ENERGY POLICY WEEKLY More online... Visit our website for all the latest news and analysis on Policy & Regulation Policy & Regulation from Brussels and beyond Contents Competition law Šefcovic reiterates calls for common gas purchaser E2 Investment & finance Cañete eyes slice of €300 billion ‘Juncker package’ E2 Environmental policy China-US climate pledges will set the scene for Paris E3 Environmental policy MEPs call for early EU ETS reform as debate heats up E4 Data page Storage obligations in the EU E5 Data page Global energy transitions E6 EU prepares to monitor Russian gas flows Energy security Andriy Kobolyev, chief executive of Naftogaz Ukrainy, has reiterated calls for the EU to monitor Russian gas flows to avoid any potential conflict over supplies this winter. “To avoid a gas crisis like in 2009, we invite EU experts to come to Ukraine to monitor gas flows from Russia to European countries,” Kobolyev told reporters in Brussels this week. “This is the best way to ensure that transit is stable.” The idea of monitoring the transit of gas through Ukraine was proposed by Ukrainian authorities this summer. “The European Commission’s Ukraine support group is currently assessing – together with ENTSO-G [the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas] experts – under which conditions and on what basis such monitoring could be set up. Preparatory work is ongoing,” a commission spokesperson told Interfax. Slovakia connection Editor, EU Policy and Regulation Andreas Walstad [email protected] Correspondent, EU Policy and Regulation Annemarie Botzki [email protected] Chief Sub-editor Rhys Timson Sub-editors Doug Kitson, Rob Loveday Layout & Design Joseph Williams www.interfaxenergy.com Kobolyev also called on the EU to implement reverse flows on the old-grid Slovakia-Ukraine interconnector. “The interconnection between Slovakia and Ukraine has been an obstacle for several years and has prevented us from integrating with the European market and importing all the gas we need,” Kobolyev told reporters. According to Naftogaz, an old technical agreement between Slovakia’s transmission system operator Eustream and Gazprom has been used to block the free flow of gas between the EU and Ukraine on the old grid. “We are urging the commission to simply implement the rules of the Third Energy Package at this connection,” he said. In reverse-flow mode the Vojany-Uzhgorod pipeline can supply gas from Slovakia to Ukraine at a capacity of 27 million cubic metres (MMcm) per day (nearly 10 billion cubic metres per year). The pipeline was officially launched in early September 2014. According to Naftogaz, the oldgrid connection between Slovakia and Ukraine has an additional capacity of nearly 100 bcm/y. EU-Ukraine reverse flows ■ Andriy Kobolyev, chief executive of Naftogaz, has called on the EU to monitor Russian gas flows and implement reverse flows at interconnection points. ■ Slovakia-Ukraine reverse flows could provide an additional capacity of nearly 100 bcm/y. ■ EU companies are supplying around 1 bcm of gas to Ukraine per month. ■ The European Commission and ENTSO-G are analysing the conditions under which gas flows could be monitored. Source: Naftogaz, EU Commission Four major European companies are supplying around 1 bcm gas per month to Ukraine, at prices lower than Gazprom, according to Kobolyev. “If we double this amount, the Ukraine could do without Russian gas forever,” Kobolyev said. Hungary could provide an additional 500 MMcm per month to the Ukraine; however, gas supply stopped in September. Energy reform Kobolyev, who has recently been mentioned as a candidate for the post of energy minister in Ukraine, also laid out how he believes his country’s energy policy should be reformed. He stressed the need for a single wholesale gas price, with subsidies given only to vulnerable customers. According to Kobolyev, discussions with the EU’s Ukraine task force are ongoing to decide how these subsidy mechanisms could be set up and managed. “Until there is a market price, no reform will help. The market price will help domestic producers that currently have to sell at a… low price. They will have more revenues to invest into domestic production, and that will decrease dependency on gas imports,” Kobolyev said. Annemarie Botzki [email protected] Energy Policy Weekly | 20 November 2014 | E1 ENERGY POLICY WEEKLY Šefcovic reiterates calls for common gas purchaser Competition law Maroš Šefcovic, the EU’s vice president for energy union, this week reiterated calls for common gas purchasing on behalf of member states – albeit on a voluntary basis. Addressing a conference in Brussels, Šefcovic said pooling purchasing power across member states was “not easy” and that it had “lots of ramifications” from a legal perspective. He advocated a “gradual step-by-step approach”, starting with a voluntary scheme. “We should explore common purchasing of gas,” Šefcovic said. He added this was to “push for better prices” and “resist undue pressure from third countries” – including