Forum Report
Download
PDF version (456KB)
The 6th EU Hitachi Science & Technology Forum opened to an audience
of 80 participants from a wide range of industry sectors who gathered in
Antwerp, Belgium from 16-18 May 2002 to discuss "Energy and its
implications for a European Society." Mr Norikiyo Koide, General Manager
of Hitachi Corporate Office, Europe, welcomed the group of scientists,
engineers, executives and policymakers to the Forum. He expressed his
appreciation to Delft Technical University for hosting the previous day's
educational tour of the Interfaculty Reactor Institute (IRI) - the Dutch
national centre for radiation-related university research and education
with a primary focus on nuclear reactors, radionuclides and ionising
radiation. Mr Koide noted that the timing of this year's Forum is
coincident with energy policy planning being undertaken in the EU and
internationally. He said that this provided an opportune time for
participants to discuss these issues and contribute their recommendations
to the wider dialogue.
Mr Koide explained that the agenda had been
designed to provide insight into the working structure of parameters by
which policy-makers are currently evaluating future energy decisions and
legislation. He explained that participants would hear presentations on
key issues such as sustainable development, energy security, and climate
change, along with overviews of existing and emerging energy supplies and
technologies, including nuclear, oil and gas, electricity, renewable
energies and hydrogen. In effect, these presentations constituted
preparatory briefings for the participants, which the afternoon working
sessions could draw upon in putting forth Forum recommendations on energy
conservation, tackling climate change and promoting new energy
technologies.
Mr Hiroaki Nakanishi, General Manager Global
Business, Hitachi Ltd. officially opened the Forum by thanking the
participants for having accepted Hitachi's invitation to discuss energy
and its implications for European society. He reiterated the importance of
the EU and its project to become the leading trading partner in the world.
Mr. Nakanishi also emphasised the role companies should play in the
societal debate on the benefits and limitations of new technologies and
referred to the Forum as a way to encourage such debates.
Mr Pierre
Longin, Hitachi consultant, served as the moderator for the morning
session, drawing linkages between the series of presentations and building
a supporting framework for the participants to engage in a constructive
analysis of the issues.
|
Introduction to Energy
Issues and their Societal Implications
Mr John
Scowcroft, Head of Environment and Sustainable Development,
Eurelectric |
 |
Mr Scowcroft started his presentation by explaining that energy issues
cut across a number of larger social priorities, including sustainable
development, climate change, environment, air quality and health. Within
the European context, enlargement plans and energy liberalisation policy
are creating a pan-European energy market, which increases the complexity
of and need for determining balanced and consistent
policy-making.
Mr Scowcroft felt that the Forum participants should
have a clear understanding of the current negotiations surrounding climate
change issues and implementation - especially as these issues impact
energy markets and investments. He explained that the EU's May 2002
decision to ratify the Kyoto Protocol under the United Nation's Framework
Convention on Climate Change will require the EU (by 2012) to reduce its
greenhouse emissions by 8% below 1990 levels. He pointed to a graph which
indicated that the EU had managed to reduce emissions by 4% from 1990 to
2000, but that projections indicate that emissions are expected to grow
considerably, exceeding the Kyoto targets. Electricity has traditionally
been a main contributor to EU emissions reduction to date, reducing by 3%
its greenhouse emissions, whilst electricity consumption rose 21%
(1990-2000). He said that measures like emissions trading are necessary to
enable companies and electric utilities to economically and efficiently
integrate environmental goals into business strategies, decision making,
and investments for providing energy. He listed Eurelectric's suggested
criteria for establishing a European wide emissions trading system, noting
the necessity for:
- Equality of effort between sectors;
- The use of voluntary approaches; the inclusion of JI/CDM credits;
- The inclusion of all six greenhouse gases.
Mr Scowcroft also elucidated a number of other energy measures which
will be necessary for Europe, not only with respect to climate, but also
to ensure a secure and stable future energy market. He noted the need to
use less electricity when possible, and that measures such as replacing
electric motors with more efficient models or using more efficient light
fixtures could significantly reduce electricity consumption.
Mr
Scowcroft stressed that Kyoto targets, and possibly larger energy security
goals can't be met without continued contributions from nuclear and large
hydro power. Natural gas use has the potential for further growth, but
much needs to be done to ensure that gas markets are kept open,
competitive, and transparent. He said that coal remains a vital fuel
worldwide, and that development of advanced coal technologies in Europe
can have a global impact on future energy mix choices. Renewables have
great potential to contribute substantially, but he questioned whether the
right mechanisms are being used to bring them to market.
