The role of energy efficiency in the framework of the EU energy and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The role of energy efficiency in the framework

• f the EU energy and climate strategy –

A policy-based scenario analysis

Stefan Lechtenböhmer Stefan Thomas Christoph Zeiss Presentation

eceee Summer Study 2009 La Colle sur Loup

2 June 2009

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 1

Overview

The triple Challenge The climate leadership of the EU and the 30% reduction target Could the EU deliver?

– A scenario with a domestic 30% GHG emission reduction – Energy efficiency as a crucial strategy element

Policy needs for implementation of EE Conclusion

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 2

Climate change, energy security and economics impose a triple challenge to the world

The climate challenge becomes increasingly urgent

 Only one or two decades left to reach the peak of GHG emissions (IPCC)  EU (ICs) must take the lead, this will not harm their economies  Emerging countries can follow if sustainable development is the aim

The time of cheap oil and gas supply is coming to an end

 Declining conventional reserves in the OECD  Increasing import dependencies in ICs, China, India and others  Fierce competition (speculation, resource conflicts) about limited resources  Increasing instability of prices and supply (oil supply crisis in 2013?)

The window of economic opportunities

 Worldwide: Strong mitigation actions today avoid much higher future costs for the

word (Stern; IPCC 2007);

 National (e.g. Germany): 40% GHG-reduction (2020) beneficial for the economy  Lead markets: “GreenTech” drives a new “Industrial Revolution”!

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 3

The Global CO2-Emission Budget

To remain below +2°C

1.000 Bln t CO2 by 2050

Sources: Hare 2007, Meinshausen 2009, Rahmstorf 2009

(1/3 alread emitted since 2008) 

By 2020:

– Max. +10% of global GHG

emissions vs. 1990 (±0 vs. 2000;

• 10% vs. 2007)



By 2050:

– -50% of global GHG emissions vs.

1990 (-55% vs. 2000; -60% vs. 2007)



Industrialised countries:

– By 2020: -25% to -40% – By 2050: -80% to -95% / 2t/Cap. 

Other countries:

– By 2020: Substancial (ca. 850 Mt)

deviation from baseline (-15% to

• 30%)

– By 2050: 2 t / Cap.

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 4

The reduction target for Kopenhagen Proposal by EU-Environment ministers (20 Oct. 2008) to „keep the 2°C Target within reach“

Industrialised countries:

– -25 to -40% by 2020 – Who should do more than the EU? Russia and Ukraine?

Developing and threshold countries

– Significant deviation from baseline

The EU can not remain below ist own pledge

– The EU might have to reduce its GHG emissions by probably even more than 30% when it stands up to its own position

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 5

Efficiency: Core solution for low GHG scenarios (WEO 2008)

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 6

..the same for the EU

(30% domestic GHG emission reduction scenario WI/WWF 2008)

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 7

 Meseberg Package:

–

Integrated energy and climate program (IEKP)

–

combrehensive package of measures to achieve the target  GHG mitigation target:

–

40% by 2020

–

if the EU commits itself to 30%  Sub-Targets:

–

More than doubling of RES-share

–

Doubling of CHP-share to 25%

–

Doubling of energy efficiency to 3% p.a.

... or Germany

(The Meseberg Package, 2007): GHG mitigation by strategy

(Meseberg Package)

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 8

Energy efficiency potentials are there & have net benefits (WI-Study for Germany on behalf of E.ON, 2006)

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 9

This holds true also on a global scale... This holds true also on a global scale... ... according to IPCC ... according to IPCC

<$100/tCO <$100/tCO2eq

2eq

2.4 - 4.7 2.4 - 4.7 1.6 1.6 – – 2.5 2.5 5.3 5.3 – – 6.7 6.7 2.5 2.5 – – 5.5 5.5

Notes: Emissions from electricity use are counted in the end-use sectors. Transport not split into regions because of international aviation fuel.

