EU deal on Russian oil embargo🛢️The deal reached by #EUCO is far from ideal, but it does represent an important step in the right direction. Quick 🧵 1/
The major weakness of the deal is timing. This will really be effective by end-2022, while we would need to cut Russian energy rent ASAP to weaken its economy and its military potential. 2/
The EU embargo is going to be a major blow to Russia, which will be forced to find new routes for its oil and to sell it at substantial discount. The USD 23 billion a month that Europe pays for Russian oil will not be easily substituted. Russia will see a fraction of that. 3/
The EU should now stand ready for eventual retaliatory actions on natural gas by Russia. For this, a strong coordination is needed at the EU level to prepare for a potential interruption of all Russian gas supplies to Europe. 4/
EU Member States need to empower the newly established EU Energy Platform to become a key tool to procure gas for storage refilling ahead of next winter and coordinate emergency gas dispatch across EU. This is key to ensure energy system resilience and political solidarity. END/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This week, Denmark, Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands committed to turn the North Sea into a "green power plant" by building artificial islands where wind energy could be turned into hydrogen and electricity. Few points on this fascinating - and a bit futuristic - project.🧵1/
The plan in a nutshell: to increase the four countries' installed offshore wind capacity from the current level of 15 GW to 65 GW by 2030 (i.e., equivalent to around 40 nuclear reactors) and to 150 GW by 2050 (i.e., equivalent to around 100 nuclear reactors). 2/
Denmark is doing preliminary studies for the development of the world's first energy island. The island will have an initial capacity of 3 GW by 2033 (i.e., equivalent to half of Denmark’s electricity consumption). The capacity is then due to be expanded up to 10 GW by 2040. 3/
The immediate challenge will be to refill gas storages as much as possible before next winter. Even record high non-Russian imports would not be enough to sufficiently refill them. So, Europe would need to reduce demand by at minimum 400 TWh (or 10%-15% of annual demand)
Europe might actually reduce its gas demand by 800 TWh, thanks to a portfolio of exceptional options (right panel). Combined with record-high LNG imports, these demand side reactions would suffice to immediately eradicate EU's dependency on Russian gas
The EU launched today its plan to support infrastructure development around the world: the #GlobalGateway. This is more a repackaging of existing initiatives than EU fresh cash, but anyhow represents an important step forward for the EU. Let’s see why [Thread🧵]
Baseline: the world needs major infrastructure investments. The World Bank estimates that to achieve key global goals –such as climate protection, access to energy, water and sanitation, greater mobility, etc– the world must invest in infrastructure EUR 1.3 trillion per year
China understood the strategic importance of global infrastructure development a decade ago and launched in 2013 the Belt and Road Initiative. Meanwhile, the EU action in the field remained fragmented in countless initiatives, undertaken at both EU and national level
🌍Glasgow: increasingly clear sense of direction, but still no real hard numbers. A quick thread with some key takeaways 🧵 #COP26
COP26 ended on a mixed note. Global climate action is visibly accelerating, and Glasgow did play an important role in channeling the increased sense of urgency into a clearer action plan for the coming years. However, the conference failed to deliver on the hard numbers.
1⃣ Emissions gap. First, Glasgow did not manage to fill the global emissions gap. The world is on track for 2.4C of warming despite COP26 pledges. However, some NDCs – like the one of India – did represent an important step forward for global climate action.
1. According to the macro-models used by the European Commission itself to assess the new 2030 climate target, the answer is: NO. At best, the EC economy would expand by 0.5% due to increased climate ambition.
2. This is not surprising. Other studies have illustrated that the macroeconomic effect of Green New Deals is likely to be small (around +0.1% of annual GDP growth according the literature review conducted by Gueret et al, 2019) newforum.org/climate/on-the…
1a. An overall climate target of 30% will apply to the total amount of expenditure from the EU budget and NextGenerationEU. As we have argued before, this target should be handled carefully, as anticipated contributions to climate-related spending are likely to be overstated.
1b. The EUCO faces this issue by: i) Asking the EC to develop an effective methodology for monitoring climate-spending and its performance; ii) Asking the EC to report annually on climate expenditure. bruegel.org/2020/01/a-tril…