Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

EU to Fall Just Short of 2010 Renewable Target

By Jane Burgermeister, Contributing Writer
August 31, 2007   |   11 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
"Setting EU wide targets is a good policy instrument for increasing renewable energy use, but the negotiations on which country has to meet which specific target are bound to be difficult this autumn, and it is only when each country has clear targets that the progress can really be measured."

-- Stephanie Schlegel,Institute for International & European Environmental Policy
11 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 11
August 31, 2007
<p>They sure have different values over there. It is amazing. The Europeans cann't figure out why other econimies are booming while their long term economic growth is sluggish.&nbsp; Yet, they still insisted on over paying 2x, 3x, even 8x the market rate for electrical power.</p><p>In contrast the truly powerful and growing economies are powered by cheap coal and oil USA (4% unemployment 1/3 of many European Counties for the past decade) and&nbsp; CHINA, which is still cheaper in most cases than alternatie energies. (Excluding WIND) I am sure the European's value high unemployment with slim ecomonic growth which helps subsidies that great alternative energy program (I know, some of them create welfare jobs but it over pays the people and is in effective)</p><p>Because the USA and China are late comers to the alternative energy movement, We are getting the alternative energy products cheaper and most cost effectively than the Europeans. In reality, every $ the Europeans spend on research and deployment of Alternative Energy, is actually a subsidy to the USA, China, and the rest of the World because it drops the cost of future products.&nbsp;</p><p>I appriciate the subsidies. I do deserve them, since the gas bill for my SUVs are so large. I just wished our gov't would sit back and take advantage of this gift. When I read that the lab at so-and-so has created solar cells that will be cost effective and will be on the market in 2 years, we should just cancel all solar projects for 2 years and save the money. Common Sense.&nbsp;</p>
Comment
2 of 11
August 31, 2007
<p>Absolutely incredible. The EU has been leading the way to a sustainable future. The population in those countries has a differnet value set then other areas of the globe. The EU is creating a stable economy based upon energy efficiency first and renewable resources secondarily and they will see great benefits from there efforts (if they already haven't?) in the future. Good job EU may we here in the United States adopt the same values set that you have.</p><p>&nbsp;jb</p><p><a href="http://www.nrgmanager.com/" target="_blank">www.nrgmanager.com</a></p>
Comment
3 of 11
September 5, 2007
My...my.&nbsp; We're sure getting caustic and taking a lot of pot shots at each other these days!&nbsp; Any chance of focusing on some innovative ideas and encouraging each other, perhaps, instead of trying to prove one another are dolts who don't either&nbsp;possess the truth about renewables development, or that we clearly perceive and understand the terrible (or beautiful) effect of renewables development on the various national economies and lifestyles of the world ?
Comment
4 of 11
September 5, 2007
Yeah Jim.&nbsp; I sure do envy those Chinese.&nbsp; Literally tens of millions of them are dying premature deaths due to environmental pollution each year.&nbsp; That sure is the way to prosperity!
Comment
5 of 11
September 5, 2007
<p>I'm living in Granada, Spain for two years, after moving here from New Mexico. I have to say that people in the US have some strange ideas about &quot;progress&quot; and &quot;living standards&quot;. Everyone here has good health care, not like in the US where about half of my friends either have no health insurance, or &quot;catastrophic&quot; insurance which costs $500 a month, with a $3000 deductable. People don't seem to be so driven to succeed, instead, the idea is to enjoy life.&nbsp;Our living costs are probably 2/3 that of the US, we don't need a car for example, since the bus comes every 10 minutes or so, right to the heart of downtown. The latest in CSP (the Andasol 100MW CSP with 7hours thermal storage) is being built right outside the city. Almost everyone takes August off, completely. Excellent tapas (little tasty foods) are free with your $2.00 beer, so a night out for a family of four&nbsp;including a plate of&nbsp;french fries for the boys is about 10 Euros. By the way, if the European economy is so pitiful, why is the Euro worth $1.35, when a few years ago it was $.85? I won't even mention the slim, beautiful women!</p>
Comment
6 of 11
September 5, 2007
<p>Some comments&nbsp; from an European:</p><p>It is of course very simplistic to assign a single reason - in this case Energy - to economic differences - GDP, unemployment, etc. - between states or blocks of states. Also as a researcher in Prospective I have learn to consider the mentioned issue of different 'sets of values' as indeed a crucial one. And anyway current GDP growth, unemployement rate etc. are poor indicators of the &quot;well-being&quot; and long term success of a country. </p><p>So here are some non-Energy type factors for us to think about:</p>In spite of larger unemployment and lower GDP, surveys say than people from most EU countries are quite more happy with their lifes than US people (decadent people often are happier, eh eh eh).<p>This has partly to do with stronger social security support and public health systems - of course partly financed by huge taxes on energy, how else?</p><p>Anyway GDP growth is partly proportional to population growth - much larger in US than EU...</p><p>... and GDP growth could be much higher in EU if we had not so many boring &quot;EU Directives&quot; pushing and pushing and pushing for higher standards of all kinds - I suppose in US culture this can be viewed as unbearable interference of governments in people's lifes, but we are ok with that.</p><p>Not to forget that we take more vacations and work less than in US - we are ok with that too, eh eh eh!&nbsp;</p><p>Many more things could be said, but it's already a too long post,</p><p>Keep cool&nbsp;</p><p>Ricardo Aguiar (Lisbon, Portugal)</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
7 of 11
September 5, 2007
<p>Jim , thanks for your amazing insight that one should never invest in&nbsp; new technologies because all the benefits accrue to the latecomers.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>On behalf of the rest of the world may I publically thank the US for all their wasted investment in chip technology computers and operating systems that has made the rest of us so rich and the US so poor.</p><p>I hate to think of Bill Gates, Andy Goves, Michael Dell, Steve Jobs et al living in their cardboard boxes on Skid Row. </p>
