Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Europe Author Georg Zachmann

1. Upgrading Europe's electricity grid is about more than just money

Author:
Conall Heussaff and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Electricity network investment is essential for the energy transition, with annual investments of tens of billions of euros required across Europe. Network companies are already investing such amounts and delivering efficient grid investments requires more than additional money. Assessing infrastructure needs is the first step in grid investment. At local, national and European Union levels, network development planning is determined by policy choices and can greatly affect the efficiency of investments. Coordinated grid planning is crucial to set the right incentives for the efficient development of the European electricity system. An EU independent system operator could assume responsibility for network planning by providing regular, independent assessment of efficient network investment needs from a holistic European perspective. Although significant capital expenditure is undoubtedly necessary, network regulation should encourage network companies to invest in the most-efficient solutions. Current regulatory approaches may favour traditional capital expenditure, leading to system inefficiencies and higher-than-necessary consumer costs. Cross-border electricity transmission infrastructure is critical to integrate renewables into the electricity system at scale and reduce costs for European consumers. But such projects are often not built or are delayed because those that decide on and pay for the infrastructure are not necessarily those that benefit from it. A European fund could smooth negotiations between parties and accelerate the physical interconnection of the European electricity system. Fairly recovering the costs of grid investments from consumers is vital to maintain public support for the energy transition. National funds could smooth out cost impacts over time, keeping electricity affordable throughout the energy transition.
Topic:
Climate Change, Electricity, Decarbonization, and Energy Security
Political Geography:
Europe

2. Europe’s energy information problem

Author:
Ben McWilliams, Simone Tagliapietra, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Comprehensive information on energy-related topics, such as take-up of heat pumps, industrial natural gas consumption and prices, and battery connections to the electricity grid, is either not available in Europe in a timely manner, or not available at the level of granularity, reliability and consistency needed for informed decision-making. Certain information is simply not collected, while other information is collected but is not comparable or consistent across Europe, or is hard to access. European policy targets, such as greenhouse-gas emission reduction pathways, are evaluated using models for which input assumptions and parameters are not public knowledge. It should be a European Union priority to improve this situation. Doing so will enable better decision-making by policymakers and companies. This is especially relevant when Europe faces the triple challenge of decarbonisation, ensuring security of energy supply and growing its internationally competitive energy-consuming industries. The EU status quo is that good energy information is provided by a mix of institutions, agencies, national bodies, industrial associations and non-governmental organisations, but with substantial room for improvement. Lessons can be learned from the United States Energy Information Administration and the European Environment Agency, which was established to better coordinate climate data. Improving energy information will involve difficult political decisions. A process should be started to evaluate the options and to measure the continued cost of inaction.
Topic:
Climate Change, European Union, Institutions, Green Deal, and Energy
Political Geography:
Europe

3. Making the best of the new EU Social Climate Fund

Author:
Eva Jüngling, Giovanni Sgaravatti, Simone Tagliapietra, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
04-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The slow pace of decarbonisation of buildings and transportation threatens the European Union’s goal of reducing emissions by 55 percent by 2030 and achieving net zero by 2050. To address this, a new emissions trading system, ETS2, is being introduced to put a carbon price on fuels used in buildings and road transport. However, the resulting cost increases risk a disproportionate impact on vulnerable households and small and medium sized enterprises. The European Union has created the Social Climate Fund (SCF) to address these distributional challenges. This instrument redistributes a portion of auction revenues generated by the ETS2 among EU countries, in order to protect the most vulnerable. A much larger share of ETS2 revenues will flow directly to national governments, offering significant opportunities for social measures and investments in the green transition. The use of those revenues will dictate how successful EU countries are in managing the transition and protecting households, particularly in higher-income member states, which will receive relatively smaller shares of SCF funding. ETS2 is an essential part of the EU climate policy toolkit. Governments should employ good practices, as identified by the European Commission, to tackle emissions from buildings and transport and to gradually phase out income support, in line with the achievement of investment targets and milestones. Higher-income EU countries should develop additional targeted financing levers to protect the vulnerable and to introduce extra enablers to encourage private investment. Proper sequencing, outreach and communication will be essential to ensure the uptake of measures and public support for policy instruments. Cross-country learning should be leveraged, including through the creation of a European policy registry that will help countries compare their approaches and potentially amend their SCF spending plans on the basis of learning from policies that been successful elsewhere.
Topic:
Climate Change, European Union, Welfare, Transportation, Carbon Emissions, Decarbonization, and Protection
Political Geography:
Europe

