Almost any design for a binding energy target will interact with the Energy Services Directive. Currently this is the only Directive that contains a multi-sectoral
energy savings target for end-use sectors (with target year 2016).
Any binding energy savings target that covers end- use energy consumption and is implemented before 2016, would overrule the indicative savings target of the Energy Services Directive. Any revision of the Directive should account for this.
Figure 6 - 43 Distance to effort sharing target in 2020, after realisation of HPI energy savings. Individual Member States are shown anonymously, green bar indicates EU 27. A positive gap indicates that additional measures beyond implementation of HPI savings potential will be required to meet the Effort Sharing Decision target. A negative value indicates an overshoot of the target. The left-hand graph is assessed against a pre-recession (PRIMES-2007) baseline46. The right-hand graph includes a first order estimate
(based on PRIMES-2009) of the recession impact.
46. E.g. EU 27 (pre-recession): EU 27 as a whole has to reduce its ‘effort sharing’ energy use (non-ETS fuel use) by 17.3% in 2020. The 2020 HPI potential for EU 27 is 20.7% (see Table 13 in Annex 2). This means that after full implementation of HPI, EU 27 needs -3.4% additional savings to meet its overall
6.4.6 INTERACTION WITH THE
EPBD
The recent revision of the EPBD has increased its scope and ambition level substantially. The nature of the Directive is that it provides a flexible framework for Member States to define standards and develop plans and national measures. Binding savings targets could stimulate Member States towards a fast and ambitious implementation of the EPBD.
This positive interaction is relevant for all design options that include fuel and electricity use in the built environment.
6.4.7 INTERACTION WITH
THE PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL
EMISSIONS DIRECTIVE (IED)
The key-element of the IED is the enforcement of the implementation of Best Available Technologies (BAT), for prevention and control of emissions into air, water or soil, for waste management, for efficient use of energy and for prevention of accidents. It gives Member States the option to impose requirements relating to energy efficiency, although in the case of industrial activities listed under the Emission Trading Directive, they are not obliged to do so. A binding energy saving target could strengthen the implementation of BAT.
The interaction between the proposed Industrial Emissions Directive and binding energy savings targets is relevant for all target designs that include heavy industry and large energy suppliers.
6.4.8 INTERACTION WITH
THE CCS DIRECTIVE
Capture, transport and storage of CO2 consume energy. CCS decreases the net efficiency of a power plant by 15 to 25% (Hendriks et al., 2004). Large-
scale application47 of CCS will therefore interact with all target designs that include the fossil fuel power supply sector (CCS for coal- or gas-based power production) and, to a lesser extent, power production from biomass plants and large industrial boilers.
6.4.9 INTERACTION WITH
THE CHP DIRECTIVE
The CHP Directive does not impose a CHP target on Member States. The Directive:
■ Sets definitions for high-efficiency CHP (HE-CHP) ■ Obliges Member States to identify their HE-CHP
potentials and to remove barriers that hamper implementation of CHP
■ Obliges Member States to set up a system for guarantees of origin for HE-CHP
■ Aims to stimulate energy savings and does not discriminate between fuels
Interaction between the CHP Directive and binding energy savings targets is relevant for all target designs that include energy supply and end-use fuel consumption (i.e. efficient heat production in the built environment).
A binding energy savings target and CHP Directive could reinforce each other
A binding energy savings target could support faster and more thorough implementation of the CHP Directive (removal of barriers to enable realisation of high-efficiency CHP potential by the market). In principle, this would help in achieving a binding energy savings target. Note, however, that the provisions in the current version of the Directive are weak and would have little, if any, impact on achieving a binding energy saving target.
6.5 FRAMEWORK FOR SCANNING
OF DESIGN OPTIONS
Figure 6 - 44 shows the legal EU instruments discussed in the previous sections, in relation to energy system-,
energy carrier- sector definitions, and positions them in the flexibility ‘hierarchy’ of EU legislation. In the next chapter this diagram will be used to illustrate the position, coverage and interaction of different design options with existing EU legislation.
Figure 6 - 44 Illustrative summary overview of the scope of current EU policies in relation to the different definitions of the energy system (supply, end-use) (upper row), energy carriers (second row) and sectors (third row). Rows 4-7 illustrate the hierarchy of policy that set binding targets at EU level (row 4), or national level (row 5) to legal acts that set more procedural obligations (row 6 and 7).
The closing chapter of this study looks at the opportunities and challenges of four different design options for a binding energy savings target (see Figure 7 - 45):
1. One economy-wide energy savings target at the EU level.
2. ‘End-user’ targets set at the EU level for sections of the economy. 3. One economy-wide energy savings target for each Member State 4. ‘End-user’ targets for Member States for sections of national economies
Here, the main criteria on which we evaluate the options is the flexibility that the options provide to Member States and the interaction with existing EU-policies. Combined, both criteria can be more broadly interpreted as the ‘coherence’ of a design option with existing EU policy.