In
closing, Mr Scowcroft emphasised that public policies can often be
contradictory, where energy policies can contradict environmental
policies, which can contradict tax policies. A climate policy, for
example, which favours nuclear energy for its minimal greenhouse gas
emissions can contradict with environmental policies concerned with
nuclear waste and safety. Likewise, a climate policy endorsing renewable
energy may contradict with economic policies opposed to increased taxes
and energy rising prices. Mr Scowcroft urged public policy makers to take
a balanced and consistent approach to future energy decisions.
|
Energy Generation,
Consumption and Alternative Uses
Renewable
Energy
Mr. Domenico Rossetti di Valdalbero,
Scientific Officer, DG Research, European Commission |
 |
Mr Rossetti's presentation was designed to inform
participants about EU objectives for increasing the percentage of
renewable fuels and technologies. He explained that the key drivers for
renewable energies are to:
- Reduce pollution and greenhouse gases;
- Ensure security of energy supply;
- Improve European competitiveness.
With respect to competitiveness, for example, he noted that Danish wind
turbines currently comprise 45% of the world market-which brings economic
benefits to these EU companies.
Mr. Rossetti argued that in a
business as usual scenario, especially at the world-level, CO2 emissions
will continue to grow - and added that renewable energy could be employed
to slow this trend. He provided several slides which showed global
installed wind energy capacities, noting that this growth is driven by the
European Union (75% of the world market)-particularly Germany, Spain and
Denmark. He also showed where photovoltaic (solar) capacities have
increased 10-fold in the last decade, though the EU percentage comprises
about 20% of the world total.
Mr. Rossetti described the EU
directive on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy
sources, which provides an indicative target of 22% of "green electricity"
by 2010 (compared to 14% in 1997). He acknowledged that in order to reach
the Directive targets, the price of renewable energy sources will need to
be more competitive with the electricity derived from traditional sources
(natural gas, coal, nuclear) which is around 4 eurocents per kWh. Wind
energy has a current price range of 4-9 c/kWh; biomass 4-8 c/kWh; and
photovoltaic 25-50 c/kWh. He noted that in addition to technological
advances, the internalisation of external costs, i.e. to take into
consideration social and environmental damages (e.g., health impacts
coming from air pollution) could make renewables more price competitive.
In this regard, he made strong arguments for current EC policies and
instruments for moving the energy system towards more sustainability (cf.
R&D, subsidies, etc).
In a short discussion following Mr.
Rossetti's presentation, several participants carried forth the notion of
'contradictions' raised by Mr. Scowcroft: that policies to site wind
turbines can often be in conflict with environmental preservation and land
use policies. It was also noted that photovoltaic cells can be discretely
integrated into existing infrastructure and, despite current cost
barriers, they don't carry the social burden that wind turbines confront.
Participants also questioned whether the use of wind power will continue
in the EU after subsidies expire. Mr. Rossetti felt that this answer
depended largely upon whether the subsidies will work in jump-starting the
technologies.
|
Hydrogen
Mr. Dolf Gielen, Energy
Analyst, Energy Technology Policy Division, IEA |
 |
Mr. Gielen informed participants that hydrogen is currently
receiving a lot of attention as another element in the future energy
supply mix. He explained that 'hydrogen' is a name for a variety of
technologies and it is rapidly emerging as a major component of clean
sustainable energy systems. It is relevant to all the energy
sectors-transportation, buildings, utilities, and industry. Hydrogen can
provide storage options for intermittent renewable technologies such as
solar and wind; and, when combined with emerging decarbonisation
technologies, it can reduce the climate impacts of continued fossil fuel
utilisation. He stated that hydrogen is a flexible energy carrier which
can contribute to a sustainable energy future.
Mr. Gielen noted the
dominance of petroleum in the transportation sector and suggested that
hydrogen could become a viable, new fuel for road vehicles. He said that
hydrogen generated from renewable energy sources, provided a "near zero"
greenhouse gas option for the transportation sector. Unfortunately,
current costs are prohibitively high. He presented a cost comparison,
explaining that conventional vehicles currently available to consumers
have a cost component of $50 per KW compared to today's hydrogen
prototypes which cost $5,000 per KW. In his opinion, this enormous cost
differential could not be overcome by subsidies or carbon abatement
incentives. As such, Mr. Gielen estimated that hydrogen for vehicles would
not be a viable option before 2040, and certainly not within the next 10
to 20 years.
Mr. Gielen closed his presentation by suggesting that
hydrogen and electricity production will ultimately come from sustainable
energy sources and that fossil fuel will likely remain a significant and
transitional resource for many decades.
|
European Energy
Policy
EC Green Paper on Energy Supply
Ms Helen
Donoghue, Principal Administrator, DG Transport & Energy,
European Commission |
 |
Ms Donoghue started her presentation by emphasising that she
believes that energy is an issue for public debate and analysis; and, that
she hoped the Hitachi Forum and its recommendations could contribute to
the ongoing public debate. She provided an in-depth presentation on the
EU's Green Paper on Security of Energy Supply, explaining that the paper
was produced in response to the following trends: growing world energy
demand, tighter supply/demand balances, oil price volatility, geopolitical
developments and environmental concerns over air quality and climate
change. Additionally, European energy production is peaking such that
external dependence is increasing (now 50%, forecast 70% in 2030).
