Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review最新文献

{"title":"The applicability of the Polluter Pays Principle in the field of nuclear energy in the EU","authors":"L. Veuchelen","doi":"10.4337/relp.2023.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/relp.2023.0004","url":null,"abstract":"This article will examine whether the Polluter Pays Principle is formulated and applied in EU versus nuclear (Euratom) law and what consequences such application could have for the EU Member Countries, e.g., when deciding on new nuclear projects or life time extension of nuclear installations.\u0000The ECJ had already clearly accepted the Polluter Pays Principle’s function of internalization of all environmental costs. It is crystal clear that EU Institutions are required to apply the PPP, together with the Precautionary and the Proportionality Principles. The application of the PPP in the nuclear field has been emphasized in an EU Commission Recommendation of 24 October 2006.\u0000On the other hand, with Council Directive 2011/70/EURATOM of 19 July 2011, a Community framework for the responsible and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste was launched. In its Article 5(1) the duty to establish and maintain a national framework was formulated, but no mention is made of the application of the PPP, not in this Directive nor in the national reports and the EU follow up reports. The terminology used therein, ‘adequate financial resources’, falls short of an unambiguous adherence to the Polluter Pays Principle. The PPP should hold that ALL costs for decommissioning, waste conditioning and final disposal should be carried by the polluter. A cap on the nuclear waste costs as decided in Belgium seems to be in full contradiction with the earlier decisions of the ECJ and with the EU Commission’s Recommendation of 2006. Furthermore, the EU General Environmental Principles are made applicable to the nuclear energy sector by the ECJ in the Hinkley Point C case. As argued in the present article, the Polluter Pays Principle will be a heavy burden to bring the EU legal acquis in line with all the uncertainties on the costs of closing the cycle of nuclear energy production. Accepting a ‘cap’ on the nuclear waste costs leaves a blank cheque for later generations, which is not only against the Polluter Pays Principle, but is also completely in contradiction with the EU Green Deal regarding fair competition in the field of energy production and limiting the effect of subsidies for costs which have to be borne by the nuclear waste producers.","PeriodicalId":438737,"journal":{"name":"Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127456153","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Marine spatial planning and offshore wind: preliminary principles for Australia","authors":"Madeline Taylor","doi":"10.4337/relp.2022.02-03.02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/relp.2022.02-03.02","url":null,"abstract":"Australia is endowed with some of the richest and most diverse renewable energy resources. Its offshore wind resources alone equate to an estimated 5,000 Gigawatts (GW) of electricity potential. Given these substantial estimates, offshore wind energy will likely represent a key pillar of Australia’s future renewable energy mix. Australia’s palpable offshore energy potential is increasingly understood and acknowledged. Yet, the critical legal and policy question remains of how its new regulatory framework to enable offshore wind development, the Offshore Electricity Infrastructure Act 2021 Act (Cth) (OEI Act), will interact with existing marine sectors and the marine environment. Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) may provide the missing process puzzle piece to enable more strategic coordination of the Australian offshore wind sector within the marine environment. This article adopts a socio-legal approach, examining and drawing upon international experiences to explore the potential adoption of MSP in the Australian offshore wind context. In so doing, the article argues for a coordinated approach to develop a federal MSP process to support and promote strategic offshore wind operations with existing sea users while preserving the Australian marine environment.","PeriodicalId":438737,"journal":{"name":"Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review","volume":"89 1-2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123431193","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Clean energy technologies: assessing advantages and risks","authors":"R. Leal-Arcas, Yael Nacht, Laure Madeleine, Javier Pelegri, Guy Mizrachi, Julia Siebenhirter","doi":"10.4337/relp.2022.02-03.01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/relp.2022.02-03.01","url":null,"abstract":"Our society increasingly depends on power and fuel in daily life. This reliance encourages legislators and regulators to place the ongoing energy supply at a relatively low and fixed price – what is often referred to as energy security – as one of their most crucial policy goals. Contemporary research has already established that energy diversification (i.e., adding renewables to non-renewable sources) is remarkably beneficial to this objective. The main reason for this is that the different origin of energy is affected by different uncertainties and thus may remain stable when the conventional courses fail. This article aims to provide arguments for energy sources diversification. It explains why policymakers should encourage the development of specific clean energy technologies. Moreover, it assesses the advantages and risks of such a decision, and explores the involvement of the public sector in renewable technologies.","PeriodicalId":438737,"journal":{"name":"Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134520031","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Steps