Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
will subsidise green energy in another member state. Some analysts fear that the
variety of liberalisation (or
) options now available to national energy
champions will fragment the European market even more. Renewables-generated
electricity is still not traded across borders, holding back its take-o
'
unbundling
'
. A proposed
North Sea supergrid interconnector for wind farms at sea has been held up by
national protection of home markets.
18
The recession has gradually eaten into funding for renewables. Italy announced
cuts in solar power incentives. Spain has cut subsidies for solar investments, leaving
many companies in severe di
culties. The UK
'
s Green Investment Bank is cur-
tailed by strict rules against de
nancing. Denmark has gradually reined back on
its use of wind farms as these were proving to be ine
cit
cient and of intermittent use.
EU o
cials fret that R and D on renewables has slowed dramatically due to the
economic crisis.
19
The Commission
'
s
agship research budget, FP7, gave only
€
2.35 billion to low carbon research out of a
€
50 billion total allocation. Its suc-
cessor Horizon 2020 programme inks in
€
5.7 billion for renewable research out of
a total
cient.
In the Renewable Energy Attractiveness Index, most European states have fallen
down the rankings and lost ground to China and US.
21
By 2012 China accounted for
over 20 per cent of new investment in renewable development. While the share of
low carbon power has grown in Europe, two-thirds of this is still nuclear. In private,
some member state o
€
80 billion budget;
20
in private, o
cials admit this may prove insu
cials complain that the Commission has adopted an extremely
legalistic approach to restricting large-scale wind farms, and that member states have
been unable to inject the geopolitical case for an expansion of such renewables.
The EU
s much-lauded ETS has not had a dramatic impact on emissions levels.
The March 2013 green paper admitted that the ETS
'
has not succeeded in being a
major driver towards long-term low carbon investment
'
.
22
The ETS
rst phase
was extremely lax; allowances were actually greater than emissions and the carbon
price plummeted. The ETS
'
'
s
s second phase tightened up allowances, but covered
sectors that still represented only 40 per cent of EU emissions. Even in its third
phase, the scheme remains well short of full auctioning. Carbon o
'
sets compromise
the scheme
s ostensible rationale: nearly all EU states have carbon footprints way in
excess of their national reporting, because they buy the right to pollute outside
Europe. Sectors excluded from the ETS still account for 50 per cent of the EU
'
s
total emissions. In a move interpreted as an interventionist turn, in 2010 the UK
announced it would set a
'
oor to the carbon price, and that this would be well
beyond that of the ETS in an e
ectiveness. Connie
Hedegaard has acknowledged that the ETS has not had a major impact but has
refused to cede to non-governmental organisations
ort to correct the latter
'
s ine
) demands for post-
2012 allowances to be revoked for some sectors. The chief of executive o
'
(NGOs
'
cer
(CEO) of German energy company E.ON de
ned the ETS as
'
bust
…
dead
'
.
23