4. Who should be charged? Principles for fair allocation of electricity system costs

Author:
Conall Heussaff, Eva Jüngling, Simone Tagliapietra, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
04-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The high costs in the European Union of supplying electricity can only be structurally reduced through decarbonisation and deeper European electricity system integration. In the short-term, policymakers have few choices. They can redistribute system costs by shifting components from one consumer to another. Another immediate distributional option would be to reduce energy taxation, implicitly shifting costs to the taxpayer. Meanwhile, decision-making processes that translates electricity system costs into final consumer prices are fragmented. Rules on the short-term production, transmission and consumption of electricity are determined at EU level. National regulators and governments determine how the fixed costs of the system are recovered from consumers, while national policymakers also set energy taxes. This Policy Brief sets out options for shifting the fixed costs of the electricity system between consumers, for changing energy taxation to reduce prices and for evaluating systemic trade-offs between system cost and other characteristics, such as sustainability and reliability. We also estimate the quantitative effects of shifting costs between consumers and reducing taxes on electricity. We set out four principles for pricing electricity fairly. Policy interventions in the electricity system should not seek to achieve broader economic objectives at the expense of energy-policy goals. Consumer prices should incentivise efficient system operation. Carbon emissions should be priced in. The fixed costs of the electricity system should be primarily recovered from inelastic consumption. European policymakers should develop transparent analytical tools to assess the distributional effects of electricity-policy interventions. Lessons should be learned from the energy crisis, during which EU and national policies attempted to shield consumers from price impacts, and these lessons should form the basis of ongoing efforts to reduce prices. EU guidelines for electricity cost recovery should be established, following fundamental economic principles, and could form a policy toolbox for national governments to reduce energy prices. Finally, the long-term strategic goal of deeper physical and institutional integration of the European electricity should be pursued to structurally reduce electricity prices.
Topic:
Climate Change, European Union, Electricity, and Energy
Political Geography:
Europe

5. The changing dynamics of European electricity markets and the supply-demand mismatch risk

Author:
Conall Heussaff and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Meeting Europe’s 2030 climate targets will require massive clean-electricity investment. To facilitate these investments, state-backed de-risking schemes such as contracts for difference (CfDs) are needed. Their role in supporting renewables has been consolidated by the European Union’s recently agreed electricity market design reform. Under such state-backed schemes, the distribution of costs between the market and the state will depend on the balance of supply and demand. Lower demand will decrease spot-market prices, reducing market costs but increasing the cost to CfD-issuing states. If electrification of European energy demand does not keep pace with the electricity supply expansion, tens of billions of euros annually could be channelled through state contracts, generating costs that must ultimately be recovered from consumers. A cost-efficient, managed transition will require European coordination of electricity supply, demand and network investments. Clean electricity supply and demand should be synchronised through a combination of state interventions and market mechanisms. Undersupply of clean power will mean a failure to meet climate targets, but oversupply can be costly too. To manage the costs of renewable de-risking schemes and to accelerate energy-system decarbonisation, flexible electricity systems should be promoted, policies to encourage electrification could be implemented and cost-recovery arising from state-backed renewable support schemes should be fair.
Topic:
Climate Change, Markets, Electricity, Energy, and Supply and Demand
Political Geography:
Europe

