KEB, Alm.del - 2013-14 - Bilag 126: Referat m.v. fra det interparlamentariske møde om The EU Internal Energy Market for the 21st Century den 17. december 2013 i Bruxelles, Europa-Parlamentet

JOINT COMMITTEE MEETINGEUROPEAN PARLIAMENT – NATIONAL PARLIAMENTSThe EU Internal Energy Market for the 21st CenturyPROCEEDINGS17 December 2013European Parliament, BrusselsIntroductory remarksIn the framework of the parliamentary dimension of the Lithuanian Presidency of the Councilof the European Union the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) of theEuropean Parliament and the Committee on Economics of the Seimas of the Republic ofLithuania co-organised a Joint Committee Meeting (JCM) onThe EU Internal Energy Marketfor the 21st Century.The JCM took place on 17 December 2013 in the European Parliamentin Brussels and was attended by Members of national Parliaments and the EuropeanParliament.The JCM was opened by the Co-Chairs Ms Amalia SARTORI, Chair of the Committee onIndustry, Research and Energy of the European Parliament, and Mr RemigijusŽEMAITAITIS, Chair of the Committee on Economics of the Seimas of the Republic ofLithuania.In session I, co-chaired by Ms Amalia SARTORI and Mr Remigijus ŽEMAITAITIS andentitledEuropean Energy Policy – Challenges, Achievements and Perspectives,thefollowing keynote speakers took the floor: Mr Jaroslav NEVEROVIČ, Minister of Energy ofthe Republic of Lithuania (presentation onIntegration of Europe's Energy Systems),Mr JerzyBUZEK MEP, former President of the European Parliament (presentation onMaking theInternal Energy Market Work),and Mr Philip LOWE, Director General for Energy at theEuropean Commission (presentation onEuropean Energy Policy - Main Goals for theFuture).In session II, co-chaired by Mr Remigijus ŽEMAITAITIS and Ms Patrizia TOIA, Vice-Chairof the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy of the European Parliament, and entitledA European Energy Policy for Sustainable Growth and Competitiveness,the followingkeynote speakers took the floor: Mr Markus BEYRER, Director General of Business Europe(presentation onEuropean Business Views on the Future of EU Energy Policy),Mr KornelisGedimino pr. 53, LT-01109 Vilnius, LITHUANIATel. + 370 5 239 6762 E-mail: [email protected]

BLOK, Professor at the University of Utrecht (presentation onRenewable Energy Sourcesand Sustainable Energy Balances),Mr Antonio TAJANI, Vice-President of the EuropeanCommission in charge of Industry and Entrepreneurship (presentation onSafe and AffordableEnergy Resources for a Competitive Industry),and Mr Randall BOWIE, Director of theEuropean Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (presentation onEnergy Efficiency – theShale Gas of Europe).The JCM ended with the concluding remarks by the Co-Chairs Mr Remigijus ŽEMAITAITISand Ms Patrizia TOIA.Overview of the presentations and debatesSESSION I. EUROPEAN ENERGY POLICY - CHALLENGES,ACHIEVEMENTS AND PERSPECTIVESIn his presentation Mr Jaroslav NEVEROVIČ, Minister of Energy of the Republic ofLithuania, reiterated the main goals of the EU energy policy: establishing a sustainableEuropean energy system, enhancing competitiveness and improving security of supply. TheMinister stressed that the key tool at the EU’s disposal to achieve these goals was acompetitive and well interconnected Internal Energy Market (IEM). He reminded of thecommitment made by the European Council in February 2011 to complete the IEM by 2014and to eliminate existing energy islands within the EU by 2015. He noted that there wasconsiderable progress made towards these goals even though there was still work to be doneto arrive at the final destination. Mr NEVEROVIČ underlined two key directions for the EU’senergy policy: first, to further liberalise the energy market (such as through the fullimplementation of the Third Energy Package); and second, to invest in infrastructure in orderto create the physical conditions for the IEM. The latter goal would be aided by theimplementation of 248 Projects of Common Interest (PCIs), for which €5.85 billion hadalready been committed in the EU budget. In the opinion of the Minister, the EU already hada solid regulatory base and infrastructure but that the main focus should be on implementationof the existing projects and regulations.Mr Jerzy BUZEK MEP, former President of the European Parliament, congratulated theLithuanian Presidency for the progress that had been achieved in the area of energy policyduring the second half of 2013. He also praised the contribution of the European Commissionin developing the IEM since 2009. Mr BUZEK stressed that energy, alongsidereindustrialisation and innovation, was the priority area in order to fully recover from theeconomic crisis. In this regard efforts should be concentrated towards achieving affordableenergy prices for the consumers, security of energy supply and environmental protection. Inorder to complete the IEM infrastructure interconnections were of key importance. On theother hand, regulating the price of energy in the IEM was not a healthy approach; instead,further liberalisation of the energy market had to be pursued. Externally the EU should strivefor a stronger and more united negotiating position vis-à-vis outside suppliers. This couldonly be achieved if the energy relationship was based on strong and transparent rules.

