ENFANTS TERRIBLES

Recommendations

Info

ENERGY EFFICIENCY Public funding from EU sources or policies, whether the ESIF, ETS revenues, EIB financial instruments or intermediated loans, is the most important driver for energy efficiency in the Czech Republic. This is also reflected in the prominent position these instruments play in the National Energy Efficiency Action Plan. 135 The ESIF promotes energy efficiency in multi-apartment houses, public buildings and industry, in households through support for efficient boilers, in transport through the purchase of new vehicles and generally and indirectly in many other areas. The Czech Republic has been a pioneer in public finance programmes for energy efficiency, at least in the CEE region. Currently, it is the first country in the region to use the ETS auction revenues for similar purposes, in a continuous call for projects to be sustained over several years. The country did not opt for the Energy Savings Obligations in order to comply with the Energy Efficiency Directive, using rather the alternative measures, including EU funding. It uses significant amounts of its ESIF allocation, almost 9% or EUR 1.9 billion, for direct energy efficiency measures. Of this, over EUR 622 million will be invested in energy efficiency renovations of existing multi-apartment residential buildings (typically panel blocks of flats) and another EUR 603 million on public buildings. In the corporate sector, SMEs will be able to use over EUR 447 million and large enterprises almost EUR 300 million for energy efficiency of their buildings as well as technological processes. Selection criteria in calls for projects with energy efficiency components have been set to favour stronger efficiency effects under the Environment Operational Programme for public buildings and especially under the Integrated Regional Programme for multi-apartment houses. After pressure from Bankwatch and other NGOs, three levels of financial support have been established according to the level of savings achieved. The first one is aimed at buildings, which have already been partially thermally-insulated or where only partial renovation is possible. It is not required for these measures to achieve a result in terms of energy class of the building, but on the other hand, each of the elements used for the renovation must have a very high efficiency standard, not only above the minimum legal level but even above recommended efficiency levels. The other two levels aim at complete renovation, and the principle of more savings, more subsidies is applied. TABLE 15: Levels of support favouring deeper energy renovation in IROP Measure Energy savings minimum Energy class minimum Energy efficiency of each construction element Share of support on eligible costs Partial energy renovation 20% - Very efficient 25.5% Shallow renovation 30% C - 25.5% Deep renovation 40% B - 32.3% 135 See: Ministry of Industry and Trade: 3rd National Energy Efficiency Action Plan, 2014. 88 ‘Climate’s enfants terribles: how new Member States’ misguided use of EU funds is holding back Europe’s clean energy transition’
2007-2013 2014-2020 In the Enterprise and Innovation for Competitiveness Operational Programme, one of the most important selection criteria the project scores on is the emissions reduction as well as price for emissions reduction (CZK/tCO 2 ). However, the call for proposals is not built in a competitive manner and requires the applicants simply to reach a certain score (60 out of 100) to be eligible for the subsidy. There is enormous demand exceeding the allocation for this call. It is therefore questionable why the calls for energy efficiency projects should not be competitive when the selection criteria would clearly give preference to projects with higher CO 2 emissions savings and a lower price for the CO 2 reduction. Despite the high allocation and selection criteria which favour energy savings, the late start of the programmes may lead to a situation when the Czech Republic will not be able to comply with the energy end-use savings target (see above). NEGLIGIBLE SUPPORT FOR RENEWABLES Energy efficiency and renewable allocations could not be further away. The only Operational Programme that supports renewable installations aimed at electricity generation for distribution is Enterprise and Innovation for Competitiveness. Renewable energy will, in the years between 2014 and 2020, receive just EUR 53 million, 0.24% of the total allocation. Wind, solar and geothermal energy have no support allocated, as most of this amount will be invested into biomass and small hydro sources as well as to heat output from existing biogas stations. EUR 175 million (0.79% of the total) for waste management under the Environment Operational Programme will be dedicated to waste treating biogas plants. However, mechanical-biological treatment and costly waste incinerators, once permitted, will be financed from this same amount, meaning that financing for renewables will be minimal. RENEWABLES UNECONOMIC, ABSORPTION IN RISK In the current