Mid- term evaluation of the Renewable Energy Directive A study in the context of the REFIT programme Prepared for: European Commission DG ENER Report Delft, April 2015 Main a uthors: Bettina Kampman (CE Delft) Stephan Sina, Christine Lucha (Ecologic Institute) Stephanie Cesbron (Ricardo-AEA) Zsuzsanna Pato (REKK) Ole Flörcken (E-Bridge) Co-authors : Anouk van Grinsven, Sebastiaan Hers, Marit van Lieshout (CE Delft) Andreas Prahl, Lena Donat (Ecologic Institute) Anna-Liisa Kaar, Oliver Edberg, Lisa Groves (Ricardo-AEA) Lajos Kerekes (REKK) Marzena Chodor, Diana Parusheva (associates) Publication Data Bibliographical data: CE Delft, Ecologic Institute, Ricardo-AEA, REKK, E-Bridge Mid-term evaluation of the Renewable Energy Directive A study in the context of the REFIT programme Delft, CE Delft, April 2015 Renewable energy / Policy / EU directive / Regulation / Measures / Evaluation Publication code: 15.3D59.28 CE publications are available from www.cedelft.eu Commissioned by: European Commission. Further information on this study can be obtained from the contact person, Bettina Kampman. © copyright, CE Delft, Delft CE Delft Committed to the Environment Through its independent research and consultancy work CE Delft is helping build a sustainable world. In the fields of energy, transport and resources our expertise is leading-edge. With our wealth of know-how on technologies, policies and economic issues we support government agencies, NGOs and industries in pursuit of structural change. For 35 years now, the skills and enthusiasm of CE Delft’s staff have been devoted to achieving this mission. 2 April 2015 3.D59.1 - Mid-term evaluation of the Renewable Energy Directive Contents Summary 5 1 Introduction 11 1.1 This report 11 1.2 Main objectives of this study 11 1.3 The RED’s intervention logic 13 1.4 Main evaluation framework 15 1.5 Structure of this report 17 2 Summary of the article assessments 19 2.1 Introduction 19 2.2 Article 3: Targets and measures 19 2.3 Article 4: National Renewable Energy Action Plans 21 2.4 Articles 6-12: Cooperation mechanisms 22 2.5 Article 13: Administrative procedures, RES in buildings, heating 23 2.6 Article 14: Information, certification, training 25 2.7 Article 15: Guarantees of origin 26 2.8 Article 16: Grid access and operation 29 2.9 Article 17-19 and 21(b): RES in transport, biofuels and bioliquids sustainability 31 2.10 Article 22 and 23: Reporting 34 3 Summary of the country case studies 37 3.1 Introduction 37 3.2 Bulgaria 38 3.3 Estonia 39 3.4 Germany 40 3.5 Poland 41 3.6 Spain 44 3.7 Sweden 45 4 Synthesis 49 4.1 Introduction 49 4.2 The regulatory fitness of the RED provisions 51 4.3 Best practices 60 4.4 Key issues: could they be resolved by EU-intervention? 62 5 Conclusions and recommendations 71 5.1 Conclusions 71 5.2 Recommendations 75 Annex A The RED’s intervention logic 79 Annex B Main evaluation framework 83 3 April 2015 3.D59.1 - Mid-term evaluation of the Renewable Energy Directive Annex C Article assessments 89 C.1 Article 3: Targets and measures 89 C.2 Article 4: National Renewable Energy Action Plans 100 C.3 Articles 6-12: Cooperation mechanism 107 C.4 Article 13: Administrative procedures, RES in buildings, heating 115 C.5 Article 14: Information, certification, training 129 C.6 Article 15: Guarantees of origin 138 C.7 Article 16: Grid access and operation 154 C.8 Article 17-19, 21: RES in transport, biofuels and bioliquids sustainability) 165 C.9 Article 22 and 23: Reporting 179 Annex D Overview of administrative procedures across EU Member States 187 Annex E Country report: Bulgaria 189 E.1 General framework 189 E.2 Assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and value added of the RED 190 E.3 Sources and interviews 204 Annex F Country report: Estonia 207 F.1 General framework 207 F.2 Assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and value added of the RED 208 F.3 Sources and interviews 224 Annex G Country report: Germany 227 G.1 General framework 227 G.2 Assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and added value of the RED 230 G.3 Sources and interviews 245 Annex H Country report: Poland 249 H.1 General framework 249 H.2 Assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and value added of the RED 251 H.3 Sources and interviews 268 Annex I Country report: Spain 275 I.1 General framework 275 I.2 Assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and value added of the RED 277 I.3 Sources and interviews 284 Annex J Country report: Sweden 287 J.1 General framework 287 J.2 Assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and value added of the RED 288 J.3 Sources and interviews 301 4 April 2015 3.D59.1 - Mid-term evaluation of the Renewable Energy Directive Summary Introduction This mid-term evaluation of the Renewable Energy Directive1 (RED) aims to assess the effectiveness and efficiency so far of measures and actions laid down in the Directive. The RED came into force at the