Following the EU Methane strategy’s adoption on 14 October 2020, the EU Commission will unveil the legislative proposal on measurement and mitigation of methane emissions.

Until 1 May 2021, all the stakeholders are invited to participate in public consultations by filling in a comprehensive questionnaire. The questionnaire aims to gather views on the range of issues, including the type and scope of regulation, leak detection, and repair programmes, venting and flaring, and on the actions to mitigate the emissions from biogas/biomethane production and the coal sector.

The companies and NGOs, both individually and in the industry groups, such as the Methane Guiding Principles, have been working to respond to the questions raised by the EU Commission in the questionnaire.

This event is an occasion to discuss the key challenges and considerations which arise from these discussions, as well as the way forward.  On which issues is there a consensus? Where are divergencies and controversies?

Hosts:

• Christopher Jones, FSR
• Andris Piebalgs, FSR

Speakers:

• Myriam Hammami, Shell
• Tania Meixus Fernandez, Enagás
• Stefan Schwietzke, Environmental Defense Fund
• Nicolas Jensen, Eurogas
• Manfredi Caltagirone, UN Environment Programme

Comments and conclusions:

Malcolm McDowell, European Commission

#FSRDebates

#FSRDebates

The focus of this debate series is on policy issues to be discussed by a panel of experts. Learn more about the FSR series.

Watch the recording:

Modern societies face many global challenges. Climate change is certainly among the most urgent and important ones. Europe has decided to address the widely diffused concern of public opinion on the effects of climate change by committing to reaching climate neutrality by 2050, an ambitious target that remains a top priority for the Von der Leyen Commission despite the difficulties raised by the COVID-19 crisis. Similar climate neutrality targets have been recently set by other jurisdictions, most notably the USA and China (the latter by 2060). The European Union can (and actually intends to) play a key leading role as regulator, negotiator and actor in the global climate challenge. While a unilateral European action will not be sufficient per se to stop global warming (as European emissions are only a relatively small part of total greenhouse gas emissions), the EU can lead the world by example in adopting more stringent climate regulations and hence influencing the others’ climate policies.

However, alternative climate policies and regulatory models might emerge at the world level possibly challenging the European leadership in the fight against climate change. Consider, for instance, the case of the European Emission Trading System (EU ETS). As it is frequently argued, the EU ETS represented a prototype for most other ETSs that have been rapidly emerging in the world. But ETSs might progressively diverge over time rather than converge towards a unique model to account for the different institutional frameworks characterising different jurisdictions. The same applies to other European climate measures and policies that might or might not fit other institutional contexts.

This raises some of the questions that we would like to address in the session, namely:

1. What are the lessons that other jurisdictions can take from the European climate policy experience? Can/should the European experience with climate regulation be replicated in non-European contexts? If so, how? If not, why?
2. How can other economies improve upon the European experience and how can Europe learn from others?
3. Will the climate neutrality implementation strategies converge or diverge across different countries?
4. Which policies will lead EU, US and China -the three main players in the global climate arena- towards the net-zero emissions target?
5. What will be the impact of the Biden administration on international cooperation and climate policy in the years to come?
6. Can international cooperation among Emission Trading Systems contribute to promoting a global climate policy?

FSR Climate, together with the Policy Outreach Committee of EAERE (European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists), and in collaboration with the School of Transnational Governance of the EUI, organises this session to promote a more integrated dialogue between academia and policy world, providing advice and support to EU policy makers and institutions in designing policy interventions.

The event builds upon the successful experience of policy debates organized by FSR Climate at State of the Union since 2018 and intends to continue the policy dialogue carried out by FSR Climate under the ongoing LIFE DICET (Deepening International Cooperation on Emissions Trading) project. The project LIFE DICET focuses on the international carbon market cooperation between the EC and the regulators of other major ETSs, namely, California-Quebec, China, Switzerland and New Zealand and intends to support EU and Member State policymakers in deepening international cooperation for the development and possible integration of carbon markets at the world level.

The event chaired by Simone Borghesi and Jos Delbeke is intended to address an audience of high-level policy makers, stakeholders and scholars such as those attending the SoU.

