Refine
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Report (7)
- Conference Object (6)
- Working Paper (6)
- Peer-Reviewed Article (4)
In diesem Gutachten wurde untersucht, welche Optionen zur Gestaltung eines marktbasierten haushaltsunabhängigen Verpflichtungsansatzes zur CO2-Minderung im deutschen Gebäudebestand bestehen. Die Analyse erfolgte technologieoffen und berücksichtigte neben Sanierungsmaßnahmen zur Steigerung der Energieeffizienz auch einen verstärkten Einsatz CO2-armer/erneuerbarer Energien. Das Verpflichtungssystem soll in der Lage sein, die bestehenden Treibhausgas (THG)-Minderungsziele im Gebäudebestand möglichst kostengünstig auf kurz- und langfristig sinnvolle Weise zu erreichen und sich gut in das bestehende Förderinstrumentarium integrieren lassen.
Vor dem Hintergrund der europäischen Klimaschutzziele bis 2050 und der damit erforderlichen Dekarbonisierung der Wirtschaft werden in dem Vorhaben die Weiterentwicklungsoptionen der europäischen Energieeffizienzpolitiken untersucht. Es werden die Sektoren private Haushalte, Verkehr und Industrie betrachtet sowie der förderliche Rahmen, d. h. auch sektorübergreifende Instrumente. In den vorgeschlagenen Politikpaketen soll sich die Vielfalt der Instrumententypen abbilden. Neben Best-Practice-Beispielen liegen Länderstudien für drei große Volkswirtschaften der EU vor (Deutschland, Frankreich, Italien) und mit Polen auch eine Länderstudie für einen Mitgliedstaat aus dem mittelosteuropäischen Raum.
Transformative Innovationen : die Suche nach den wichtigsten Hebeln der Großen Transformation
(2021)
Der hier vorliegende Zukunftsimpuls soll den Grundgedanken der Transformativen Innovationen und ihre Notwendigkeit beschreiben sowie erste Kandidaten für solche Transformativen Innovationen aus diversen Arbeitsbereichen des Wuppertal Instituts vorstellen. Er dient vor allem als Einladung, gemeinsam mit dem Wuppertal Institut über solche Innovationen zu diskutieren, die irgendwo zwischen den großen Utopien und kleinen Nischenaktivitäten liegen. Denn es braucht nicht immer den ganz großen Wurf, um Veränderungen in Gang zu setzen.
The paper presents the results of an ex-ante evaluation of the economy-wide benefits that may be achieved through the implementation of the 20-year Energy Efficiency Action Plan (EEAP) in Thailand. The objective of the EEAP is to reduce energy intensity by 25 % in 2030 compared to 2010. This is to be reached by reducing the projected energy consumption by 20 % or 38 Mtoe until 2030. We have specified an analytical framework, which allows for a calculation of the overall energy cost savings, energy import cost reductions and reduced CO2 emissions. Moreover, we calculated the induced energy efficiency investments, employment effects and impacts on governmental budget. The evaluation shows that an effective implementation of the plan may lead to a reduction in energy expenditure of 37.7 billion EUR by 2030. Moreover, the EEAP-induced energy savings will significantly reduce the greenhouse gas emissions as well as Thailand’s energy import costs and generate private investment in energy efficiency of about 5 billion EUR annually in 2030, which in turn may lead to about 300,000 new jobs. The size of the net impact of the plan on Thailand’s governmental budget is uncertain due to positive and negative effects on corporate and income tax revenues, expenses for unemployment benefits, governmental energy consumption, expenses for energy subsidies and energy tax income.
The core objective of Energy Efficiency Watch 3 (EEW3) is to establish a constant feedback loop on the implementation of European and national energy efficiency policies and thus enable both compliance monitoring and mutual learning on effective policy making across the EU. The project team applied a mixed-method approach to assess energy efficiency policy developments in EU Member States. It analysed progress of national policies by screening official documents, sought experts' knowledge via an EU-wide survey and has been creating new consultation platforms with a wide spectrum of stakeholders including parliamentarians, regions, cities and business stakeholders. Analysis of the National Energy Efficiency Action Plans (NEEAPs), the expert survey with input from over 1,100 experts on policy ambition and progress in each Member State, as well as 28 Country Reports have been central elements in EEW3. This paper will present the main conclusions and policy recommendations of EEW3. In doing so, it will first summarise the findings of the document analysis based on the 28 Country Reports, showing developments of energy efficiency policies since the second NEEAP in 2011 in a cross-country overview for six sectors. These findings are then contrasted with the experts' perspective on progress in energy efficiency policies in their countries as collected in the EEW survey. Moreover, ten case studies of good practice energy efficiency policies are shown, three of them will be presented in more detail. The paper ends with key policy conclusions for improving the effectiveness of European energy efficiency policies. A key finding is that policy implementation has improved a lot since 2011 but more is needed to achieve the EED Art. 7 and other targets.
This paper presents the evaluation of a regional energy efficiency programme implemented in two "départements" of France. Électricité de France (EDF), a French energy company, provides refurbishment advice and financial incentives to end-users in the residential sector as well as specific training courses and certification to local installation contractors and building firms. Refurbishment measures analysed in this paper are efficient space heating equipment (condensing boilers, heat pumps and wood stoves or boilers), solar water heating systems and the installation of double-glazed windows. A billing analysis based on a survey of programme participants' energy consumption is used to calculate the energy savings attributed to the programme. In order to receive an economic feedback of this demonstration programme, the evaluation of both saved energy and programme costs is of importance. Detailed knowledge of the programme's cost-effectiveness is essential for EDF to achieve the saving obligations imposed by the French White Certificate scheme at the lowest cost. Results of this evaluation can support the development and implementation of further energy efficiency programmes with similar characteristics in other regions of France. The cost-effectiveness is determined from the perspective of the programme participant and the society as well as the energy company in charge of the programme. All cost and benefit components are calculated in Euro per kilowatt-hour, which allows a direct comparison of levelized costs of conserved energy with the avoidable costs of the energy supply system.
