Moderate cooperation
-8%
Strong cooperation
-10%
-12%
-10.8%
Avoided CO2 emissions
30
-0.1%
Avoided fossil fuels
40
Strong
cooperation
0%
Capital expenditures
50
0.4%
0.7%
0.2%
0.3%
Additional generation cost
60
2%
Support expenditures
70
Limited
cooperation
(reference)
Moderate
cooperation
Indicators on (yearly average (2011 to 2020)) cost &
benefits of new RES installations (2011 to 2020)
- change compared to reference (limited cooperation) [%]
80
Support expenditures
Indicators on (yearly average (2011 to 2020))
cost & benefits of new RES installations
(2011 to 2020) [billion €]
RES cooperation from a
modelling perspective
Why aiming for RES cooperation
 Intensifying cooperation
appears (highly) beneficial, in
particular with respect to support
expenditures
Indicators on yearly average (2011 to 2020) cost and benefits of new RES installations (2011 to 2020) at EU level for all assessed cases,
expressed in absolute terms (billion €) (left) and assuming moderate or strong cooperation between Member States, expressed as
deviation from the (reference) case of limited RES cooperation (right)
Why aiming for RES cooperation
Conclusions
More cooperation can help to reach
the 2020 RES targets at lower cost!
• The cooperation mechanisms introduced in the RES Directive
provide new options for an improved resource allocation across
Europe – including neighbouring countries – as well as for further
convergence of RES support schemes.
• Intensifying cooperation allows for a more cost-efficient RES
target fulfilment at EU level, leading to lower costs and expenditures.
• The plans of individual Member States show that there is an aim to
provide RES volumes for a possible cooperation in the 2020
context. Thus, in practice countries are however reluctant to actually
make use of the cooperation mechanisms introduced by the RES
Directive for the time being (since there remains uncertainty related to
their practical use as well as with respect to actual future RES deployment).
BRINGING E UROPE AND T HIRD COUNTRIES CLOSER
TOGETHER THROUGH RENEWABLE E NERGIES
Gustav Resch
Email: [email protected]
Phone: +43-1-58801-370 354
Why aiming for RES cooperation