Moreover, energy market liberalisation and competition, along with EU
enlargement are creating complex new conditions which must be planned for.
In the bigger picture, there may exist a variety of trends and
constraints, but the world is still looking to the same (fossil)
resources.
The aim of the Green Paper is to create a sustainable
energy policy: "For the good of the public and the smooth functioning of
the economy, the uninterrupted physical availability on the market of
energy products at affordable prices for all consumers, in the framework
of the objective of sustainable development." Ms Donoghue acknowledged
that there are no quick, easy solutions, only important, long-term choices
- and that action and investment will be needed from all sectors. She
offered that energy savings and renewable energies will be key to future
security. In terms of implementation, she described several EU actions,
including:
- Buildings Directive and Renewable Energy Directive;
- Nuclear package (there is a need to deal with waste and safety --
without which the nuclear future looks dubious);
- Completion of internal energy market;
- Dialogue, partnerships with neighbouring countries (Russia, Caspian
area);
- Research, technological developments.
She closed her presentation with the following guidelines for a
step-by-step process which opens up development prospects and addresses
our mutual energy dependence:
- Development and implementation of a long term integrated approach to
security of energy supply;
- Step changes in energy use needed to de-couple economic growth from
rising energy needs;
- Stable but dynamic markets to innovate and invest in a diverse range
of new, cleaner and more efficient technologies and infrastructure;
- Development of producer-consumer dialogue;
- Safety and security must be assured.
Response to the
Green Paper
The Forum was structured in a way to provide
expert responses to the morning presentations, in particular the sweeping
EU Green Paper on Security of Energy Supply. Responses were heard from the
petroleum sector, industry, the Climate Action Network and the Swiss
Government.
|
Petroleum Industry
Dr Peter Tjan,
Secretary General, Europia |
 |
Dr Tjan started his presentation with an overview of key
points necessary for formulating a broad EU plan on energy supply
security, including:
Need to ensure a Sustainable World in
environmental, social and economical dimensions;
- Energy is a main driver for economic growth;
- Recognition that Europe is a major energy consumer and will continue
to depend heavily on imports of primary energy;
- Increasing concerns about the environmental impact of energy use;
- Some environmental issues are local, some global;
- Europe has significant know how on energy technology.
He also described what he believes are the key structural weaknesses in
the EU energy market. In terms of supply, there is a high and growing
external dependency and a continued reliance on fossil fuel. Moreover,
there have been only small contributions from renewables, and the future
for nuclear and coal remains uncertain. In terms of demand, EU consumption
will continue to grow at the rate of 1-2% per year, mainly by transport
and domestic sectors. There is also an economic risk due to relative
failure of energy efficiency and conservation measures and the volatility
of energy prices.
Dr Tjan presented several options for
consideration, which focused on reducing and modifying patterns of
consumption and encouraging cleaner energy usage and energy conservation
measures. He also felt that it was necessary to promote the
diversification of types & sources of energy, to keep nuclear power
options open, to promote renewables and to enhance dialogue with energy
(oil) producing countries.
From the perspective of the oil
industry, Dr. Tjan pointed out that the transportation sector had already
achieved major improvements in energy efficiency and reduction of CO2, and
that other sectors must now follow. He said that cleaner fuels have
dramatically reduced emissions and allowed the car industry to meet
reduced consumption targets. Unfortunately, the speed of implementation of
alternative fuel vehicles has been slower than expected.
With
respect to supply, the oil industry foresees no threat of exhaustion of
oil and gas supplies and no resource constraints to satisfy these demands.
To this end, the oil and gas industry will invest US$1 trillion over the
next 10 years in new European oil and gas facilities. In this regard, he
suggested that the Green Paper underestimates the potential for indigenous
and international oil and gas sources.
Dr. Tjan's view is that
energy security should not be measured by the degree of import dependency
but rather by the level of diversity of energy sources. EU security is
served by the expansion of world-wide supplies through the free flow of
investment and the integration of global and European energy markets. In
this respect, the real issues are the rate of investment and technical
progress to expand energy supply: within the EU (UK, Norway, The
Netherlands); with connected countries (Algeria, Russia, Libya, Egypt);
and internationally. He also expressed the following positions:
- The role of policymakers is to foster the right climate for
investment;
- Inappropriate regulation or additional taxation would adversely
affect production and distribution;
- Energy taxation is not a good tool and should be minimised.
Speaking on security, he suggested that solving issues in the Middle
East would be more important and useful than many of the Commission's
other measures. Moreover, despite a number of international incidents
which have the potential to disrupt energy security (e.g., Gulf Wars,
Nigeria, etc.), these have gone virtually unnoticed vis-a-vis the market.
In his opinion, the system works.
