Monday 27 February 2012

Stagiaires Ideas That Matter - TED video online

My TED talk on the low-carbon transition of our energy system and the Energy Roadmap 2050 has been published online: Making the low-carbon transition of our energy system happen.



The video, pictures and more information can also be found on the website of the event: http://stagiairesideasthatmatter.wordpress.com/




Monday 20 February 2012

Stagiaires Ideas That Matter

This Wednesday (22/02), I will be giving a TED talk about the transition of our energy system and the role and function of the Energy Roadmap 2050 on the event Stagiaires Ideas That Matter @ The Hub Brussels.
Here a short pre-taste:


What is your name and DG?
Lothar Van Driessche, DG Energy

Who is your personal hero?
It’s impossible to name only one. I have several heros in several domains. Humans have done some amazing things in history. Naming just one here, would dishonour too many others.

What is your Idea That Matters?
I will speak to you about a very concrete issue, that will profoundly determine our every day lives in the decennia to come: our energy system. We are facing a transition towards a low-carbon energy system in the upcoming decades. That is not only vital to combat climate change and preserve the environment, but equally to keep our energy provision sustainable and secure. Our households and industries most heavily, and ever more, depend on secure and affordable supply of energy. Becoming less dependent on fossil fuel imports, diversifying our supply, and at the same time securing the competitiveness of our economy and industries, form a tremendous challenge of at least the same order as saving the euro and our financial system.
The Commission’s recently adopted Energy Roadmap 2050 is a tool that attempts to steer that transition, based on a number of decarbonisation scenarios. The Roadmap shows that realising a decarbonised energy system is economically and technologically feasible, if only we start acting now, and act together. I will present to you how we can make the unavoidable transformation of our energy system work, by addressing and combatting some of the most common and popular misunderstandings about the RM 2050.

What is your favourite TED talk and why?
Steve Jobs: “How to live before you die” (for Stanford graduates in 2005), as it gives such a nice personal peek into the thoughts and emotions of an otherwise enigmatic man, and also because it turned out to be a visionary speech, like the man himself has always been, in his professional occupations.

Where can we find you online?
Twitter: @Lotharvd


To attend the conference: register.
Links:

Messages from the high level conference on the Energy Roadmap 2050

On February 7, 2012, the European Commission together with the Danish presidency of the European Council organized a high level stakeholder conference on the Energy Roadmap 2050.

The Alcide de Gasperi auditorium in the Commission's Charlemagne building, seating a nice 450 people, was entirely filled for the keynote speeches in the morning, with a number of people even attending the live stream in an additional room, in order to be able to follow the conference on the screen (with translations). Apparently the beau monde of the European energy field was eager to discuss ideas and listen to opinions from a nice line-up of speakers. They were not disappointed, some firm opinions were ventured indeed.

Energy commissioner Oettinger ventured his believe in the market (read: carbon pricing) as an instrument to foster renewables penetration, but at the same time called for a broad discussion on new milestones for 2030 on carbon emissions, energy efficiency and renewables. For the latter, Oettinger doesn't want to rule out binding legislation in case they aren't able to compete fairly on the price with fossil fuels.
Remarkably, Oettinger expressed some scepticism about the future of biofuels, and more specifically the 10% renewables target in transport. Biofuels are suffering from a lack of public acceptance and sustainability, mostly because the space needed to grow the necessary crops is lost for agriculture. The commissioner didn't drag into doubt the current 2020 policies on the subject, but called for a defensive attitude in discussing new policies beyond that point. It's an at least unusual posititon that the commissioner took there, in comparison to the Commission's previous stance on biofuels.

A very noticed speech came from Johannes Teyssen, the CEO of E.ON, who sharply criticized the European Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS). The system in its current form entirely misses its purpose and gives no incentives at all to reduce emissions, with an explicit price per megaton for carbon allowances that is estimated to be ten times lower than the actual cost. On top of that the implicit carbon prices from support schemes lead to inefficient allocation of emissions, with investments going into areas with large subsidies rather than cheaper options for carbon abatement. His message to the policy makers: fix it or abandon it.

