Energy Efficiency: The Commission's Complicated Calculations
Who hasn’t heard of the 3x20, those pillars of European energy policy? And yet who is able to give their exact definition?
Recently, the Commission announced that current efforts are insufficient to achieve the third goal, concerning the improvement in energy efficiency.
How is it calculated? From 1990, as is generally thought? Wrong. The Commission is basing its target on 2005. Using the PRIMES baseline scenario, it estimated in 2007 that the EU"s primary energy consumption in 2020 would be 1968 million TOE. This scenario presumes:
• An annual 2.2% economic growth rate from 2005 to 2020,
• Reductions in energy consumption due to the effects of prices, structural changes and already-adopted measures.
These reductions are estimated at 1.8% per year throughout the period, which is divided between the impact of structural changes (0.6%), the effects of existing policies (0.35%) and independent progress in efficiency (0.85%). Moreover, the 2020 estimate already takes into account the 470 million TOE energy consumption reductions resulting from the drop in industrial activity in former Soviet Bloc members of the EU and the more efficient subsequent growth.
It is from the figure of 1968 million TOE which the Commission deducts a deliberate proportion of 20%, that is roughly 390 million TOE. The objective to achieve in 2020 now amounts to about 1575 million TOE.
Then the crisis arrived, and with it the plummet in growth. PRIMES reconsidered the 2020 forecast taking into account measures taken up to 2009 and fixed it at 1781 million TOE. Conclusion: We are still 204 million TOE short of achieving the much talked-about 1575.
More effort, Europeans. The crisis alone did not accomplish enough, it was still necessary to put into place the supplementary regulations required by the Commission.
These calculations can only create unrest. In fact, the only important objective for the struggle against climate change is the absolute reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. We have obligations towards humanity, but it is absolutely not necessary to break ourselves in fulfilling them. And let us place more trust in the prices (including that of carbon) and in the behaviour of economic agents.
Author(s)
Jacques LESOURNE
Jacques Lesourne was President of the Scientific Committee of the Center for Energy
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programs
Center for Energy & Climate
Ifri's Energy and Climate Center carries out activities and research on the geopolitical and geoeconomic issues of energy transitions such as energy security, competitiveness, control of value chains, and acceptability. Specialized in the study of European energy/climate policies as well as energy markets in Europe and around the world, its work also focuses on the energy and climate strategies of major powers such as the United States, China or India. It offers recognized expertise, enriched by international collaborations and events, particularly in Paris and Brussels.
Find out more
Discover all our analyses
Can carbon markets make a breakthrough at COP29?
Voluntary carbon markets (VCMs) have a strong potential, notably to help bridge the climate finance gap, especially for Africa.
Taiwan's Energy Supply: The Achilles Heel of National Security
Making Taiwan a “dead island” through “a blockade” and “disruption of energy supplies” leading to an “economic collapse.” This is how Colonel Zhang Chi of the People’s Liberation Army and professor at the National Defense University in Beijing described the objective of the Chinese military exercises in May 2024, following the inauguration of Taiwan’s new president, Lai Ching-te. Similar to the exercises that took place after Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taipei in August 2022, China designated exercise zones facing Taiwan’s main ports, effectively simulating a military embargo on Taiwan. These maneuvers illustrate Beijing’s growing pressure on the island, which it aims to conquer, and push Taiwan to question its resilience capacity.
India’s Broken Power Economics : Addressing DISCOM Challenges
India’s electricity demand is rising at an impressive annual rate of 9%. From 2014 to 2023, the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) surged from 1.95 trillion dollars ($) to $3.2 trillion (constant 2015 US$), and the nation is poised to maintain this upward trajectory, with projected growth rates exceeding 7% in 2024 and 2025. Correspondingly, peak power demand has soared from 136 gigawatts (GW) in 2014 to 243 GW in 2024, positioning India as the world’s third-largest energy consumer. In the past decade, the country has increased its power generation capacity by a remarkable 190 GW, pushing its total installed capacity beyond 400 GW.
The Troubled Reorganization of Critical Raw Materials Value Chains: An Assessment of European De-risking Policies
With the demand for critical raw materials set to, at a minimum, double by 2030 in the context of the current energy transition policies, the concentration of critical raw materials (CRM) supplies and, even more, of refining capacities in a handful of countries has become one of the paramount issues in international, bilateral and national discussions. China’s dominant position and successive export controls on critical raw materials (lately, germanium, gallium, rare earths processing technology, graphite, antimony) point to a trend of weaponizing critical dependencies.