A new EU energy technology policy towards 2050 : which way to go?
Title: A new EU energy technology policy towards 2050 : which way to go?
Author: RUESTER, Sophia; SCHWENEN, Sebastian; LASSOURCE, Adeline; FINGER, Matthias; GLACHANT, Jean-Michel
Series/Number: Florence School of Regulation; 2013/01; Policy Briefs
ISSN: 1977-3900; 1977-3919
External link: http://www.florence-school.eu
–– Market actors are calling for a post-2020 energy technology policy framework now. As a result, the policy is likely to be negotiated in a time of fierce global competition in clean-tech markets, financial crisis and institutional frictions in the EU. To contribute to the debate and to assist DG ENER to prepare a new Communication on ‘Energy Technologies in a future European Energy Policy’, our THINK report discusses a renewed EU energy technology policy towards 2050. –– A first possible policy path would be to extend the 2020 policies to 2030 and 2050. From this reference case, departures in two major ways are possible. Policy path 2 would rely on a strong carbon price signal and technology-neutral support to innovation. In contrast, an alternative policy path 3 would depart from a weak carbon price signal and technology targets. –– A multi-criteria evaluation shows that no single policy path is clearly superior to another. Therefore, a renewed SET Plan should allow for all possible future policy paths. Priority technologies that are key to achieve 2050 objectives and/or can help to support green growth within the EU should be identified based on a comprehensive approach across sectors. –– But not only the policy context is uncertain. There are also other possible futures not yet recognized in the EU Energy Roadmap 2050. First, shifts in paradigm of EU energy policy away from decarbonization and in favor of competitiveness or supply security might call for strong technology support. Second, technological revolutions, such as a global shale gas revolution, could result in the “rational” price of carbon falling extremely low. –– There are several reasons that justify some directed technology push, instead of building fully on technology-neutral support to innovation. Pushing energy efficiency enhancing and enabling technologies thereby offers a no-regret strategy in any future setting and dominates other push strategies in terms of implementability and robustness. Creating options for technology breakthroughs has to be a main pillar in any future SET-Plan.
Type of Access: openAccess