Saturday

4th Apr 2020

Letter

Energy efficiency report based on outdated studies

Tuesday’s EUobserver article “No benefits from EU energy projects for 150 years” seems to imply that energy efficiency projects are a waste of money. CAN Europe would rather the article focused on the real problem: the lack of oversight on the types of projects that received EU funding during the study period.

There are many examples of energy efficiency projects in the EU with pay-back periods as short as 6 years, such as one audited social housing project in Lubeck, Germany. Clearly this time frame is much shorter than the 150 years cited in the EUobserver headline. This project, however, did not receive EU funding.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Support quality EU news

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

The studies cited in the European Court of Auditors (ECA) report were performed on projects that were developed more than a decade ago, long before the existence of coherent EU energy efficiency policy. In the years since, this policy area has been maturing, culminating most recently in the new Energy Efficiency Directive (EED). Ambitious implementation of the EED, together with a binding EU-wide energy efficiency target for 2020 and beyond, would help ensure that the know-how and efficient supply chains needed to deliver cost- and energy-efficient projects take shape and grow.

Building renovation projects that are well-conceived and well-managed offer enormous potential benefits to those who undertake them, in terms of cost savings and improved comfort, and to society in terms of reduced energy imports, lower bills and job creation. The real take-home point of the ECA report is that Member States must conduct proper needs assessments and commit to regular monitoring of projects in order to receive this type of funding. If this were required within the context of today’s more robust EU energy efficiency legislation, public funding for energy efficiency projects would become a cost-effective and important element in achieving the EU’s climate objectives.

Wendel Trio is Director for Climate Action Network (CAN) Europe, Europe’s largest coalition working to prevent dangerous climate change and promote sustainable climate and energy policy in Europe.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

A coronavirus 'Marshall Plan' alone won't be nearly enough

The 1948-51Marshall Plan provided about €118bn in today's figures in American assistance to European countries. These numbers are dwarfed by prospective needs, and the needs are not just European or American - but global.

Column

Only democracy can fight epidemics

As Li Wenliang, the deceased Chinese doctor who was reprimanded for reporting on the virus, said: "There should be more openness and transparency".

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. UNESDAMaking Europe’s Economy Circular – the time is now
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersScottish parliament seeks closer collaboration with the Nordic Council
  3. UNESDAFrom Linear to Circular – check out UNESDA's new blog
  4. Nordic Council of Ministers40 years of experience have proven its point: Sustainable financing actually works
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic and Baltic ministers paving the way for 5G in the region
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersEarmarked paternity leave – an effective way to change norms

Latest News

  1. EU's 'Irini' Libya mission: Europe's Operation Cassandra
  2. Slovak army deployed to quarantine Roma settlements
  3. Lockdown: EU officials lobbied via WhatsApp and Skype
  4. EU: Athens can handle Covid outbreak at Greek camp
  5. New push to kick Orban's party out of centre-right EPP
  6. EU launches €100bn worker support scheme
  7. Court: Three countries broke EU law on migrant relocation
  8. Journalism hit hard by corona crisis

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us