Mr Philip LOWE, Director General for Energy at the European Commission, described theperiod of the five years since 2008 as a perfect storm, considering such factors as theeconomic and financial crisis, the shale gas revolution, the Fukushima disaster and the rapidgrowth of energy prices in Europe. In this regard completing the IEM was a 'no regrets' policyoption. Mr LOWE spoke about the recently released Green Paper by the EuropeanCommission onA 2030 Framework for Climate and Energy Policies1, which estimated thatfailure to complete the IEM would cost the EU €40-70 billion a year. He stressed that themarket mechanism was the most optimal one to ensure efficiency of the energy sector. Themarket should also judge the right price of energy products. Therefore a fresh look wasneeded on practices of government intervention in the energy market. He noted that publicsubsidies were applied on a national basis, while they had serious cross-border effects. MrLOWE also highlighted the importance of the Third Energy Package. Currently across the EUthere were 12 cases of non-compliance with this legislation and it was therefore imperativethat the Member States accelerate its implementation.DebateIn the ensuing debate five MEPs and members from national Parliaments from Lithuania,Greece, Norway, the UK, Austria, Spain, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Croatia, Italy, Finland,Kosovo and Turkey took the floor. Several members stressed the need to invest sufficiently inenergy infrastructure and in innovative technologies. In particular, the interconnectivity of thegrids was considered as crucial for the functioning of the internal energy market. In thisregard, it was pointed out that the current level of funding for the PCIs was not sufficient andthat as a result not all necessary infrastructure projects would be implemented. Another issuethat resonated in the discussion was energy prices: on the one hand, they were unequal acrossEurope, which distorted competition between the Member States; on the other hand, the levelof energy prices had been constantly increasing while incomes were not – this harmed boththe consumers and businesses.Some participants stressed that the use of indigenous energy sources, particularly shale gas,should be increased in order to ensure energy security and improve Europe’s externalcompetitiveness. Other participants, however, stressed that more investments were needed ingreen energy, which would significantly reduce Europe’s dependence on third countrysuppliers. Several interventions highlighted the need for more harmonised support schemes inthe field of renewable energy sources. It was also stressed that the Europe 2020 target forrenewable energy was successfully met and that it should be expanded beyond 2020.Considerable attention in the discussion was also given to the liberalisation of the energymarket. While some questioned the need to engage in further liberalisation, the generaltendency was to emphasise the positive effects of liberalisation. Responding to the commentsby the participants, Mr LOWE emphasised that in recent years electricity prices had increasedonly by half as much as those of production inputs.

