Refine
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Peer-Reviewed Article (7)
- Conference Object (3)
- Report (3)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Contribution to Periodical (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
- English (16) (remove)
Division
German electricity giants have recently taken high-level decisions to remove selected fossil fuel operations from their company portfolio. This new corporate strategy could be seen as a direct response to the growing global influence of the fossil fuel divestment campaign. In this paper we ask whether the divestment movement currently exerts significant influence on decision-making at the top four German energy giants - E.On, RWE, Vattenfall and EnBW. We find that this is not yet the case. After describing the trajectory of the global fossil fuel divestment campaign, we outline four alternative influences on corporate strategy that, currently, are having a greater impact than the divestment movement on Germany's power sector. In time, however, clear political decisions and strong civil support may increase the significance of climate change concerns in the strategic management of the German electricity giants.
The electric utility sector in Australia, Germany and the U.S. are all going through major changes driven by declining sales, increasing use of distributed energy sources and policy responses to global climate change. This paper discusses efforts in each of these countries to reform their electric industries, address climate change and promote energy efficiency. Going forward, we see a role for government, utilities and private market energy efficiency efforts in all three countries, although the emphasis will vary by country and will evolve over time. Where all three parties can work together with a common vision, reform efforts are likely to be more successful and more sustained. In all three countries the future is uncertain. In the face of this uncertainty, energy efficiency supporters need to keep abreast of these changes, and find more flexible and nimble policy strategies for energy efficiency to prosper, as the future is likely to unfold in unexpected ways.
In the light of Germany's chosen path towards the energy transition, the regulatory framework has changed considerably. New players have succeeded in entering the market, and renewable energies have become increasingly competitive. Greater electrification of the transport and heating sectors will be needed in the future to achieve national climate targets. Against this background, Germany's big energy companies need to be sure that their sales will increase. However, they were unable to anticipate this development, and made strategic mistakes in the past. The development of sustainable business models in line with the energy transition failed to materialize. Now it is becoming increasingly clear that companies must create new business models to survive in the long term. These business models have to keep with the tradition, whilst meeting the needs of low-carbon power supplies. In this paper, we will examine the past and future challenges of the four energy companies and develop a proposal for evaluating sustainable business models. For this purpose, we use the multi-level perspective to categorize developments in the electricity market over the last 50 years, and then apply a multi-criteria analysis to derive five suitable business models from the results.
Green hydrogen will play a key role in building a climate-neutral energy-intensive industry, as key technologies for defossilising the production of steel and basic chemicals depend on it. Thus, policy-making needs to support the creation of a market for green hydrogen and its use in industry. However, it is unclear how appropriate policies should be designed, and a number of challenges need to be addressed. Based on an analysis of the ongoing German debate on hydrogen policies, this paper analyses how policy-making for green hydrogen development may support industry defossilisation. For the assessment of policy instruments, a simplified multi-criteria analysis (MCA) is used with an innovative approach that derives criteria from specific challenges. Four challenges and seven relevant policy instruments are identified. The results of the MCA reveal the potential of each of the selected instruments to address the challenges. The paper furthermore outlines how instruments might be combined in a policy package that supports industry defossilisation, creates synergies and avoids trade-offs. The paper's impact may reach beyond the German case, as the challenges are not specific to the country. The results are relevant for policy-makers in other countries with energy-intensive industries aiming to set the course towards a hydrogen future.
This chapter reconstructs the main actors, objectives and the pertinent contextual factors that co-determined the German coal phase-out. The German decision to phase out coal no later than 2038 was prepared by intense negotiations under the German "coal commission". It was tasked with finding an end date for coal-fired electricity generation and proposing ways and means to support coal workers and the affected regions. This latter objective was the dominant one, supported by a coalition of trade unions, industry, state-level governments as well as major political parties fearing a surge of far-right populism. Meanwhile, meeting the German climate targets was a key condition in the mandate of the coal commission. Yet, the German targets date back to 2010 and are not aligned with the more ambitious objectives enshrined in the Paris Agreement. This explains why the German coal phase-out schedule is so late and so expensive.