IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/diw/diwwob/80-29-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Europäische Stromerzeugung nach 2020: Beitrag erneuerbarer Energien nicht unterschätzen

Author

Listed:
  • Christian von Hirschhausen
  • Claudia Kemfert
  • Friedrich Kunz
  • Roman Mendelevitch

Abstract

In its Green Paper, "A 2030 framework for climate and energy policies," the European Commission calls for a framework for the future development of environment and energy policy beyond 2020. However, much like the "Energy Roadmap 2050" adopted by the Commission in December 2011, the Green Paper is based on assumed scenarios that are, to a great extent, no longer relevant. The European Commission needs to provide updated model calculations immediately to enable energy policy decisions to be taken on the basis of transparent and comprehensible scenarios. A comparison of recent estimates conducted by DIW Berlin indicates that the Commission systematically underestimates the cost of nuclear power and carbon capture, transport, and storage, while the cost of renewable energies tends to be overestimated. This applies in particular to photovoltaics where capital costs are, to a certain extent, already lower than the Commission's estimates for 2050. In contrast to renewable energies, neither nuclear energy nor carbon capture, transport, and storage are cost efficient enough to play a central role in the future European electricity mix. It is therefore vital for Europe to continue to focus on the further development of renewable energies in future. This requires the setting of ambitious renewables targets for 2030 as well as clear emissions reduction and energy efficiency targets. Die Europäische Kommission hat in ihrem Grünbuch "Ein Rahmen für die Klima- und Energiepolitik bis 2030" dazu aufgefordert, Einschätzungen für umwelt- und energiepolitische Entwicklungen jenseits des Jahres 2020 zu entwickeln. Allerdings beruht das Grünbuch ebenso wie die "Energy Roadmap 2050" der Kommission vom Dezember 2011 auf Szenarioannahmen, die in wesentlichen Teilen nicht mehr aktuell sind. Die Europäische Kommission sollte umgehend aktualisierte Modellrechnungen bereitstellen, um der Energiepolitik transparente und nachvollziehbare Szenarien als Entscheidungshilfe an die Hand zu geben. Ein vom DIW Berlin durchgeführter Vergleich aktueller Schätzungen zeigt, dass von Seiten der Kommission die Kosten von Atomenergie und CO2-Abscheidung systematisch unterschätzt werden, während die Kosten von erneuerbaren Energien überschätzt werden. Dies gilt insbesondere für die Fotovoltaik, deren Kapitalkosten heute bereits zum Teil unterhalb der Werte liegen, die die Kommission für 2050 erwartet. Im Gegensatz zu den erneuerbaren Energien können weder die Atomkraft noch die CO2-Entsorgung zu vertretbaren Kosten eine tragende Rolle im künftigen europäischen Strommix spielen. Es ist daher unerlässlich, dass Europa konsequent auf den weiteren Ausbau erneuerbarer Energien setzt. Dazu ist es notwendig, dass anspruchsvolle Ziele für erneuerbare Energien für das Jahr 2030 definiert werden, kombiniert mit klaren Emissionsreduktions- und Effizienzzielen.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian von Hirschhausen & Claudia Kemfert & Friedrich Kunz & Roman Mendelevitch, 2013. "Europäische Stromerzeugung nach 2020: Beitrag erneuerbarer Energien nicht unterschätzen," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 80(29), pages 3-13.
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwwob:80-29-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.424632.de/13-29-1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andreas Schröder & Friedrich Kunz & Jan Meiss & Roman Mendelevitch & Christian von Hirschhausen, 2013. "Current and Prospective Costs of Electricity Generation until 2050," Data Documentation 68, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Wolfgang Buchholz & Jonas Frank & Hans-Dieter Karl & Johannes Pfeiffer & Karen Pittel & Ursula Triebswetter & Jochen Habermann & Wolfgang Mauch & Thomas Staudacher, 2012. "Die Zukunft der Energiemärkte: Ökonomische Analyse und Bewertung von Potenzialen und Handlungsmöglichkeiten," ifo Forschungsberichte, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 57.
    3. Karsten Neuhoff & Anne Schopp, 2013. "Europäischer Emissionshandel: durch Backloading Zeit für Strukturreform gewinnen," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 80(11), pages 3-11.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Saskia Ellenbeck & Andreas Beneking & Andrzej Ceglarz & Peter Schmidt & Antonella Battaglini, 2015. "Security of Supply in European Electricity Markets—Determinants of Investment Decisions and the European Energy Union," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(6), pages 1-19, June.
    2. Glachant, Jean-Michel & Ruester, Sophia, 2014. "The EU internal electricity market: Done forever?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1-7.
    3. Jean-Michel Glachant & Sophia Ruester, 2013. "The EU Internal Electricity Market: Done Forever?," RSCAS Working Papers 2013/66, European University Institute.
    4. Saskia Ellenbeck & Peter Schmidt & Antonella Battaglini & Johan Lilliestam, 2013. "Der Strommarkt als soziale Institution: eine erweiterte Perspektive auf die deutsche Diskussion um Kapazitätsmechanismen," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 82(3), pages 171-182.