The project LIFE DICET is co-financed by the EU LIFE Programme of the European Commission.

FSR Talk with Grischa Perino organised by FSR Climate 

In this online talk, we will look at the upcoming reform of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS), particularly the Market Stability Reserve (MSR) Review, with Grischa Perino from the University of Hamburg.

The EU ETS is the cornerstone of the European climate policy covering about 45% of the EU’s greenhouse gas emissions. It follows the polluter pays principle under a cap-and-trade mechanism, whereby firms covered by the ETS purchase, sell and exchange emissions allowances representing one tonne of CO2-eq.

Within this carbon market, the Market Stability Reserve has the objective to increase resilience to demand shocks, deliver investment signals, and raise synergies with other climate and energy policies. It consists of a rule-based mechanism that adjusts the number of allowances to be auctioned to the market surplus by controlling the number of allowances in circulation in the carbon market. The surplus of allowances determines the response of the MSR:

• If the surplus exceeds a certain threshold, a predetermined percentage of the surplus is withheld from auctions and added to the reserve;
• if the surplus is lower than another threshold, some allowances are taken from the reserve and injected into the market through auction.

The European Commission’s proposal for MSR Review is planned for June 2021, in the context of a broader reform of the EU ETS to include new sectors in its scope and to support the new EU pledge to reach climate neutrality by 2050. In the publication discussed during this talk, the authors argue that a new MSR design appears necessary. They identify the risks that arise from the current MSR design and propose a feasible way to address them in the upcoming review of the EU ETS.

In this event hosted by Jean-Michel Glachant, Simone Borghesi will discuss with Grischa Perino and Jos Delbeke the MSR and the main findings of the paper. 

Host:

Jean-Michel Glachant, Director of the Florence School of Regulation

Speakers:

• Simone Borghesi, Director of FSR Climate, European University Institute
• Grischa Perino, Professor, University of Hamburg
• Jos Delbeke, EIB Chair on International Carbon Markets, School of Transnational Governance, European University Institute

The paper:

EU ETS Market Stability Reserve needs a new design, Grischa Perino, Michael Pahle, Fabian Pause, Simon Quemin, Hannah Scheuing and Maximilian Willner, 2021

Read more:

EU Emissions Trading System, Series Cover the Basics FSR, 2021

The EU ETS needs a new autopilot: a proposed reform for the MSR, Grischa Perino, LIFE DICET Blog, 19 March 2021

The EU ETS at a crossroads: The MSR review as a defining moment, Michael Pahle and Simon Quemin, LIFE DICET Blog, 19 June 2020

Emissions trading systems with different price control mechanisms: implications for linking – Report for the Carbon Market Policy Dialogue, Giulio Galdi, Stefano F. Verde, Simone Borghesi, Jürg Füssler, Ted Jamieson, Emily Wimberger, Li Zhou, Florence School of Regulation – Climate, LIFE DICET Project, 2020

This FSR Talk is organised with the support of EAERE.

#FSRTalks 

Live interviews with experts from the broader network of the school to showcase and discuss a recent work (a book just published, exciting study, innovative project) in a light and interactive way.

Hosts: Prof. Jean-Michel Glachant, Ilaria Conti, Swetha Baghwat

Brexit and Electricity Trading

The Workshop will first discuss which form of volume coupling is best suited for governing day-ahead trading on the borders between Great Britain and the EU/Northern Ireland, taking the limitations imposed by Brexit on the possible governance arrangements. In the second part we will turn to how disputes between operators/owners of interconnectors, disputes between regulators at different ‘ends’ of the interconnectors, and disputes between the parties to the TCA might be settled in the future. The TCA provides that exemptions from requirements for third-party access, unbundling and the use of revenues already granted to gas and electricity interconnectors will continue in accordance with the same terms.