SESSION II. A EUROPEAN ENERGY POLICY FOR SUSTAINABLEGROWTH AND COMPETITIVENESSIn his presentation Mr Markus BEYRER, Director General of Business Europe, emphasisedthat the key factor for the competitiveness of Europe’s industry was the price of energy. In theUS, for example, both electricity and gas prices were significantly lower than in the EU.Alongside the lack of access to finance, high energy prices were among the principle reasonswhy companies were reluctant to invest in Europe. In his view, the debate in the EU focusedtoo much on climate change exclusively. Instead, there should be a balance in focus betweencost competitiveness, security of supply and climate change. He also expressed support for theEU’s Emissions Trading System, yet stressed that other countries, especially the mainpolluters, should contribute their fair share in efforts to combat climate change. Otherwise, inthe view of Mr BEYRER, the competitiveness of EU companies would suffer. That was whythe business community strongly favoured a global agreement on climate change. MrBEYRER also expressed support for the diversification of energy sources, especially for anincreased production of shale gas in Europe.Mr Kornelis BLOK, Professor at the University of Utrecht, presented the results of his studyon the prospects of the use of renewable energy in Europe. In his view, 40% of the EU‘senergy needs could be met by renewable energy by 2030 provided that annual investments inthe range of 2 % of GDP were made until 2025. He also considered that by 2030 energyefficiency had the potential to increase substantially. Mr BLOK presented several policyproposals to increase the production and consumption of renewable energy. First, reliable andstable support systems should be provided. Second, investment risks should be taken intoaccount (this should help in reducing production costs). Third, support should be adapted tothe level of technology and market conditions. He warned of across-the-board harmonisationand underlined that tailor-made support systems for the respective renewable energy sourceswould be most cost-effective. Mr BLOK also noted that renewable energy had the potential tostimulate businesses, as was the case in Germany, where several hundred thousand peoplewere employed in the renewable energy industry. The earlier countries started to participateactively in this market, the more they would benefit.Mr Antonio TAJANI, Vice-President of the European Commission in charge of Industry andEntrepreneurship, reminded that the goal was to get 20% of the EU’s GDP frommanufacturing by 2020. He emphasised the need to increase support for the real economy,such as by investing more in training and education but also in further developing the energysector. According to Mr TAJANI, industrial buyers pay twice as much for electricity inEurope as in the United States. A similar discrepancy existed in the gas sector as well. Suchdifferences in energy prices meant decreasing competiveness of the EU’s economy. Over thepast 10 years the EU lost around €350 billion of investments because of its decreasingcompetiveness. To reverse this trend the EU should diversify its energy mix. One solution tobe considered was to invest more in shale gas production. On the other hand, in the EU non-energy components of the final energy price, such as taxes, special levies or transmissioncosts, had been too high and were continuously increasing. Improving energy efficiency wasanother solution. Mr TAJANI also noted that the EU should invest more in research anddevelopment of renewable energy technologies.

Mr Randall BOWIE, Director of the European Council for an Energy Efficient Economy(ECEEE), pointed out that there was broad agreement among stakeholders in the EU on theexisting problems, such as rising energy prices, declining competitiveness, climate changeand unemployment. There was less agreement, however, on how to solve these problems.Moving forward with the IEM was one solution, developing renewable energy was another.However, the most cost-effective approach would be to reduce energy demand throughsavings before investing in increased energy supply. He also stressed that the price of energywas only one component of competitiveness and that other factors were just as important,such as the level of innovation and the quality of human resources. Instead of focussing solelyon the price per kWh he suggested that the focus should be on reducing thecostsof energy,including social and environmental costs. In his opinion, that was one reason why shale gaswas not the solution, especially in Europe, which was densely populated and which wouldnever allow the level of environmental depletion witnessed in the US. The ECEEE hadestimated that more than 40% of energy could be saved in Europe by 2030. The primarysources of such savings would be buildings, which consumed around 40% of the total energyin the EU, followed by industry and transport.DebateFollowing the presentations 4 MEPs and members from national Parliaments from Kosovo,Poland, Greece, Lithuania, Romani and Italy took the floor. In this debate it was stressed thatEurope’s position as the frontrunner in the use of renewable energy had faltered in the recentyears. The call for more energy efficiency was broadly backed as representing an untappedpotential, especially in Eastern Europe, where huge energy savings could be made byrenovating old buildings. Participants also emphasised the importance of increased support toresearch and innovation into renewable energy to reduce its production cost. On the otherhand, there was considerable criticism of the continued use of nuclear energy and theproposals to accelerate the extraction of shale gas in Europe.