Refine
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Report (183) (remove)
Language
- English (183) (remove)
Division
- Energie-, Verkehrs- und Klimapolitik (183) (remove)
While digital technologies hold significant transformational potential, anecdotal evidence suggests that the digital transformation might not be directed towards sustainable development sufficiently. Drawing on a modified and extended version of the framework proposed by Wanzenböck et al. (2020), we explore the cases of the circular economy and the transition towards a sustainable energy system in the twin transition. Making use of insights from 20 expert interviews and two in-depth interviews, we aim to gain a first careful indication of the convergence/divergence in societal views on key problems and solutions across different dimensions (technological, economic, socio-cultural, regulatory) and derive insights for integrated policy-making. Thereby the study contributes to bridging the existing gap between mission-oriented policies and the twin transition. Overall, our first insights indicate that while showing high similarities in the structure of problems and solutions across cases, the variety in wickedness (contestation, complexity, uncertainty) calls for differentiated policy-making: Significant parts of the relatively young twin transition might be in a state of disorientation where societal views on problems and solutions diverge. This would require policy-makers to follow a "discovery-mode" (basic research, experiments and monitoring) with only selected diffusion-focused strategies. Further, we show that missions in the twin transition require highly flexible policy-making as different approaches need to be applied simultaneously. Finally, there are several options for exploiting synergies in policy-making due to some overlapping characteristics as well as learning opportunities between cases. We believe that particularly our holistic perspective on the twin transition can yield substantial guidance for researchers and policy-makers in the field.
In order to limit global warming and fulfill their contributions to the Paris agreement, both Germany and Japan have set targets for climate neutrality towards the middle of the century. Reaching these goals will imply transformation of all sectors of society to avoid all fossil greenhouse gas emissions, heavy industry not the least. The focus of this study is the transformation of the petrochemical industry. This sector can become climate neutral but cannot be "decarbonized", as carbon is integral to the chemical structures of the products like polymers and solvents. Reaching climate neutrality thus means that the whole lifecycle of the petrochemical products has to be regarded. Another specific challenge is today's synergetic relation of this industry to fossil transport fuel production, which cannot be maintained in a climate neutral world.
The two countries interestingly share a similar industrial structure overall, and the chemical and petrochemical industry is one of the major industries in both countries. The countries' respective chemical industries are the third and fourth largest in the world in terms of sales, but at the same time, these industries represent just over 5% of the respective countries' greenhouse gas emissions. However, these scope 1 emissions of the chemical industry itself are far less relevant than the end-of-life emissions of their products, which belong to scope 3 and are thus not counted under the chemical industry in the country greenhouse gas balances. To mediate these emissions, there is a need to set the direction, draw out paths and investigate possible alternatives for how the petrochemical industry can be become climate neutral. In this report, the existing scenario analyses, energy strategies and roadmaps dealing with this issue in the two countries are compared, as well as the current state of their petrochemical industries. We highlight similarities, differences and identify possible areas of cooperation and exchange in order to find robust paths forward for the transformation of the petrochemical industries.
Established in 2016, the German-Japanese Energy Transition Council (GJETC) strives to promote bilateral cooperation between Germany and Japan on energy transition. Among other studies and topical papers, an output paper in 2020 (Rauschen et al., 2020) already compared the energy efficiency in buildings in both countries with a particular focus on heating and cooling. One important finding of this output paper was that further efforts in the building sector are needed to improve the energy efficiency of buildings in Germany and Japan. Following the more ambitious climate protection targets in both countries, this study seeks to analyze the German and Japanese policies put in place to accelerate the decarbonization of the building sector. The decarbonization of the vast number of buildings that both Japan and Germany are facing will be a major contribution to achieving the GHG reduction targets of both countries and should continue to be discussed among experts and developed into a discussion among policy makers.
This report examines and compares the characteristics of the building stock in both countries, as well as existing policies and new strategies and policies that are planned or discussed to achieve energy conservation and decarbonization of buildings. The current shape of buildings, especially houses, is greatly influenced by the land area of the country corresponding to the available space for buildings, the natural environment surrounding the country, the natural resources available, and the lifestyle and cultural ideas that have been passed down and taken root over time. Therefore, it might be difficult to compare them and the corresponding strategies and policies with the same yardstick, so we also discuss common or deviant situations. Through this joint research, we aim to find each other's advantages and challenges and to develop useful and concrete policy recommendations that will contribute to decarbonization policies in both countries.