In closing, Dr Tjan acknowledges
that policy making isn't easy, it's about making difficult choices. He
felt that too little has been said about the potential of technology, and
it is important not to extrapolate our current world, but think about it
in fundamentally different ways. Also, many of the solutions to energy
challenges can be found in consumer choice. He posited that quality of
life and lifestyle choices, (e.g.What temperature do you want the house to
be? Do you drive to work or take public transportation?) will be the major
determinants impacting supply and demand.
|
Industry
Representative
Mr Thierry de Bresson, Head of Energy
Marketing Group, Pechiney |
 |
Mr de Bresson's presentation focused on the importance of reasonable
electricity pricing standards as a critical and necessary element for
sustainable industrial growth. Energy price is an important index for
industrial consumers and stable pricing is necessary for business
investment. In this regard, policy measures oriented toward introducing
greater market liberalisation or internalising energy consumption
externalities should be careful not to also introduce too much price
volatility. This, in his opinion could equate to destroying thousands of
manufacturing jobs.
To elucidate his thoughts, Mr de Bresson
considers the current, liberalised electricity bidding practices to be
"bizarre," and to create difficulties for investors and users. He also
asked participants to look at results of electric industry restructuring
efforts around the world, where he suggests scandals, loss of capital,
asset write downs, and investment shortage are derived from poor economic
governance and irrational energy pricing schemes. He urged participants to
consider the relative value of trading an old, but stable system of
subsidy for a new one which, for industry, carries levels of uncertainty
and risk which would be wholly unacceptable for business or residential
customers.
|
Non-Governmental
Organisation
Mr Jason Anderson, Climate Action
Network |
 |
Mr Anderson focused his comments on various environmental
aspects of security of energy supply, expressing the view that energy
security and environmental protection can be achieved in concert. Mr.
Anderson's view of the energy market constraints was similar to many of
the previous speakers, pointing to potential supply shortages resulting
from increasing demand, decreasing EU production, declining nuclear
options and pressures to reduce CO2 emissions in power generation (coal).
Environmental security issues include the depletion of finite natural
resources, the social risk of large outages due to safety problems, such
as nuclear accidents or pipeline ruptures. He stressed that "affordable"
prices must compensate for social externalities.
Mr Anderson
suggested a number of supply-side options for EU consideration:
- Increased use of combined heat and power production;
- Retrofitting of existing power production plants;
- Fuel switch to low-carbon fuels;
- Increase in energy efficiency of new power production plants;
- CO2 removal;
- Use of biomass for electricity production;
- Increased wind power production;
- Increase of other renewable electricity production.
...and demand-side options:
- Reduction of stand-by losses of household appliances;
- Increased use of efficient appliances in households;
- Efficient cooling for households;
- Efficient lighting for households and services;
- Recycling of aluminium;
- Reduced electricity use in the chlorine industry;
- Efficiency motor technologies.
- Increase of other renewable electricity production.
With respect to the EU's recent legislative activities, Mr Anderson
expressed his concerns that efficiency and renewables get strong
rhetorical support in the Green Paper, but legislation is weak. In
particular, renewable energy progress is slow and the new buildings
directive delays action. He said that completion of the energy services
directive is unlikely, and the liberalisation directive side-steps a
number of renewable energy issues.
In an expression of support for the value of energy conservation and
efficiency, he said that it will be easier to meet demand with renewable
sources if there is less demand to meet.
|
Government
Mr Jean-Christophe
Fueg, International Energy Affairs, Swiss Federal Office of
Energy |
 |
Mr Fueg presented a very interesting overview of the traditional roles
of government in the energy sector. He explained that in the 1990s,
governments focused on opening and liberalising markets; now they are more
concerned about security of supply, especially following the 1999-2000 oil
price volatilities, the California electricity crisis, September 11, and
the Iraq war. Mr Fueg also delineated a number of specific, traditional
roles for governments:
- Shaping markets by setting market framework, regulator, investment,
competition authority, and standards;
- Guaranteeing prosperity and international competitiveness;
- Collecting taxes;
- Shareholder in energy assets: central state or regional/local level;
- Financier/investor: little in energy sector, more in
energy-impacting sectors (transport, agriculture);
- Diplomat: international stability, energy dialogues;
- Market interventionist: state aids, subsidies.
With respect to the EU Green Paper, Mr. Fueg reiterated what he
referred to as the undeniable fact-that self-sufficiency in energy is
impossible. As such, it will be necessary to diversify supply
geographically and across the range of fuels and energy sources. There
will need to be a strong focus on curbing energy demand and to keep
working on sustainable applications of all present and future energy
options. He also noted that hydrogen will not be the panacea to security
of supply with Green Paper timeframe.
In terms of recommendations,
he suggested that short term gains could be achieved by investing in
strong diplomatic relations with OPEC, Russia, other producing and transit
countries, as well as investing in trans-European energy networks. Within
the EU, it may be useful to stock strategic supplies of energy and to find
sustainable methods for using traditional energy supplies, e.g., natural
gas supply diversity, clean coal technology and acceptable nuclear
production and waste storage. He was cautious about the absolute impact
that renewables can have in displacing fossil-fissile fuels, especially in
the absence of state intervention, subsidies, taxes, or feed-in
tariffs.