To explore these issues, the Workshop will be structured in two sessions:

• Session I will focus on the possible future framework for day-ahead electricity trading between Great Britain and the EU/Northern Ireland, aiming at maximising benefits for consumers in the EU and the United Kingdom, while respecting the limitations imposed by Brexit on the governance arrangements.;
• Session II will focus on dispute resolution. Will European law still apply to the continental end of the interconnector. Or do we have to develop a new framework? After all, EU law defines an interconnector’ as a ‘transmission line which crosses or spans a border between Member States and which connects the national transmission systems of the Member States’, but what about interconnectors that do not connect Member States – but third countries, such as the UK. Can we learn from experience with the EEA?

Background

The United Kingdom left the European Union (EU) on 1 February 2020 (Brexit) and the transition period during which most of the provisions of EU Law, including those governing the Internal Electricity Market, still applied ended on 31 December 2020.

Therefore, as of 1 January 2021, electricity trading between Great Britain, on the one hand, and the European Union and the island of Ireland1, on the other hand, is no longer governed by the body of EU primary and secondary legislation implementing the Electricity Target Model (ETM) and Price-based Market Coupling. The ETM has been developed and implemented over the last fifteen years to deliver efficient cross-border trading to maximise benefits for final electricity consumers.

On 24 December 2020, the United Kingdom and the EU concluded a Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA)2 for the post-Brexit period, which is provisionally applicable as of 1 January 2021. This agreement provides a framework for future electricity trading across interconnectors between the United Kingdom and the EU. This framework should promote the efficient use of the interconnectors between Great Britain and the EU/Northern Ireland, in order to preserve, as much as possible, the benefits from trading achieved when the United Kingdom was part of the Internal

Electricity Market, avoid electricity flowing in the non-economic direction on the interconnectors and thus maximise benefits for electricity consumers in the United Kingdom and the EU3.

The TCA establishes a Specialised Committee on Energy (SCE) which is tasked with addressing various matters relating to energy under the TCA4. For the day-ahead timeframe, the SCE is expected to take steps to ensure TSOs develop a new procedure based on “multi-region loose volume coupling”, and a new algorithm, by the end of March 2022.

Please note: This event is by invitation only. For further information, please contact Elena Iorio.

In this Debate we will discuss which measures should be used and which mechanisms should be harnessed to pursue the “energy efficiency-first” approach, which is at the core of a more circular economy system, one of the pillars of the EU decarbonisation strategy.

This issue is particularly critical given that, since 2014, the trend in energy consumption in Europe has been pointing towards the EU not meeting its 2020 energy efficiency targets, for both primary and final energy consumption. In 2018 primary and final energy consumption were still 5.8% and 3.5%, respectively, above the 2020 targets. The COVID crisis significantly hampered the economy and decreased energy consumption in 2020. However, unless the European economy will become more energy-efficient, the subsequent recovery will lead to a rebound in energy consumption.

The fact that the EU seems to be unable sufficiently to promote energy efficiency appears all the more surprising considering that already in 2005 the Commission, in its Green Paper on Energy Efficiency or Doing More with Less1, was able to refer to “numerous studies” according to which “the EU could save at least 20% of its present energy consumption in a cost-effective manner”,

The 2018 Energy Efficiency Directive2 established a headline EU energy efficiency target for 2030 of at least 32.5% (compared to projections of the expected energy use in 2030), with a clause for a possible upwards revision by 2023. In fact, it is likely that the target will be increased sooner in line with the Green Deal strategy.

In this context, the Debate will aim at discussing:

• which have been the barriers which prevented the EU from reaching its 2020 energy efficiency target, despite the promising outlook back in 2005; and
• how these barriers could be tackled to achieve the more ambitious 2030 target.

