129 / 154
ENTSOG TYNDP 2017 Public consultation questionnaire
Q20:
ENTSOG developed four demand scenarios:
three were designed as differentiated paths towards
achieving the EU 2030 energy and climate targets (Blue
Transition, Green Evolution, EU Green Revolution),
and one as failing to achieve these targets (Slow
Progression). These differentiated paths are intended
to provide the future frame under which to assess the
gas infrastructure. Would you consider this provides a
comprehensive view on the future role of gas?
No,
Explanation :
The scenarios fail to capture the downside risks
associated with a low gas demand scenario. In
particular, none of the scenarios fully meet the newly
proposed 30% EU binding energy efficiency target
for 2030, and are thus not in line with the current
European policy context. No scenario helps
assessing the impact of going beyond the 2030
objectives agreed in 2014, and thus fails to assess
the implications of complying with the EU
commitment to the Paris agreement.
Q21:
TYNDP indicates how scenarios comply with the
EU 2030 energy and climate targets. Do you see that as
an important element of TYNDP?
Yes,
Explanation :
ENTSO-G – thanks to its membership and access to
information - is in a unique position to highlight the
potential impact of climate and clean energy policies
on the business models of its members and to key
investors in the gas sector. Yet, the choice of the
scenarios fails to capture the full range of upside and
downside risks for investors in terms of future gas
demand, and does not send the right signals to
ensure a competitive EU energy sector. For
example, there is not one single scenario adequately
reflecting the EU's long term climate targets
equivalent to reaching a zero carbon energy sector
by 2050. None of the ENTSO-G scenarios for 2030
is in line with a 2 degree compatible pathway
(ranging from being 4%-28% above IEA projections
under the 450ppm scenario). For some of them,
meeting the target over a longer time frame is
implausible. In order to be in line with a pathway to
maintain the “well below 2 degree” goal as per the
EU’s international commitment, the Blue Transition
pathway would require the EU to reduce its gas use
by 39% in just 10 years (Comparing Blue Transition
2030 to the IEA450pmm scenario for 2040). This
risks leading to stranded assets and to EU funds or
governments wasting taxpayers’ money through
regulated tariffs, tax breaks or public grants. In its
recent update on the State of the Energy Union, the
Commission has highlighted this as an area of
concern, by saying: "In view of scarce resources in
the Member States [...] Support should only be given
if in line with the long-term energy policy of the
European Union, avoiding stranded assets and
carbon lock-in."