Mr. Fueg offered a number of conclusions, noting that
government policies have not been very effective due to the lack of
binding instruments and political/public acceptance. Moreover, the
conditions for more interventionist energy policy have not (yet) been
established. He suggested that governments might be able to gain public
support for stronger energy policy action when tough choices emerge in
response to the need for new power plant capacity and meeting Kyoto
targets. He also challenged the participants to appreciate that energy
policy debates are not always about energy choices, but about social
issues (e.g. coal subsidies, state employee status, environmental impact).
Regarding the role of government in energy policy, Mr. Fueg states that
the United States has its policy in line with its foreign policy, but the
EU, on the other hand, has none such in this regard. He also noted that
energy ministries are often undermined by other government bodies
responsible for larger issues such as economy, industry, finance and
sometimes environment. Echoing some of the other speakers, Mr Fueg
questioned whether consumers are prepared to commit to tough energy
choices and whether, in the end, they will be "willing to pay."
|
Update: EU Enlargement
and its Impacts
Mr. Antoine Ripoll, Administrator,
European Parliament |
 |
In order for Forum participants to have a deeper understanding of the
geographical and political context within which EU energy policy is taking
shape, Mr Ripoll gave a brief presentation on EU Enlargement objectives
and measures.
Mr Ripoll informed participants that enlargement is
one of the most important opportunities for the EU to further the
integration of the continent by peaceful means, extending a zone of
stability and prosperity to new members. He explained that in March 1998
the EU formally launched the process to include thirteen applicant
countries: Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia,
Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia and
Turkey. This task poses a unique challenge, in terms of the number of
candidates, the area (increase of 34%) and population (increase of 105
million), and the wealth of different histories and cultures. He explained
that enlargement is expected to significantly benefit countries and the
Union - through a single set of trade rules, a single tariff, and a single
set of administrative procedures which will simplify dealings for
third-country operators within Europe and improve conditions for
investment and trade.
Mr Ripoll delineated the benefits of
enlarging the Union to include these countries as political, economic, and
cultural:
- The extension of the zone of peace, stability and prosperity in
Europe will enhance the security of all its peoples;
- The addition of more than 100 million people, in rapidly growing
economies, to the EU's market of 370 million will boost economic growth
and create jobs in both old and new member states;
- There will be a better quality of life for citizens throughout
Europe as the new members adopt EU policies for protection of the
environment and the fight against crime, drugs and illegal immigration;
- The arrival of new members will enrich the EU through increased
cultural diversity, interchange of ideas, and better understanding of
other peoples;
- Enlargement will strengthen the Union's role in world affairs - in
foreign and security policy, trade policy, and the other fields of
global governance (even if the Iraq crisis creates huge difficulties).
He also noted that benefits have already been achieved in Central and
Eastern Europe, where stable democracies have emerged, with democratic
institutions and increased respect for minorities. The economic reforms in
these countries have led to high rates of economic growth (higher than the
EU) and better employment prospects. As a result the Union enjoys growing
trade with these countries (17 billion trade surplus in 2000), and this
generates employment and growth in the member states.
The European
Union has not defined its limits in geographical terms, but every
applicant country has to meet the basic conditions laid down by the
European Council in Copenhagen. Thirteen countries are involved in the
enlargement process at this stage, and in the coming years other countries
are expected to submit applications for membership. The EU has identified
as potential candidates the countries of the West Balkans region,
including the states of ex-Yugoslavia, which have the prospect of one day
joining the EU. The Stabilisation and Association process, which is the
framework for the EU's policy in the Western Balkans, offers the prospect
of accession to the Union, and an assistance programme to support that
aim. Norway and Switzerland have applied in the past, and may one day
reactivate their applications.
|
Japan's Energy
Situation and Hitachi Technologies for a Sustainable
World
Dr. Shigeru Azuhata, General Manager, Power
& Industrial Systems R&D Laboratory, Hitachi, Ltd. |
 |
After lunch, the participants enjoyed a presentation on Japan's energy
situation and development of Hitachi technologies for a sustainable
world.
Dr Azuhata's presentation on Japan's energy situation and
recent energy policy measures enabled participants to clearly see that
implementing sustainable energy policy is indeed a global challenge. In
particular, Japan is confronted with the need to ensure balanced energy
imports, improve thermal efficiencies of power generation, utilise
renewable energy, and deregulate the power market. In June 2002, Japan
signed the Kyoto Protocol, which will, as in the EU and elsewhere, require
the government to pursue energy policy measures which limit CO2 emissions.
Among these measures, the Japanese government has called for an amendment
of the 1999 law on the rational use of energy. This includes increasing
the use of renewable energy generation up to 1.35% of total electricity
supply by 2010 and requiring industrial users to submit plans for
rationalisation of energy use.
