Figure 1: Climate Actions Influence on Industry Emissions50
Figure 1 depicts transportation comprising 70% of total GHGs in 201451. Since 2015, GHG emissions have decreased beyond the 20% reduction target and which makes the 2020 climate and energy targets for the EU on track.52 Despite emissions slightly increasing to the previous year 2014, a year marked as being exceptionally warm from the Mediterranean to Nordic Europe, the EU still achieved a GHG reduction rate of 22% below 1990 levels.53 The implementation of renewable energy sources (RES) into the EU’s energy mix has steadily
increased annually.54 In 2015, RES were at 16.7% of gross final energy consumption; at this pace it was confidently concluded that the 2020 target was attainable.55 By 2018, the overall reliance and usage of energy from RES had steadily gotten closer to the target however a deeper review of individual Member States depicted a different story.56 As of 2015, 27 Member States had successfully met their annual GHG emission targets while 25 Member States had met and or
50 European Commission, 2020.
51 European Commission – Energy, Climate Change, and Environment, 2014.
52 EAA, 2018.
53 EAA, 2018.
54 EAA, 2018.
55 EAA, 2018.
56 EAA, 2018.
exceeded their projected trajectories under the Renewable Energy Directive.57 While this is a success overall, it is disheartening as 23 Member States were below their energy efficiency trajectory.58 “While EU legislation painted a new operating landscape for networks, assets in use today have been inherited from former integrated utility companies59. European legislation, however, was not passed without some form of cultural and political resistance to the creation of unbundled operating models, in which networks began their own lives within separate entities60. This process of reform led to a complete transformation of the energy policy landscape allowing the European Union to advance towards the objective of supplying 20% of the final energy consumption by renewables in 202061.” Energy Union legislation such as the Renewable Energy Directives and the Fuel Quality Directive were not met with unanimous support through the European Union. EU Member States which promote heavily promote renewable such as
Germany, Denmark, or Finland typically find greater success in achieving renewable integration at higher levels compared to Member States such as Poland who actively resist the integration of renewable energy technologies62. With regards to achieving targets such EU Member States such as Austria and Sweden were at a geographical head start while others such as Hungary or
Romania faced less than favorable conditions, as well as lacked the necessary infrastructure financing and overall expertise63. Consequentially, these differences and autonomy have led to divergent national energy security interests and policy strategies; these differences unfortunately influence the way Member States cooperate and integrate energy infrastructure64. What makes the divergent paths in Energy policy all the sensitive is that it is upon the West-East Axis65.
Countries which make up the East section of the divergent path includes Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Romania, Bulgaria,
57 EAA, 2018.
58 EAA, 2018.
59 Faure-Schuyer, Aurélie., Pye, Steve, 2017.
60 Faure-Schuyer, Aurélie., Pye, Steve, 2017.
61 Faure-Schuyer, Aurélie., Pye, Steve, 2017.
62 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 1.
63 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 1.
64 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 2.
65 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 2.
and Luxemburg66. Their main energy supplier is Russia with their traditional fossil fuels67. With these countries hosting large workforces based in the fossil fuel industries it makes sense as to why they are less inclined to switch to renewables68. However, the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia, and Hungary have been more open to coordinating their negotiations with the
European Union’s energy directives and frameworks but believe that the 2030 climate targets are unfeasible, unrealistic, and incompatible with their national competencies69. Countries which view the Energy Union as a tool to fight climate change and generally support renewable energy as a business tool include Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, and Belgium70. Many of these countries are motivated by environmental and economic interests to promote renewables; this is further justified via their high shares in European and global
sustainable technology initiatives and patents71. As such, “renewable energy is perceived as win-win in the West, and win-win-lose in the East72. These different energy priorities and concerns translate into different energy strategies vis-à-vis the Energy Union73. As a result, [West] cluster countries receive the EC’s ambitious renewable energy goals with open arms while [East] cluster countries prefer better gas interconnection to European markets and resist shifting from
traditional power sources to renewables in a short timeframe74.” The legal basis of the EU’s energy policy is derived from Article 194 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union75. Directive 2009/28/EC also known as the original Renewable Energy Directive was ratified and adopted via codecision on April 23rd 200976. It established a mandatory 20% share of RES for EU energy consumption by 202077. It also stated that all Member States were required to ensure that a minimum of 10% of transport fuels came from RES by 2020 as well78.
66 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 2.
67 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 2.
68 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 2.
69 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 2.
70 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 2.
71 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 2.
72 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 3.
73 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 3.
74 de la Esperanza Mata Pérez – Scholten - Smith Stegen, 2017, p. 3.
75 European Parliament – Fact Sheets on the European Union. Renewable: Renewable Energy, 2020.
76 European Parliament – Fact Sheets on the European Union. Renewable: Renewable Energy, 2020.
77 European Parliament – Fact Sheets on the European Union. Renewable: Renewable Energy, 2020.
78 European Parliament – Fact Sheets on the European Union. Renewable: Renewable Energy, 2020.
Directive (EU) 2018/2001 more commonly referred to as the Renewable Energy Directive II entered into force in December 201879. What is legally significant, is that the revised RED defined two distinct regulatory regimes80. Up until 2020, it reaffirmed existing national renewable energy targets for Member States and also took into account their unique starting points and potential integration of renewables81. It also set up legal operative procedures which allowed Member State progress to be measured every two years when EU countries were expected to publish their national renewable energy progress reports82. Going forward from 2021, with the new Clean energy for all Europeans package, the revised directive established a new overall EU renewable energy target for 2030 that would require Member States to propose their new national energy targets for the 10-year NECPs83. The NECPs will be assessed by the European Commission, who are legally authorized to force measure at EU level to ensure the success of the overarching EU target84. Similar to the pre-2021 agenda, progress will be measured in increments of two years upon Member States publishing their national energy progress reports85.
