In 2016, the European Commission presented the Clean Energy for all Europeans Package , comprising legislative proposals to facilitate the clean energy transition within the EU, such as the revised EPBD 2010/31/EU and EED 2012/27/EU.Besides putting energy efficiency first and achieving global leadership in renewable energy, a third goal of the package was to provide a "fair deal to consumers" with "no one left behind"., While in some Member States the issue of energy poverty already was on the political agenda, enabling affordable access to basic energy services for all households and thus reducing energy poverty is now an explicit policy target of the revised EU Directives.
In order to assess and monitor the extent of the issue across the EU and address it by suitable measures, the concept of energy poverty needs to be defined, operationalised and measured. The paper aims to investigate the role of energy poverty indicators for policy making. To do so, it provides an overview on existing measurement approaches.Furthermore, the paper presents the development and current state of energy poverty across the EU using a set of four complementary indicators used by the EU Energy Poverty Observatory. These consensual and expenditure-based indicators are calculated using data from the EU Survey on Income and Living Conditions and the Household Budget Survey.
In addition, the paper highlights peculiarities of results on the different indicators, describes persisting issues with regard to their calculation and interpretation against the background of the underlying data base.
Based on the results of this analysis, further necessities of data collection and research are pointed out.
Energy sufficiency policy : an evolution of energy efficiency policy or radically new approaches?
(2015)
In the last four decades, energy efficiency increased significantly in OECD countries. However, only during the most recent years, total energy consumption started to decrease a little, and much more slowly than energy efficiency potentials would suggest. Energy sufficiency has therefore gained new attention as a way to limit and reduce total energy consumption of a household or a country overall.
The project "Energiesuffizienz" funded by the German ministry for research has examined what energy sufficiency actually is, and what householders, household members but also manufacturers and local authorities could do to make electricity use in the home more sufficient. The focus of this paper is the policy part of the project - the first comprehensive analysis of an energy sufficiency policy.
The objective is to find out how policy can support market actors in using the energy sufficiency options identified. As for energy efficiency policy, it starts with the gathering of potential sufficiency actions and the analysis of the relevant barriers all market actors face, to derive recommendations for which policy instruments need to be combined to an effective policy package, and which other pre-conditions have to be met. Energy efficiency and energy sufficiency should not be seen as opposed to each other but work in the same direction - saving energy. Therefore, some instruments of the energy sufficiency policy package may be the same as for energy efficiency - such as energy taxation, and linear or progressive energy prices. Some may simply adapt technology-specific energy efficiency policy instruments. Examples are progressive appliance efficiency standards, standards based on absolute consumption, or providing energy advice. However, sufficiency may also require radical new approaches particularly to mitigate the drivers of non-sufficiency. They may range from promotion of completely different services for food and clothes cleaning, to instruments for limiting average dwelling floor area per person, or to a cap-and-trade system for the total electricity sales of a supplier to its customers, instead of an energy efficiency obligation. The paper presents these and other elements of an integrated energy sufficiency policy package resulting from this analysis.
Energy sufficiency has recently gained increasing attention as a way to limit and reduce total energy consumption of households and overall. This paper presents selected results of a research project funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research that examined the potentials and barriers for energy sufficiency with a focus on electricity in households, how household members perceive sufficiency practices, and how policymakers could support and encourage these. Bottom-up calculations for an average 2-person household in Germany yielded a total electricity savings potential from energy efficiency and sufficiency combined of theoretically up to 75 %.
The continuous growth of per capita living space was identified as one important driver for additional energy consumption both for heat and electricity. The paper will present findings of a representative survey of 600 persons responsible for the housework. It revealed that a part of the households is already practicing sufficiency options or are open towards these. Up to 30 % of these households can imagine, given the right conditions and policy support, to move to a smaller dwelling or to share an apartment with others when they are older.
Results of a first comprehensive analysis of an energy sufficiency policy to encourage and support households to sufficiency practices form the second part of the paper, with a focus on the feasibility and potential effectiveness of instruments for limiting the growth in average living space per person. This includes a case study on fostering communal housing projects as a measure to reduce living space. Further, the feasibility of a cap scheme for the total electricity sales of a supplier to its customers was examined. Instruments supporting energy-efficient and sufficient purchase and use of equipment complete the integrated energy sufficiency and efficiency policy package.
The paper will finally present the project's conclusions on an integrated energy sufficiency policy package resulting from this analysis.