Dr Azuhata presented a variety of
Hitachi technologies which are playing an important role in helping Japan
to improve energy efficiency, reduce emissions, and improve the country's
long term security of energy supply. In particular, he introduced slides
featuring Hitachi's wide line-up of gas and steam turbines. These
technologies are commercially employed in utilities across Japan, in
pulverised coal-fired power plants, pressurised fluidised bed combustion
(coal and natural gas), and integrated coal gasification combined cycle
(coal and natural gas). These technologies greatly improve the
efficiencies of the feedstock fuels and significantly reduce stack
emissions. He also presented an overview of Hitachi renewable energy
technology developments, including the Bifacial Solar Cell, which can be
installed in thousands of unique, un-intrusive applications in buildings,
airports, along highways, as part of fencing and on street
lamps.
On the subject of nuclear power, Dr. Azuhata explained that
this reliable energy source has grown the most since the 1970s and will
continue to be an important part of Japan's energy supply mix, with
certain advantages in helping Japan to meet the CO2 constrained world
prescribed by the Kyoto Protocol. He gave a short overview of Hitachi
nuclear power technologies. Dr. Azuhata noted that nuclear lifecycle CO2
intensity is lower than coal, oil, natural gas, solar or wind - because
there are no 'fuel associated' CO2 emissions. He emphasised that only
hydropower can produce lower total net emissions.
Working
Sessions
Three parallel working sessions, comprised of
participants and panellists, were formed for the afternoon discussions on
energy conservation, climate change and energy technology. Each group had
a chairperson and a rapporteur. Their recommendations were presented to
the plenary session on the second day.
|
Working Session I: What should governments do to promote
energy conservation?
Mr. Jean-Christophe Fueg,
International Energy Affairs, Swiss Federal Office of
Energy
Rapporteur: Ms. Linda Geux, KPN Mobile |
 |
Working Session I was tasked with exploring various options
for governments to promote energy conservation and efficiency. Before
putting together a set of recommendations, the group discussed the need
and value of energy efficiency. They noted that improving efficiency
raises the question of collecting data on energy consumption and use -
which is extremely difficult due to both the lack of information and the
ways information is collected. For example, energy use in rail transport
could be either electric or diesel; are rail cars half full or half empty?
Data collection is extremely complex and methods are not in place for
accurate measurement.
The group also discussed the perplexing question
of why most people agree with the concept of conserving energy, but take
little or no action or responsibility. The group suggested that there are
a number of reasons for this:
- Consumers are not informed about energy saving potentials;
- Limited knowledge of costs: few customers are aware how much they
pay for their electricity;
- Split incentives, e.g, the landlord-tenant dilemma where the
landlord is not interested in putting in more efficient equipment
because he does not pay the bill;
- Consumer habits create inertia, even for simple changes like
utilising more efficient light bulbs.
The problem of climate change is not something people are
directly aware of -- in contrast to diesel emissions, for
example.
They also discussed what could be considered a 'vicious
circle' where greater efficiency (along with general increases in
GNP/wealth) yields more disposable income which in turn can be used to
acquire and consume more energy and energy services. Likewise, savings
gained through more efficient refrigerators can also lead to consumer
choices for larger models, yielding no net gains. The same can be said for
vehicles, when increased fuel efficiencies are offset by increased
kilometres travelled.
The group agreed that of the three major
consuming sectors, industrial and transport customers are responsive to
economic signals; they noted that more needs to be done to impact
behaviour changes for private motorists and residential consumers. They
suggested the following policy instruments are available to governments:
- Providing information
- Standards & regulations
- Fiscal incentives
- Voluntary agreements
- Finance/R&D
In particular, most private consumers are not aware of their energy
consumption patterns or the associated costs. Consumers have to be made
aware of when, how and how much energy they use. The group suggested that
regulations in combination with better information (e.g. programs to
promote energy efficiency for home users in France) can be successful.
They were convinced that incentives work better than simple price
increases, because without explanation and/or suitable alternatives users
will object to price increases.
They also suggested that consumers
would be responsive to 'responsible consumption' upon more fully
understanding how their individual actions can result in aggregated
benefits. To this end, the group concluded that improvements in energy
conservation are closely tied to consumer psychology and effective
government messaging and marketing. They noted a parallel example in waste
separation which stands as a viable model for achieving similar
responsible energy consumption behaviour.
|
Working Session II:
What is the best energy technology for defeating global
warming?
Dr Jan Kretzschmar, Innovation &
Renovation, VITO (Flemish Institute for Technological
Research)
Rapporteur: Mr. Etienne Dancer, ELYO Groupe |
 |
Working Session II was tasked with exploring the topical, if
not intractable, question of the best energy technology for defeating
global warming. Session II reported that their session was filled with
lively debate on a range of issues which factor into the question of
climate change, including deforestation, the life expectancy of petroleum
reserves, timelines to develop viable alternatives to oil and coal, the
ability of uranium resources to supply a world dependent on nuclear-and
what to do with the waste. The potential of hydrogen--how to produce it
and when fuel cells might be available. Will global warming continue even
if Kyoto targets are met? They also explored scenarios where CO2 emissions
are allowed to continue growing and whether carbon sequestration
technologies (e.g. CO2 injection in depleted oil and gas fields, the role
of bacteria in absorbing CO2 and deep, undersea storage of CO2 are valid
solutions.