As the climate crisis is accelerating and the pressure to act is steadily increasing, many companies are claiming themselves or their products carbon neutral. This is usually achieved by offsetting residual emissions with carbon certificates (carbon offsetting). However, recent revelations about the inadequate quality of carbon credits and legal uncertainties surrounding the use of such offset claims are increasingly raising doubts about this approach.
This Wuppertal Report examines how the EU can promote integrity in corporate climate action. Taking into account the new framework of the Paris Agreement, the paper outlines various options for how the EU could push for more integrity and effectively combat greenwashing through the targeted use of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.
In their recommendations, the authors advocate addressing the most serious consequences of ongoing offset practices through increased regulation of offset claims. If a ban on offset claims cannot be implemented, claims requirements and carbon offset regulations should be further specified, for example, by prohibiting any type of double counting of emissions reductions. In addition to tightening the rules for corporate offset claims within Europe, the EU could help partner countries make informed decisions when approving climate change mitigation measures and respective carbon credits. The report also emphasizes the EU's special role in international climate negotiations, where it should advocate for a strong legal framework for climate action under Article 6.
The original objectives for introducing Energy Performance Certificates (EPCs) were 1) to make energy performance transparent in the building market, as a measure of energy costs of using a building that a potential buyer or tenant would be interested in; and 2) to encourage energy efficiency renovation. However, the current implementation of EPC schemes in the Member States still shows significant challenges in achieving these two objectives. The recast of the EU Directive on the Overall Energy Performance of Buildings (EPBD) provides a chance to enhance both the usefulness and quality of EPCs and the EPC schemes overall.
This document aims to inform both the debate on the recast of the EPBD and the enhancement of national EPC schemes in EU Member States. It presents the draft policy recommendations of the Horizon 2020 QualDeEPC project for making the EPBD and the national schemes more effective, particularly for deep renovation, and enhance their quality overall. The policy recommendations particularly target the link between EPCs and deep (energy) renovation1, while increasing the levels of ambition and convergence across the EU in terms of building renovation. Deep (energy) renovation is crucial for mitigating climate change and for energy security. The EPBD and all of its articles, as well as national EPC schemes, should aim to make deep (energy) renovation the default. This objective would be embedded and ensured in EPC schemes, if the policy recommendations provided in this document were adopted and implemented.
The QualDeEPC project is aiming to both improve quality and cross-EU convergence of Energy Performance Certificate schemes, and the link between EPCs and deep renovation: High-quality Energy Performance Assessment and Certification in Europe Accelerating Deep Energy Renovation. The objective of the project is to improve the practical implementation of the assessment, issuance, design, and use of EPCs as well as their renovation recommendations, in the participating countries and beyond.
This report serves as a compilation of the project's proposal for an enhanced and converging EPC assessment and certification scheme. It aims to provide a detailed description on the set of practical concepts, policy proposals, and tools for an enhanced EPC scheme towards deep renovation, developed by the QualDeEPC project. The project's substantial proposals both on EU and national level are presented in a comprehensive and rational way, guiding the relevant stakeholders, in particular the policy makers and competed bodies, on which steps need to be followed so as the proposals to be adapted and how the specific values can be determined in MSs. Furthermore, this report includes the project's proposal for defining "Deep Energy Renovation" based on a modified nZEB-based approach.
The project's priorities A) to G) addressed are presented in the following order in this document, reflecting the importance of the enhanced EPC template form and the training of EPC assessors in such schemes:
A) Improving the recommendations for renovation, which are provided on the EPCs, towards deep energy renovation;
E) High user-friendliness of the EPC, by way of an enhanced EPC template form, including an introduction of the proposed "Energy Rating" indicator;
D) Regular mandatory EPC assessor training or examination on assessment and renovation recommendations, required for certification/accreditation and registry;
B) Online tool for comparing EPC recommendations to deep energy renovation recommendations;
C) Creating Deep Renovation Network Platforms (DRNPs);
F) & G) Voluntary/mandatory advertising guidelines for EPCs and Improving compliance with the mandatory use of EPCs in real estate advertisement.
D2.1 report on local EPC situation and cross-country comparison matrix : QualDeEPC H2020 project
(2020)
Considering that 40% of the European Union's energy consumption can be traced back to its buildings, it is essential to improve their energy efficiency in order to achieve the EU's energy efficiency targets. Both the rate of energy renovation and its depth, i.e. the amount of energy savings during a renovation, need to be improved. Energy Performance Certificates (EPC), regulated by the EU's Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD), are an important instrument to enhance the market uptake of energy-efficient new buildings and the energy-efficient renovation of existing buildings.
