Refine
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Conference Object (59)
- Report (48)
- Peer-Reviewed Article (16)
- Working Paper (8)
- Part of a Book (7)
- Contribution to Periodical (2)
Language
- English (140) (remove)
As many other countries, Germany misses to exploit most of its large potential for cost-effective energy efficiency improvements. An organisation collecting funds and allocating them to the most (cost-)effective programmes could be a solution.
Therefore, political parties and trade unions as well as environmental NGOs have called for the creation of such an Energy Efficiency Fund. A recent study by the Wuppertal Institute together with a number of partners, commissioned by the Hans Böckler Foundation, analysed the feasibility of such an institution.
It has been the objective of the project, completed in March 2005, to
identify the added value of an Energy Efficiency Fund,
develop concrete proposals for the institutional setting and the financing of an Energy Efficiency Fund in Germany,
prepare and assess the benefits and costs of a portfolio of innovative but realistic energy efficiency programmes and campaigns, which the Energy Efficiency Fund would implement,
identify the effects of the fundraising and the programmes on different industries, particularly on the suppliers of energy-efficient technologies and services, and on their growth and employment perspectives,
estimate the net employment effects of such an Energy Efficiency Fund and its activities.
This paper presents the results and assesses the usefulness of the project and the participatory elements for increasing the acceptance of such a policy instrument.
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.
What makes a good policy? : Guidance for assessing and implementing energy efficiency policies
(2013)
Which factors are crucial to successfully design and implement a "good practice" policy to increase the energy efficiency of buildings and appliances? This is one of the main challenges for the new web platform bigee.net that provides guidance on good practice policies.
In this paper we examine the question what "good practice" is by presenting a multi-criteria assessment scheme to analyse different policies worldwide.
The assessment scheme contains a set of criteria addressing key factors leading to the success of a policy as well as its outcomes: a good policy addresses all market players and barriers, avoids lost opportunities and lock-in effects, has ambitious and regularly updated energy efficiency levels, and spill-over effects. Other criteria are high energy savings and the calculated cost-effectiveness.
The assessment scheme provides a standardised data collection approach, which paves the way for both qualitative and quantitative evaluation. Furthermore, it can help policy-makers to transfer a successful policy.
The development of the scheme is based on a literature review of worldwide implemented policies and measures that promote energy-efficiency of buildings and appliances. Criteria were operationalized, including a ranking between 0 and 10. The ranking is a decisive factor whether the policy qualifies as good practice. To demonstrate the practicability of this scheme, the paper analyses a good practice example according to the assessment scheme: Energy-Efficient Refurbishment and Energy Efficient Construction programmes of the German public bank KfW.
Towards an effective and equitable climate change agreement : a Wuppertal proposal for Copenhagen
(2009)
This paper presents comprehensive proposals for the post-2012 climate regime: the scale of the challenge, emission targets for industrialised countries, increased actions by Southern countries, financing, technology, adaptation and deforestation. The proposals are based on ongoing research by the Wuppertal Institute.
Toothless tiger? : Is the EU action plan on energy efficiency sufficient to reach its target?
(2007)
Motivated by, inter alia, the increasing energy prices, the security of energy supply and climate change, the new EU "Action Plan for Energy Efficiency: Realising the Potential" (EEAP), sets out the policies and measures required to be implemented over the next six years to achieve the EU's goal of reducing annual primary energy consumption by about 20 % by 2020. By increasing energy efficiency, the security of energy supply and the reduction of carbon emissions are also improved.
The paper will analyse the 20 % target of the new EEAP for the energy demand side by comparison with different recent energy scenarios for the EU. It will therefore review the recommended policies and measures and examine, in which energy demand sectors energy efficiency may be increased and to which extend. The main focus is whether the recommended policies and actions will be sufficient and which additional measures may be useful, if additional measures are needed.
There's no decarbonisation without energy efficiency : but take care of the "rebound effects"
(2013)
This study intends to provide a comprehensive overview of the water-energy nexus' relevance to the Iranian electricity sector, by illustrating key trends, analysing water-related challenges and identifying knowledge gaps. It summarises the results of a workshop, and a series of dialogues with Iranian energy and water experts, in which both the current situation and future water-related risks and impacts on the Iranian power sector were discussed. Based on those results, it highlights research needs and further options for scientific collaboration.
Based on a comprehensive scenario analysis of the EU's GHG emissions by 2020, we show that the 20% energy savings target set in the Action Plan "Doing more with less" in 2006 is still the most significant and thus indispensable strategy element within an ambitious EU climate and energy strategy targeting at a 30% reduction of GHG emissions by 2020.
The scenario analysis provides a sector by sector projection of potential future energy use and GHG emissions, combined with a detailed policy analysis of the core policies on energy efficiency by the EU and its Member States taken from current research results by the authors and others.
Consequently the paper identifies and quantifies the current implementation deficit in the EU and shows that, despite of sufficient targets, implementation is still significantly lacking in almost all fields of energy efficiency. Some, e.g. transport sector and buildings, are still substantially far from receiving the necessary political impetus. The paper also demonstrates co-benefits of a strong energy efficiency strategy, e.g. the achievability of the targets of the RES directive, which crucially depends on a strong efficiency policy.
We conclude that the efforts of the energy efficiency policy of the EU and its Member States have to be significantly intensfied. As proposed by the EU in case that other developed and key developing countries take up comparable targets in order to fulfil its role in the climate and energy strategy. To achieve this, we offer an analysis of the current weaknesses of EU energy efficiency policy and derive recommendations on how the EU can still reach its targets for 2020.
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.
Concretely defined targets are guiding policy efforts and the measures required to achieve national energy and low-carbon transformations in order to reach the maximum 2 degree climate change mitigation target agreed at the COP in Paris in 2015. Reducing energy consumption by harnessing the potential of energy efficiency, expanding the use of renewable energy resources, and transforming all sectors into low-energy and low-carbon structures is crucial. Among the G20 states, most states have set targets for renewable energies, energy efficiency, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions. Yet, it seems that starting points and target units differ a lot between the G20, and hence comparability is difficult. This topical paper presents a synopsis on the current targets within the G20. The relative lack of energy efficiency targets shows that this pillar needs much greater efforts in current and future energy policy.
Energy efficiency activities are high on the current EU energy policy agenda. Key policy instruments like the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED), the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) and the Energy Labelling Directive are under revision.
In a project for the German government, we therefore analysed the effectiveness and consistency of existing sectoral policy packages anew, to open the discussion on which policy changes to the EU's energy efficiency policy packages are crucial to reach the targets.
This comprehensive review addressed the industrial, buildings, and transport sectors plus the overarching governance framework (targets and roadmaps, EED, energy taxation and EU ETS). For each of these, the first step was a gap analysis of the main deficits in the sectoral policy packages, against effective model packages.
At first glance, the combination of energy efficiency policies at EU level seems already quite comprehensive. However, their design and implementation often lack a consistent and ambitious approach to leverage their full potential.
To give some examples of the many shortcomings identified, the governance framework suffers from exceptions and the transport sector being only marginally considered in the EED; an outdated Energy Tax Directive has very low minimum rates and several exception clauses; there is a lack of commitment to implement energy management systems and investment projects in large companies; a clear EU-wide definition of nearly zero energy buildings (nZEB) is missing; and the labelling of energy-using products is still confusing for consumers. Subsequently, we elaborated comprehensive policy recommendations to increase the effectiveness of all these policies, and to bridge some gaps with new policies. A list of priorities was established to sort them by their relevance.
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.