Comment
8 of 11
September 5, 2007
<p>Jim, you really must get a grip on what you mean by growth. You are obviously using a definition which counts&nbsp; the unnecessary rebuilding of New Orleans&nbsp; ( every few years)&nbsp; as growth. Cleaning up the&nbsp; cyanide and heavy metal mine tailings in montana, and moving the odd city because the water supply&nbsp; has been polluted is growth. The additional healthcare costs and deaths due to strip mining and coal fired powerstations are growth. Presumably you are in favour of bulldozing the entire US and rebuilding it to create more growth.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>If you bother to look into the definitions of growth used in in the US and the EC for example you will find that once the more obvious distortions have been removed their growth is about the same, with europe being slightly ahead over the last decade.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Looking across the world in developed countries there is little evidence of a strong correlation between electricity prices and growth . As prices rise economies move from&nbsp; low added value industries based on energy and raw materials, to high added value ones based on smarts.</p><p>Johns comment is very germane. If you look at patents per person across economies, and across industries you will see that the US is dropping proportionately , Japan, Sweden, and Finland ( very high energy costs) are very high in the tables. China interestingly is rising fast and may well overtake the US in patents in a few years. It is also very aware of the pollution costs of their current energy strategy and struggling to find a renewable way forward as pollution costs consume increasing proportions of their &quot;growth&quot; </p>
Comment
9 of 11
September 5, 2007
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; direction: ltr; unicode-bidi: embed; text-align: left" dir="ltr" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">Solar Photo-Voltaic (PV) and other renewable energy technologies are gaining acceptance as a way of maintaining and improving living standards without harming the environment. In recent years the idea of introducing solar PV power into the electrical network has become quite popular. The size of the Grid-Connected (GC) plants varies from a few kW to MW. A grid connected PV system is able to supply power into the electrical distribution grid of a utility company. In this way there is diversity in potential as the power is generated from all the generators in parallel. The performance ratios of GC systems are in the range of 40 to 70 %. </font></p><p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; direction: ltr; unicode-bidi: embed; text-align: left" dir="ltr" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">GC systems, such as PV in Buildings, also have a significant potential, as has been proved in countries where a partnership has been established between government and industry (e.g. The Netherlands, Germany, Japan) to increase market sizes whilst at the same time bringing down costs. Existing players are increasing manufacturing capacity, and new companies are entering the market. The application of Building Integrated (BI) PV systems is particularly interesting because it demonstrates several advantages compared with conventional PV power plants. Moreover, on-site generation has the additional efficiency benefit of avoiding the transmission and distribution losses associated with centralized generation. </font></p><font face="Times New Roman"><span style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 12pt">The long-term goal is to realize GC Solar System (GCSS) that produce electrical as well as thermal energy at sufficiently low cost. This means that the<span>&nbsp; </span>investment costs has to be lowered as much as possible. <span style="layout-grid-mode: line">This can only be achieved by careful design, proper realization, optimization, standardization and mass production. In addition to this, PV/T building elements should also be designed in such a way that they meet architectural requirements and technical standards and look attractive to consumers as well.</span> From this standpoint the recent study [1] was undertaken to include proposed GCSS targets the two dominating energy demands in residential buildings: low level energy for water heating and high level energy (electricity) to cover a significant fraction of the electricity demand</span><span style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 12pt">.</span><span style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 12pt"> </span><span style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 12pt"></span></font><span style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 12pt"><font face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></span><span style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 12pt"><font face="Times New Roman">[1] Hussain Alrobaei, 2007 , <u>The Effectiveness of Combined Heat and Power Solar Water Heating Systems</u>/ environmental-expert.com/resultarticlept.asp.<span>&nbsp; </span></font></span><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">&nbsp;</font><span><font face="Times New Roman" size="3">&nbsp;</font></span>
Comment
10 of 11
September 7, 2007
The US as a whole may be behind Europe and Japan when it comes to renewable energy but there is a lot more activity&nbsp;here then&nbsp;most people think.&nbsp; For example California has a loading order which dictates that demand reduction and energy efficiency be the first priority.&nbsp;&nbsp;Behind&nbsp;demand reduction comes renewable energy.&nbsp; To encourge renewable energy we have a RPS and a $700 million dollar ten year solar energy rebate program with the goal of 3000mw of installed PV and a leadership position in renewables.&nbsp; The US put a man on the moon with computers as powerful as my watch.&nbsp; We can shift away from a carbon based economy and join the EU and Japan as they move into the era of renewable energy.
Comment
11 of 11
September 12, 2007
I think the photo on the article is amusing.&nbsp; It's fits the title. &quot;... to Fall Short..&quot;&nbsp; A bunch of windmills sitting in dead calm air.&nbsp; Think that's hurting the bottom line a little?
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

Brightergy Admirals Bank Advanced Energy Industries, Inc. Growth Energy 350 Media UnThink Solar Prudent Living, Inc.
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters