ABSTRACT
The 2020 framework was put in place after years of debates in the European Union and among Member States. Although the March 2007 Summit of Europe’s heads of state and government certainly played a pivotal role in establishing the consensus and later transforming it into relevant legislation in the formof theClimate andEnergy Package (Chapter 3 of this book), it is worthwhile understanding that this level of agreement – including both painful compromise and joyful success for some of the participants – would not have been possible without prior scientific work on the feasibility of the targeted framework and on potential impacts on costs, jobs, environmental and other issues. The climate and energy package was well prepared by various stakeholders and it became reality through decisive and courageous action of decision makers in governments and parliaments all over Europe, underpinned by the expertise of EU officials and of scientists looking more deeply into impacts and solutions. This section explores the importance of focussed policy debates as well as the important role of
learning from the experience of other parts of the world and of sharing experience that might help improve performance towards a sustainable energy system elsewhere.And it bridges the gap from today’s state of implementation of the directives via a number of scenarios to the ongoing policy debates which are to result in agreement about a post-2020 framework for renewable energy, energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions reduction in the European Union. Chapter 9 addresses the role of scenarios for successfully reaching agreement on the climate
and energy package in 2009. Scenarios looking beyond 2020 aiming at 2050 to outline a vision of a sustainable energy system are described and analysed. It is show how assumptions, methodology but also the intention of the authors can influence the results of a study. It is shown howEurelectric in 2009, supported later in a separate study by EWI, re-opened the debate on a number of questions which had been settled in the climate and energy package – immediately after the package was agreed. The agreement on strengthening national support systems for renewables and supporting convergence by good practice exchange was attacked by forging proof for billions of Euros of potential savings through harmonisation of support schemes, and upholding the role of nuclear and CCS as allegedly necessary for climate protection and security of supply and for reducing costs. Eurelectric’s Power Choices Study (Eurelectric 2009) and EWI’s European RES-E PolicyAnalysis (EWI 2010) are confrontedwith reactions fromother stakeholders and compared to studies aiming at greenhouse gas reductions of 80-95% by 2050 while at the same time increasing the shares of renewable energy – including scenarios aiming at 100% renewables in 2050. Apart from stakeholder contributions the three energy related roadmaps presented by
European Commission in 2011 are described and analysed. The LowCarbon Roadmap (European Commission 2011a), the Transport Roadmap (European Commission 2011c1) and the Energy Roadmap 2050 (European Commission 2011d) provide a solid framework for assessing policy options for a new climate and energy package beyond 2020. The roadmaps are evaluated in detail, in particular their strengths and weaknesses are analysed and solutions provided.