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 10

...or McKinsey

Quelle: „The McKinsey Quarterly“ 2007-1

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 11

Potentials for 30% GHG Emissions Reduction (EU27): Acceleration of Final Energy Efficiency

• vs. BAU
• vs. 2005

FE-Intensity Reduction:

• BAU: -1.4%/year
• P&M: -2.8%/year

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 12

Components of energy related CO2 emission reduction Kaya Identities

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 13

Economic Benefits of the 30% P&M scenario (EU27): Reducing Import Dependency (comp.to BAU)

75% 64%

Subsequently reduced costs of imported energy: 1.3% of GDP (at 100$/barrel)

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 14

Policy needs for implementation of EE

Wuppertal Institute

• 17. Mai 2009

15

Current policy for energy efficiency The pending 20% energy savings target

 Doing more with less / Energy efficiency action plan (2006):

– Proposed target: 20% energy savings vs. BAU by 2020

 Climate change comittee (EP) (Florenz Report, Dec. 2008):

– Binding target: 20% energy savings vs. BAU by 2020 – „net zero energy“ new buildings from 2015/20

 Spring council (March 2009):

– Update of Energy efficiency action plan in 2009 – Energy efficiency package to be concluded in 2009

 We might get a binding target on energy efficiency soon

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 16

Potential for 30% GHG Emissions Reduction (EU27): Buildings – stand for a third of energy savings vs. BAU

 Exchange of most heating systems by:

District heating systems, Solar and biomass, Condensing boilers

 Tighter building codes

– For all buildings, with improved quality assurance/enforcement – With stepwise increasing standards, approaching Passive house level by 2020 – Step wise including existing buildings

 Boosting of renovation rates

– From currently below 1% to about 2.5% per year – 100% of renovations coupled with high quality energetic refurbishments

 Comprehensive policy package needed

– Standards --> EPBD with stricter requirements (however, most of building energy is consumed in NW-Europe with already high standards) – Financial support and other support and incentives (national subsidies, energy efficiency funds, project based machanisms/bundling of projects to attract external funding)

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 17

Potentials What would be needed for the 30% reduction scenario?

Transport stands for 36% of energy savings vs. BAU:

 Fuel economy of cars is decisive

– 120gCO2/vkm mandatory from 2012 – 100gCO2/vkm mandatory from 2018 – That means quick tightening of current regulation

 Equivalent improvements in trucks  Plus:

– Active demand management – Modification of modal split CHP increases primary energy efficiency:

 Increasing of the CHP share in

electricity generation: from 13 to 23 % (by 2020)

 Due to:

– Increased electricity to steam ratio – Expansion of district heating and industrial CHP – Cutting of electricity demand growth rate by 50%

 50% of new CHP biomass/biogas

fired

CHP Transport

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 18

30% Domestic GHG Emission Reduction by 2020 (EU27): Conclusions I

 The EU should do -30% domestically, in order to stay credible and a front runner

in climate policy

 The potentials to deliver on that are there

– Numerous studies prove promising potentials for efficiency, renewables and CHP – Such a policy has significant co-benefits (preventing price shocks and securing energy supply) – But: Still a huge implementation gap - immediate action is needed because of long investment circles

 Energy Efficiency

– EU27- 20% savings target is compatible with the 30%-P&M scenario – Active supporting frame work to create energy services markets is lacking (e.g. energy efficiency funds; incentives for Contracting, DSM)

 Renewable Energies

– EU27 - 20% RES target is almost sufficient for the the 30%-P&M scenario – Expansion and investments are on a good track, but only for electricity – Without increased FE-efficiency (double rate p.a.) other sector specific targets for buildings, RES, CHP, transport etc. will hardly be achievable

Wuppertal Institute

2 June 2009 Lechtenböhmer, Thomas, Zeiss 19

Conclusion II: Demand side energy efficiency particularly important

 19% demand side energy savings (vs. BAU)

– Contribute by more than 40% to the -30% GHG target – Significantly ease the target of 20% renewables

 The implementation has to be significantly accelerated

– Transport:

• Targets have been watered down
• This has to be re-tightened, otherwise 30% domestic reductions seem to be

hardly reachable

– Buildings:

• Rapid action needed on standards and particularly refurbishment rates
• This requires particular action with regards to financial incentives

– Appliances

• Tigther standards have to be implemented faster
• Standards and labels have to become dynamic

Many thanks for your attention ! Itʻs in our hands to save energy