Against this background, the Horizon2020 funded project QualDeEPC will work on EU-wide convergence of the building assessment and the issuance, design, and use of quality-enhanced EPCs as well as their recommendations for building renovation. The aim is to make these recommendations coherent with deep energy renovation towards a nearly-zero energy building stock by 2050.
The first part of the QualDeEPC project (work package 2) aims to identify the priorities for elements of EPC schemes that show a need to be improved, and for which the project will investigate further and propose how the elements can be improved. The first step in identifying these priorities is taking stock of the existing EPC schemes. Based on the input from all national consortium partners and other sources, the Wuppertal Institute prepared this detailed overview of the country-specific EPC assessment and certification procedures and their links to other policies and programmes, existing initiatives, and projects. The analysis was based on a list of almost 50 potential options for enhancing the existing EPC schemes.
The aim of this deliverable is to present this stock-taking by a detailed analysis on which of the potential enhanced EPC elements are already implemented in which form in which country, covering all 28 countries that were EU member states until 31 January 2020. All partners conducted bilateral interviews with the major actors in the EPC procedures, including executive bodies on EPC at regional and/or national level. For countries not represented in the Consortium, Wuppertal Institut and EAP conducted specific literature research, e.g. from the Concerted Action EPBD, and aimed to obtain contributions from other member states. The information collected allows a detailed presentation on the elements implemented as well as a cross-country comparison matrix (see Annex I) in this report, which outlines the current EPC practices across the EU regarding the elements of a good practice scheme or innovative improvement options, their comparability, compliance with EU legislation, and to which extent they differ or converge.
The results show, once more, the high diversity in EPC schemes across the EU. They also provide useful information in at least two directions: 1) which improvement options are not yet implemented at all or in sufficient quality in most QualDeEPC partner countries as well as other EU member states, and could therefore be interesting candidates for the further work of the QualDeEPC project in development, testing, discussion, and possibly implementation of elements for enhanced and converging EPC schemes; and 2) which countries, within or beyond the QualDeEPC project, offer good practice examples for the implementation of these options that could serve to guide the development and implementation in other countries. This deliverable will thus serve as a basis for the upcoming tasks to develop priorities and actual proposals for improvement of EPC schemes.
Digital product passport : the ticket to achieving a climate neutral and circular European economy?
(2022)
The introduction of a Digital Product Passport (DPP) is an opportunity to create a system that can store and share all relevant information throughout a product's life cycle. This would provide industry stakeholders, businesses, public authorities and consumers with a better understanding of the materials used in the product as well as their embodied environmental impact.
With the COVID-19 pandemic, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the cost-of-living crisis, now is a critical moment to transform our economic and business models, while also addressing the huge scale of material emissions. DPPs can be a pivotal policy instrument in this goal. Furthermore, DPPs can accelerate the twin green and digital transitions as part of EU efforts to deliver positive climate action and sustainable economies.
In 2020, the European Commission (EC) adopted a new Circular Economy Action Plan (CEAP), which emphasised the need for circular economy initiatives to consider the entire life cycle of products, from the production of basic materials to end-of-life disposal. The Circular Economy Package published in March 2022 includes a proposal for an Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR), which builds upon the Ecodesign Directive that covers energy-related products.
A DPP will form a key regulatory element of the ESPR by enhancing the traceability of products and their components. This will provide consumers and manufacturers with the information needed to make better informed choices by taking their environmental impact into consideration.
As discussed in the report, there is widespread agreement amongst business leaders that a well-designed DPP could have both short- and longer-term benefits, improving access to reliable and comparable product sustainability information for businesses, consumers and policymakers.
A well-designed DPP can unify information, making it more readily accessible to all actors in the supply chain. This will support businesses to ensure an effective transformation towards a decarbonised industry. It could also create incentives for companies to make their products more sustainable, as improving access to reliable and consistent information across supply chains will make it easier for customers to make comparisons.