Draft Programme

14.00 – 14.05 Introduction to the Debate

Alberto Pototschnig | Florence School of Regulation

14.05 – 14.15 The “energy efficiency-first” approach in the Green Deal

Claudia Canevari | European Commission, DG Energy

14.15 – 14.25 Energy efficiency in the National Energy and Climate Plans

Golnoush Soroush | Florence School of Regulation

Lessons learnt from auditing EU-funded energy efficiency projects in buildings

14.25 – 14.35

Lorenzo Pirelli | European University Institute

PANEL DISCUSSION:

Moderator: Alberto Pototschnig: Florence School of Regulation

14.35 – 14.55 Introductory remarks from the panellists

Sabine Löbbe | Reutlingen Energy Center

Zsuzsanna Pató | Regulatory Assistance Project

Giuseppe Velluto | Gianni Origoni

14.55 – 15.00   Polls

15.00 – 15.20   Comments on the outcome of the poll and Q&A from the audience
Panellists

15.20 – 15.30   Concluding remarks

Alberto Pototschnig | Florence School of Regulation
Leigh Hancher | Florence School of Regulation and Tilburg University

#FSRDebates

The focus of the debate series is on recent court cases, regulatory decisions, EU legislation, or public consultations to be discussed by a panel of experts. Learn more about the FSR series.

The biochar system presents itself as an exceptional negative emis­sions technology (NET) in that it can readily provide multiple public goods at relatively low cost as well as multiple private goods related to the use of biochar as a soil amendment and other possible uses. Appropriate financial reward of greenhouse gas (GHG) removals, as well as of soil carbon restoration, would likely propel the diffu­sion of the biochar system. But which policy instruments should be used to reward GHG removals produced by the biochar system and other NETs? Arguably, setting specific targets for emission reductions and for removals, rather than aggregate targets for net emissions, would help address this ques­tion as well as avert the risk of delaying either emission reductions or removals.

In this online event hosted by Leonardo Meeus, we will discuss how the EU should incentivise GHG removals with a  view to its long-term climate mitigation targets. The biochar system as a NET provides a useful case for reflecting on this question.

Speakers:

• David Chiaramonti (Polytechnic of Turin)
• Paul Ekins (University College London)
• Sabine Fuss (Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change)
• Stefano F. Verde (Florence School of Regulation – FSR Climate)

Read more

The biochar system in the EU: the pieces are falling into place, but key policy questions remain (FSR Climate policy brief)

#FSRinsights

The series focuses on the insights from the FSR research.  These online events will give the FSR researchers the chance to share our research findings and to collect feedback on ongoing research by engaging with the audience and invited experts.

After the great success of the first edition, Universidad Carlos III, DIW Berlin, Florence School of Regulation (EUI), Technical University Berlin, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, University College London and Université Libre de Bruxelles are happy to announce the second edition of the PhD Summer School on “Economic Foundations for Energy and Climate Policies”.

The PhD Summer School will be held on September 6-10, 2021 at Universidad Carlos III de Madrid (Downtown campus) The plan is to organise the school on-site but a mixed format could eventually be considered in case the situation does not improve as expected.

Instructors and topics

The main objective of the School is to provide PhD students in Economics with high-level academic training on the micro-economic foundations of energy and climate policies. The School is also aimed at supporting the development of a PhD-student network for students interested in the topic, and connect them with top academics in the field.

• Stefan Ambec (Toulouse School of Economics): “‘The Challenges of Intermittent Renewables’”
• Estelle Cantillon (Université Libre de Bruxelles): “Design and Development of the EU ETS”
• Juan Pablo Montero (Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile): “Environmental Regulation and the Transport Sector”, and “The Design of Environmental Instruments“
• Ulrich Wagner (University of Mannheim): “The Effects of Climate Policy”

More information at the attached Call for Applications.

• Deadline for applications: April 30, 2021. APPLY HERE
• Local Committee: Natalia Fabra and Carmen Arguedas
• The Organizers: Carmen Arguedas, Simone Borghesi, Estelle Cantillon, Olga Chiappinelli, Natalia Fabra, Michael Grubb and Karsten Neuhoff
• Costs: the School will be free of charge for students but accommodation, food and travel is not covered.

Shift to rail is one of the main challenges to reach the ambitious Green Deal objectives in transport and one of the key issues in the European Year of Rail. However, data shows that such a modal shift is not happening, as rail modal share is not growing in passenger services and is too low and basically stagnated in freight services (Rail Market Monitoring 2021).

The scope of the conference is to evaluate the existing policies and analyse new proposals to accelerate the modal shift. Debate between academics, industry and public officials is the proposed methodology to provide deep insights and fresh approaches.

