Eine Analyse der deutschen Energie- und Klimapolitik hat ergeben:
Nur im Maßnahmenfeld "Ausbau der Erneuerbaren Energien im Strombereich" wird voraussichtlich das Ziel ereicht. Dagegen wird in allen anderen Maßnahmenfeldern das Ziel verfehlt oder es bestehen Wirkungsdefizite der eingesetzten Politikinstrumente. Das betrifft insbesondere die Energieeffizienz auf der Nachfrageseite, aber auch die Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung und Erneuerbare Energien-Wärme. Für die Maßnahmenfelder "Fluorierte Treibhausgase", "Industrieprozesse" und "Landwirtschaft" müssen überhaupt erst verbindliche Reduktionsziele festgelegt und Politikinstrumente eingeführt werden.
This paper reviews the current EU policy framework in view of its impact on hydrogen and fuel cell development. It screens EU energy policies, EU regulatory policies and EU spending policies. Key questions addressed are as follows: to what extent is the current policy framework conducive to hydrogen and fuel cell development? What barriers and inconsistencies can be identified? How can policies potentially promote hydrogen and fuel cells in Europe, taking into account the complex evolution of such a potentially disruptive technology? How should the EU policy framework be reformed in view of a strengthened and more coherent approach towards full deployment, taking into account recent technology-support activities? This paper concludes that the current EU policy framework does not hinder hydrogen development. Yet it does not constitute a strong push factor either. EU energy policies have the strongest impact on hydrogen and fuel cell development even though their potential is still underexploited. Regulatory policies have a weak but positive impact on hydrogen. EU spending policies show some inconsistencies. However, the large-scale market development of hydrogen and fuel cells will require a new policy approach which comprises technology-specific support as well as a supportive policy framework with a special regional dimension.
The paper aims to shed light on the methodological challenges of GHG monitoring at local level and to give an overview on current practices. Questions addressed are as follows: How do the methodologies which underlie different GHG inventory tools differ? What are the critical variables explaining differences between inventories? Can different GHG inventory tools be compatible - and/or interoperable - and under which conditions? The first section discusses methodological challenges related to the formation of local GHG inventories. Rather than giving a comprehensive overview on methodological problems, this section mainly highlights some of the central methodological challenges posed by local GHG inventories. This overview identifies critical variables and clarifies concepts that are necessary for the understanding of the subsequent analysis. In section two, some of the most advanced GHG inventory tools are analysed and the most important differences between these tools are highlighted. The paper concludes that the methodologies are not consistent. Local GHG inventories can thus hardly be compared. The paper gives research and policy recommendations towards greater comparability and sketches the requirements of an international protocol on urban GHG inventories.