Energy efficiency improvements have numerous benefits/impacts additional to energy and greenhouse gas savings, as has been shown and analysed e.g. in the 2014 IEA Report on "Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency". This paper presents the Horizon 2020-project COMBI ("Calculating and Operationalising the Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency in Europe"), aiming at calculating the energy and non-energy impacts that a realisation of the EU energy efficiency potential would have in 2030. The project covers the most relevant technical energy efficiency improvement actions and estimates impacts of reduced air pollution (and its effects on human health, eco-systems/crops, buildings), improved social welfare (incl. disposable income, comfort, health, productivity), saved biotic and abiotic resources, and energy system, energy security, and the macroeconomy (employment, economic growth and public budget). This paper explains how the COMBI energy savings potential in the EU 2030 is being modelled and how multiple impacts are assessed. We outline main challenges with the quantification (choice of baseline scenario, additionality of savings and impacts, context dependency and distributional issues) as well as with the aggregation of impacts (e.g. interactions and overlaps) and how the project deals with them. As research is still ongoing, this paper only gives a first impression of the order of magnitude for additional multiple impacts of energy efficiency improvements may have in Europe, where this is available to date. The paper is intended to stimulate discussion and receive feedback from the academic community on quantification approaches followed by the project.
The unprecedented challenge of reaching carbon neutrality before mid-century and a large share of it within 2030 in order to keep under the 1.5 or 2 °C carbon budgets, requires broad and deep changes in production and consumption patterns which, together with a shift to renewables and reinforced efficiency, need to be addressed through energy sufficiency. However, inadequate representations and obstacles to characterising and identifying sufficiency potentials often lead to an underrepresentation of sufficiency in models, scenarios and policies.
One way to tackle this issue is to work on the development of sufficiency assumptions at a concrete level where various implications such as social consequences, environmental co-benefits, conditions for implementation can be discussed. This approach has been developed as the backbone of a collaborative project, gathering partners in 20 European countries at present, aiming for the integration of harmonised national scenarios into an ambitious net-zero European vision.
The approach combines a qualitative discussion on the role of energy sufficiency in a "systemic" merit order for global sustainability, and a quantitative discussion of the level of sufficiency to be set to contribute to meeting 100 % renewables supply and net-zero emissions goals by 2050 at the latest. The latter is based on the use of a dashboard, which serves as a common descriptive framework for all national scenario trajectories and their comparison, with a view to harmonising and strengthening them through an iterative process.
A set of key sufficiency-related indicators have been selected to be included in the dashboard, while various interrelated infrastructural, economic, environmental, social or legal factors or drivers have been identified and mapped. This paves the way for strengthening assumptions through the elaboration of "sufficiency corridors" defining a convergent, acceptable and sustainable level of energy services in Europe. The process will eventually inform the potential for sufficiency policies through a better identification of leverages, impacts and co-benefits.
On the pathway to climate neutrality, EU member states are obliged to submit national energy and climate plans (NECPs) with planned policies and measures for decarbonization until 2030 and long-term strategies (LTSs) for further decarbonization until 2050. We analysed the 27 NECPs and 15 LTSs submitted by October 2020 using an interrater method. This paper focuses on energy sufficiency policies and measures in the transport sector.
We found a total of 236 sufficiency policy measures with more than half of them (53 %) in the transport/mobility sector. Additionally, we found 41 measures that address two or more sectors (cross-sectoral measures). From the explicit sufficiency measures within the transport sector, 82 % aim at modal shift. A reduction of transport volumes is much less addressed. Countries plan to use mainly fiscal and economic instruments. Those are in many cases investments in infrastructure of low-carbon transport modes and taxation instruments. Plans on decarbonisation measures are also frequently mentioned. The majority of cross-sectoral measures are carbon taxes or tax reforms, also economic instruments.
On the one hand it is encouraging that Member States strongly emphasize the transport sector in their NECPs and LTSs - at least quantitatively and concerning sufficiency measures - because this sector has been the worst-performing in climate mitigation so far. On the other hand, the measures described seem not sufficient to reach ambitious climate targets, and we doubt that the presented set of policy instruments will get the transport sector on track to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in the necessary extent.
"400,000 new homes per year are needed in German cities." This figure has been cited repeatedly in political discussions, media, and statements of different groups for a couple of years now. Living space is needed to mitigate the (further) inordinate increase of rents in some cities and regions and to ease finding appropriate flats at affordable prices for low- and medium-income households. But how to activate investors and the real estate market?
Having the triangle of sustainability in mind with its ecologic, social and economic cornerstones the discussion - metaphorically spoken - currently pulls the three corners: Which should have the highest priority?
The economically driven most favourable solution is lowering the requirements for new buildings such as the energy performance to make building cheaper. The social perspective prefers an increase of public social housing investments regardless of efficiency standards. And the ecological side argues that a high performance is needed to reach energy and climate targets in the buildings sector.
Starting at this point of discussion, firstly, the paper reflects the assumptions behind the numbers of new homes needed against a sufficiency background.
Secondly, it presents current changes in German building policies: a new legislation for energy supply and efficiency is currently in preparation.
It discusses the potential to integrate sufficiency aspects in building policies, focussing specifically on the new regulation, financial incentives, and energy advice.