6. Ukraine’s path to European Union membership and its long-term implications

Author:
Zsolt Darvas, Marek Dabrowski, Heather Grabbe, Luca Léry, André Sapir, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Whether and when Ukraine accedes to the European Union will depend greatly on how and when its war with Russia ends and post-war reconstruction starts, and how the EU handles issues of governance, security, migration, trade, investment, the energy transition, decarbonisation and the EU budget. The enlargement process is likely to overlap with post-war reconstruction, increasing the EU's influence in fostering Ukraine’s institutional development. Ukrainian leaders will have strong incentives to comply with the accession criteria, which the EU should use astutely to create a better-functioning economy and public institutions, especially by reducing opportunities for corruption. This will require clearer standards for rule-of-law and fundamental values, including effective tools to ensure continued compliance after accession. That is also the most effective way to ensure a positive impact of future enlargements on EU governance. The EU will also need to develop assistance programmes to help the Ukrainian government manage post-war external and internal security challenges, including the large number of weapons in circulation, and to encourage Ukrainian refugees to return to the country when possible, as they will be needed for the reconstruction effort. If the current EU budget rules were applied and there were no transitional arrangements – which is unlikely – we calculate the total annual cost of Ukraine's integration into the EU budget at 0.13 per cent of EU GDP, which would hardly change net recipient/payer positions of current EU members. Some of this funding would come back to the EU via EU companies participating in EU-funded projects in Ukraine. Ukraine’s entry into the EU would benefit EU GDP via trade, migration and foreign direct investment, boosting employment, production and tax revenues in the EU. The history of EU enlargement shows that the strongest motivation for difficult reforms is a credible and predictable accession process based on rewarding reforms. Both Ukraine and the EU would benefit from progressive integration of the country into EU policies, alongside the formal accession negotiations. That would show the Ukrainian public the tangible benefits of moving towards EU standards, while also bringing Ukraine into areas such as energy cooperation and decarbonisation.
Topic:
European Union, Regional Integration, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

7. Unity in power, power in unity: why the EU needs more integrated electricity markets

Author:
Georg Zachmann, Carlos Batlle, Francois Beaude, and Christoph Maurer
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The energy crisis that started in 2022 reminded European governments of the resilience provided by relatively well-integrated European electricity markets, which have been painstakingly built-up over several decades. European Union leaders thus decided to reverse a creeping energy renationalisation and to invest in completing the internal market. However, there are some indications that this momentum is being lost, with different EU capitals taking different lessons from the energy crisis, at a time of unprecedented investment needs in generation and grids across the EU. The multiple benefits of enhanced EU energy-market integration should be emphasised. ‘Techno-economic’ benefits can be secured from optimising the design and operation of several national electricity systems jointly, rather than individually. These benefits will increase massively with higher shares of renewables and include less fossil-fuel burn and less volatile short-term prices, cost savings through harnessing regional renewables advantages, reduced need for expensive back-up capacity and flexibility, and enhanced resilience to shocks. In addition, greater energy-market integration will trigger benefits of a more managerial-governance related nature, though these are harder to quantify. They include benefits in terms of competition, innovation and credibility, which are particularly useful in the electricity sector, which typically faces rather long investment times and high degrees of concentration in purely national markets. Further market integration requires substantial political investment. Governments will need to deal with significant distributional effects within and between countries. Experience has shown that domestic political constraints in this respect are often numerous and difficult to overcome. Therefore, achieving the benefits of integration will require a vision on what degree of integration is feasible and desirable, and how to properly implement and govern it. It will also require an honest acknowledgement of the implications and costs of not pursuing greater integration.
Topic:
Markets, European Union, Regional Integration, Electricity, and Energy Crisis
Political Geography:
Europe

8. Europe’s under-the-radar industrial policy: intervention in electricity pricing

Author:
Ben McWilliams, Giovanni Sgaravatti, Simone Tagliapietra, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The different ways in which European Union member-state governments add levies to the price of electricity creates huge discrepancies in the prices paid by consumers. Europe’s energy transition depends upon increasing electrification of the economy and increasing the share of that electricity produced by renewable sources. Both factors raise the importance of electricity taxes set by governments. The energy crisis drew attention to this: as electricity prices soared, governments responded with billions of euros in subsidies to protect households and companies. While the acute phase of the energy crisis has passed, growing concerns about industrial competitiveness create political pressure for governments to continue with such subsidies or tax exemptions. High profile examples include the French reform of nuclear-power generated electricity pricing, and a political debate in Germany over how aggressively to subsidise the electricity price paid by energy-intensive firms. We frame the debate on intervention in electricity pricing around five distributional dilemmas concerning the recuperation of electricity expenses: 1) whether to raise general or electricity taxes, 2) the split between household and companies, 3) the split between energy-intensive and non-energy intensive companies, 4) cross-border effects, and 5) trade-offs in attracting new clean-technology manufacturing factories. Priorities according to these distributional criteria will differ by country, but these factors should be central to discussions. Governments must recognise that efforts to lower prices artificially for one group of consumers will raise prices for others, including with cross-border implications. The current compromises in the French and German cases do not pose substantial issues to the integrity of the European single market and do not penalise non-energy-intensive domestic consumers excessively.
Topic:
Industrial Policy, European Union, Electricity, Price, and Energy Crisis
Political Geography:
Europe