forward in the implementation of the Green Deal","authors":"D. Fouquet, Yola Traum","doi":"10.4337/relp.2022.02-03.00","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/relp.2022.02-03.00","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":438737,"journal":{"name":"Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129798467","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The failure of Euratom to harmonize the EU nuclear safety and environmental regulation. Can a recent ECJ judgment become a breakthrough, beneficial for EU’s quest for a sustainable, renewable-driver future?","authors":"L. Veuchelen","doi":"10.4337/relp.2023.0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/relp.2023.0003","url":null,"abstract":"The Treaty Establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (known as the Euratom Treaty), which was signed on 25 March 1957, contained commitments to promote nuclear energy technology and to integrate financial and technical efforts to develop that technology in the six signatory countries, in order to enhance wealth creation and the wellbeing of their citizens. The 66 year history of the Euratom Treaty undoubtedly shows that it didn’t fulfil its promises and worse, it became completely obsolete in the light of the European integration efforts contained in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). This article examines its fundamental shortcomings, whereby national interests in nuclear energy were at the forefront and whereby the harmonization of Nuclear Safety Standards and the protection of the environment and the health of the EU citizens became secondary, when confronted with industrial interests and the promotion of nuclear technologies (promotion which still continues for an industrial nuclear sector which is fully mature). This provoked a painful discord between nuclear counties and non-nuclear EU Member States, still the Achilles’ heel of Euratom as can be concluded from the discussion regarding nuclear energy as part of the EU Green Taxonomy. Euratom can be seen as the flagship of the pro-nuclear countries, albeit that the content of the Treaty is obsolete, as will be explained below from a legal angle. Because the EU Commission is the executive body of the Euratom Community, it is to blame for the failure to harmonize the safety standards as foreseen in the Euratom Treaty and for the unwillingness to integrate the EU legal environmental principles into nuclear law. It will be argued that the Nuclear Basic Safety Standards, as foreseen by the Euratom Treaty and the secondary Euratom Directives, are ‘empty shells’ and should no longer stand in isolation from the EU environmental acquis. The Justification and the ALARA principles should be informed by the Precautionary Principle and the Polluter Pays Principle. This entails that with the risks of global warming (such as heat waves, floodings, cooling water, wildfires, terrorism etc.) and the many caveats on nuclear decommissioning and disposal of high-level nuclear waste, the equation between the advantages of nuclear power (e.g., minor CO2 emissions) and its major risks should be reconsidered, not leaving this justification process to the nuclear industry, as in Belgium. The EU national governments should undertake this justification process at every stage of their political decisions regarding nuclear energy (e.g., life time extension), in full transparency and giving access to justice, as foreseen in the AARHUS Convention. A specialized EU Nuclear Safety Agency should receive a mandate by the EU Commission to harmonize such a justification process in the EU Member States and to harmonize the Nuclear Basic Safety Standards. The elementary decisions on the future of (n","PeriodicalId":438737,"journal":{"name":"Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130622863","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Assessing the design and the outcome of the new renewable electricity auctions in Spain","authors":"P. Río, Christoph P. Kiefer","doi":"10.4337/relp.2023.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/relp.2023.0002","url":null,"abstract":"Similarly to other countries in the EU, Spain has very ambitious renewable electricity targets for the 2030 timeframe. According to its National Climate and Energy Plan, 74% of electricity will have to be generated from renewable electricity sources. This means that around 60 GW of new renewable electricity capacity (mostly wind and solar PV) will have to be deployed in the next decade, which will certainly be a challenge. Auctions are the main instrument to reach those targets. A radically different design of the auctions was adopted in 2020 and already four auctions have been conducted with the new design. Based on an analysis of official data and secondary sources, the aim of this article is to assess the main design features and the outcome of those auctions. The design of the auction is considered to be appropriate. However, the ex-ante effectiveness of the auction has decreased over the auction rounds. Similarly, support cost efficiency was very high in the first auction and decreased over auction rounds (higher bid prices) due to the higher costs of materials, logistics and financing. Finally, technological and actor diversity have been low in most auctions.","PeriodicalId":438737,"journal":{"name":"Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129902969","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Current and future protection against carbon leakage in the European Emissions Trading System","authors":"Vera Grebe","doi":"10.4337/relp.2023.0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/relp.2023.0001","url":null,"abstract":"With the Fit for 55 