We are looking for original papers covering the various aspects of railway regulation and focusing on transversal issues such as: competition, track access charges, capacity allocation, traffic management, night trains, long-distance and cross-border passenger rail services, high-speed services, intermodality, digital mobility/railway platforms and others.

Contributions utilising multidisciplinary, as well as interdisciplinary approaches to regulation, are very welcome. Papers, linking academia and practice, as well as policy research papers, are particularly encouraged.

The conference is intended for academics, as well as academically minded practitioners.

This is a 2-day conference, aiming to engage a selected group of a total of 30 individuals including leading academics, high-level stakeholder representatives (CEOs or deputies) and public officials into a fruitful policy debate.

On the first day there will be presentations of 9 academic papers, followed by a discussion with the audience. The foreseen outcome of the conference is 9 academic papers of excellent quality with policy recommendations, which DG Move and national authorities can use in future planning.

The second day will be devoted to the high-level policy debates based on the papers presented the day before, with the participation of representatives of DG Move, stakeholders and academics.

List of selected authors and titles of their papers:

• Beria, P., Tolentino, S., Shtelle, E., Lunkar, V. “Is there an effect on prices of market entry in open-access rail Italian market?”
• Carames, J.G. “Next steps in the liberalization of the EU passenger rail market: new challenges for future public service contracts”
• Fahnenmüller, L. “How Technical Regulations Shape the Competitive Landscape – a Discussion on ECM, TSI and other Technical Regulations”
• Jain, A., van der Heijden, R., Marchau, V., Bruckmann, D. “The role of digital platforms in the modal shift of road to rail freight transport”
• Kristoffersson, I., Pyddoke,R., Börjesson,M., Karlsson, R., Liu, C. “Modal shift – A dream?”
• Mastrodonato, E. “Integrated coordination to make the railway system more efficient and facilitate the modal shift”
• Michaux, L. “Public Service Obligations in the Railway Sector: The EU’s Regulatory Self-Restraint as Part of the Problem?”
• Nash, C., A., Smith, A., S., Fitzova, H. “Achieving mode shift – what needs to be done?”
• Pagand, I., Bizzotto, S., Holvad, T., Potenza, G. “Rail renaissance strategy”
• Tomeš, Z. “Regulatory approaches to rail competitive entries”

Conference timeline

• Submission of the abstract by 1 June 2021; 15 June 2021. We extended the deadline!
• Notification of acceptance by 1 July 2021;
• Submission of the full paper by 15 November 2021; participants who fail to submit a full paper by this deadline will be automatically removed from the programme;
• Conference on 9^th-10^th December 2021 in Florence (Italy).

Submission of the abstract

• Step 1: Download the obligatory submission template
• Step 2: Fill in all required fields: Introduction and Purpose of the Study; Research Design and Expected Results; Keywords. Please pay attention to the word limit!
• Step 3: Fill in the registration form online and enclose the submission template (see Step 2).

For any issues regarding the submission, please contact Ms Irina Lapenkova at FSR.Transport@eui.eu;

Publication opportunities

• Papers will qualify for fast track review for the Journal Competition and Regulation in Network Industries (SAGE)

Organising Committee

• Prof Juan Montero (EUI, Part-time professor of the Transport Area of the FSR, Professor of Administrative Law and Regulation in UNED University (Madrid).
• Prof Matthias Finger (EUI, Part-time professor and Director of the Transport Area of the FSR. EPFL, Professor Emeritus).
• Prof Chris Nash (Research Professor, Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds. Scientific Advisor, FSR Transport).

In this online talk, we will look at the energy transition from an alternative perspective, with the authors of the book: Engendering the Energy Transition.

Panel

Joy Clancy is Professor of Energy and Gender in the Department of Governance and Technology for Sustainability at the University of Twente,

Nthabiseng Mohlakoana holds a Doctorate in Innovation and Governance for Sustainable Development from the University of Twente, The Netherlands.

