IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v66y2014icp209-217.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A post-2020 EU energy technology policy: Revisiting the strategic energy technology plan

Author

Listed:
  • Ruester, Sophia
  • Schwenen, Sebastian
  • Finger, Matthias
  • Glachant, Jean-Michel

Abstract

With the European Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET Plan) expiring in 2020, the EU needs to revisit its energy technology policy for the post-2020 horizon and to establish a policy framework that fosters the achievement of ambitious EU commitments for decarbonization by 2050. We discuss options for a post-2020 EU energy technology policy, taking account of uncertain technology developments, uncertain carbon prices and the highly competitive global market for energy technologies. We propose a revised SET Plan that enables policy makers to be pro-active in pushing innovation in promising technologies, no matter what policy context will be realized in the future. In particular, a revised SET Plan should include a more technology-specific focus, provide the basis for planning and prioritization among decarbonization technologies, and should be based on a comprehensive approach across sectors. Selected technology targets and EU funding of innovation should be in line with the SET Plan prioritization.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruester, Sophia & Schwenen, Sebastian & Finger, Matthias & Glachant, Jean-Michel, 2014. "A post-2020 EU energy technology policy: Revisiting the strategic energy technology plan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 209-217.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:66:y:2014:i:c:p:209-217
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513011518
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stavins Robert N., 1995. "Transaction Costs and Tradeable Permits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 133-148, September.
    2. Wilson, Charlie, 2012. "Up-scaling, formative phases, and learning in the historical diffusion of energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 81-94.
    3. Chai, Kah-Hin & Yeo, Catrina, 2012. "Overcoming energy efficiency barriers through systems approach—A conceptual framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 460-472.
    4. Weyant, John P., 2011. "Accelerating the development and diffusion of new energy technologies: Beyond the "valley of death"," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 674-682, July.
    5. Martin, Stephen & Scott, John T., 2000. "The nature of innovation market failure and the design of public support for private innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 437-447, April.
    6. Philippe Aghion & Reinhilde Veugelers & David Hemous, 2009. "No Green Growth Without Innovation," Policy Briefs 353, Bruegel.
    7. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W. H. Parry, 2008. "Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(2), pages 152-174, Summer.
    8. repec:dau:papers:123456789/10174 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Kitzing, Lena & Mitchell, Catherine & Morthorst, Poul Erik, 2012. "Renewable energy policies in Europe: Converging or diverging?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 192-201.
    10. Hyytinen, Ari & Toivanen, Otto, 2005. "Do financial constraints hold back innovation and growth?: Evidence on the role of public policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 1385-1403, November.
    11. Martin L. Weitzman, 1974. "Prices vs. Quantities," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(4), pages 477-491.
    12. Juan Delgado, 2007. "Why Europe is not carbon competitive," Policy Briefs 33, Bruegel.
    13. Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and government-led incentives for non-incremental technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 700-709, June.
    14. Jacobsson, Staffan & Bergek, Anna & Finon, Dominique & Lauber, Volkmar & Mitchell, Catherine & Toke, David & Verbruggen, Aviel, 2009. "EU renewable energy support policy: Faith or facts?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2143-2146, June.
    15. Olmos, Luis & Ruester, Sophia & Liong, Siok-Jen, 2012. "On the selection of financing instruments to push the development of new technologies: Application to clean energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 252-266.
    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. Kaivo-oja, Jari & Vehmas, Jarmo & Luukkanen, Jyrki, 2016. "Trend analysis of energy and climate policy environment: Comparative electricity production and consumption benchmark analyses of China, Euro area, European Union, and United States," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 464-474.
    2. Newbery, David M., 2016. "Towards a green energy economy? The EU Energy Union’s transition to a low-carbon zero subsidy electricity system – Lessons from the UK’s Electricity Market Reform," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1321-1330.
    3. C. Conti & M. L. Mancusi & F. Sanna-Randaccio & R. Sestini & E. Verdolini, 2016. "Transition Towards a Green Economy in Europe: Innovation and Knowledge Integration in the Renewable Energy Sector," Working Papers 2016.71, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Su, Yujie & Zhang, Peidong & Su, Yuqing, 2015. "An overview of biofuels policies and industrialization in the major biofuel producing countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 991-1003.
    5. Yuzran Bustamar & Ian Lange & Elizabeth Van Wie Davis, 2017. "Characteristic of Successful Energy Policy from Politics, Economics, Social and Technological Perspective - a qualitative analysis," Working Papers 2017-10, Colorado School of Mines, Division of Economics and Business.

    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:eee:enepol:v:66:y:2014:i:c:p:209-217. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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 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.

    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.