欧盟：中期欧盟能源发展报告.pdf
Subsidies and costs of EU energy An interim report Subsidies and costs of EU energy An interim report By: Sacha Alberici, Sil Boeve, Pieter van Breevoort, Yvonne Deng, Sonja Förster, Ann Gardiner, Valentijn van Gastel, Katharina Grave, Heleen Groenenberg, David de Jager, Erik Klaassen, Willemijn Pouwels, Matthew Smith, Erika de Visser, Thomas Winkel, Karlien Wouters Date: 10 October 2014 Project number: DESNL14583 Reviewer: Prof. Dr. Kornelis Blok This study was ordered and paid for by the European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy. All copyright is vested in the European Commission. The information and views set out in this study are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commissions behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein. © Ecofys 2014 by order of: European Commission A cooperation of: This project was carried out and authored by Ecofys. KPMG, the Centre for Social and Economic Research (CASE) and CE Delft provided data collection support with regard to public interventions in 28 Member States. KPMG collected data for twenty Member States and CASE and CE Delft collected data for the remaining eight. We wish to thank CE Delft and CASE also for helpful discussions during the development of the methodology. DESNL15334 i Summary Introduction The way energy markets function and the effect of government interventions in the European Union has been the subject of much debate in recent years. To date however, there has not been a complete dataset for the EU28 detailing the Government interventions in the energy market. This report presents the results of a study commissioned by DG Energy to quantify the extent of public interventions in energy markets in all 28 Member States for all energy use excluding transport. One of the reasons Governments have to intervene in energy markets is that the market does not adequately price external costs such as environmental damages. In this project we also estimate the monetary value of environmental impacts from the use of energy. Finally, the study gives an indication of energy costs and prices, which is useful to provide context to the quantifications of interventions and external costs. More specifically we report: 1. Historical and current data on public interventions in the energy market in all EU Member States and the EU overall. These interventions may regard the production and consumption side of energy products and carriers, as well as the energy system. The focus is on those measures that impact energy costs and energy market prices paid by consumers in 2012. Recent developments in policy will have an impact on future prices but not retrospectively on 2012 prices. 2. Monetary values for environmental impacts from the energy system that are not internalised in the price. Apart from these negative impacts energy has many benefits such as employment and tax revenues. However, these benefits are private and are reflected in the prices, so unlike the impacts we consider, these are not external. 3. Energy cost data covering capital and operating costs of different electricity and heat technologies. The cost analysis is used to put the subsidies and external costs in context. The cost data on technologies is complemented by estimates of national energy transmission costs. Both costs and external costs will vary in future in response to changes in the energy system such as a higher proportion of renewable energy, unconventional fossil fuel sources such as shale gas and/or changing energy demand and demand patterns. However, these changes are not affecting prices now. This study explicitly does not unravel retail price compositions. This study is the first to provide consistent data on energy costs and subsidies for all EU Member States and for all technologies. Findings This study shows that in 2012, the total value of public interventions in energy (excluding transport) in the EU-28 is 2012 122 billion (see Figure S - 1). This figure is composed of the value of public interventions in 2012 of 2012 113 billion and a central estimate of direct historic support of 2012 9 billion (direct historic support is between 2012 3 and 15 billion). The direct historic support still has a direct effect today. DESNL15334 ii The energy mix as it exists now has associated external costs of 2012 200 billion, with a range of 2012 150-310 billion (see Figure S - 1). To put these numbers into context: the total cost of this energy would be around 2012 500 billion, based on wholesale/spot prices1. The cost to consumers would be even higher than this because retail prices are higher than wholesale prices. Interventions to support renewable energy sources have the highest value (2012 41 billion). Support for energy demand is significant (2012 27 billion). Support to energy efficiency is 2012 9 billion. Figure S - 1 Total direct interventions, external costs and wholesale cost of energy in 2012 (in billion 2012) The direct historic interventions is shown as a range on top of the direct interventions in 2012. Direct interventions in 2012 include the EU ETS free allocations. Interventions In this study we monetised public interventions by Member States and the EU as a whole in the energy market. We present annual values of over 700 interventions in 2012. These regard payments made or revenues foregone as stipulated by all regulations in force, including regulations that were enacted in the past. The information on the specific interventions was collected by our partners in the Member States according to a tier system defined at the start of the project. For most interventions, national sources of information such as national balance sheets were available. Where these sources were not available the intervention values were calculated according to a specified methodology. Public interventions in the energy market have been occurring for decades and some still have an impact on energy prices in todays markets. Much of the current energy infrastructure was developed in a time when there was significant public (national or local government) ownership and central planning. 1 The total wholesale costs are the product of the total volume of fossil fuels consumed in 2012 and the average spot prices (import prices) of coal, oil and natural gas plus the product of the volume of electricity consumed in 2012 and the average wholesale price of electricity in Europe. These cost represent the costs of energy without any taxes, transmission and distribution costs or costs of conversions (e.g. from crude oil to gasoline). 