The true cost of EU Green Energy Policy

Posted: January 11, 2014 by tallbloke in alarmism, government, Incompetence, Legal, Politics


From the Telegraph

The EU directive on renewable energy has probably had more impact on how power generation works and the bills paid by households than any other single piece of European legislation.The 2009 directive set the objective of ensuring that 20pc of the energy used by 2020 should come from renewable sources. After sharing out the obligations across the EU, Britain was set the binding target of ensuring that 15pc of energy demand must be met from renewable sources before the end of the decade.

The targets are enforceable in the EU courts, meaning the prospect of a country facing huge daily fines drawing closer as the decade draws to an end. The legislation has certainly kept lawyers busy.

Since January 2011, the European Commission has opened 27 investigations into whether countries are meeting their targets. Eleven cases are pending and Poland, Cyprus and Austria have been referred to the courts.

Because renewable power generation is expensive and inefficient, in terms of the high yields needed to keep national grids going and the lights on, huge subsidies have been needed for the wind and solar farms that now litter the European landscape and sea.

When the policy was launched, the EU declared that renewables would “help to reduce bills” and the cost of using energy. But the subsidies have been passed on to the public. Between the second half of 2010 and the second half of 2011 the cost of electricity in the average European household rose 6.3pc.In Denmark and Germany, which embraced the shift to renewables, green levies and taxes account for 55.8pc and 44.9pc of the final price of electricity respectively.

A study for the British government put the lifetime cost of meeting the renewables target at up to €351.7bn (£290bn) for the whole EU, including a bill of €93.1bn for the UK. Most of that cost burden has been picked up by consumers, contributing to a marked rise in the cost of living.

Read the rest here

  1. ren says:

    Radioactive radiation over the the Arctic Circle has fallen to about 14, and yesterday it was almost 30 .Increased after the outbreak of the X on the Sun. Was it the gamma?

  2. oldbrew says:

    There seems to be some confusion at the moment over whether the EU is trying to tighten the rules on subsidies for wind farms. If true it would seem to give them more opportunities to fine countries for missing renewables targets.

  3. Joe Public says:

    “Most of that cost burden has been picked up by consumers ……”

    Eh? ALL of that cost burden must be picked up by consumers, there’s no one else to pay for it.

  4. Streetcred says:

    Oldbrew … LOL, it is reminiscent of the US EPA rules mandating increased ethanol content in petrol … there just isn’t enough available to meet the mandates and the engine technology isn’t sufficiently advanced to use fuels containing more E than already in use.

  5. Paul says:

    Has anyone seen a cost benefit analysis on whether it would be more economically and financially effective to just pay the fines while providing the UK population with cheap and reliable energy?

  6. ren says:

    You can see next impact polar vortex in the Great Lakes region.

  7. Don Keiller says:

    Re the renewables bill of €93.1bn for the UK.
    Meethinks this is a case for judicial review ( on the basis that a misinformed decision which has had an adverse impact on an individual, or a community is “unreasonable”.

  8. Roger Andrews says:

    Will the UK will meet its 15% renewables by 2020 EU target? The following excerpt from the DECC UK Renewable Energy Roadmap Update 2013 makes it pretty clear that the UK won’t (remember that the 15% applies to TOTAL energy consumption, not just electricity):

    “The UK has made very good progress against the 15% target introduced in the 2009 EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2012, 4.1% of UK energy consumption came from renewable sources, up from 3.8% in 2011.”

    Wouldn’t it be cheaper to forget about renewables and just pay the fines? The European Commission wants to fine Poland 133,228.80 euros a day year for non-compliance with the Directive, and if that’s all they want it would be far cheaper to pay the fines.

    That is, if the EU can enforce the Directive. A legal appraisal I read points out that while it requires Member States to set targets nowhere does it say that they have to achieve them.

  9. Roger Andrews says:

    That’s 133,228.80 euros a DAY, or 50 million a year.

  10. cornwallwindwatch says:

    Reblogged this on Cornwall Wind Watch.