Panel 1 – Europe’s energy infrastructure needs
How can we create single European energy network? How do we identify projects of common interest? Technological developments (transmission, distribution, storage and demand side management). New challenges such as electrical vehicles. Smart grids.
Possible discussion points:
- How to deal with externalities (and other aspects) that are hard to quantify
- Long term time horizons in line with 2050 aspirations or shorter time spans that require fewer ‘heroic’ assumptions?
- What role for national regulators (European approach desirable but national regulators are currently still legally obliged to honour national objectives; how does this square?)
- Technology neutral policies desirable, yet some choices have to be made: transmission infrastructure will have an impact on generation investments, storage, and the extent to which demand response is needed to accommodate renewables
- Need for better coordination between distribution and transmission grid planning?
- De iure, member states are independent in choosing their energy mix (Art. 194); yet, transnational infrastructure implies that de facto independence is limited (example: nuclear power); Do we need a more honest discussion about member states’ energy mix?
Catharina Sikow-Magny Deputy Head of Unit B1, DG ENER, Networks & Regional Initiatives, European Commission
Stefan Dohler Head of Business Division Asset Optimisation and Trading, Vattenfall
Dominique Woitrin Director, CREG – Commission de Rgulation de l’Electricit et du Gaz, Belgium
Antonella Battaglini Executive Director, RGI – Renwables-Grid-Initiative
Moderator: Arno Behrens Head of Energy & Research Fellow, CEPS
Panel 2 – Permitting and financing energy infrastructure projects
How do we make permitting procedures shorter and more efficient? Best practices. Difficulties with exiting granting procedures. How should projects of common interest be financed? Cost allocation for cross-border projects.
Possible discussion points:
- Should one step up efforts to overcome local opposition? For example, one could use EU funds for the extra costs of underground cables as opposed to overhead transmission lines
- Increase transparency and public participation vs three-year time limits for permitting: Can the two objectives be aligned in practice?
- Should cost alocation be based on EU-wide cost-benfit analysis or based on more pragmatic bi- or multilateral agreements between transmission system operators and regulators
- What kind of time horizons are needed?
- Cost allocation is difficult when positive externalities are hard to quantify
- Risk of providing public funding to projects that are commercially not viable: market distortions (example: storage impacts scarcity pricing; subsidised storage thus competes with investments in flexible generation)
António Fernando Correia de Campos MEP, Rapporteur ITRE Committee
David Halldearn Policy Advisor, CEER
Rudi Peters Value Chain Marketing Manager, Borealis, Member of Europacable
Dimitrios Chaniotis Manager System Development, ENTSO-E
Prof Dr. Christian von Hirschhausen Technische Universität Berlin and Deutsches Institut fur Wirtschaftsforschung