The Renewable Energy Directive (RED) set binding national RES targets for Member States the lowest being for Malta at 10% and 49% for Sweden was reflective of the unique starting points of each Member State.86 Per an indicator assessment published by the European Environment Agency (EAA), the recent increase in RES shares of final energy consumption has slowed down due to overall increases in EU energy consumption as well as lack of progress in the transport sector specifically.87 In 2018, the EU in total had renewable energy accounting for 30.7% of gross final electricity consumption, with 8.1% of transport consumption.88 The EU transport sector renewable energy (RES-T) chiefly derives from biofuels.89 Biofuel consumption expanded
79 European Parliament – Fact Sheets on the European Union. Renewable: Renewable Energy, 2020.
80 European Parliament – Fact Sheets on the European Union. Renewable: Renewable Energy, 2020.
81 European Parliament – Fact Sheets on the European Union. Renewable: Renewable Energy, 2020.
82 European Parliament – Fact Sheets on the European Union. Renewable: Renewable Energy, 2020.
83 European Parliament – Fact Sheets on the European Union. Renewable: Renewable Energy, 2020.
84 European Parliament – Fact Sheets on the European Union. Renewable: Renewable Energy, 2020.
85 European Parliament – Fact Sheets on the European Union. Renewable: Renewable Energy, 2020.
86 EAA, 2018. & Romppanen, S., 2013, p. 2.
87 EAA, 2019.
88 EAA, 2019.
89 EAA, 2019.
at an exponential rate between 2005 and 2017 at an average annual growth rate of 30%.90 However the next three years required an annual growth rate of 32% in order to reach National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAP) for 2020 targets.91 As of 2017, only Austria, Finland, and Sweden had reached and exceeded their 10% 2020 target of final RES-T consumption.92
While these figures appear to positively indicate that the EU is on track, it is primarily due to specific RES powerhouses which are “carrying the team on their back”. These powerhouses being Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Sweden achieved their energy share targets for 2020 in 201893. In particular Finland
increased their RES share in their gross final energy consumption by 12.2 percentage points, Sweden by 14.0 and Denmark by 19.8. 94
Figure 2: 2018 Projections for 2020 EU RES Goals95
90 EAA, 2019.
91 EAA, 2019.
92 EAA, 2019.
93 EAA, 2019.
94 EAA, 2019.
95 EAA, 2019.
Referencing Figure 2, the final calculation for the final gross energy consumption for Malta and Cyprus specifically applied a derogation from RED.96 The RED derogation allowed these two countries to apply a maximum proportion of 4.12% from energy consumed in aviation as a proportion of the gross final energy consumption.97 This serves to their benefit as it was
determined due to their insular and peripheral nature vis-à-vis physical locations, both countries are at a disadvantage as they rely on aviation as a central mode of transportation.98 Under Article 12, section 35 of the RED, it states that with these Member States’s gross energy consumption rates being over three times higher than their Union peers, they are disproportionately impacted by regulatory and technological constraints which therefore merits the energy derogation.99 As such, it can be relatively understandable as to why Cyprus and Malta are well below their 2020 RES targets.100 With that in mind, the two Member States were granted further derogations in their possibilities of consuming biofuel in relation to the structure and size of their fuel markets.101 Article 27 Section 1, B. states that upon taking into account the availability of feedstock, Malta and Cyprus are again exempt from a 1.7% limitation regarding the energy content of transport biofuels and biogas supplied for market consumption.102
In comparison with their Mediterranean Member States, such as Malta and Cyprus who rely on aviation as their central mode of travel, the Baltic and Nordic Countries, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Norway, and Sweden are well on track and then some regarding their 2020 RES targets. All data on growing their share of renewable energy sources for electricity generation for Norway comes from the European Network of Transmissions System Operators for Electricity data.103 Per the RED, within the EU, Finland’s 2020 target for share of RES in gross final consumption of energy was to be at 38%, a 9.5% increase from 2005.104 Sweden’s 2020 target for share of RES in gross final consumption of energy was to be at 49%, a 9.2% increase from 2005.105 Latvia’s
96 EAA, 2019.
2020 target for share of RES in gross final consumption of energy was to be at 40%, a 7.4%
increase from 2005.106 With again reference to Figure 2, amongst their EU peers, Sweden’s 2017 RES share was at 54.5% and their RES proxy share projected to be at 56.98% in 2018.107 Next, Latvia’s 2017 RES share was at 39.01% and their RES proxy share projected to be at 40.2% in 2018.108 Finland’s 2017 RES share was at 41.01% and their RES proxy share projected to be at 41.75% in 2018.109 It is important to note that in 2014 Sweden’s total final energy consumption was being produced by RES by over half110. In comparison, Finland was only at 38.7%111. However, it is important to note the differences in sources of renewable energy. Sweden derives their energy primarily from hydropower and bioenergy while Finland has a more diverse energy portfolio and has invested in bioenergy, alternative fuels from forestry, wood-based fuels, hydropower, wind power, as well as ground heat. Arguably Sweden had a head start when it came to geographical advantages to transitioning to renewable energy which justifies Finland’s smaller renewable growth. However, Finland in the long term is establishing themselves for greater success by setting up diverse renewable energy sources; this will better allow them to be more adaptable to various climate induced weather impacts as well as other potential energy crisis.
2.2 Issues with the Transportation Sector and Biofuels; What are they and why the