The group took a very balanced approach to its task by
first calling into question the validity of the relationship between
greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. They recognised the existence
of a wide range of expert opinions on the subject, some in direct
contradiction. They suggested that, in their opinion, the current base of
knowledge was 'enough' to inspire action, if not mandate it. The
'precautionary principle' was cited as a useful guide for governing
action: "When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the
environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some
cause-and-effect relationships are not fully established
scientifically."
In this context, the group more specifically
addressed how to reduce CO2 emissions from energy consumption. They
recommended:
- The introduction of low carbon fuels and technologies across all the
major consuming sectors;
- The potential of biomass, wind, solar, hydrogen and nuclear
energies;
- The need to find alternatives to oil, particularly in the road
transportation sector;
- The need to reduce 'citizen' contributions, through better education
and rational energy use;
- Increased taxes to change fossil fuel consumption are not likely to
be politically acceptable.
They also recommended that all forms of carbon sequestration/storage be
explored, especially in the context of the [expressed] current necessity
to reduce atmospheric concentrations. In listing the options, the group
raised the caveats that these are all expensive and possible ineffective
measures.
- Forests/sea
- Bacteria
- Chemicals
- Storage
In reaching its conclusions, the group presented a comparison between
nuclear and renewable energy, based on installed capacity and
availability. As an example, 1,000 MW of electricity, could be generated
by one nuclear power plant operating at 90%. In comparison, it would
require 500 wind turbines, each with 5MW capacity operating at 30%, to
provide the equivalent amount of electricity to the market. In this
regard, the group offered the following recommendations for the best
energy approach to mitigating climate change:
- Nuclear power is the preferred solution for providing electricity at
near zero CO2 emissions now (waste is the perceived problem; industry
should better communicate the current ability to deal with it).
- New, renewable technologies and sequestration technologies, along
with better consumption behaviours for the longer term.
|
Working Session III:
What should governments do to promote new energy
technologies?
Mr. Enzo Millich,
Consultant
Rapporteur: Mr Fabrice Axisa, INSA Lyon |
 |
Session III restricted the discussion to the public
authority role in promoting new renewable energy sources and rational use
of energy technologies. Following the moderator's suggestion the group
split into subgroups, tasked with addressing the following topics:
- Research, development, demonstration and market deployment of
renewables and energy efficiency technologies;
- New legislation and fiscal measures in renewables and energy
efficiency sectors;
- Other financial incentives, such as feed-in tariffs, subsidies,
green certificates.
Concerning what governments should do to promote R&D, demonstrate
and deploy renewable energy and energy efficiency, the subgroup provided
the following statements and conclusions:
- Improve public awareness of energy issues by: -
- Information campaigns for general public and specific training
programs for schools;
- Provide examples of best practice, particularly in the rational
use of energy;
- Promote replacement of oil by natural gas;
- In transport sectors, enhance the role of railway versus road.
- R&D activities should be modulated according to the specificity
of each EU member country. No specific action should be provided for the
EU as a whole, but it should be proceeded to cost estimates of each
national R&D program. Trade off with non-EU countries, in particular
a candidate country, should be enabled.
- EU candidate countries: include energy technology and energy
industry cleanliness in a roadmap: create a European database for
improving the access conditions of these countries.
- Market deployment: financial incentives should be provided for a
better penetration of these technologies into the energy markets;
standards should be continuously improved, non-technical barriers like
public acceptance of these technologies and reduced administrative
burdens should be implemented.
Concerning new legislation and fiscal measures necessary to be
implemented by public authorities, the second subgroup suggested the
following:
- At EU levels, call for proposals for each state in qualities and
quantities of renewable energy sources. This call for proposal includes
milestones, subsidies related to achievement and time-limited subsidies
or grant for each state in order to assure a new renewable energy
structure economy but not to provoke market distortion;
- A European scientific committee to control the quality of the
achievement for each member state;
- The EU can allow each member state to propose fiscal special
measures for structures which produce or promote renewable energy;
- To enhance efficiency of energy consumption, propose standards for
building isolation, heating, cooling, lighting and control;
- Compulsory technical control of transportation means should be set
up in order to reduce the energy used for transportation. Towns can be
encouraged to develop buses or subways to limit the use of cars
downtown.
Concerning which kind of additional intervention should be implemented
by governments in order to develop new energy technologies in this field,
the third subgroup suggested:
- In the case of a newly created renewable energy market, subsidies
and feed-in tariffs should be preferred in order to enhance the take-off
of these energy technologies. These instruments are particularly
suitable for candidate countries as well as developing countries.
- In the case of an already developed energy market, a green
certificate system should be given a preference as it will not engender
any market distortion.
- However, these three instruments should be progressively utilised
for long term energy issues.