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Total direct interventionsTotal external costs billion 2012 Wholesale expenditures on energy (for comparison) Direct historical interventions Direct interventions DESNL15334 iii In addition to the monetisation of public interventions for the years 2008 - 2012 discussed above, we provide an estimate of historic interventions that are still having an effect on the energy market today. The approach to estimate these interventions is different to that for the years 2008 - 2012. The changing structure and priorities in the energy sector makes the definition of what was a subsidy very difficult for some categories. We have adopted an approach to estimate those subsidies but it must be recognised that this is subject to a high degree of uncertainty in both the methodology and data. Figure S 2 shows the total value of current interventions in 2012 for energy production of 14 different technology categories and separately for energy demand and energy savings. The largest single category of intervention is for energy demand which covers measures that would encourage the use of energy such as tax reductions for particular users. In general, support to energy demand tends to support individual fuels in proportion to their place in the fuel mix, which in the EU is still dominated by gas, coal and nuclear. Support to production of electricity or of primary fuels such as coal, gas and oil makes up almost 70% of the total support. Of this, most support is given to the renewable energy technologies, particularly solar, although significant support is also given to coal and nuclear, including decommissioning and waste disposal. Support to energy savings (i.e. for reducing energy use) is around 8% of the total. We also present breakdowns of interventions by Member States and technology, both in absolute value (Figure S 3) and divided by the total primary energy demand of the Member State (TPED) as a measure for domestic energy demand (Figure S 4)2. 2 TPED refers to primary energy, i.e. the form of energy that first appears in the energy balance, before conversion processes and related losses (e.g. crude oil, coal, natural gas, biomass). DESNL15334 iv Figure S - 2 Total support provided in the 28 Member States (in billion 2012), including EU level support. Historic support is not included 051015202530 FF - Coal FF - Natural gas FF - Oil products FF - Other Nuclear RE - Biomass RE - Solar RE - Wind onshore RE - Wind offshore RE - Hydro RE - Geothermal RE - Other Heat pumps Infrastructure Support to energy demand Support to energy savings Free allocation of EUAs billion 2012 DESNL15334 v Figure S - 3 Interventions per Member State in 2012 (in million 2012) 02500500075001000012500150001750020000225002500027500 Austria Belgium Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden United Kingdom EU-level million 2012 RE - SolarRE - Wind offshoreRE - Wind onshoreRE - Biomass RE - HydroRE - GeothermalRE - Other (not listed)FF - Coal FF - Natural gasFF - Oil productsFF - Other (not listed)Heat pumps NuclearInfrastructureSupport to energy demandSupport to energy savings Other DESNL15334 vi Figure S - 4 Interventions by Member State per unit of primary energy demand (GJ) in 20123 3 Total primary energy demand (TPED) represents domestic demand only and is broken down into power generation, other energy sector and total final consumption. 00.511.522.53 Austria Belgium Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden United Kingdom EU-level 2012/GJ RE - SolarRE - Wind offshoreRE - Wind onshoreRE - Biomass RE - HydroRE - GeothermalRE - Other (not listed)FF - Coal FF - Natural gasFF - Oil productsFF - Other (not listed)Heat pumps NuclearInfrastructureSupport to energy demandSupport to energy savings Other DESNL15334 vii For historic subsidies, we distinguish three types of interventions: ones that relate directly to capacity that is still operating in the market today (direct historic support), ones that indirectly affect the development of capacity such as research and development (indirect historic support), and other historic support which does not have a direct impact on markets today, see Figure S 5. Figure S - 5 Cumulative historic interventions over the period 1970-2007 (in billion 2012) Direct historic support: Before liberalisation much of the infrastructure was built by Government or Government owned companies. It is plausible to argue that some of this infrastructure would not have been built without the implicit transfer of risk to Government. Typically, this would apply to the more capital intensive projects such as coal, hydro and nuclear. This transfer of risk can be classed as an intervention (although it is not a direct transfer of money). An estimate of the effect can be made by calculating the difference in levelised cost with the lower rate of capital for Government and with commercial rates of capital. This direct investment support results in cumulative interventions equalling almost 2012 200 billion for coal, 2012 100 billion for hydro, and 2012 220 billion for nuclear power plants. The contribution to the total level of interventions in 2012 is valued at 2012 15 billion at maximum (see Figure S 1)4. Another area of support for nuclear has been soft loans for nuclear plants. It is assumed that the effect of these loans is also captured by this method. Indirect historic support/Energy RD Figure S-5 shows the ranges for the cumulative support levels (1970-2007). DESNL15334 viii Historically the nuclear sector has received around 78% of the funding, of which the majority was on nuclear fission. The remaining RD Interventions that indirectly affect the development of infrastructure and the market such as research and development (indirect historic support); and Historic (direct) interventions that no longer affect the energy markets today. 2.3.1 Direct historic support New renewable energy technologies For the direct support of renewable energy technologies (e.g. feed-in tariffs) we take the so-called funding gap in the first year of operation (cost minus reference energy price), multiplied by the energy production in the view year, as the measure for the intervention. Any new capacity that became operational in the period before 2008 hence adds to the total level of support in the years after 2008. Investments under non-liberalised market conditions Before liberalisation much of the power generation capacity was built by Government or Government owned companies. It is plausible to argue that some of this capacity would not have been built without the implicit transfer of risk to Government. Typically, this would apply to the more capital intensive projects such as coal, hydro and nuclear. This transfer of risk can be classed as an intervention (although not a direct transfer of money). An estimate of the effect can be made by calculating the difference in levelised cost with the lower rate of capital for Government and with commercial rates of capital. In a perfect market, the value of this intervention would have been included in the price paid for the assets at privatisation. It is difficult to demonstrate whether this was the case. We provide a sensitivity by looking at the difference in value if it is assumed that any intervention acts over the whole lifetime (base case), and the alternative that it acts only for the depreciation period of the asset. The motivation for the base case is that the impact of this intervention is not necessarily constrained to the depreciation period (which is basically a fiscal/accounting variable), or when a private party buys the power plant. The transfer of ownership from public to private during the privatisation of the energy sector (either of the power plant, or of complete companies) does not significantly affect the calculation of the a
