European Energy Policy: Energy Savings Glass 2/3 Empty
Summing up Europe’s climate policies suggests we still haven’t grasped the full potential for energy savings. We act as if we were living in a system with infinite resources easily exploited by human innovation and ingenuity. We focus on the efficiencies we can gain from components of our system, but not on the system as a whole and we do not consider how the other billions of people on earth can achieve our level of comfort with a resource or carbon-constrained future and with aspirations that necessarily imply sharply growing energy consumption.
In fact, EU energy policies are too confined to energy efficiency and renewable energies. Efficiency policies are broken up by sector and product. Questions about re-defining our needs and load reduction are not considered as part of the solution. Efficiency is seen as a physical output/input ratio and technological improvements allow this ratio to be increased. Unsurprisingly, we never reach the theoretical savings potential particularly when market failures and weak policy implementation occur.
The European Council confirmed this mind-set by reminding us that “safe, secure, sustainable energy … remains a priority for Europe” and the way forward to achieve our objectives and to reduce our energy import dependency is for “the EU and its Member States to promote investment in renewables and safe and sustainable low carbon technologies”. In spite of the recognition by the European Commission that “we are unlikely to achieve a 20% reduction under the current set of policies” the European Council ended its statement by directing the blame at Member States because “the quality of National Energy Efficiency Action Plans, developed by Member States since 2008, is disappointing, leaving vast potential un-tapped”. According to the 27 Heads of States and Governments, “the move towards renewable energy use and greater energy efficiency in transport is happening too slowly. While we are broadly on track for the 20% target for renewables, we are a long way from achieving the objective set for energy efficiency” .
Although the original legislation allowed for a change in behavior or a sense of energy “frugality” to play a major role, over time the notion of frugality has been eclipsed by a single-minded drive for product efficiency. Our energy policy is based on the comparison of the efficiencies (output/input ratio) for products delivering the same service. We use efficiency labels to compare one product with another, but fail to grasp the bigger picture of a systemic awareness of overall energy consumption and growing demand for energy services.
By doing so, we ignore the increase in energy demand due to new functionalities and devices, or increases in size. In fact, even if the output/input ratio is better, big houses, larger cars and appliances still have high energy demand compared to small ones. Yet larger products are usually labeled as more efficient than smaller ones which misleads consumers on the total energy consumed. An example is the increase of big individual houses located in suburban areas which leads to more cars on our roads and more congestion. Maybe our cars, appliances and equipment are indeed more efficient but the system as a whole is not and the increase of primary energy demand is a reality.
The European Council highlighted the need for “a revolution in energy systems” to reduce our GHG emissions. However, this revolution will not be enough to meet the climate change challenge if it’s a “technology revolution” only. Efficient technologies will allow the reduction of our primary energy consumption only if addressing behavior is among the first steps in our energy policy, only if creating an awareness of the need to conserve energy - the sense of energy “frugality”. Promoting this sense of frugality is probably more challenging than improving technical efficiencies of products. It implies adjusting our lifestyles and questioning ourselves about our choices on individual houses, cars, new devices and the hundreds of daily decisions we make that bear on our personal energy consumption.
It’s time for a conceptual revolution in European energy policy: renewable energies and energy efficiency will not be sufficient to meet 21st century challenges. China and the US have placed conservation as a top priority in their energy policy. If the EU would like to assert its leadership on “green” technologies and innovation, we need an ambitious conservation policy - a sense of frugality - for all natural resources, realizing that energy efficiency is most effective as a complement to frugality.
_________________
1) Interview with Marie C. DONNELLY published by EurActiv.com on 23 December 2010
2) EUCO 2/11, February 4th
3) The original legislation states an absolute reduction of primary energy consumption of 390 Mtoe, See COM 2006 (545)
Available in:
Regions and themes
Share
Author(s)
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.