This report develops an evaluation framework that policymakers can use to identify whether offsets can add value and uphold environmental integrity of a compliance scheme. It uses a scoring framework on factors to: (1) identify which sectors have hard-to-abate emissions that can justify demanding offsets as cost-containment measures for ambitious climate policies; and (2) identify mitigation activities that are otherwise inaccessible, fosters sustainable development, and the extent to which it enables transformative sectoral action to be eligible to supply offsets. This evaluation framework identifies the optimal conditions that make factors successful in either having sectors demand offsets, or specific mitigation activities supply offsets. Sectoral emissions that are hard-to-abate are those that are technically unavoidable due to a lack and maturity of technologies, and therefore should be allowed to have cost-containment measures - such as offsets - to avoid adverse economic ramifications such as carbon leakage. Mitigation activities that can supply offsets are those that are currently inaccessible to local actor’s due to lack of access to technology, finance or capabilities. Allowing these mitigation activities to be eligible to supply offsets allows to pilot such activities and realize mitigation outcomes outside the original scope of the compliance scheme. This report has chosen selected sectors and mitigation activities to illustrate how this framework can be applied at the global level. It recognizes that country-specific factors can change the assessment of whether the offset approach will add value and uphold environmental integrity to proposed compliance schemes of a country. The report further proposes practical steps policymakers can do to undertake an evaluation at the national level.
Offsetting enables countries and companies to meet part of their climate change mitigation obligations by using mitigation outcomes generated elsewhere - in lieu of own emission reductions. This report explores the future role of offset approaches and how they could be successfully integrated into a post-2020 climate regime by focusing both the supply and demand side. For this purpose, the report develops a conceptual approach that derives a normative vision of what should be considered a successful offset use in a top-down manner to then link this vision to specific factors on the ground in sectors and jurisdictions where offsets will be generated and used. It explores how these factors influence the successful operationalisation of the offset approach and how they can inform its design. In addition, the report also explores six conceptual design aspects to providing recommendations on how to take these factors into account during the design of the offset approach. Based on these findings, the authors derive overarching policy recommendations on the integration of offsets into carbon pricing schemes.
The objective of this report is to use historical analysis to identify conditions that determine when offsets add value to compliance schemes while upholding environmental integrity. The indicators of success include: increased acceptance of introducing compliance schemes; raising ambition in subsequent compliance periods; the possibility to drive emission reductions outside the compliance sectors; promoting investments in sustainable development; and avoiding perverse incentives that undermine the stringency of the compliance scheme or compliance actors’ efforts in reducing their own emissions. Through undertaking in-depth case study analyzes on the effects of offsets in the European Union, Alberta, Australia, Colombia and Japan, the report identifies common conditions that explain why offsets were successful (or not) in achieving individual indicators. The report further identifies two common conditions that can help explain when offsets achieve all five indicators of success. The first is that policymakers need to be willing to design the compliance scheme to set and maintain a strong compliance price signal that justifies the need for incorporating cost containment measures, such as offsets, to avert negative political and economic ramifications. Relatedly, the second condition requires institutions, processes and infrastructure that govern both the compliance scheme and offsets to be well developed so that they can ensure offsets uphold the principles of environmental integrity, achieve sustainable development benefits, and act as a reliable cost containment measure to high compliance prices. The findings also highlight how difficult it is to achieve both conditions, as both domestic and international political economy factors determine whether policymakers and voters are willing to introduce and maintain compliance schemes that deliver effective action on climate.
The challenges and also potentials of the energy transition are tremendous in Germany, as well as in Japan. Sometimes, structures of the old energy world need "creative destruction" to clear the way for innovations for a decarbonized, low-risk energy system. In these times of disruptive changes, a constructive and sometimes controversial dialog within leading industrial nation as Japan and Germany over the energy transition is even more important. The German-Japanese Energy Transition Council (GJETC) released a summarizing report for the first project phase 2016-2018. It includes jointly formulated recommendations for politics as well as a controversial dialogue part.
The Council jointly states and recommends that:
Ambitious long-term targets and strategies for a low-carbon energy system must be defined and ambitiously implemented; Germany and Japan as high technology countries need to take the leadership.
Both countries will have to restructure their energy systems substantially until 2050 while maintaining their competitiveness and securing energy supply.
Highest priority is given to the forced implementation of efficiency technologies and renewable energies, despite different views on nuclear energy.
In both countries all relevant stakeholders - but above all the decision-makers on all levels of energy policy - need to increase their efforts for a successful implementation of the energy transition.
Design of the electricity market needs more incentives for flexibility options and for the extensive expansion of variable power generation, alongside with strategies for cost reduction for electricity from photovoltaic and wind energy.
The implementation gap of the energy efficiency needs to be closed by an innovative energy policy package to promote the principle of "Energy Efficiency First".