Mariëlle Feenstra is a PhD researcher on gender approaches in energy policy design at the University of Twente, The Netherlands

#FSRTalks

Live interviews with experts from the wider network of the school to showcase and discuss a recent work (a book just published, interesting study, innovative project) in a light and interactive way.

Hosts: Prof. Jean-Michel Glachant, Ilaria Conti, Swetha Baghwat

FSR Policy Workshop in collaboration with the Copenhagen School of Energy Infrastructure

On 15 December 2020, the Commission published its legislative proposal for the revision of Regulation (EU) No 347/2013 on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure (the TEN-E Regulation)[1]. The 2013 TEN-E Regulation aimed at accelerating the development of strategically important priority projects interconnecting energy networks along eight priority corridors and in the area of smart grids, against the demanding timeline of the EU 2020 energy and climate objectives. These projects are labelled Projects of Common Interest (PCIs). To achieve the PCI status, projects need to be included in the latest Ten-Year Network Development Plan (TYNDP) and, as such, they need to deliver positive net welfare benefits. Since the entry into force of the TEN-E Regulation, the European Commission has adopted four PCI lists; the last one was published on 31 October 2019[2].

The European Green Deal[3] requires a revision of the TEN-Regulation, which was already planned on the basis of the experience gained over the seven years of its implementation. However, the European Green Deal makes this revision more wide-reaching, also involving a redefinition of the objectives of the TEN-E Regulation, to align it to the new context and thus ensure that the development of energy networks enables and supports decarbonisation, by fostering the deployment of innovative technologies and infrastructure, while keeping the energy transition socially fair.

In this respect the Commission’s legislative proposal, while maintaining the main tenets of the TEN-E Regulation – e.g. the PCI status for priority projects, the possibility of an enabling Cross-Border Cost Allocation for PCIs – envisages changes in some important features of the Regulation, such as the exclusion of oil and gas network infrastructure from the projects eligible for the PCI status, the inclusion of hydrogen and smart gas grid projects, albeit subject to meeting a mandatory sustainability criterion, the requirement that total investment costs be allocated through the cross-border cost allocation and several improvements in the governance of various aspects of the TYNDP/PCI selection process.

Over the last year, the Florence School of Regulation has been working with the Copenhagen School of Energy Infrastructure to assess the experience with the implementation of the TEN-E Regulation and to identify those changes in the Regulation required better to support the new EU energy and climate goals of the Green Deal. The preliminary results of this assessment were contributed to one of the webinars organised by the European Commission as part of its consultation process, further discussed in an online roundtable on 23 June 2020 – Revision of the TEN-E regulation: an academic perspective (eui.eu) –  and presented in a Policy Brief – “Making the TEN-E Regulation Compatible with the Green Deal: Eligibility, Selection, and Cost Allocation for PCIs”.

The Workshop will aim at discussing the changes to the TEN-E Regulation proposed by the European Commission and assess how they fare vis-à-vis the new challenges faced by the energy sector and the corresponding needs for infrastructure development.

To explore these issues, after an introductory presentation by the Commission of its legislative proposal, the Workshop will be structured in two sessions:

• Session I will focus on those aspects related to the identification of the scenarios supporting the development of the TYNDP, the CBA methodologies and the PCI selection process;
• Session II will review the experience with CBCA decisions to put into context and assess the changes proposed by the Commission in this area.

Please note:

This workshop is by invitation only. For further information, please contact Elena Iorio.

[1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32013R0347

[2] https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/c_2019_7772_1_annex.pdf

[3] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1588580774040&uri=CELEX%3A52019DC0640

The European Green Deal strives to transform Europe into the world’s first carbon neutral continent by 2050: a commitment, which will necessitate significant transformations across all sectors of the economy. For the transport sector, which accounts for a quarter of the EU’s total greenhouse gas emissions, meeting this ambition will require a 90% reduction in CO₂ emissions by mid-century. The recently published Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy stresses that ‘greening mobility must be the new license for the transport sector to grow’. While a number of measures will need to be considered, ranging from pricing, to regulation, and a rethinking of mobility needs, this panel will explore the role of modal shift in placing the sector on a firm path to sustainable and smart mobility.