Russia. Šefcovic said he had discussed the common purchasing idea with Federica Mogherini, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs and security policy. Mogherini will discuss the proposal further with EU foreign ministers, Šefcovic said. Šefcovic addressed the EU’s combined €400 billion ($500 billion) per year bill for fossil fuel imports. The EU depends on imports for 66% of its gas, according to the European Commission. “We are the biggest energy customer in the world. [And] we pay on time,” Šefcovic said. The idea of a common purchaser of gas on behalf of several member states was launched by the former Polish prime minister and incoming president of the European Council, Donald Tusk. The proposal addresses the fact that EU member states pay very different prices for Russian gas. However, the idea has been opposed by many member states – including the UK and Germany – as well as stakeholders in the oil and gas industry. The proposal may also be at odds with EU and WTO competition law. The idea of an obligatory gas-purchasing body for the whole of the EU is no longer being considered, Klaus-Dieter Borchardt, the commission’s director of the internal energy market, said in Brussels recently (see EU rules out obligatory gas-purchasing body, 13 November 2014). The commission is expected to launch an energy union paper by the end of the year, which will provide more details about common gas purchasing. Šefcovic has previously outlined five pillars of the energy union, including prioritising energy efficiency and renewables. “When we talk about an energy union we are not just talking about buying gas together. Certainly, renewables and energy efficiency is on the frontline,” Monica Frassoni, president of the European Alliance to Save Energy, told the event. Andreas Walstad [email protected] Cañete eyes slice of €300 billion ‘Juncker package’ Investment & finance Miguel Arias Cañete, EU commissioner for climate and energy, has said the €300 billion ($375 billion) investment package proposed by the European Commission is an opportunity to secure more funding for energy infrastructure projects. Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the commission, has said he aims to raise €300 billion in additional public and private funding over the next three years by focusing on smarter investment and less regulation. Cañete would not say how much of the ‘Juncker package’ would be allocated to energy projects, but said it represented a big opportunity for the energy sector. “In the Juncker package we have a concrete possibility – €300 billion is a lot,” Cañete told a conference in Brussels this week. His comments echo those made by Dominique Ristori, the director-general for energy, earlier in the week. www.interfaxenergy.com “The Juncker investment plan represents a unique opportunity to accelerate investment in energy [infrastructure],” Ristori told an event at the commission, adding that the €300 billion package would be presented soon. According to the commission, around €200 billion is needed up to 2020 for investment in energy transmission networks alone. Investment in smarter grids to foster the expansion of renewables, as well as energy efficiency measures – in buildings, for example – are seen as key priorities by the commission. “I cannot prejudge the exact place of energy, but I am convinced energy will be one of the key priorities of Juncker’s package,” Ristori told an event in Brussels on 12 November. Andreas Walstad [email protected] News in brief The European Commission may present a discussion paper on capacity mechanisms in January next year, Klaus-Dieter Borchardt, the commission’s director of internal energy market, told a conference in Brussels this week. Capacity mechanisms remunerate power plant operators for availability, and are complementary to the price for electricity. Borchardt has said the commission is less sceptical about capacity mechanisms than it was previously, and that they are an interim solution to making gas-fired power plants profitable. “Are capacity mechanisms a good thing? In my view no. But [with the] current market conditions there has to be an instrument in place.” Energy Policy Weekly | 20 November 2014 | E2 ENERGY POLICY WEEKLY China-US climate pledges will set the scene for Paris Environmental policy Following extensive communication between Beijing and Washington over the past few months, China has agreed to peak its emissions by 2030, while the United States will cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 26-28% from 2005 levels by 2025. “The China-US joint announcement is potentially the most important development in international climate negotiations in the past five years, possibly the last decade,” Robert Stavins, professor of business and government at Harvard University, told Interfax. The fact that China and the US jointly announced quantitative targets greatly enhances the likelihood of some form of global agreement in Lima in December and Paris in 2015. “I think this has to be