    5. Glachant, Jean-Michel & Ruester, Sophia, 2014. "The EU internal electricity market: Done forever?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 221-228.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Franziska Holz & Christian Von Hirschhausen, 2013. "The Infrastructure Implications Of The Energy Transformation In Europe Until 2050 — Lessons From The Emf28 Modeling Exercise," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 4(supp0), pages 1-26.
    2. Karsten Neuhoff & Sophia Rüster & Sebastian Schwenen, 2015. "Power Market Design beyond 2020: Time to Revisit Key Elements?," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1456, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    3. Gerbaulet, Clemens & von Hirschhausen, Christian & Kemfert, Claudia & Lorenz, Casimir & Oei, Pao-Yu, 2019. "European electricity sector decarbonization under different levels of foresight," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 973-987.
    4. Iegor Riepin & Thomas Mobius & Felix Musgens, 2020. "Modelling uncertainty in coupled electricity and gas systems -- is it worth the effort?," Papers 2008.07221, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2020.
    5. Johnson, Nils & Strubegger, Manfred & McPherson, Madeleine & Parkinson, Simon C. & Krey, Volker & Sullivan, Patrick, 2017. "A reduced-form approach for representing the impacts of wind and solar PV deployment on the structure and operation of the electricity system," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 651-664.
    6. Mostafa Shaaban & Jürgen Scheffran & Jürgen Böhner & Mohamed S. Elsobki, 2018. "Sustainability Assessment of Electricity Generation Technologies in Egypt Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(5), pages 1-25, May.
    7. Paula Díaz & Oscar Van Vliet & Anthony Patt, 2017. "Do We Need Gas as a Bridging Fuel? A Case Study of the Electricity System of Switzerland," Energies, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(7), pages 1-15, June.
    8. Tom Brijs & Arne van Stiphout & Sauleh Siddiqui & Ronnie Belmans, 2016. "Evaluating the Role of Electricity Storage by Considering Short-Term Operation in Long-Term Planning," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1624, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    9. Hörnlein, Lena, 2019. "The value of gas-fired power plants in markets with high shares of renewable energy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 1078-1098.
    10. Zimmermann, Florian & Bublitz, Andreas & Keles, Dogan & Fichtner, Wolf, 2019. "Cross-border effects of capacity remuneration mechanisms: The Swiss case," Working Paper Series in Production and Energy 35, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Industrial Production (IIP).
    11. Schill, Wolf-Peter, 2014. "Residual load, renewable surplus generation and storage requirements in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 65-79.
    12. Thao Pham, 2016. "Energiewende and competition in Germany: Diagnosing market power in wholesale electricity market," Post-Print hal-02568253, HAL.
    13. Konstantin Löffler & Karlo Hainsch & Thorsten Burandt & Pao-Yu Oei & Claudia Kemfert & Christian von Hirschhausen, 2017. "Designing a Global Energy System Based on 100% Renewables for 2050: GENeSYS-MOD: An Application of the Open-Source Energy Modelling System (OSeMOSYS)," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1678, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    14. Mier, Mathias & Weissbart, Christoph, 2020. "Power markets in transition: Decarbonization, energy efficiency, and short-term demand response," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    15. Casimir Lorenz & Clemens Gerbaulet, 2017. "Wind Providing Balancing Reserves: An Application to the German Electricity System of 2025," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1655, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    16. Jan Abrell and Hannes Weigt, 2016. "Investments in a Combined Energy Network Model: Substitution between Natural Gas and Electricity?," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    17. Petitet, Marie & Perrot, Marie & Mathieu, Sébastien & Ernst, Damien & Phulpin, Yannick, 2019. "Impact of gate closure time on the efficiency of power systems balancing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 562-573.
    18. Breyer, Christian & Koskinen, Otto & Blechinger, Philipp, 2015. "Profitable climate change mitigation: The case of greenhouse gas emission reduction benefits enabled by solar photovoltaic systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 610-628.
    19. Richstein, Jörn C. & Lorenz, Casimir & Neuhoff, Karsten, 2020. "An auction story: How simple bids struggle with uncertainty," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    20. Denholm, Paul & Brinkman, Greg & Mai, Trieu, 2018. "How low can you go? The importance of quantifying minimum generation levels for renewable integration," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 249-257.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Electricity generation; costs; learning; renewables;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • Q47 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Energy Forecasting

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwwob:80-29-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.