1 / 14

First Vijverberg Session

First Vijverberg Session. Netherlands Chapter. Two sides of the same coin? Securing European energy supplies with internal and external policies Christian Egenhofer & Arno Behrens Centre for European Policy Studies ( CEPS) Brussels. The Hague, 20 May 2008.

elmer
Download Presentation

First Vijverberg Session

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. First Vijverberg Session Netherlands Chapter Two sides of the same coin? Securing European energy supplies with internal and external policies Christian Egenhofer & Arno Behrens Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) Brussels The Hague, 20 May 2008

  2. A European external energy policy to address energy security and other energy challenges? • Necessity/possibility? • Preconditions • EU policy options • 10 questions … to provoke discussion

  3. Content • Introduction • Current external energy policy • Energy chapter in Lisbon treaty • Limitations of coordination • What concept of security of supply? • The role of the internal energy market • Russia • One voice • Preconditions and options for a common external energy policy • 10 questions

  4. State of EU external energy policy (II) • Energy security is now part of EU foreign policy as it was not a few years ago • Does not go beyond the familiar notion of ”Europeanisation” (projecting the EU’s values externally)  concept of a ”European security of supply policy” is missing • EU stuck in coordination, partnerships ... ?

  5. Does Lisbon Treaty make the difference? (III) • New energy chapter is overdue – fuel mix subject to unanimity (what does this mean?) • Open questions: solidarity mechanism will need to be fleshed out, ”moral hazard”, who pays? • Stronger Commission role in ”disciplining” member states ?

  6. Better coo-ordination (IV) • European Council sticks to traditional EU role of coordination • But signs of change become visible (Network of energy correspondents ...) • Role of periodic ”Strategic Energy Review”?

  7. What is security of supply ? (V) • With market liberalisation (”globalisation) government role has changed • Are governments responsible for securing energy supply at affordable prices – or should they set a framework to minimise risks?  “Securisation” or not? • Disagreement still ongoing? Poland? Other member states?

  8. The role of the internal market ? (VI) • Member states disagree on exact features masking disagreement on the role of markets • Economic rents are at stake • Moral hazard issues • Does more integration do away with gas security issues?

  9. Russia (VII) • Russia’s dominant role and the failure to bind Russia into a partnership • Only Russia to blame? • Bilateral gas supply deals make a lot of sense • EU preaches interdependence but reacts in a neurotic way … • The role of markets • Mandil’s prescription – mix of internal and external policies

  10. Speaking with one voice (VIII) • Speaking with one as the mantra … but what can Europe say if there is no agreement? Ask Mr Solana … • If Europe agrees, it can act – trade, climate change • “Mr/Ms Energy” risks duplication of structures, bureaucracy, infighting • Lisbon Treaty will help but will take time • Is there a way around EU consensus-building ?

  11. Preconditions and options (IX) • EU will need to develop a regulatory framework (including market design) that reflects security of supply considerations • Financing issues are on agenda (“security of supply does not come for free”) • Need for common understanding of security of supply  government intervention (securisation?) or framework?

  12. Preconditions and options (IX)(Cont’d) 4. In transition to true internal market, need for a stronger Commission (watchdog) role 5. If EU is serious about “interdependence” , need to develop the concept 6. Impacts of EU and global climate change policy on Russia will need to be recognised • No way to get around EU consensus-building if the EU is to speak with one voice understood and EU will need to develop a regulatory framework

  13. 10 questions (X) • What is a EU security of supply concept? • What shape of an emergency strategy? • What are regulatory conditions for an internal energy market that addresses security of supply? • Will member states accept a stronger Commission role? • What does interdependence mean? • How to finance EU solidarity measures? • Does Europe need a European Grid Operator and/or a European Regulator? • To what extent can markets address the Russia question? • How to recognise the impacts of global climate change policy on Russia’s interests? • Will member states live up to ambitions of the climate/energy package?

  14. CENTRE FOREUROPEANPOLICYSTUDIES christian.egenhofer@ceps.eu arno.behrens@ceps.eu Place du Congrès 1 B-1000 Brussels T: +32 2 229 3911 F: +32 2 219 4151 www.ceps.eu

More Related