positive for Europe, which has been standing largely alone in pursuing significant carbon reductions,” Charles Kolstad, an environmental economist at Stanford University, told Interfax. “All in all, I am more optimistic that something will be achieved in Paris, [although] I wouldn’t expect a global agreement along the lines of Kyoto, with targets and timetables,” he said. Stavins agreed the bilateral deal is a sign climate talks are moving beyond the foundation of the Kyoto Protocol, which currently accounts for 14% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Europe already agreed in October to reduce GHG emissions by at least 40% by 2030, and increase energy efficiency and renewables by at least 27% (see EU deal on 2030 targets shows mixed ambitions, 24 October 2014). Together, China, the US and the EU 28 are responsible for around 60% of global emissions. “I have more hope now compared with a few weeks ago. It is the last chance in Paris if we want to keep the world as it is… we expect a legally binding agreement,” Fatih Birol, chief economist at the International Energy Agency, said in Brussels on 14 November. www.interfaxenergy.com US-China climate deal: What’s been agreed? ■ The US agreed to cut GHG emissions by 26-28% from 2005 levels by 2025. ■ The rate of carbon pollution reduction is set at 1.2% per year on average during the 2005-2020 period, and at 2.3-2.8% per year between 2020 and 2025. ■ China agreed its CO2 emissions will peak around 2030, with the intention to peak early. ■ China said it will increase the non-fossil fuel share of its energy to around 20% by 2030. ■ The pledges have increased the likelihood of a global deal in Paris next year, although many uncertainties remain. Source: White House, Interfax While the deal between the two largest emitters is likely to boost progress, the agreement has no legal basis, nor did the parties lay out specifically how the goals will be achieved. “The deal fits the politics, but not the science. Coal consumption has to peak and decline by 2020 to bring the air pollution level down in China,” Li Shuo, climate and energy campaigner for Greenpeace China, told Interfax. Much of the success of Lima and Paris will also depend on how Mexico, South Korea, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Nigeria and South Africa react to the deal and where they position themselves. The Paris 2015 conference has been called the most important negotiation ever. It will decide how the remaining ‘carbon space’ – the amount of carbon that can be emitted globally while staying below a 2 C warming level – will be divided among the countries of the world. “We need to avoid some of the harsher language of ‘binding’ and ‘legally enforced’ and recognise that any commitment is ultimately voluntary,” John Reilly, co-director of the global change programme at MIT, told Interfax. Facing heavy opposition to climate politics domestically, US President Barack Obama may have crafted a politically smart deal by tying targets for both countries together in a bilateral deal. The proposed 26-28% emission reductions by 2025 are also achievable without additional legislation going through Congress if policies such as the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed Clean Power Plan are adopted. CCUS funding agreement Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping also agreed to renew funding for coal carbon capture, use and sequestration (CCUS) projects and will jointly fund a carbon capture and storage (CCS) project in China as well as a large-scale CCUS project. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recently stressed the important role CCS could play as a climate mitigation technology worldwide in its Fifth Assessment Report (see IPCC highlights importance of CCS for climate change, 6 November 2014). “With CCS, it’s possible fossil fuels can continue to be used; without it, fossil fuels would be phased out almost entirely by 2100,” IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri told the European Parliament. China and the US have been leading the way on CCS research in recent years, whereas Europe has been falling behind. “Better to take countries at their word, urge them to stretch to reach difficult (but realistic goals) and then monitor and evaluate progress, relying on each country’s sense of its role in the world to push it toward living up to its commitment,“ Reilly added. Annemarie Botzki [email protected] Energy Policy Weekly | 20 November 2014 | E3 ENERGY POLICY WEEKLY MEPs call for early EU ETS reform as debate heats up Environmental policy The European Parliament’s energy committee debated the proposed Market Stability Reserve (MSR) this week, with several MEPs calling for early implementation to boost prices for carbon allowances under the EU’s Emissions Trading System (ETS). The MSR has been proposed by the European Commission and European Council to address the 2 billion surplus carbon allowances under the ETS. In January, the commission proposed that 12% of surplus