The paper analyses if and to what extent it is likely to balance the three cornerstones of sustainability by integrating sufficiency aspects into efficiency policies. Household experiences with prepayment meters are used as an example to illustrate the potential for tapping efficiency and sufficiency potentials in low-income households considering social, economic, and ecological aspects. Based on the identified (in)consistencies, thirdly, it suggests further development in German policies to make better use of synergies between the ecologic, social and economic demands on buildings.
Improvements in energy efficiency have numerous impacts additional to energy and greenhouse gas savings. This paper presents key findings and policy recommendations of the COMBI project ("Calculating and Operationalising the Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency in Europe").
This project aimed at quantifying the energy and non-energy impacts that a realisation of the EU energy efficiency potential would have in 2030. It covered the most relevant technical energy efficiency improvement actions in buildings, transport and industry.
Quantified impacts include reduced air pollution (and its effects on human health, eco-systems), improved social welfare (health, productivity), saved biotic and abiotic resources, effects on the energy system and energy security, and the economy (employment, GDP, public budgets and energy/EU-ETS prices). The paper shows that a more ambitious energy efficiency policy in Europe would lead to substantial impacts: overall, in 2030 alone, monetized multiple impacts (MI) would amount to 61 bn Euros per year in 2030, i.e. corresponding to approx. 50% of energy cost savings (131 bn Euros).
Consequently, the conservative CBA approach of COMBI yields that including MI quantifications to energy efficiency impact assessments would increase the benefit side by at least 50-70%. As this analysis excludes numerous impacts that could either not be quantified or monetized or where any double-counting potential exists, actual benefits may be much larger.
Based on these findings, the paper formulates several recommendations for EU policy making:
(1) the inclusion of MI into the assessment of policy instruments and scenarios,
(2) the need of reliable MI quantifications for policy design and target setting,
(3) the use of MI for encouraging inter-departmental and cross-sectoral cooperation in policy making to pursue common goals, and
(4) the importance of MI evaluations for their communication and promotion to decision-makers, stakeholders, investors and the general public.
What role do transaction costs play in energy efficiency improvements and how can they be reduced?
(2019)
Ex-ante policy evaluation requires a detailed understanding of how the subjects addressed by the policy react to its implementation. In the context of energy efficiency, policy measures typically aim at influencing investment decisions towards more efficient options.
As has been discussed widely in the context of the "energy efficiency gap", investments in energy efficiency improvements are frequently not conducted even though they seem cost-effective from a simple cost-benefit perspective, where transaction costs have been identified as one important barrier.
While transaction costs have been discussed widely from a conceptional perspective, empirical studies quantifying transaction costs and measures to reduce them are rare. This paper presents approaches, results and insights from a recently completed research project funded by the German Federal Energy Efficiency Center (BfEE), addressing transaction costs in various energy efficiency measures and the role of energy efficiency services to overcome the barrier.
We analyse a set of 11 energy efficiency investments covering private households, public institutions and the industry sector. We gather data on direct investment costs and energy cost savings and provide a detailed analysis of the various barriers and transaction costs associated with the implementation. We then analyse the costs of existing energy efficiency services using data provided by the BfEE. We compare the different cost elements and analyze the potential of energy efficiency services to reduce transaction costs.
We find that the role of transaction costs differs substantially between households, public institutions and companies and that the impact of energy efficiency services on transaction costs needs to be evaluated using different methodological approaches. We conclude that while data availability on disaggregated transaction costs is a major challenge, energy services can reduce transaction costs considerably.
The European Horizon 2020-project COMBI ("Calculating and Operationalising the Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency in Europe") aims at estimating the energy and non-energy impacts that a realisation of the EU energy efficiency potential would have in the year 2030. The project goal is to cover the most important technical potentials identified for the EU27 by 2030 and to come up with consistent estimates for the most relevant impacts: air pollution (and its effects on human health, eco-systems/crops, buildings), social welfare (including disposable income, comfort, health and productivity), biotic and abiotic resources, the energy system and energy security and the macro economy (employment, economic growth and the public budget). This paper describes the overall project research design, envisaged methodologies, the most critical methodological challenges with such an ex-ante evaluation and with aggregating the multiple impacts. The project collects data for a set of 30 energy efficiency improvement actions grouped by energy services covering all sectors and EU countries. Based on this, multiple impacts will be quantified with separate methodological approaches, following methods used in the respective literature and developing them where necessary. The paper outlines the approaches taken by COMBI: socio-economic modelling for air pollution and social welfare, resource modelling for biotic/abiotic and economically unused resources, General Equilibrium modelling for long-run macroeconomic effects and other models for short-run effects, and the LEAP model for energy system modelling. Finally, impacts will be aggregated, where possible in monetary terms. Specific challenges of this step include double-counting issues, metrics, within and cross-country/regional variability of effects and context-specificity.