- Public authority's involvement will increase if these instruments
are adopted by EU members and candidate countries.
|
Summary Presentation
on Working Session Conclusions
Mr. Jeffrey P. Hardy,
President, IDA Consulting |
 |
In summarising the presentations and recommendations of the Hitachi
Forum, Mr Hardy noted that the discussion re-enforced the understanding
that energy has deep relationships with each of the three pillars of
sustainable development - the economy, the environment and society. For
policy-makers, planning for a sustainable energy future will be a major
priority, which will require broad societal consensus around the strategic
choices of economic, environmental and social development. Transparency,
stakeholder involvement and institutional flexibility will be key
ingredients of any set of decisions. Final choices will also require
different policy mixes, likely incorporating fiscal, regulatory and
research and development efforts to overcome barriers to the adoption of
new approaches.
Mr Hardy highlighted the fact that several speakers
had mentioned the appropriateness and the good timing of this Forum's
focus on energy and society, especially since a number of national and
international policy-making bodies are currently tackling the same issues.
He mentioned that in addition to the EU work on the Green Paper, various
new directives and the public debate, that the United Nations Commission
on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) is also putting forth recommendations
for the rational and sustainable use of the world's energy
resources.
Mr Hardy noted that the cross-cutting nature of energy
and energy policy was evident in the recommendations of the three working
sessions-who all touched on the need to promote renewable energy, change
consumer behaviour and introduce subsidies. Another cross cutting theme
was the acknowledgement that as energy use continues to grow, a key
question will be how the world's economies can use less energy, and
diversify and expand energy production, while maintaining economic growth
and prosperity.
In his conclusions, Mr Hardy identified the
circular nature and trade-offs inherent in the participants' discussions
on energy policy, notably:
- Government intervention vs. market forces -- which works better,
taxes, incentives or both?
- Climate policy vs. environmental policy vs. economic policy - which
takes precedent? Can they be accomplished in unison?
- Short term fuel and technology decisions vs. long term - should
government leap frog to sustainable energy now? Or pursue
business-as-usual (unsustainable) patterns until economic and political
conditions are favourable?
- What are the characteristics of a good citizen? Willingness to pay
(e.g. taxes) or more sustainable consumption behaviour?
He also noted that all the working sessions and many of the expert
presentations were convinced that making the difficult choices required
for implementing energy policy (consumers and policymakers) would be
greatly facilitated in an environment of greater knowledge. It was noted
that this forum provided an excellent opportunity of non-energy sector
citizens to have a much deeper understanding of:
- The necessity for sustainable energy policy;
- The difficult trade-offs involved in creating and implementing such
policy;
- The important role that each person has in the energy market (both
in terms of consumption patterns, and in providing the proper signals to
policy makers).
In conclusion, Mr. Hardy delineated the key recommendations of the
Hitachi Forum participants:
- Low carbon fuels and technologies should be introduced across all
the major consuming sectors;
- The potential of biomass, wind, solar, hydrogen have promise and
should be subsidised to encourage market penetration;
- In order to promote renewable energy, subsidies, feed-in tariffs and
green certificates should be preferred in order to enhance the take-off
of these energy technologies;
- Alternatives to oil are necessary, particularly in the road
transportation sector;
- Transportation challenge may require compulsory action-not only in
terms of fuel choice, but also for modal choice;
- Nuclear power is the preferred solution for providing electricity at
near zero CO2 emissions in the present and near-to mid- term;
- Nuclear waste is a perceived problem; industry should better
communicate the current ability to deal with it;
- Renewable technologies and sequestration technologies are advocated
as key to tackling climate change;
- Financial incentives should be provided for better penetration of
new energy and efficiency technologies into energy markets;
- tandards should be continuously improved, non technical barriers
like public acceptance of these technologies and reduced administrative
burdens should be implemented;
- Increased taxes to change fossil fuel consumption are not likely to
be politically acceptable;
- Regulations in combination with better information can be
successful;
- Consumer education and public dialogue are critical to creating
behavioural changes in energy consumption; and for creating an enabling
environment for difficult political decision-making.
|
Closing of the
Forum
Dr Michiharu Nakamura, Senior Vice President,
Hitachi Ltd. |
 |
Dr Nakamura congratulated the participants and the planners
for generating an interesting and successful dialogue on energy and its
implications for society. He noted that year after year this group has
addressed the relationship between science and society - and every year
the group learns that the more a country supports and finances R&D,
the more competitive that country becomes. In this respect, he implored
the European Commission to ensure that science and technology is given an
appropriate priority, enabling it to continue contributing to the
prosperity of the European Union.
He explained that the Forum is an
example of Hitachi's continued social responsibility and commitment to
activities which contribute toward a truly sustainable society. He
stressed that Hitachi believes in the power of dialogue and collective
thinking for advancing technology's contribution to society, and that it
is his hope that the participants' efforts reflected in the Forum summary
can contribute constructively to the policy debate in the EU.
In
closing, he announced that next year's Forum topic will be on
transportation issues, technologies and choices.
 |
|