allowances be taken out of the market and placed in a reserve each year, starting in 2021 (see EU ETS reform ‘must come sooner’ than 2021, 3 April 2014). However, several MEPs called for early implementation at a debate in the parliament’s industry, research and energy committee (ITRE) this week. “The process needs to be fast-tracked. The earlier it starts the more effectively it will help address the growing supply of allowances. If we have a good instrument why should we wait to implement it? In that sense, 2017 would be a good starting date,” Theresa Griffin (S&D, UK) told the debate. The parliament’s environment committee (ENVI) is the lead committee on the MSR, but ITRE will deliver its opinion before ENVI votes on it. A vote in ENVI is scheduled for 23-24 February next year. The proposal needs backing from both the parliament and council to go through. Carbon leakage In a draft opinion on behalf of ITRE, rapporteur Antonio Tajani (EPP, Italy) proposed energy-intensive industries – such as steel and cement producers – should receive all their allowances for free until 2030 to avoid carbon leakage. “I am in favour of the MSR, which will be the next step after backloading. Having said that, we have to be sure there is no carbon leakage. We don’t want our industries to be leaving Europe for countries that are less in favour of fighting climate change,” Tajani told this week’s debate. However, Tajani’s proposal sparked a reaction. The current legal framework www.interfaxenergy.com Market Stability Reserve – now or later? ■ Carbon prices are almost €25 lower than the highs seen in 2008. A combination of the economic slowdown and an influx of international credits has led to a surplus of 2 billion allowances in the market. ■ Prices recently gained some strength and are now trading at around €7/ton. But significant fuel switching from coal to gas in power generation will only happen with carbon prices at around €17/ton, according to estimates by Sandbag. ■ The European Commission wants a Market Stability Reserve whereby 12% of surplus allowances are taken out of the market each year, starting in 2021. The allowances will be handed back to the market if the surplus falls below 400 million, according to the commission’s proposal. ■ At a debate in the European Parliament’s ITRE committee this week, several MEPs called for earlier implementation of the MSR, possibly in 2017. This echoed the views of many stakeholders in the gas industry. ■ However, some MEPs said energy-intensive industries must be given all their allowances for free until 2030 to avoid carbon leakage to other parts of the world. ■ The 900 million allowances backloaded should be put directly into the reserve, according to a draft opinion by ENVI rapporteur Ivo Belet. Sources: European Parliament, European Commission, Sandbag, Interfax only allows for energy-intensive industries to receive theri allowances for free until 2020 (Directive 2003/87/EC). A draft opinion by ENVI rapporteur Ivo Belet (EPP, Belgium) has said free allocations should continue after 2020, but in a system that incentivises best performance. During this week’s debate, several MEPs said carbon leakage should not be addressed at all under the MSR. “Amendments to the carbon leakage rules are not needed in this context. They should be addressed under upcoming legislative proposals following the October 2014 council conclusions on the EU 2030 framework,” said Griffin. The economic slowdown has led to a sharp decline in prices for carbon allowances since 2008, giving coal a competitive edge over gas in power generation. However, sceptics have said the MSR will not be enough to boost prices to fuel-switching levels. “Carbon prices will rally [with the MSR], but will never reach high [enough] levels [to attract] carbon capture and storage investment or fuel switching from coal to gas,” said Bryony Worthington, UK shadow minister for energy and climate, during a debate in Brussels this week. Worthington said policy initiatives should also focus on carbon intensity and that measures such as emission caps at new power plants could play a role. The UK’s Energy Act 2013 established an Emissions Performance Standard to limit carbon dioxide emissions from new fossil fuel power stations. “We cannot rely on the ETS to deliver everything,” said Worthington. “I am not saying it is not possible to fix it... but it is also a very broad-based system that covers industry as well as power plants.” Carbon prices have made some gains in recent weeks, from below €6/ton ($7.5/ton) in early October to around €7/ton now. Analysts at French Bank Société Générale forecast European emission allowances to average €6.50/ton next year and €8.35/ton in 2020. “While everybody agrees the MSR will support prices if adopted... there is much more uncertainty as to when it will start and by how much it will support prices,” the bank said in a report from 3 November. Research, published in October by UK-based climate NGO Sandbag said there is evidence significant fuel switching