The COMBI project aimed at quantifying the multiple non-energy benefits of energy efficiency in the EU-28 area and incorporate those multiple impacts into decision-support frameworks for policy-making. Therefore, all multiple impacts of energy efficiency are analysed from an overall societal view in the project. The COMBI policy recommendations resulting from the evaluation outcomes are presented in this report.
COMBI draws on a reference scenario until the year 2030 including existing policies. By modelling 21 sets of "energy efficiency improvement" (EEI) actions, a second efficiency scenario was modelled amounting to additional energy savings of around 8% p.a. in 2030, and that is comparable to the EUCO+33 to EUCO+35 scenario. All figures quantified by COMBI relate to additional values, i.e. additional impacts resulting from additional EEI actions beyond the reference scenario as a consequence of additional policies. The project quantified in total 31 individual impact indicators with appropriate state-of-the-art models.
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.
The implementation of energy efficiency improvement actions not only yields energy and greenhouse gas emission savings, but also leads to other multiple impacts such as air pollution reductions and subsequent health and eco-system effects, resource impacts, economic effects on labour markets, aggregate demand and energy prices or on energy security. While many of these impacts have been studied in previous research, this work quantifies them in one consistent framework based on a common underlying bottom-up funded energy efficiency scenario across the EU. These scenario data are used to quantify multiple impacts by energy efficiency improvement action and for all EU28 member states using existing approaches and partially further developing methodologies. Where possible, impacts are integrated into cost-benefit analyses. We find that with a conservative estimate, multiple impacts sum up to a size of at least 50% of energy cost savings, with substantial impacts coming from e.g., air pollution, energy poverty reduction and economic impacts.
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 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.
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.
Dieses Wuppertal Paper dient dazu, a) die mögliche Klimaschutzwirkung eines CO2-Preises zu analysieren, allein und im Gesamtpaket von Instrumenten zum Klimaschutz, b) die Möglichkeiten der Mittelverwendung zu analysieren und zu bewerten, c) dadurch den Dschungel der Argumente und Motivationen in den bestehenden Vorschlägen zu lichten und d) aus der Analyse ein Modell zu skizzieren, das den Anforderungen von Klimaschutz und sozialer Gerechtigkeit sowie Erhalt der Wettbewerbsfähigkeit am besten gerecht wird und damit der Bundesregierung als Anregung bei der Entscheidung über Einführung und Ausgestaltung eines CO2-Preises dienen kann.
In dem Papier werden diese Fragen anhand von neun Thesen mit einem abschließenden Fazit ergründet. Daraus wird deutlich:
Ein CO2-Preis kann sektorale Ziele und Instrumente nicht ersetzen. Seine volle Wirkung kann er nur entfalten, wenn er komplementär zu sektorspezifischen Klimaschutzinstrumenten eingeführt wird. Nur wenn für diese Instrumente ein guter Teil der Einnahmen aus der CO2-Steuer eingesetzt wird, sind die Klimaziele erreichbar. Die Ziele werden dadurch mit weitaus geringerem CO2-Preis bei gleichzeitig höheren Kostenentlastungen für Verbraucherinnen und Verbraucher, Unternehmen und sogar die öffentlichen Haushalte erreichbar, als wenn die Politik allein auf einen CO2-Preis setzen würde.
The core objective of Energy Efficiency Watch 3 (EEW3) is to establish a constant feedback loop on the implementation of European and national energy efficiency policies and thus enable both compliance monitoring and mutual learning on effective policy making across the EU. The project team applied a mixed-method approach to assess energy efficiency policy developments in EU Member States. EEW3 analysed the progress made in the implementation of energy efficiency policies in European Member States since the publication of the second National Energy Efficiency Action Plans (NEEAPs) in 2011 by screening official documents, sought experts' knowledge via an EU-wide survey and has been creating new consultation platforms with a wide spectrum of stakeholders including parliamentarians, regions, cities and business stakeholders. Results are presented in Country Reports for each of the 28 Member States, the Expert Survey Report, 10 Case Studies presenting outstanding energy efficiency policies in Europe, the Key Policy Conclusions, the project summary report in brochure format and this Feedback Loop Report, which summarises the overall EEW3 portfolio.
The economic assessment of low-carbon energy options is the primary step towards the design of policy portfolios to foster the green energy economy. However, today these assessments often fall short of including important determinants of the overall cost-benefit balance of such options by not including indirect costs and benefits, even though these can be game-changing. This is often due to the lack of adequate methodologies.
The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive account of the key methodological challenges to the assessment of the multiple impacts of energy options, and an initial menu of potential solutions to address these challenges.
The paper first provides evidence for the importance of the multiple impacts of energy actions in the assessment of low-carbon options.
The paper identifies a few key challenges to the evaluation of the co-impacts of low-carbon options and demonstrates that these are more complex for co-impacts than for the direct ones. Such challenges include several layers of additionality, high context dependency, and accounting for distributional effects.
The paper continues by identifying the key challenges to the aggregation of multiple impacts including the risks of overcounting while taking into account the multitude of interactions among the various co-impacts. The paper proposes an analytical framework that can help address these and frame a systematic assessment of the multiple impacts.