end of 2009, and set binding national renewable energy targets and a mandatory target for renewable energy use in transport for 2020, among a range of other provisions. The study also assesses the impact of the RED requirements for administrations and businesses (the administrative burden) at Member State (MS) level, in line with the requirements of the regulatory fitness programme (REFIT) of the European Commission. This project was commissioned by DG Energy, and carried out by a consortium of CE Delft, Ricardo-AEA, Ecologic Institute, E-Bridge and REKK. Study objectives The main objective of this study is to provide a mid-term evaluation of the RED. The evaluation assesses relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and added value of the RED as a whole and of the various provisions laid down in the Directive, in view of achieving the desired outcomes. This evaluation furthermore aims to understand a number of core issues related to the various provisions of the RED: best practices: what provisions are most effective and efficient, and what can we learn from this; implementation and enforcement challenges and failures; administrative burden on public authorities and economic operators; impacts and effects, both financial and non-financial; key bottlenecks and barriers to achieving the directive’s provisions in an effective and efficient way; solutions that might resolve any of the issues and improve the provisions. Methodology The study started by clarifying the RED’s intervention logic. For each of the RED’s provisions, the rationale, objectives, expected outcomes and impacts were identified. These were used as a basis for the evaluation framework, which detailed the questions that were to be addressed in this study, regarding both the individual provisions and the RED as a whole. With this framework in place, article assessment reports were drafted. For each topical group of RED provisions, a mid-term evaluation was carried out, based on available literature and data and some stakeholder interviews. These reports resulted in an EU-wide assessment of effectiveness, efficiency and added value of each topical group of RED provisions. Six country case studies were carried out to gather more detailed information and stakeholder views on the effectiveness, efficiency and added value of the RED as well as recommendations to improve the RED. Case studies were carried out for Bulgaria, Estonia, Germany, Poland, Spain and Sweden, 1 Directive 2009/28/EC. 5 April 2015 3.D59.1 - Mid-term evaluation of the Renewable Energy Directive selected to ensure a broad range of political opinions and geographical regions. The results from both the article assessments and the country case studies were then combined into a comprehensive overview of findings. The regulatory fitness of the RED was assessed, best practices and key issues were identified and potential EU level actions and policy options were compiled that might resolve these issues. As a final step of this mid-term evaluation, conclusions were drawn and recommendations were derived regarding the regulatory fitness of the RED, both for the directive as a whole and for the various (groups of) provisions. Key issues and best practices For each of the RED articles analysed, a number of positive effects towards the objectives of the RED were identified, as well as any key issues and barriers to reach their full potential. A summarized overview of these findings is provided below, per article or article group of the RED. Article 3: Targets and measures Positive contributions Key issues and barriers Mandatory targets backed by indicative 10% target for transport is still controversial, interim targets seem to be effective, especially due to environmental concerns. especially in MS with low renewable energy Efficiency benefits are mainly related to the sources (RES) shares and investments. overall RES-target, the transport target is They have also enhanced investor security affected by uncertainty about the EU level and contributed to drive RES technology cost indirect land use change (ILUC) decision and down. The indicative interim targets is expected to have limited innovation contribute to ensure that measures to benefits. achieve the national targets are introduced Progress monitoring towards targets and timely, and allow a continuing assessment timely intervention are hampered by whether MS are on track. non-linear growth paths of many MS. Article 4: National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAPs) Positive contributions Key issues and barriers EU-wide transparency of plans and policy NREAPs become outdated over time. measures has significantly improved, administrative burden seems reasonable. Indicative trajectories enable progress monitoring. Articles 6 to 12: Cooperation mechanisms Positive contributions Key issues and barriers Potential benefits may be significant on EU Very limited use and effects so far.