from coal to gas takes place with a carbon price of €17/ton. Andreas Walstad [email protected] Energy Policy Weekly | 20 November 2014 | E4 ENERGY POLICY WEEKLY Storage obligations in the EU Unlike with oil and petroleum products, which are covered by Directive 2006/67/EC, there is no EU directive in place that obliges member states to have minimum stocks of gas in place in case of supply disruptions. Hungary’s strategic gas stockpile 1.2 bcm 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 2009 Strategic storage 2010 2011 2012 2013 Sold by HUSA 20% Increase in storage capacity since 2009 Storage market interventions in Europe Source: CEER 92.5% Average storage levels across the EU No obligations Supplier obligation Strategic storage No data The EU’s Security of Gas Supply Regulation 994/2010 obliges member states ensure they can supply gas, at least to household users, for a minimum of 30 days. The supply standard – which is expected to be reviewed next year – does not set out minimum stock levels, however. Several member states – including France, Italy and Hungary – have set out gas storage obligations at a national level. However, a recent consultation paper by the Council of European Energy Regulators (CEER) said such regulatory interventions should be kept to a minimum. A well-functioning wholesale gas market is the best mechanism to ensure security of supply, the report said. “CEER recognises that storage obligations can provide a degree of certainty regarding the level of storage bookings; however, their implementation should be restricted to situations where there is clear market failure... Therefore, regulators and policymakers should be careful when thinking about introducing such measures,” the report said. Where strategic storage is introduced, clear rules and responsibilities are needed to minimise the impact on the functioning of the wholesale market, the report added. In Hungary, the government temporarily lowered the strategic storage volumes to 916 MMcm in 2011, down from 1.2 bcm originally. In Italy, the total amount of strategic storage has been set at 4.6 bcm for April 2014-March 2015. In France, all suppliers have to store a volume of gas amounting to no less than 80% of their storage capacity rights by 1 November each year. CEER www.interfaxenergy.com Andreas Walstad in Brussels Energy Policy Weekly | 20 November 2014 | E5 ENERGY POLICY WEEKLY Global energy transitions Total final energy consumption 2.0 billion toe 0.5% Energy consumption in China and Saudi Arabia has risen substancially over the last 20 years because of their rapid economic growth, a recent study has found. 1.5 A World Energy Council study analysed fundamental changes in the energy sectors of six large economies across the globe, namely Brazil, China, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, the United States and Germany. 4.6% 1.0 0.5 -0.3% 3.2% 5.8% 1.5% Saudi Arabia South Africa 0.0 Brazil 1990 2000 China Germany 2012 Compound annual growth rate United States Source: Enerdata Electricity price in industry 0.15 $*/kWh 0.12 0.09 0.06 0.03 0.00 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 *US dollar fixed at 2005 exchange rates Germany United States Brazil South Africa China Saudi Arabia Source: Enerdata/World Energy Council Energy Efficiency Indicators Share of renewable energies in total electricity consumption China had the largest total final energy consumption (TFEC) with 1.89 billion tons of oil equivalent (btoe) in 2012, followed by the US with 1.46 btoe. Saudi Arabia and China saw high annual growth rates in energy consumption because of their rapid economic growth between 1990 and 2012. In Brazil and South Africa, dynamic growth ranged from 2-3% per year, while for Germany and the United States TFEC decreased in absolute terms. Government policies, such as renewable energy targets and related support schemes, were the main drivers of change in the countries analysed. Whereas the US and Germany are decentralised and a significant number of decisions are made on a state level, the emerging economies – such as Brazil, China and Saudi Arabia – are highly centralised. “Wholesale power markets experienced changes in the levels and structure of market prices, rendering previous investment in gas power plants, unprofitable,“ the study said. 100% Industrial electricity prices have increased over the last years and are now highest in Germany. “In South Africa, prices are increasing as well, however, from a lower base, whereas prices are decreasing in China,” the study said. 80% -0.6% 60% 40% 1.8% 7.9% 20% 0.2% 0.7% 0% Brazil 1990 2000 China 2012 www.interfaxenergy.com Germany Compound annual growth rate South Africa Renewables provided 83% of electricity consumption in Brazil in 2012, as a result of the large share of hydropower, followed by Germany at 24% and China with 21%. United States Source: Enerdata/World Energy Council Energy Efficiency Indicators Annemarie Botzki in Brussels Energy Policy Weekly | 20 November 2014 | E6
© Copyright 2024