set-up, at least hydropower and biomass will receive operating support from a feed-in tariff and investment support from Enterprise and Innovation for Competitiveness. But the programming document does not allow any combination of operating and investment support: investors have to choose. According to the Chamber of Renewable Sources, it is unprofitable to run such an installation without GRAPH 54: Renewable energy allocation 2014 - 2020 compared to 2007 – 2013. Source: Own calculation based on categories of intervention for 2014 – 2020 Quarterly Monitoring report IV.Q 2014 for 2007 - 2013 euro mil. 300 250 200 150 Public beneficiaries (muncipalities, academia, state) Private beneficiaries )SMEs) 100 50 0 ‘Climate’s enfants terribles: how new Member States’ misguided use of EU funds is holding back Europe’s clean energy transition’ 89
Page 1 and 2:
CLIMATE’S ENFANTS TERRIBLES HOW N
Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 5 and 6:
safeguard mechanism, the Strategic
Page 7 and 8:
SLOVAKIA HUNGARY ROMANIA CROATIA Sl
Page 9 and 10:
INTRODUCTION PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY
Page 11 and 12:
EU FUNDS IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUR
Page 13 and 14:
LT RO SK HU CZ LV CEE EE PL HR 20.0
Page 15 and 16:
GRAPH 7: Comparison of energy effic
Page 17 and 18:
GRAPH 10: Different types of energy
Page 19 and 20:
GRAPH 12: Member States’ GHG emis
Page 21 and 22:
TABLE 2: Criteria for renewable ene
Page 23 and 24:
What EU money can’t buy: the gree
Page 25 and 26:
25% of production respectively 30 .
Page 27 and 28:
are implemented through six Nationa
Page 29 and 30:
track to carbon-neutral development
Page 31 and 32:
It is also worth noting, that all O
Page 33 and 34:
very specific - although mostly sil
Page 35 and 36:
110 billion in the optimal renovati
Page 37 and 38: whose ROP clearly prioritises commu
Page 39 and 40: aimed at modernising and building n
Page 41 and 42: The long and rocky path away from s
Page 43 and 44: GRAPH 21: Production of electricity
Page 45 and 46: CLIMATE ACTION: THE CASE FOR EU FUN
Page 47 and 48: GRAPH 23: Investment areas of Cohes
Page 49 and 50: could play a major role in replacin
Page 51 and 52: The missing pathway to long-term de
Page 53 and 54: intensity has decreased over the la
Page 55 and 56: achieving policy objectives. Such i
Page 57 and 58: change. Nevertheless, no specific c
Page 59 and 60: Considering the fact that renewable
Page 61 and 62: equires a more comprehensive assess
Page 63 and 64: A ‘green’ veneer, but at what c
Page 65 and 66: NATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS The transiti
Page 67 and 68: monopoly (which imports Russia`s ga
Page 69 and 70: GRAPH 36: Cargo traffic by mode of
Page 71 and 72: than that of deforestation, some ex
Page 73 and 74: GRAPH 41: Energy efficiency allocat
Page 75 and 76: Bring on the money, don’t ask for
Page 77 and 78: GRAPH 43: Energy mix of the Czech R
Page 79 and 80: Regarding the Europe 2020 emissions
Page 81 and 82: the renewables share to 35%, the Cz
Page 83 and 84: of commitment of public authorities
Page 85 and 86: GRAPH 53: Share of transport modes
Page 87: TABLE 12: Renewable energy output i
Page 91 and 92: GRAPH 55: The different types of en
Page 93 and 94: Finance for the energy transition -
Page 95 and 96: ENERGY SECTOR OF SLOVAKIA: STEADY W
Page 97 and 98: strategy until 2030, in 2012, but t
Page 99 and 100: This support is very welcome as it
Page 101 and 102: environmentally-friendly production
Page 103 and 104: participation in assessment procedu
Page 105 and 106: The Integrated Infrastructure OP se
Page 107 and 108: THE DARK SIDE IS IN THE DETAILS Cli
Page 109 and 110: GRAPH 60: Climate targets, scenario
Page 111 and 112: GRAPH 64: Total climate allocations
Page 113 and 114: EXPECTED COMPLEMENTARY FINANCING MO
Page 115 and 116: Recommendations for the mid-term re
Page 117 and 118: Notwithstanding a few exceptions, t
Page 119 and 120: c) Renewable energy sources Eligibl
Page 121 and 122: enewables in transport, as this tas
Page 123 and 124: Annex II - Complementary financing
Page 125 and 126: Going ‘super-green’, but not ri
Page 127 and 128: GRAPH 67: Energy mix 2013 - Gross i
Page 129 and 130: OVERVIEW OF EUROPEAN STRUCTURAL AND
Page 131 and 132: cogeneration systems, monitoring sy
Page 133 and 134: pollution levels and poor air quali
Page 135 and 136: line with the Europe 2020 targets a
Page 137 and 138: esidential sector and the usage of
Page 139 and 140:
In the preparation phase, the mains
Page 141 and 142:
of the Thematic Objective or progra
Page 143 and 144:
Land of unfulfilled clean energy po
Page 145 and 146:
hydropower plants (94%), and the ot
Page 147 and 148:
points to a need for the developmen
Page 149 and 150:
and adaptation, disaster resilience
Page 151 and 152:
significant biomass growing fields.
Page 153 and 154:
ports (EUR 140 million), new and im
Page 155 and 156:
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PLANNING, MONIT
show all

ENFANTS TERRIBLES

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?