Synergies and co-benefits of an enhanced energy and resource efficiency policy need to be realized.
Co-existence of central infrastructure and the growing diversity of the activities for decentralization (citizens funding, energy cooperatives, establishment of public utility companies) should be supported.
Scientific cooperation can be intensified by a joint working group for scenarios and by the establishment of an academic exchange program.
The German-Japanese Energy Transition Council (GJETC) was established in 2016 by experts from research institutions, energy policy think tanks, and practitioners in Germany and Japan.
The objectives and main activities of the Council and the supporting secretariats are to identify and analyze current and future issues regarding policy frameworks, markets, infrastructure, and technological developments in the energy transition, and to hold Council meetings to exchange ideas and propose better policies and strategies. In its second project phase (2018-2020), the GJETC had six members from academia on the Japanese side, and eight members on the German side, with one Co-Chair from each country.
From October 2018 to March 2020, the GJETC worked on and debated six topics:
1) Digitalization and the energy transition. 2) Hydrogen society. 3) Review of German and Japanese long-term energy scenarios and their evaluation mechanism. 4) Buildings, energy efficiency, heating/cooling. 5) Integration costs of renewable energies. 6) Transport and sector coupling.
The outputs and the recommendations of the second phase of the GJETC are summarized in this report.
The aim of this study is to contribute to a learning process about innovative and successful approaches to overcoming problems and challenges of urban environmental protection. To this end, a detailed overview of the importance of environmental challenges, political priorities and successful solutions in selected countries and cities is given. Based on this, the study analyzes specific success factors and discusses the extent to which these can be transferred and replicated to other cities. Finally, recommendations are made for cities, countries and the international community on how environmental protection at the urban level can be further strengthened. The role of German cities and institutions will also be discussed. The case studies analyzed include Belo Horizonte in Brazil, Moscow in Russia, Kochi in India, Beijing in China, Cape Town in South Africa and Jakarta in Indonesia. These cities were selected because they have already implemented successful policies, measures and other initiatives in the past. For each city, the study analyzes relevant policy documents in order to present the respective challenges and political priorities. The analysis aims to understand the effectiveness of the plans and instruments taking into account the national political environment. Despite the cross-sectoral approach, the analysis of each case study focuses on specific sectors in order to produce well-founded results. The success factors that are worked out based on this sectoral analysis are placed in a holistic context in order to be able to make generalizable statements about success factors.
Transport is a key economic sector in Europe, it influences the opportunities of production and consumption. By improving access to markets, goods and services, employment, housing, health care, and education, transportation projects can increase economic productivity and development. The ability to be mobile is also a prerequisite for inclusion. At the same time, transport induces a range of negative effects, most notably the emission of greenhouse gases. At the urban level, motorised transport significantly contributes to air pollution.
Since 2013, the European Commission has increased EU funding for projects: The "Urban Mobility Package" provided EUR 13 billion for investments into sustainable urban mobility between 2014 and 2020. This has allowed cities across Europe to put in place a range of initiatives. European funding programmes and financing institutions such as the European Investment Bank increasingly insist on a contribution to more sustainable mobility systems in their financing commitments.
The impact, however, is mixed. The European Court of Auditors warned that EU cities must shift more traffic to sustainable transport modes. They found that EU-funded projects were not always based on sound urban mobility strategies and were not as effective as intended.
In many EU member states, the transfer of EU funds to cities is contingent on the existence of a SUMP. A statistical analysis of the modal split of 396 cities in the European Union revealed that the implementation of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans positively correlates with a reduction of the share of the private car in the cities. Such plans include strategies and activities to pursue sustainable mobility.
This report analyses transport and mobility in Bratislava with a view to providing a clear picture about its current sustainability state. It points to both good practice and areas of improvement. In so doing, it provides recommendations how mobility in the city can be developed increasingly sustainable. Bratislava is the capital and largest city of Slovakia. In 2016, the population of the city was 426,000 inhabitants, the Bratislava region was home to 642,000 inhabitants.
The Paris Agreement combines collective goals with individual countries' contributions. This hybrid approach does not guarantee that the individual contributions add up to what is required to meet the collective goals. The Paris Agreement therefore established the Global Stocktake. Its task is to "assess collective progress" towards achieving the long-term goals of the agreement as of 2023 and every five years thereafter. Corresponding to this role, this report addresses three questions: What should an effective Global Stocktake look like? What information and data are needed? Is it possible to execute an effective Global Stocktake within the mandate of the Paris Agreement?