Another dissident voice was from Dieter Helm, who chaired the independent advisory group that the Commission installed to get a "second opinion" about the RM 2050. Mr. Helm rebutted the assertion that higher fossil fuel  prices would foster the development of (expensive) renewable technologies. To the contrary, Mr. Helm believes that gas prices will rise in the long term as a result of their unbundling from the oil price and the development of shale gas resources in Eastern Europe.

In the afternoon, breaking groups on different topics (energy efficiency, infrastructure and market design) resulted into some conclusions and recommendations that were summarized by the respective moderators, followed by round-up conclusions from Danish energy minister Martin Lidegaard.
Mr. Lidegaard reaffirmed commitment to the 2020 targets and spotted consensus about the need to (at least) think about and discuss milestones or targets for 2030. He identified as key messages of the day, inter alia, the need for an adequate financial framework, financing mechanisms and the right incentives for investments in infrastructure and energy efficiency (including a working ETS), completion of the internal market for energy, more coordination on EU level for renewable support schemes and more money for RTD.

Quite some food for discussion, and that is exactly what the RM 2050 is supposed to bring about.

The entire conference was recorded on video and can be rewatched. The video covering and other materials (including the programme, speaker biographies etc.) can be found under the following link:

Friday 10 February 2012


From European Energy Review: http://www.europeanenergyreview.eu



09 February 2012 | posted by Sonja
Energy executives ready to save Emission Trading Scheme
“The ETS system is bust – it is dead,” proclaimed Johannes Teyssen, CEO of Eon, at a high-level energy conference in Brussels this week. “I don’t know a single person that would invest a dime based on ETS signals.” Europe’s renewables and efficiency policies have only worked against the Emission Trading Scheme (ETS), not for it, he said. There’s a problem of policy coherence.

Bold statements and welcome drama at what could have been yet another high-level conference filled with empty words. But the best was yet to come. Teyssen became the first utility CEO to speak out in favour of fixing the ETS, and fixing it right now. “We do not need more regulation, we need to fix what we have [and] we need to start with fixing the ETS,” he said.

Nor was he alone. Fulvio Conti, CEO of Enel and president of Eurelectric, representing the European electricity sector, came out with the same message just a few hours later.

With their statements, Teyssen and Conti give implicit support to the controversial idea of taking out or “setting aside” carbon allowances from the European emission trading scheme (ETS)’s third trading phase from 2013-20. This would push up the carbon price – not an enticing prospect from the perspective of utilities, which will have to pay for all their emissions from 2013.
That is why utilities have so far opposed the idea of a set aside. Indeed, on the same day Jesse Scott, Eurelectric’s new head of sustainable development, made clear the organisation does not so far have an official position – whatever its president and vice-president – yes, Conti and Teyssen – may be saying.

So why the turnaround in position? Several answers emerged at a debate on the ETS in Brussels on Tuesday night. One is a growing fear of unilateral national efforts to patch up the carbon market. The UK will introduce a carbon price floor of £16 a tonne next year, rising to £30 by 2020, for example. There is also fresh talk of carbon taxes in other member states. And there are utilities’ balance sheets to consider, with substantial investments in carbon allowances making a higher carbon price, paradoxically, attractive.

Meanwhile, the energy-intensive manufacturing sector continues to oppose the move. They say the purpose of the ETS is to meet an emissions cap in a cost-effective way. “We find the ETS delivering exactly as it was supposed to deliver,” says Peter Botschek from chemical industries association Cefic.

If NGOs like Sandbag are correct in calculating the number of surplus carbon allowances held by these manufacturing firms due to the recession however (as output dropped so did emissions), we have to wonder whether their opposition is as firm as it appears.

BusinessEurope meanwhile, Europe’s main business association, is urging MEPs “on balance” to reject the set aside proposals. A set aside would “create further uncertainty and price volatility and establish a risky precedent of rapid political interference in the market”, it warns.

The Commission insists it would be a one-off intervention. But there is uncertainty too over what would happen to the set aside allowances. Only Parliament and member states together could definitively delete them – would this happen, in the end? BusinessEurope would prefer a broader, longer-term review of the ETS instead.

All eyes are now turned to the European parliament’s energy committee vote on 28 February. If they slot the idea of a set-aside into the energy efficiency directive, the Danish EU presidency will be forced to put it to member states for debate.
(Sonja van Renssen - svr.envi@gmail.com - reports from Brussels.)