The shift of passenger and goods traffic away from less environmentally sound modes, such as road in particular, but also aviation, towards the greenest modes, namely rail and inland waterways, constitutes a central pillar of the EU transport decarbonisation strategy. In fact, the EU’s modal shift strategy sets out that rail freight traffic should increase by 50% by 2030 and double by 2050, whereas transport by inland waterways and short sea shipping should increase by 25% by 2030 and by 50% by 2050. This, in turn, will require measures to manage better, and to increase the capacity of railways and inland waterways, which the Commission will propose by 2021. To advance the delivery of these objectives, the Commission has declared 2021 as the European Year of Rail.

In addition to supporting greening objectives, a shift to rail and inland waterway vessels can ease congestion on roads, lower the pressure on road infrastructure by taking over the heaviest loads and reducing the risks linked to transporting dangerous goods. Yet, the progress achieved to date in the Member States remains insufficient, and the share of rail freight stagnates around 18%. While the COVID-19 pandemic has brought about unprecedented challenges for the entire transport sector, it has also brought to light more prominently the higher safety and reliability of rail freight, where rail has offered efficient cross-border cargo connections carrying large volumes of essential goods and medical supplies using minimal human resources. The post-COVID-19 period, furthermore, offers a unique opportunity for railway undertakings to tap into the unused potential and develop more rail passenger services, especially in cross-border contexts. Night trains could increasingly compete with short haul flights and stimulate European tourism in the recovery phase.

This panel discussion, hosted by FSR-Transport under the framework of the European University Institute’s annual flagship conference The State of the Union (SOU), brings together EU policy makers and industry experts for a timely debate on the technical and regulatory barriers, as well as the possible solutions and legislative opportunities to turn the EU’s modal shift objectives into reality.

Context:

The State of the Union conference, organised by the European University Institute (EUI), is an annual event for high-level reflection on the European Union, renowned for fostering global connections and conversations, disseminating expert knowledge and providing excellent networking opportunities in the beautiful setting of Florence.

Celebrating its tenth anniversary, the 2021 edition of the conference will address the theme ‘Europe in a Changing World.’ The focus will be on the challenges and opportunities for Europe amidst rising concerns over global commons and the climate emergency, a shifting economic and geopolitical power balance, major challenges to multilateralism, and the ongoing global battle against COVID-19. Europe’s role on the global stage will be tackled across sessions on artificial intelligence, climate, geopolitics, the global economy, multilateralism, peace and human rights, public health, and strategic autonomy.

Background

The European Green Deal envisages an important role for gas in the energy transition. However, to follow this pathway, the gas value chain should be more oriented towards sustainability. Methane emissions are responsible for around a quarter of today’s global warming, second only to carbon dioxide emissions (which currently are responsible for half of global warming).

In addressing methane emissions from the energy sector, one of the key considerations is that the EU has only a minor direct responsibility (accounting for only 2.3% of global methane emissions), with the Russian Federation and the United States being responsible for 15% and 14% of global emissions, respectively. However, the EU is the largest buyer of natural gas on the international market – having a 46% share – and therefore it could well be in a position to promote the adoption of methane emission-reduction strategies and standards by the countries from which it buys gas (mainly the Russian Federation, Algeria, Nigeria, Qatar, and the United States).

One possible way of providing incentives for gas network companies to reduce methane emissions would be to include these emissions in the EU Emission Trading System (EU ETS), which has been in operation since 2005.

Against this background, the online Workshop will aim to assess the pros and cons of extending the EU ETS to cover methane emissions.

To explore these issues, after an opening session outlining the current strategies and measures to curb methane emissions in the EU, the Workshop will be structured in two sessions:

• Session I will review the state of the art in measurement, reporting and verification of methane emission, with specific reference to the requirements for the inclusion of these emissions in the EU ETS;
• Session II will review the international experience with including methane emission in tradable quota systems and assess to what extent such an inclusion in the EU ETS will be feasible and its advantages and drawbacks, and any associated challenges.

Please note

This workshop is by invitation only. For further information, please contact: Elena Iorio