9. The EU can manage without Russian liquified natural gas

Author:
Ben McWilliams, Giovanni Sgaravatti, Simone Tagliapietra, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The European Union has committed to eliminate all Russian fossil-fuel imports by 2027. Progress has been made, with sanctions on oil and coal already introduced. The glaring exception is natural gas, on which the EU has so far refrained from imposing limitations, owing to greater dependence on Russia. Nevertheless, pipeline gas imports have fallen by four-fifths following Russia’s weaponisation of gas supplies. However, Russia’s exports of liquified natural gas (LNG) to the EU have increased since the invasion of Ukraine. The EU needs a coherent strategy for these LNG imports. Our analysis shows that the EU can manage without Russian LNG. Anticipated impacts are not comparable to those felt in 2022 as Russian pipeline gas dried up. The regional impact would be most significant for the Iberian Peninsula, which has the highest share of Russian LNG in total gas supply. Meanwhile, the global LNG market is tight, and we anticipate that Russia would find new buyers for cargos that no longer enter Europe. We discuss the options available to the EU. Wait-and-see implies delaying any action until 2027, while soft sanctions would discourage additional purchases but not break long-term contracts. We argue instead for an EU embargo on Russian LNG, to reduce exposure to an unreliable and adversarial entity, and to limit the extent to which EU consumers fund the Russian state. The embargo may be designed to allow purchases only if they are coordinated via the EU’s Energy Platform, with limited volumes and below market prices. This could be accompanied by the implementation of a price cap on Russian LNG cargos that use EU or G7 trans-shipment, insurance or shipping services.
Topic:
European Union, Gas, Energy, and Green Economy
Political Geography:
Russia and Europe

10. Adjusting to the energy shock: the right policies for European industry

Author:
Giovanni Sgaravatti, Simone Tagliapietra, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
05-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
In 2022, overall European Union industrial employment and output increased above 2021 levels, despite rocketing energy prices. However, output declined from energy-intensive industries including basic metals, chemicals, non-metallic minerals and paper, for which energy costs represent a much bigger share of production costs than for less energy-intensive manufacturing. Energy prices are likely to remain above historic levels for the foreseeable future. In its industrial strategy response to this context, the EU must ask first whether the energy-intensive parts of the value chain should be outsourced permanently. Conditional on the answer being no, the second question is how to reduce energy prices to ensure the competitiveness of the energy-intensive productions stages that remain in the EU. First, the EU could bridge the high energy price period with unconditional subsidies, which seems to be the preferred strategy currently. This will avoid irreversible large-scale relocation abroad but is expensive, does not help to drive down energy prices and poses risks of fragmentation within the EU. It will only succeed if internationally competitive energy supplies are made available quickly. Second, the EU could support decarbonised production processes built on large-scale deployment of domestic renewables, grid interconnectors and storage. This would accelerate the green transition and reduce clean-tech prices worldwide. However, EU taxpayers would bear the cost of new technologies, without any guarantee of solving the current cost-competitiveness issue. Third, the EU could facilitate imports of energy-intensive products, while helping EU industry move to higher value-added parts of the value chain. Subsidies could be given directly to industrial sectors that have not become structurally uncompetitive, while bringing down energy demand and thus energy prices. However, this strategy would result in temporarily higher unemployment and factory closures in energy-intensive industries, would need to accommodate concerns over excessive reliance on imports and would need to be engineered to address carbon leakage. Policymakers should implement a mix of these policies. The EU should subsidise existing energy-intensive industries only in clearly justified cases, while deciding which energy-intensive products can be left to international market forces. By choosing which decarbonisation investments should be supported in Europe, the EU can combine industrial competitiveness and environmental sustainability.
Topic:
Industrial Policy, European Union, Value Chains, Energy, and Green Economy
Political Geography:
Europe