News
EU climate plan reduces energy security
2011-05-08 21:08:41
New economic research commissioned by the Copenhagen Consensus Center shows that the EU’s climate plan will lead to greater reliance on foreign energy imports.
The Copenhagen Consensus Center asked Professor Christoph Böhringer and Andreas Keller of the University of Oldenburg to examine the EU ‘20-20-20’ Climate Plan’s impact on energy security.
The plan has been touted as a way to cut CO2 emissions, create ‘green jobs’, and enhance energy security.
In the research paper, “Energy Security: An Impact Assessment of the EU Climate and Energy Package”, Böhringer and Keller find that if the 20-20-20 policy hadn’t been pursued, then just slightly over half of Europe’s energy needs would be met by imported fossil fuel by 2020 — very similar to today.
If the full 20-20-20 plan is implemented, increasing renewable energy use and cutting overall energy use, then the researchers find there would be “increased energy imports as well as increased price risks”.
This is because of an uncoordinated jumble of targets, instruments and policies, and also because of the phase-out of domestic nuclear power generation.
These outcomes are based on the International Energy Outlook’s optimistic scenario, under which renewable energy use will grow at a rapid rate regardless of other settings. Strip away this unrealistic expectation, and the cost of achieving EU’s policy would be even higher.
Böhringer and Keller find that EU policy practice “violates basic principles of cost-effectiveness”, and note that the EU has never set itself a clear metric for energy security.
2011-05-08 21:08:41
New economic research commissioned by the Copenhagen Consensus Center shows that the EU’s climate plan will lead to greater reliance on foreign energy imports.
The Copenhagen Consensus Center asked Professor Christoph Böhringer and Andreas Keller of the University of Oldenburg to examine the EU ‘20-20-20’ Climate Plan’s impact on energy security.
The plan has been touted as a way to cut CO2 emissions, create ‘green jobs’, and enhance energy security.
In the research paper, “Energy Security: An Impact Assessment of the EU Climate and Energy Package”, Böhringer and Keller find that if the 20-20-20 policy hadn’t been pursued, then just slightly over half of Europe’s energy needs would be met by imported fossil fuel by 2020 — very similar to today.
If the full 20-20-20 plan is implemented, increasing renewable energy use and cutting overall energy use, then the researchers find there would be “increased energy imports as well as increased price risks”.
This is because of an uncoordinated jumble of targets, instruments and policies, and also because of the phase-out of domestic nuclear power generation.
These outcomes are based on the International Energy Outlook’s optimistic scenario, under which renewable energy use will grow at a rapid rate regardless of other settings. Strip away this unrealistic expectation, and the cost of achieving EU’s policy would be even higher.
Böhringer and Keller find that EU policy practice “violates basic principles of cost-effectiveness”, and note that the EU has never set itself a clear metric for energy security.
advertisement
