The Renewable Energy Directive is up for review. Heating & cooling provisions require an urgent reform to meet the 2030 climate goal & avoid excessive use of unsustainable bioenergy. Our new @RegAssistProj report explains the problem the solution. 1/6 raponline.org/knowledge-cent…
Current ambitions by Member States to increase the share of renewables in the heating and cooling sector fall short on delivering the EU’s climate and energy goals with an expected share of renewables of heating and cooling of just 33% compared to the required 39-41%. 2/6
There is currently no cap on any heating and cooling sources other than waste heat. As a result, biomass contributed 81% of the total amount of renewable heating and cooling target in 2018 and will continue to play a major role in 2030. 3/6
For the sectoral transport target, several safeguards and incentives have been established to mitigate against unsustainable bioenergy and support alternative solutions. This can serve as inspiration for reforming the heating and cooling provisions. 4/6
A cap on unsustainable bioenergy will be required to avoid negative environmental and health impacts. Here are a few options for doing this. 5/6
Applying a multiplier to ambient heat over the period to 2030 would encourage Member States to put in place policy measures to help overcome the market failures and barriers that slow the uptake of technologies that transfer ambient heat to buildings. 6/6
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
What is the least-cost pathway to decarbonise heating?
New @UCL_Energy@CREDS_UK research shows hydrogen-dominated heating would cost consumers 73% more compared to pathways relying on district heating and heat pumps.
THREAD 1/10 researchsquare.com/article/rs-629…
@UCL_Energy@CREDS_UK The whole UK energy system would cost 33% less if we follow heat pump and district heating pathways compared to a hydrogen-dominated pathway. 2/10
This is driven by significantly higher electricity requirements for hydrogen production. 3/10
Fossil fuel industry representatives have suggested that, when it comes to decarbonising buildings, hydrogen is their get out of jail free card. No need to insulate buildings. Just replace the fuel.
Here's why their argument is deeply flawed and false.
THREAD: Where to use hydrogen and where not - new research by @PIK_Climate led by @FalkoUeckerdt just published in @NatureClimate provides merit order for hydrogen use.
Headline finding: Hydrogen is not recommended for use in cars and space heating. 1/n
It all comes down to efficiency. Overall electricity-to-useful-energy efficiencies of hydrogen range from roughly 10% (light trucks) to 35% (boilers), which translates into electricity requirements that are 2–14 times higher than for direct electrification alternatives. 2/n
E-fuel mitigation costs are estimated to be €800–1,200 per tCO2. Large-scale deployment could reduce costs to €20–270 per tCO2 until 2050, yet it is unlikely that e-fuels will become cheap and abundant early enough. 3/n
The article shows that oil giants such as Shell, BP and Norway’s Equinor have staked their futures on fossil gas as a less-polluting alternative to oil. Now they hope that by stripping the carbon from their methane to create hydrogen, they can ensure a market for it remains. 3/7
Existing policy is insufficient to deliver on the target and falls short by close to 50%. The gap is even larger to the @theCCCuk trajectory required for net zero. 2/7
We will need a policy package consisting of 4 elements:
1) financial support especially for low-income households
2 structural reform of bills and stamp duty 3) regulatory backstop in early 2030s 4) all of this underpinned by robust governance framework