package, the European Commission has proposed a comprehensive reform of the European Emissions Trading System and the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). A key element of this is the switch of carbon leakage protection from free allocation and electricity price compensation to CO2 pricing of imported goods and greater support for technological innovation in the CBAM sectors (aluminum, cement, electricity, fertilizer, iron, steel, and hydrogen). Whether this new approach will be able to prevail in the face of the immense subsidy approach through the Inflation Reduction Act in the US remains to be seen.","PeriodicalId":438737,"journal":{"name":"Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review","volume":"378 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115949916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The right to adequate housing for IDPs in the context of slow-onset climate-induced disasters within the European Union","authors":"Robert Max Lange","doi":"10.4337/relp.2022.01.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/relp.2022.01.03","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The effects of climate change are projected to lead to significant displacement within the European Union (EU). However, internal displacement caused by slow-onset disasters has been neglected from discourse, and the EU lacks a legal framework for internal displacement. This article deploys an interdisciplinary approach to assess the protection offered to internally placed persons (IDPs) in this context: a legal analysis evaluates the right to adequate housing and a discourse analysis unpacks the construction of ‘forced displacement’ surrounding the non-binding Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Special attention will be paid to individual vulnerabilities and structural socio-economic constraints as drivers for internal displacement.\u0000The findings reveal that the human-rights-based framework provides relatively weak socio-economic housing rights. Protection of adequate housing is only offered in reactive claims requiring proof of severe environmental impact. Moreover, IDPs were initially constructed as a distinct group characterized by direct violence and imminent disasters rather than structural constraints. While the discourse recently shifted to recognize the complexity of individual displacement experiences, no corresponding concept has been institutionalized. Thus, this article recommends that the EU draw inspiration from the Kampala Convention regarding its definition of internal displacement, the legally binding nature and proactive state obligations.","PeriodicalId":438737,"journal":{"name":"Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126634347","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Despite stormy times in Europe, more needs to be done for renewables","authors":"D. Fouquet","doi":"10.4337/relp.2022.01.00","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/relp.2022.01.00","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":438737,"journal":{"name":"Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116308363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"‘Consumer power’ on the power market: the new paradigm on electric power","authors":"Sir Per Ribbing","doi":"10.4337/relp.2022.01.04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/relp.2022.01.04","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000In the old, physical, way of regarding the Product Electricity as being similar to water flowing in pipes, the statement ‘All electricity mixes on the grid’ held true. The picture of a bathtub into which electricity was supplied (flowed) from different sources: Hydro, Nuclear, Fossil, and Wind & Solar was the norm, the ‘truth’. However, from a market and consumer power point of view, and from an economic point of view, this analogy with a bathtub actually reveals a misunderstanding of what the Product Electricity really is and how power is transferred from producer to consumer.\u0000Electricity which is audited does not mix with any other electricity. Only electricity which is not audited does mix. The anonymous agents who are the carriers of the purchased Product Electricity, i.e. the kWh:s, they are mixed. The product itself (the Product Electricity) is not mixed, if audited. The old bathtub analogy is false. It is an old misunderstanding of how electric power is traded and transferred.\u0000NB: It is electric power that is produced and consumed. Energy cannot be produced, nor consumed. The first law of thermodynamics states this as a fundamental law of nature.\u0000The new paradigm on electric power explains how the Product Electricity is transferred from power generator to power consumer. The transfer is made by help of anonymous and interchangeable agents: kWh:s.\u0000This is the correct way of understanding the new situation with deregulated power markets offering different ‘colours’ of power, i.e. electricity with different environmental loads, e.g. ‘Green Power’. The new paradigm uses an analogy with the banking system, ‘The Bank Grid’, where the parallel between bank grid and electric grid is, in fact, exact. In this new market situation the new paradigm on electric power shows that there exists a possible choice of not consuming any coal power.\u0000The 10 hottest years ever measured globally have all occurred since 2010, with the top ten being 2016, 2020, 2019, 2015, 2017, 2021, 2018, 2014, 2010, 2013, respectively. The Climate Crisis is here. The New Paradigm on Electric Power shows us how we can choose to not consume any power produced by fossil energy.","PeriodicalId":438737,"journal":{"name":"Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125323051","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}