EU looks to renewables to help cut emissions

Date: 10/02/2000

By Renée Cordes

IF the European Union wants to come close to delivering on its ambitious pledge to cut emissions of six greenhouse gases by 8% over the next dozen years, it will have no choice but to look to cleaner energy sources.

When Environment Commissioner Margot Wallström delivered her stark warning last autumn that the EU was not on track to meet the emission reduction pledges made at Kyoto in 1997, she pointed to the enormous potential offered by new car technologies, renewable energy sources and energy-efficient equipment to help in the fight against climate change.

But when it comes to actually tapping into this potential and devising a concrete strategy for promoting wind, solar and other kinds of clean power, the Union still has a long way to go and pressure is mounting on it to act soon.

The European Commission has yet to come forward with concrete legislative proposals for achieving its long-term goal of doubling the consumption of renewable energy to 12% of total electricity used by 2012, following the outcry which greeted the initial ideas for a blueprint put forward by former Energy Commissioner Christos Papoutsis.

Although his successor Loyola de Palacio has promised to come forward with new proposals by March, at the latest, the EU executive is not now expected to unveil a new set of guidelines to govern the extent to which member states can subsidise renewable energy until later in the year, even though time is running out to replace the current guidelines, which expire in June.

When she took office last autumn, De Palacio announced that she intended to come forward with her proposals in October. But the hugely sensitive nature of the debate on this issue forced her to delay publication of fresh plans until member states had been given a chance to express their views.

They have also been held up by an internal Commission dispute over how to ensure that any measures which are introduced to promote renewable energy do not conflict with those aimed at ensuring a properly-functioning single European electricity market.

The original proposals drawn up by Papoutsis called on EU governments to set national targets for domestic electricity consumption from solar and other forms of renewable energy. He also suggested creating a favourable regulatory framework and increasing funding for renewable energy both at national and Union level. But his plans were scuppered by a bitter dispute over how clean energy should be subsidised.

Papoutsis' proposals for renewables were intended to be part of an overall strategy to help the EU meet the commitment it made at the 1997 Kyoto climate change conference to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 8% compared to 1990 levels by 2012 at the latest.

Despite the continuing arguments over what form De Palacio's new proposals should take, the Union has already taken some steps to support clean energy.

Late last year, the EU institutions reached agreement on the level of funding to be provided for two programmes designed to promote energy efficiency and renewables.

A joint committee of the Union government and European Parliament representatives settled on a figure of €77 million for the EU's Altener programme to boost renewables from 1998-2002, and agreed h66 million for the same period for the Save programme, which aims to encourage investments in energy conservation by both industry and private consumers.

At the same time, the nuclear industry is promoting itself as a clean energy source which could help the EU meet its climate change goals. But about the only leg it has to stand on is the fact that it does not contribute to global warming, and that is unlikely to be enough to counter public hostility towards and arguments against its use.

Firstly, there is the problem of the waste generated by nuclear plants. Secondly, there is the widespread concern about the safety in the industry, which has been fuelled by the tussles between the EU and the countries of central and eastern Europe applying for membership over the timetable for decommissioning old plants.

As a result, many experts believe that the nuclear industry has little chance of surviving in the long run. "Nuclear will really probably kill itself off," said Rob Bradley, an energy specialist at Climate Network Europe, who added that that although nuclear energy did not contribute to carbon dioxide emissions, "in most countries there is no solution on where to put the waste".

If the European Union wants to come close to delivering on its ambitious pledge to cut emissions of six greenhouse gases by 8% over the next dozen years, it will have no choice but to look to cleaner energy sources. Article forms part of a survey 'Environment'.